Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1547708672-scaled

Weapons biz celebrates declining 'state of humankind,' cold war with China

Defense industry CEOs recently assured investors that the world is still unstable enough to keep the money flowing.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Business is good for weapons companies according to their just released first-quarter-2021 earnings. Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and General Dynamics all had first-quarter-revenues that exceeded estimates. And executives from all three corporations were surprisingly blunt with investors on earnings calls about why their revenues were soaring: the Biden administration’s tilt toward great power competition with China and greater international instability.

General Dynamics’ Chairman and CEO Phebe Novakovic clearly stated that what’s bad for people is good for their bottomline. “[U]nfortunately, for the state of humankind, the world has become an increasingly dangerous place,” said Novakovic on Wednesday. “And so we see the reflection of that concern in many U.S. allies with increased demand for many of our products in Europe, Eastern Europe, a little bit in Asia, parts of the Middle East and in the former Commonwealth nations and the U.K.”

She later concluded that the potential of the world becoming more dangerous was producing a “nice cadence continuing in terms of our orders.”

Meanwhile, Lockheed CEO James Taiclet — who in January told investors that a growing security rivalry with China should give his company leeway with antitrust regulators concerned about Lockheed’s vertical consolidation of the missile industry — doubled down on his emphasis that a brewing cold war with China would be good for Lockheed’s business.

“[T]he Biden administration clearly recognizes that we're all in the year of this resurgent great power competition and regional disruptive powers that are out there as well like Iran and North Korea,” said Taiclet on April 20. “That's a world that's not going to get any more peaceful anytime soon, most likely and so strong national defense is a priority of the administration, I believe, based on their own statements.”

Taiclet went on to conclude that “I see strong opportunities going forward under this administration for international defense cooperation, that would benefit Lockheed Martin, I expect.”

Northrop Grumman CEO Kathy Warden echoed similar sentiments, telling investors on Thursday that “we believe our capabilities will remain well aligned with U.S. national security priorities,” emphasizing that “the Biden administration has signaled that it views competition with China as the most pressing long-term security challenge and will invest in the capabilities needed to maintain U.S. national security advantages.”

She singled out the government’s “modernizing” of the nuclear arsenal as “aligned with our portfolio.” The investment in nuclear weapons is a $2 trillion project, one that Quincy Institute Distinguished Fellow Joe Cirincione observed was “a collection of legacy systems and new programs promoted for financial and political profit,” benefiting lobbyists and defense contractors like Northrop, not driven by U.S. national security interests or strategy.

Indeed, none of the comments coming from weapons manufacturers celebrating the potential for a cold war competition with China or the declining “state of humankind” shouldn’t come as any surprise. They are, after all, in the business of selling tools of war. But it’s taxpayers who are picking up a growing bill for weapons, and those bills are coming from an increasingly less competitive and shrinking industry.

A 2019 report from the Government Accountability Office found that nearly half of all Defense Department contracts went to United Technologies, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, General Dynamics, and Boeing. And, according to Brown University’s Cost of War Project, over half of the defense budget — currently at $740 billion per year — goes to private contractors.

That might explain why Novakovic’s statements to investors on Wednesday could lament the “state of humankind” and “the world has become an increasingly dangerous place” but lead with the observation that “it’s a very good start to the year.”

With a president in the White House who explicitly linked his ambitious domestic spending bill to competing with China, an ongoing (if unnecessary) nuclear weapons overhaul, and a Pentagon budget that may actually grow by $11 billion if Biden’s proposed budget is adopted, it’s certainly a “good start to the year” for an industry that profits off the world becoming more dangerous. 


Image: Pla2na via shutterstock.com
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Diplomacy Watch
Top Photo Credit: Khody Akhavi

Diplomacy Watch: Euro leaders  reeling after Trump-Putin call

QiOSK

Europeans are surprised and frustrated by President Trump’s decision to call Russian President Putin without consulting Ukrainian President Zelenskyy or other European leadership.

The president made good on his promise to begin negotiations with Russia by having a phone call with President Vladimir Putin on Wednesday, which he described as “lengthy and highly productive” and indicated that further negotiations would begin “immediately.”

keep readingShow less
Donald Trump Marc Fogel
Top image credit: President Donald J. Trump greets Marc Fogel at the White House after his release from a Russian prison, Tuesday, February 11, 2025. (Official White House Photo by Daniel Torok)

Trump's peace efforts should be a wake-up call for Dems

QiOSK

In less than 3 weeks, President Trump secured a ceasefire in Gaza, spoke directly to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky, and kickstarted diplomacy to end the Ukraine war. At the same time, he has also put forward some idiotic ideas, such as pushing Palestinians out of Gaza and making Canada the 51st state.

But it raises important questions: Why didn't the Biden administration choose to push for an end to the wars in Gaza and Ukraine? Why didn't the majority of the Democrats demand it? Instead, they went down the path of putting Liz Cheney on a pedestal and having Kamala Harris brag about having the most lethal military in the world while Trump positioned himself as a peace candidate — justifiably or not.

keep readingShow less
POGO
Top image credit: Project on Government Oversight

$200 billion more for the Pentagon?

Military Industrial Complex

No one has ever accused the U.S. military of being a lean, mean, fighting machine. A call to give it $200 billion more split between this year and next won’t do anything to change that reality. But that’s what the new chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee wants to do. Senator Roger Wicker (R-MS) thinks the money should be pumped into President Trump’s “Iron Dome for America” missile defense shield, as well as “key investments in areas such as shipbuilding, submarines and the Air Force’s next-generation fighter,” Valerie Insinna of Breaking Defensereported.

Such an increase would represent “a magnificent opportunity to make the Defense Department and defense procurement more efficient and modern,” Wicker said. (Did Wicker increase his three kids’ allowances when they made poor choices?) Admiral Mike Mullen, when he was serving as chairman of the Joint Chiefs a decade ago, was closer to the mark when he said the Pentagon’s civilian and military leaders “lost their ability to prioritize” amid the Defense Department’s post-9/11 cash gusher. But Wicker maintains that forcing the Pentagon to buy more commercially, outside of the Defense Department’s crazy procurement process, could generate big benefits.

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.