Follow us on social

google cta
Mohammad_bin_salman_in_washington_-_2018_26083237057

Retired US military brass are cashing in with work for Gulf autocrats: reports

Some officials were even arranging plans to advise foreign governments while on active duty, according to a pair of new investigations.

Middle East
google cta
google cta

Hundreds of U.S. veterans, including former generals and other high-ranking officers, are cashing in on their government experience by working for foreign countries, according to a pair of explosive investigations from the Project on Government Oversight and the Washington Post.

The vast majority of former service members implicated in the investigations have worked for countries in the Middle East, where the U.S. military has taken part in a series of wars in recent decades. 

Most of those have worked for military contractors in the United Arab Emirates, a country with a dismal human rights record both at home and abroad. The U.S. presence in the UAE is so significant that the Post called it a “military machine guided by Americans.” Notably, retired Marine Gen. Jim Mattis served as a military adviser to the UAE in 2015 before returning to government two years later as secretary of defense.

And 15 former generals and admirals have worked directly for Saudi Crown Prince and Defense Minister Mohamed Bin Salman, who launched, and has since led, his country’s brutal war in Yemen.

Retired Marine General James L. Jones, who served as President Barack Obama’s national security adviser, started working with MbS in 2017, when the Saudi government enlisted Jones to “conduct an organizational assessment” of the country’s military. For the project, the former general enlisted the help of “about a dozen ​​former senior Pentagon officials, including William S. Cohen, who served as secretary of defense in the Clinton administration,” according to the Post.

The news raises serious questions about how secondary considerations — like getting a cushy job after retirement — could affect the decision-making process of America’s military leadership. After all, base pay for even the nation’s top generals is around $200,000 per year, and many have made far more than that in the service of foreign governments.

As the Post noted, some officers “even negotiated jobs with foreign governments while they were still on active duty,” and others are working in countries where they were stationed while on active duty.

The investigations stem from a trove of documents that POGO and the Post acquired from the Pentagon in a pair of lawsuits.

Given that former soldiers and officers can be called back to active service at any time, they are not allowed to receive anything of value from a foreign government, like all current U.S. officials. But in 1977, Congress granted the Pentagon and State Department the ability to issue waivers for that rule; those documents make up much of the dossiers acquired in the investigation. 

Many of the forms are heavily redacted, and POGO and the Post continue to push the government for more complete information.

Though the executive branch can reject requests for waivers for numerous reasons, 95 percent of them have been approved since 2015, implying that the process is little more than a rubber stamp. And the Post found “scores of retirees on LinkedIn who say they have taken military contracting jobs in the Persian Gulf, but for whom there is no record of federal approval,” meaning that many veterans simply don’t take the time to ask permission. In other words, the actual scale of the problem remains hard to quantify.

In total, the documents reveal that veterans have been authorized to work for at least 50 foreign governments. In addition to countries in the Middle East, this includes Singapore, Indonesia, the United Kingdom, Georgia, Djibouti, and Australia.

Furthermore, this would mean that retired officers would be picking up six- or seven-figure salaries overseas while earning lucrative taxpayer-funded pensions back home. A four-star general with over 40-years of service in the military, for example, would be expected to receive more than $230,000 a year in retirement pay, plus health care benefits. 

Notably, U.S. defense contractors have also become more enmeshed in the military-industrial complex of foreign countries. As the Post notes, Northrop Grumman has opened a joint venture called Vinnell Arabia LLC with Saudi firm Arab Builders for Trading. Vinnell employs “hundreds of Americans” tasked with training the Saudi national guard, according to the Post. 

The revelations add to concerns about the extent to which foreign countries, including many with authoritarian governments, have expanded their influence over U.S. institutions.

Just last month, Responsible Statecraft reported that former Sen. Norm Coleman, a leading Republican fundraiser, currently works as a paid lobbyist for Saudi Arabia. And another recent RS investigation found that dozens of former officials, including numerous ex-members of Congress, have become lobbyists for Middle East autocracies, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Egypt.

Moreover, Retired four-star Marine general John R. Allen stepped down as head of the Brookings Institution in June after news broke that federal authorities believe Allen illegally lobbied for Qatar. 

In order to address these problems, some members of Congress have introduced a new piece of legislation known as the Fighting Foreign Influence Act. If passed, the bill would force think tanks and other tax-exempt organizations to disclose major gifts from foreign governments. It would also “impose a lifetime ban on former senior U.S. military officers, presidents, vice presidents, other senior executive branch officials, and members of Congress from ever lobbying for a foreign principal,” according to a press release from the proposal’s sponsors.

However, the bill would not prevent the behavior revealed in the new investigations given that this work does not include lobbying for a foreign principal.


Then-Defense Secretary James N. Mattis meets with Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Defense, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman bin Abdulaziz, at the Pentagon in Washington D.C., Mar. 22, 2018. (DoD photo by Navy Mass Communication Specialist 1st Class Kathryn E. Holm)
google cta
Middle East
Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi 首相官邸 (Cabinet Public Affairs Office)

Takaichi 101: How to torpedo relations with China in a month

Asia-Pacific

On November 7, Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi stated that a Chinese attack on Taiwan could undoubtedly be “a situation that threatens Japan’s survival,” thereby implying that Tokyo could respond by dispatching Self-Defense Forces.

This statement triggered the worst crisis in Sino-Japanese relations in over a decade because it reflected a transformation in Japan’s security policy discourse, defense posture, and U.S.-Japan defense cooperation in recent years. Understanding this transformation requires dissecting the context as well as content of Takaichi’s parliamentary remarks.

keep readingShow less
Starmer, Macron, Merz G7
Top photo credit: Prime Minister Keir Starmer meets Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney and António Costa, President of the European Council at the G7 world leaders summit in Kananaskis, June 15, 2025. Picture by Simon Dawson / No 10 Downing Street

The Europeans pushing the NATO poison pill

Europe

The recent flurry of diplomatic activity surrounding Ukraine has revealed a stark transatlantic divide. While high level American and Ukrainian officials have been negotiating the U.S. peace plan in Geneva, European powers have been scrambling to influence a process from which they risk being sidelined.

While Europe has to be eventually involved in a settlement of the biggest war on its territory after World War II, so far it’s been acting more like a spoiler than a constructive player.

keep readingShow less
Sudan
Top image credit: A Sudanese army soldier stands next to a destroyed combat vehicle as Sudan's army retakes ground and some displaced residents return to ravaged capital in the state of Khartoum Sudan March 26, 2025. REUTERS/El Tayeb Siddig
Will Sudan attack the UAE?

Saudi leans in hard to get UAE out of Sudan civil war

Middle East

As Saudi Arabia’s powerful crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), swept through Washington last week, the agenda was predictably packed with deals: a trillion-dollar investment pledge, access to advanced F-35 fighter jets, and coveted American AI technology dominated the headlines. Yet tucked within these transactions was a significant development for the civil war in Sudan.

Speaking at the U.S.-Saudi Investment Forum President Donald Trump said that Sudan “was not on my charts,” viewing the conflict as “just something that was crazy and out of control” until the Saudi leader pressed the issue. “His majesty would like me to do something very powerful having to do with Sudan,” Trump recounted, adding that MBS framed it as an opportunity for greatness.

The crown prince’s intervention highlights a crucial new reality that the path to peace, or continued war, in Sudan now runs even more directly through the escalating rivalry between Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE). The fate of Sudan is being forged in the Gulf, and its future will be decided by which side has more sway in Trump’s White House.

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.