National Security, as a term, means many things as you travel the globe. For most, it’s a government responsibility intended to protect its citizenry in their home country. In democracies, what this means has become contentious in countries whose relationship with its military has drifted beyond its original intent.
In the United States, some political factions applaud the US military as an untouchable bastion of security. Others in US politics see it in skeptical terms, asserting an unfair take of budget allocation for domestic use. The vast majority of ordinary Americans respect the military and its role in protecting American society. Did politicians get the balance right for national security in the United States?
Eisenhowers Iron Triangle and National Security
It is a tough question to answer, as most cannot discern the line between the military and the military industrial complex. In 1961, this blur was the focus of a warning in a speech by the outgoing US President, Dwight Eisenhower. He warned of the blurring of lines between democratically elected government, the military, and the military industrial complex. Some refer to this as ‘Eisenhowers Iron Triangle’.
Fast forward to today, and technology’s hyper acceleration. It has raised the stakes in a world where villains appear to triumph over the good. Appearances can deceive, or can they? Internal threats have manifested in new reach via technology, which just literates over, and adds to the rationale backing Eisenhower’s words of the day.
Technology Redefines National Security
This technology vector has redefined the scope and meaning of the term national security. It’s especially true when you think about democracies and the interconnectedness of social media in the modern world. Web 2.0 has had relatively few real benefactors compared to its original promises of democratizing the internet. Some have used their power for good, some for evil, and some for both.
As Elon Musk rose to prominence via this PayPal sale, his SpaceX gamble, and Tesla, all celebrated his success. What no-one apparently saw coming was the Twitter acquisition. More importantly, no-one saw its impact on the global social media community, national security, and the American people. His slide into what many consider a madness has a hubris hint of the neo-conservative agenda via project 2025.
From Terror to Valor: Echoes and Shadows, available on pre-order for September 11th release.
The Elon Musk Effect
This rapid switch from tech hero to potential national security threat was over a short period. It appears Musk’s obsession with Twitter has become as radicalised as any far-right account holder on the platform. His apparent personality change from mild-mannered success story to foul-mouthed hate monger, has the hallmarks of behavioral modification via disinformation.
Despite his support of subversive surrogate groups looking to create social disruption in democratic countries, his deep involvement with top secret US projects continues. Normally, the US government withdraws these top secret contracts from businesses where someone like Elon Musk would exert influence. Yet, with Elon Musk, they remain.
His hubris, shown to date, requires an answer from the US Government, which seems to be hamstrung by malicious politics. Has the military complex unduly influenced the US defence mission, just as President Eisenhower predicated? With Elon Musk, his partisan use of Starlink, supporting an enemy of the United States, supports this statement.
However, the stakes are now much higher. Starlink’s (an Elon Musk company) contract to ferry highly sensitive US spy satellites into orbit for the United States is where my jaw drops on thinking of the security risks involved.
While hybrid warfare targeting the United States by Russia and China seems to have hamstrung US politics, this should never affect the Department of Defence on its mission. This includes policing of contractor integrity, and the risks involved in delivering goods and services to highly secret areas of the US defence mission.
Unusual Solutions for Unusual Problems
I’m sure a man like Elon Musk considers himself to be too big to fail. As Robert Reich points out, there are options to address the destructive behavior by the tech entrepreneur. Some of his ideas are very valid and merit implementation. However, it’s my view that Elon Musk and his companies, by extension, have become genuine threats to the national security of the United States, and nearly all western democracies.
I also think that the responsibility of addressing this lies with his host country, the United States. The gravity of the situation may gain no credible traction, given resistance in some quarters to any form of radical solutioning. While the current level of controls may appear sufficient, the Federal Government should develop contingency plans to nationalize Musk’s companies, which support national security, or present a direct threat to it.
National security has new friends, new foes, and new priorities. Thinking outside of the box, even if unpopular, can bring holistic solutions, which can preserve a way of life. Exploring these options may be taboo, but will always sound like a good idea for me! How about you?
About the Author
John is a versatile author known for his gripping fiction narratives in the thriller, action, and suspense genres. With a background as a journalist since 2016, and expertise in cloud technologies as an engineer; John brings a unique blend of storytelling prowess and technical acumen to his work.
