logo
Billions for weapons, rather than troops, won't make us safer

Billions for weapons, rather than troops, won't make us safer

The Pentagon got a whopping $150-billion increase in the budget bill passed by Congress and signed by the president July 4. That will push next year's proposed Pentagon budget to more than $1 trillion. Most of that enormous amount will go to weapons manufacturers.
A new report by the Quincy Institute and the Costs of War Project at Brown University found that for the period from 2020 to 2024, more than half of the Pentagon budget — 54% — went to private companies. That figure has climbed considerably since the immediate post-Cold War period of the 1990s, when the contractor share was 41%.
The surge of spending on the Pentagon and its primary weapons suppliers won't necessarily make us safer. It may just enrich military companies while subsidizing overpriced, underperforming weapons systems, even as it promotes an accelerated arms race with China.
While weapons firms will fare well if the new budget goes through as planned, military personnel and the veterans who have fought in America's wars in this century will not. The Trump administration is seeking deep cuts in personnel, facilities and research at the Veterans Affairs, and tens of thousands of military families have to use food stamps, a program cut by 20% in the budget bill, to make ends meet.
The $150 billion in add-ons for the Pentagon include tens of billions for the Trump administration's all-but-impossible dream of a leak-proof Golden Dome missile defense system, a goal that has been pursued for more than 40 years without success. Other big winners include the new F-47 combat aircraft, and the military shipbuilding industry, which is slated for a huge infusion of new funding.
The question of how to allocate the Pentagon's orgy of weapons spending is complicated by the fact that there are now two powerful factions within the arms industry fighting over the department's budget, the traditional Big Five, composed of Lockheed Martin, RTX (formerly Raytheon), Boeing, General Dynamics and Northrop Grumman, and emerging military tech firms such as SpaceX, Palantir and Anduril.
The Big Five currently get the bulk of Pentagon weapons spending, but the emerging tech firms are catching up, winning lucrative contracts for military-wide communications systems and antidrone technology. And there will be more such contracts. Even after the public falling out between Elon Musk and the president, the emerging tech firms have a decided advantage, with advocates such as Vice President JD Vance, who maintains close ties with his mentor and political supporter Peter Thiel of Palantir, and dozens of staff members from military tech firms who are now embedded in the national security and budget bureaucracies of the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, the tech sector's promises of a new, revolutionary era of defense made possible by artificial-intelligence-driven weapons and other technologies are almost certainly overstated. If past practice tells us anything, it is that new, complex high-tech weapons will not save us.
The history of Pentagon procurement is littered with 'miracle weapons,' from the electronic battlefield in Vietnam to Ronald Reagan's 'impenetrable' Star Wars missile shield to networked warfare and precision-guided bombs used in the Iraq and Afghan wars. When push came to shove, these highly touted systems either failed to work as advertised, or were irrelevant to the kinds of wars they were being used in.
Just one example: Despite the fact that the Pentagon spent well over $10 billion to find a system that could neutralize improvised explosive devices in Iraq and Afghanistan, only modest progress was made. Even after the new technology was deployed, 40% of I.E.Ds could not be cleared.
Technology is a tool, but it is not the decisive factor in winning wars or deterring adversaries. An effective military should be based on well-trained, well-compensated and highly motivated troops. That means taking some of that 54% of the Pentagon budget that goes to contractors and investing in supporting the people who are actually tasked with fighting America's wars. But to be truly safe, we need to fight fewer wars by adopting a more realistic strategy that emphasizes diplomacy and close cooperation with allies, and that resorts to force only when there is a major, direct threat to U.S. security. A more balanced strategy would be much less likely to put U.S. troops in high-risk situations like the nation-building efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Instead of letting corporate special interests distort our foreign and military policies, we need to press for an approach that puts strategic considerations first. That will mean taking steps to reduce the power of the arms makers, new and old, through steps such as stronger measures to limit the revolving door between government and industry. And we need to bring more independent voices into the Pentagon's budget discussions. Lockheed Martin, Palantir, SpaceX and other companies shouldn't have undue influence over decisions on how much to spend on our military, and what to spend it on. That's no way to make a military budget, and no way to defend a country.
William D. Hartung is a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft and the co-author, with Stephen Semler, of the report 'Profits of War: Top Beneficiaries of Pentagon Spending, 2020 to 2024.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

US condemns French inquiry into Elon Musk's social media platform X
US condemns French inquiry into Elon Musk's social media platform X

Yahoo

time9 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

US condemns French inquiry into Elon Musk's social media platform X

US officials have strongly condemned a criminal investigation by France into the social network X, owned by billionaire Elon Musk, on suspicion of foreign interference. "As part of a criminal investigation, an activist French prosecutor is requesting information on X's proprietary algorithm and has classified X as an 'organized crime group,'" the US State Department's Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights and Labor wrote on their X account. "Democratic governments should allow all voices to be heard, not silence speech they dislike. The United States will defend the free speech of all Americans against acts of foreign censorship." Paris cybercrime prosecutors called for the police probe 11 July to investigate suspected crimes – including manipulating and extracting data from automated systems "as part of a criminal gang". The social media company last week denied the allegations, calling them "politically motivated". X also said it had refused to comply with the prosecutor's request to access its recommendation algorithm and real-time data. X slams French probe as 'politically motivated', refuses to cooperate Foreign interference The investigation follows two January complaints that alleged the X algorithm had been used for foreign interference in French politics. One of the complaints came from Eric Bothorel, an MP from President Emmanuel Macron's centrist party, who complained of "reduced diversity of voices and options" and Musk's "personal interventions" in the platform's management since he took it over. X said it "categorically denies" all allegations and that the probe "is distorting French law in order to serve a political agenda and, ultimately, restrict free speech". Tesla and SpaceX chief Musk has raised hackles with his forays into European politics, including vocal backing for the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party ahead of February legislative elections. "Democracy is too fragile to let digital platform owners tell us what to think, who to vote for or even who to hate," Bothorel said after the investigation was announced. Tesla customers in France sue over brand becoming 'extreme right' (with newswires)

Donald Trump To Release Billions In Frozen Funds: What To Know
Donald Trump To Release Billions In Frozen Funds: What To Know

Newsweek

time11 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Donald Trump To Release Billions In Frozen Funds: What To Know

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. More than $5 billion in frozen education grant funding to the states will be released in the coming weeks, according to the Department of Education. The money, which was used to found a range of initiatives including teacher training and English language programs, was suspended by the Trump administration on June 30 pending a review by the federal Office of Management and Budget. Newsweek contacted the Department of Education for comment on Saturday via email outside of regular office hours. The Context The announcement follows weeks of lobbying from both Democratic and Republican lawmakers concerned about the impact the funding suspension would have on their districts. Lawsuits aiming to get the money unfrozen had been submitted by 24 states and the District of Columbia along with a separate group of teaching unions, school districts and parents. What To Know On Friday, the Department of Education spokesperson Madi Biedermann said the funding had been unfrozen and would begin being paid out next week. The money was part of a larger sum of nearly $7 billion that had been approved by Congress for education spending and was due to be released on July 1, but that the Trump administration announced it had placed a block the previous day. On June 30, the Education Department announced the spending was under review with the Office of Management and Budget saying it would investigate whether it had previously been spent supporting a "radical left-wing agenda." President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he arrives at Glasgow Prestwick Airport on July 25, 2025 in Prestwick, Scotland, UK. President Donald Trump speaks to the media as he arrives at Glasgow Prestwick Airport on July 25, 2025 in Prestwick, Scotland, UK. Andrew Harnik/GETTY The money had been earmarked for a number of services including migrant education, English language programs and adult education with $2.2 billion committed to teachers' professional development. On Friday the administration said there would be "guardrails" in place to ensure the released money wasn't spent "in violation of executive orders or administration policy." Earlier this month the Supreme Court ruled the Department of Education can go ahead with its plan to lay off nearly 1,400 workers. The Trump administration reportedly considered abolishing the Department of Education in its entirety earlier this year. What People Are Saying In a post on X, Nebraska House Republican Don Bacon wrote: "Exciting news to announce! All frozen education funding for the upcoming school year have been released." Referring to the payments on Friday at the National Governors Association's summer meeting Education Secretary Linda McMahon said: "I would think now that we've reviewed them … a year from now, we wouldn't find ourselves in the same situation." Addressing The Washington Post Democratic Senator Patty Murray said: "This administration deserves no credit for just barely averting a crisis they themselves set in motion. "You don't thank a burglar for returning your cash after you've spent a month figuring out if you'd have to sell your house to make up the difference." Speaking to Axios Republican Senator Shelley Moore Capito said: "The programs are ones that enjoy long-standing, bipartisan support like after-school and summer programs that provide learning and enrichment opportunities for school aged children, which also enables their parents to work and contribute to local economies, and programs to support adult learners working to gain employment skills, earn workforce certifications, or transition into postsecondary education." Skye Perryman, president of the Democracy Forward campaign group, said: "While this development shows that legal and public pressure can make a difference, school districts, parents, and educators should not have to take the administration to court to secure funds for their students." What Happens Next Payments from the frozen funding should start going out next week according to the Department of Education.

Why a 'mini Trump' is breaking through in Japan
Why a 'mini Trump' is breaking through in Japan

NBC News

time11 minutes ago

  • NBC News

Why a 'mini Trump' is breaking through in Japan

TOKYO — As President Donald Trump's tariffs add to a sense of uncertainty in Japan, more voters here are embracing an idea inspired by their longtime ally the United States: 'Japanese first.' The nationalist slogan helped the right-wing populist party Sanseito make big gains in Japan's parliamentary elections on Sunday, as it capitalized on economic malaise and concerns about immigration and overtourism. Party leader Sohei Kamiya, who since 2022 had held Sanseito's only seat in the upper house of Japan's parliament, will now be joined by 14 others in the 248-seat chamber. It's a far cry from the party's origin as a fringe anti-vaccination group on YouTube during the Covid-19 pandemic. Though Japan has long had a complex relationship with foreigners and its cultural identity, experts say Sanseito's rise is another indication of the global shift to the right embodied and partly fueled by Trump, with populist figures gaining ground in Europe, Britain, Latin America and elsewhere. Kamiya 'fancies himself a mini-Trump' and 'is one of those who Trump has put wind in his sails,' said Jeff Kingston, a professor of Asian studies and history at Temple University's Japan campus. Speaking at a rally on Saturday at Tokyo's Shiba Park, Kamiya said his calls for greater restrictions on foreign workers and investment were driven not by xenophobia but by 'the workings of globalization.' He criticized mainstream parties' support for boosting immigration in an effort to address the labor shortage facing Japan's aging and shrinking population. 'Japan is still the fourth-largest economy in the world. We have 120 million people. Why do we have to rely on foreign capital?' Kamiya told an enthusiastic crowd. The election results were disastrous for Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba, who is facing calls to resign now that his conservative Liberal Democratic Party — which has ruled almost uninterrupted since the end of World War II — has lost its majority in both houses of parliament. The Japanese leader had also been under pressure to reach a trade deal with the Trump administration, which said Tuesday that the two sides had agreed to a 15% U.S. tariff on Japanese goods. On Wednesday, Ishiba denied reports that he planned to step down by the end of August. The message from his party's string of election losses is that 'people are unhappy,' Kingston said. 'A lot of people feel that the status quo is biased against their interests and it advantages the elderly over the young, and the young feel sort of resentful that they're having to carry the heavy burden of the growing aging population on their back,' he said. Kamiya, 47, an energetic speaker with social media savvy, is also a strong contrast to leaders such as Ishiba and the Constitutional Democrats' Yoshihiko Noda, both 68, who 'look like yesterday's men' and the faces of the establishment, Kingston said. With voters concerned about stagnating wages, surging prices and bleak employment prospects, 'the change-makers got a lot of protest votes from people who feel disenfranchised,' he said. Sanseito's platform resonated with voters such as Yuta Kato. 'The number of [foreign immigrants] who don't obey rules is increasing. People don't voice it, but I think they feel that,' the 38-year-old hairdresser told Reuters in Tokyo. 'Also, the burden on citizens including taxes is getting bigger and bigger, so life is getting more difficult.' The biggest reason Sanseito did well in the election, he said, 'is that they are speaking on behalf of us.' Kamiya's party was not the only upstart to benefit from voter discontent, with the center-right Democratic Party for the People increasing its number of seats in the upper house from five to 16. Sanseito, whose name means 'Participate in Politics,' originated in 2020 amid the Covid-19 pandemic, attracting conservatives with YouTube videos promoting conspiracy theories about vaccines and pushing back against mask mandates. Its YouTube channel now has almost 480,000 subscribers. The party has also warned about a 'silent invasion' of foreigners in Japan, where the number of foreign residents rose more than 10% last year to a record of almost 3.8 million, according to the Immigration Services Agency. It remains far lower as a proportion of the population than in the U.S. or Europe, however. Critics say such rhetoric has fueled hate speech and growing hostility toward foreigners in Japan, citing a survey last month by Japanese broadcaster NHK and others in which almost two-thirds of respondents agreed that foreigners received 'preferential treatment.' At the Sanseito rally on Saturday, protesters held up signs that said 'No Hate' and 'Racists Go Home.' Kamiya denies that his party is hostile to foreigners in Japan. 'We have no intention of discriminating against foreigners, nor do we have any intention of inciting division,' he said Monday. 'We're just aiming to firmly rebuild the lives of Japanese people who are currently in trouble.' Despite its electoral advances, Sanseito doesn't have enough members in the upper house to make much impact on its own and has only three seats in the more powerful lower house. The challenge, Kingston said, is whether Kamiya can 'take this anger, the malaise, and bring his show nationwide.'

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store