Follow us on social

Kendall

Frank Kendall flies out of revolving door and into Air Force confirmation

Biden's pick for secretary worked in Pentagon acquisitions before his most recent gigs consulting for top defense contractors.

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

On Tuesday morning, the Senate Armed Service Committee will hold a confirmation hearing to consider three of President Joe Biden’s nominees, including Frank Kendall III, Biden’s pick to serve as Secretary of the Air Force.

In some ways, Kendall is a natural choice. He served as Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology and Logistics in the Obama administration. But his activities over the past four years tell a very different story: a trip through the revolving door to lucrative consulting and board membership gigs with two of the Pentagon’s top contractors.

Kendall’s transition from overseeing acquisitions at the Pentagon to working for the companies whose products he procured while in government came with a generous payday. His Public Financial Disclosure Report shows $702,319 in consulting fees from Northrop Grumman, as part of a $300,000 per year consulting contract with the weapons manufacturer, and between $500,000 and $1,000,000 in Leidos stock, a weapons firm and government contractor for which Kendall annually receives approximately $125,000 in cash and $155,000 in stock, in return for his board membership.

Kendall says he will terminate these relationships if confirmed but the flood of money he received from Pentagon contractors after overseeing procurement, and potentially before his appointment as Secretary of the Air Force, offers a clear example of how weapons firms lavish stock and cash on individuals who have made, or will make, procurement decisions.

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. Over half of the defense budget — currently at $740 billion per year — goes to private contractors.

Kendall’s consulting client, Northrop Grumman, expressed blunt truths about its business interests in its April quarterly earnings call. CEO Kathy Warden told investors, “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.”

On top of cheering on a potential clash between the U.S. and China, Warden praised the $2 trillion “modernizing” of the nuclear arsenal as “aligned with our portfolio.” Quincy Institute Distinguished Fellow Joe Cirincione, an expert on nuclear weapons, observed that the push for costly new nuclear weapons was ultimately driven by “ financial and political profit” and fails to address real national security concerns.

Leidos, for its part, is far less known than Northrop Grumman but regularly makes the lists of top federal contractors and, according to Washington Technology and the Federal Procurement Data System, took in over $8 billion in contracts in 2019.

The company has contracts from a variety of federal agencies but the company’s CEO, Roger A. Krone, also expressed positive sentiments about the Pentagon’s ballooning budget, assuring investors in February that the $740 billion defense budget and Biden’s pending 2022 $753 billion defense budget recommendation is “unlikely to put pressure on defense industry outlays before fiscal year 2023.”

Krone added, “Given the great power competition, and leading national security issues, we do not anticipate major cuts but rather flattish to slightly declining budget numbers with focus on modernization and reprioritization,” effectively endorsing Northrop and other defense contractor’s assessment that a brewing Cold War competition will pad their bottom lines.

Kendall has shown an independent streak and, at least in the past, hasn’t held back from criticizing weapons firms. In 2014, Kendall, who was overseeing acquisitions, declared the over budget and behind schedule F-35 “acquisition malpractice” in a 60 Minutes interview.

Right out of the revolving door, Kendall’s attitude toward his weapons industry clients and employers will face a fresh test with his hearing on Tuesday and likely confirmation as Biden’s Secretary of the Air Force.


Frank Kendall III, then-undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology, and logistics, speaks with Maj. Claire Lundberg, 494th Fighter Squadron pilot, and Lt. Col Bob Remey, deputy air boss, during the Farnborough International Airshow, England, July 15, 2014. (U.S Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Erin O'Shea)
Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
Rand Paul Donald Trump
Top photo credit: Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) (Shutterstock/Mark Reinstein) and President Trump (White House/Molly Riley)

Rand Paul to Trump: Don't 'abandon' MAGA over Maduro regime change

Washington Politics

Sen. Rand Paul said on Friday that “all hell could break loose” within Donald Trump’s MAGA coalition if the president involves the U.S. further in Ukraine, and added that his supporters who voted for him after 20 years of regime change wars would "feel abandoned" if he went to war and tried to topple Nicolas Maduro, too.

President Trump has been getting criticism from some of his supporters for vowing to release the files of the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and then reneging on that promise. Paul said that the Epstein heat Trump is getting from MAGA will be nothing compared to if he refuses to live up to his “America First” foreign policy promises.

keep readingShow less
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

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.