Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_2090547517-scaled-e1654639104356

With Raytheon move, the defense industry consolidates around the Pentagon

One expert called the company's relocation to Virginia the 'WD-40' for the 'revolving door' between industry and government.

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
google cta
google cta

Leading defense contractor Raytheon Technologies announced Tuesday that it plans to move its headquarters from Massachusetts to Arlington, VA, where execs will be a short walk from the Pentagon.

The decision comes only a month after Boeing said it would decamp from Chicago in favor of Arlington. With Raytheon and Boeing coming to town, every one of the five leading defense contractors will now be based in the D.C. area, giving them closer access to the network of officials, politicians and lobbyists that help these defense giants bring in massive profits. In other words, the military industrial complex has officially set up shop in the Pentagon’s shadow.

In a statement, Raytheon said their new location "increases agility in supporting U.S. government and commercial aerospace customers and serves to reinforce partnerships that will progress innovative technologies to advance the industry." 

Mark Thompson, a national security analyst at the Project on Government Oversight, had a less sanguine take. “This increasing concentration of the military industrial complex a stop or two away from the Pentagon is really not good either for taxpayers, for troops, or for national security,” Thompson said, adding that the move amounts to “WD-40” for the “revolving door” between the government and defense companies.

Thompson also noted that each of these companies already had a major lobbying presence in D.C., meaning that the only real reason to move is to “rub shoulders with the powers that be.”

“If that’s what they’re trying to do,” he continued, “I just don’t think it bodes well for national defense.”

Of course, Raytheon's decision may have included factors beyond the proximity to the Pentagon. As Jeff Jacoby pointed out on Twitter, "Virginia is a right-to-work state with lower taxes" and has "a legislature that rarely convenes, a far more business-friendly environment, and a bipartisan congressional delegation." 

Still, it's hard to see this as much more than Raytheon playing catch-up with other top defense firms. After all, the defense giant will still have “600 facilities across 44 states and [US] territories” and doesn’t plan to significantly expand its current Arlington-based team of 130 employees, so the move is more of a statement of intent than a big change in policy. 

What’s interesting is that the migration of contractors toward D.C. started as the Cold War ended and American military policy entered a state of flux. General Dynamics got the ball rolling in 1991 when it left St. Louis in favor of Rosslyn, and Lockheed Martin followed suit shortly after when it moved from California to Bethesda, Maryland, after a 1994 merger with Martin Marietta. The next domino fell in 2011, when Northrop Grumman made its own pilgrimage to Arlington.

This movement toward the nation’s capital has gone hand-in-hand with another seismic shift in the defense industry: In the course of only 14 years in the 1980s and 90s, 51 different defense manufacturers dwindled down to five through a series of mergers and acquisitions. This pattern has continued in recent years, most notably with Raytheon’s 2020 merger with United Technologies.

Thompson argues that these trends are likely related. “As the number [of contractors] shrinks, the importance of the Pentagon to each of them becomes more important,” he said. “They need every edge they can get.”


Editorial credit: Arnold O. A. Pinto / Shutterstock.com
google cta
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.