Follow us on social

Screen-shot-2021-08-05-at-1.20.17-pm

GOP Senate candidate promotes border security technology made by his boss

Billionaire Peter Thiel has poured millions into the campaign of Blake Masters, who in turn appears to be boosting Thiel’s financial interests.

Reporting | North America

Last month, billionaire Peter Thiel contributed $10 million to a super PAC supporting the Senate candidacy of his employee, Blake Masters, in Arizona. At the time, Masters, who serves as chief operating officer of Thiel Capital — Thiel’s investment firm — and president of the Thiel foundation, seemed to launch his Senate run with a number of policy prescriptions that would potentially steer federal funding to Thiel’s investments in border security technology and defense contractors who stand to profit from a militarized competition with China.

Since then, Masters, despite his populist rhetoric of pushing back against “corporations that have gotten so big, they think they’re bigger than America,” is doubling down on militarization of the border that closely tracks with his boss and top campaign supporter’s investments in surveillance technologies.

Masters, speaking at an event on August 3 at the Pima County Republican Club, describes “day one legislation to fix the [border] wall,” saying:

I think we need to double or triple the size of the Border Patrol. And I also think we need to arm those guys with the technology they need. Very often it's just like you know two guys with a pickup truck and — God bless them — they have a huge territory, and they just have like a radio and a sidearm or something like that. We should be using drones. We should be using, you know, infrared beams. We should be getting — we have the technology. We can get them pickup trucks with heads-up, night-vision displays, so they can actually do their job around the clock in a much safer way.

Anduril Technologies, in which Thiel is an early investor, signed its first federal government contracts with the border patrol to put up autonomous surveillance towers incorporating, among other technologies, infrared sensors. Anduril is also developing small drones and, at the company’s formation, outlined a vision for a high tech border wall using many of the technologies described by Masters.

Thiel also founded Palantir Technologies, a $20 billion data-analytics firm with ongoing contracts with Immigration and Customs Enforcement  for technology that includes software used to support the Trump administration’s controversial detention, deportation, and family separation policies on the southern border.

While Masters’ campaign noticeably promotes federal spending on technologies that, coincidentally or not, are developed by companies linked to Thiel, Masters denied that his boss and campaign funder would have undue influence over him if he succeeds in unseating Democratic Arizona Senator Mark Kelly, in an interview with the New York Post

In that same interview, Masters faced questions about whether his high tech border strategy would ultimately steer taxpayer money to Thiel’s companies. 

“I’m familiar with those companies and bullish on them,” he told the New York Post in reference to Palantir and Anduril. “I’m open to whatever works.”


Photos: mark reinstein via shutterstock & Benjamin Chambers/The RepublicCent02 via Reuters
Reporting | North America
Afghanistan withdrawal
Lloyd Austin, Kenneth McKenzie, and Mark Milley in 2021. (MSNBC screengrab)

Turns out leaving Afghanistan did not unleash terror on US or region

Military Industrial Complex

It will be four years since the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan on Aug. 30, 2021, ending a nearly 20-year occupation that could serve as a poster child for mission creep.

What began in October 2001 as a narrow intervention to destroy al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, and topple the Taliban government for refusing to hand over al-Qaeda’s leader, Osama bin Laden, morphed into an open-ended nation-building operation that killed 2,334 U.S. military personnel and wounded over 20,000 more.

keep readingShow less
Francois Bayrou Emmanuel Macron
Top image credit: France's Prime Minister Francois Bayrou arrives to hear France's President Emmanuel Macron deliver a speech to army leaders at l'Hotel de Brienne in Paris on July 13, 2025, on the eve of the annual Bastille Day Parade in the French capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe facing revolts, promising more guns with no money

Europe

If you wanted to create a classic recipe for political crisis, you could well choose a mixture of a stagnant economy, a huge and growing public debt, a perceived need radically to increase military spending, an immigration crisis, a deeply unpopular president, a government without a majority in parliament, and growing radical parties on the right and left.

In other words, France today. And France’s crisis is only one part of the growing crisis of Western Europe as a whole, with serious implications for the future of transatlantic relations.

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Middle East

Europe appears set to move from threats to action. According to reports, the E3 — Britain, France, and Germany — will likely trigger the United Nations “snapback” process this week. Created under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), this mechanism allows any participant to restore pre-2015 U.N. sanctions if Iran is judged to be in violation of its commitments.

The mechanism contains a twist that makes it so potent. Normally, the Security Council operates on the assumption that sanctions need affirmative consensus to pass. But under snapback, the logic is reversed. Once invoked, a 30-day clock begins. Sanctions automatically return unless the Security Council votes to keep them suspended, meaning any permanent member can force their reimposition with a single veto.

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.