The federal government and U.S. taxpayers are effectively underwriting massive returns for Lockheed Martin shareholders, returns so impressive that the weapons firm’s CEO, James Taiclet, boasted about how the company handed $11 billion over to shareholders in 2022 via share repurchases and dividend payments, creating “significant value for our shareholders.”
Taiclet, speaking on a January 24 earnings call, said that Lockheed, the world’s largest weapons firm, was “ending the year with a total shareholder return of 40 percent.”
Lockheed may be a for-profit, publicly traded, company but those stock buybacks, dividends and appreciated stock value are largely underwritten by U.S. taxpayers. The company’s 2021 annual report acknowledged that, “…71% of our $67.0 billion in net sales were from the U.S. Government.”
Weapons companies often boast about the jobs they create and how their products are vital tools for U.S. national security. But in this case Lockheed is effectively acknowledging that billions of dollars of profit, overwhelmingly driven by U.S. government contracts, are being handed over to investors. In other words, $7.8 billion of the $11 billion transferred to shareholders in 2022 was effectively funded by the U.S. government and Americans who thought their tax dollars went to providing public services and keeping the country safe.
Eli Clifton is a senior advisor at the Quincy Institute and Investigative Journalist at Large at Responsible Statecraft. He reports on money in politics and U.S. foreign policy.
A group of Democratic lawmakers led by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) on Tuesday slammed a Republican proposal to pour $150 billion into the military beyond the increases already planned for 2025.
“Republicans are putting the Pentagon before the people,” Markey said during a press conference on Capitol Hill highlighting wasteful Pentagon spending.
The senator stood next to a large list of alternative projects that could be funded by a $150 billion allocation including new hospitals, student loan forgiveness, affordable housing units, and free school lunches.
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) took aim at Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, highlighting the hypocrisy of a military budget increase amid massive cuts to much smaller federal agencies like the U.S. Agency for International Development, the National Institute of Health, and the Department of Education.
“Let’s not be fooled by the hollow claims that Elon is going to go after waste in Pentagon spending,” she said.
Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) said the $150 billion spending increase proposal was driven by her colleagues’ investments in the military industrial complex, echoing an opinion piece she published in the Detroit Free Press late last month.
Rounding out the slate of speakers were Robert Weissman, co-president of Public Citizen, Gabe Murphy, and Thomas Countryman. Murphy, a policy analyst at the nonpartisan organization Taxpayers for Common Sense, lamented the bloating influence of private companies, noting that “half of our budget goes to defense contractors.”
Meanwhile, Countryman, a former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for International Affairs and current Board Chairman at the Arms Control Association, criticized the proposal’s emphasis on nuclear weapons spending as a defense strategy. “What concerns me about this particular agenda request by Republicans is that it will contribute to a nuclear arms race,” he said.
keep readingShow less
Top photo credit: Pam Bondi speaks on the day of her swearing in ceremony as U.S. Attorney General, at the White House in Washington, U.S., February 5, 2025. REUTERS/Kent Nishimura
Buried within a flurry of memos from the Department of Justice Wednesday was a clear and concise invitation for foreign actors and lobbyists to secretly meddle in America.
When it comes to the nation’s preeminent law for regulating foreign influence in the U.S., the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), the DOJ is henceforth only going to bring criminal charges in “instances of alleged conduct similar to more traditional espionage by foreign government actors,” according to a memo sent late Wednesday from Attorney General Pam Bondi.
“These changes are an invitation to foreign actors to interfere in American affairs,” Aaron Zelinsky, a former DOJ national security prosecutor, told Bloomberg Law, which first reported this news. “Even worse, it’s an invitation to Americans to help them do it.”
Bondi knows all of this better than most, as she was previously a registered foreign agent working for Ballard Partners, a Florida-based firm with close ties to President Trump. She provided “advocacy services relative to U.S.-Qatar bilateral relations” on a contract worth $115,000 a month.
Firms representing foreign governments, like Ballard and others covered by FARA are required to disclose certain information about who they are working for, who they are contacting, and the size of their contracts. But, with Bondi’s announcement, fear of punishment for flauting the these disclosure requirements will disappear along with the transparency they afforded to the American people. This is music to the ears of foreign government officials looking to covertly influence American politics and lobbyists looking to avoid disclosure — such as Bondi’s colleague Kash Patel, Trump's nominee for head of the FBI, who came under fire this week for his undisclosed work for Qatar.
Citing concerns of “risks of further weaponization and abuses of prosecutorial discretion,” Bondi also disbanded the Foreign Influence Task Force, which was set up to identify covert foreign influence operations. For all of the talk of the weaponization of FARA, the DOJ has only brought 13 FARA cases in the past three years.
And several of those Biden-era FARA cases — and closely related foreign influence statutes — involved high-level Democrats, not Republicans. That list includes New York City mayor Eric Adams, Rep. Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), and, of course, former Democratic Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair Bob Menendez, who just last week was sentenced to 11 years in prison for taking bribes — including piles of cash and gold bars — from the Egyptian government. It’s unclear if corruption cases short of espionage, such as these, would be pursued under Bondi’s new DOJ guidelines.
Josh Rosenstein, a partner at Sandler Reiff Lamb Rosenstein & Birkenstock, which advises clients on FARA compliance, explained via email that he is concerned that “a wide swath of foreign influence operations would go undisclosed” under the new guidelines. For instance, Azerbaijan’s Deputy Foreign Minister scared off several Washington lobbyists last year after asking them to avoid FARA disclosure. Amidst the Trump Administration’s foreign influence fire sale, he might find it easier to shop around for a new contract off the books.
With criminal charges much less likely, Bondi claims that FARA will still be able to focus on “civil enforcement.” Good luck with that; FARA does not have civil investigation authority or even the ability to issue civil fines, rendering this concession all but useless. There are no speeding tickets for minor FARA violations, which is a glaring weakness that multiple FARAreform bills have sought to remedy.
In response to a series of questions seeking clarity on the threshold for criminal charges and how they plan to enforce civil fines, DOJ spokesperson Peter Carr declined to comment beyond the memo.
Relying on these toothless tools will cripple America’s ability to fight malign foreign influence in the U.S. Authoritarian countries stand to benefit most from this lack of enforcement. Not only do they lead the way in lobbying activities, but some of the biggest spenders on foreign influence under FARA are regimes like China, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar. And, that’s just the funding that’s been reported. Under Bondi’s new guidelines, firms worried about the reputational risks of working with an abusive despotic client — like the firms that cut ties with Saudi Arabia after the murder of Jamal Khashoggi — will now have a perverse incentive to simply avoid registering altogether. Bondi’s guidance effectively gives them the green light to keep all their influence off the books.
If the Trump administration wants to live up to its slogan of putting “America First” the very least it can do is defend America from foreign meddling. President Trump and Attorney General Bondi should rescind this guidance and put America first by defending it from covert foreign influence.
President Donald Trump on Monday suggested that future U.S. military aid to Ukraine could be given in exchange for valuable natural resources, echoing an idea that Ukrainian President Vlodomyr Zelenskyy originally proposed in October.
“We’re putting in hundreds of billions of dollars. They have great rare earth,” Trump said. It isn’t clear which rare earth metals Trump is referring to, but Ukraine’s mineral deposits include lithium, uranium, and titanium, and are worth an estimated several trillion dollars. In addition, Trump did not clarify how much of that value he wants to extract, merely saying that he wants “equalization” from Ukraine for past U.S. military aid dating back to the start of the Russia-Ukraine war. This would amount to roughly $66 billion.
Following an European Union meeting in Brussels, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz claimed that Trump’s proposal was “self-centered” and said that Ukraine’s mineral wealth should instead be spent on reconstruction efforts when the war ends.
Even if Zelenskyy does eventually address or even support Trump’s plan, many of Ukraine’s mineral deposits are now in Russian hands.
Since August 2024, Russia’s military strategy has shifted to target mineral rich Ukrainian land areas. As Ian Proud reported for Responsible Statecraft, Russian forces have made significant progress in capturing coal, uranium, and lithium mines. In the process they have weakened a Ukrainian economy that is already in massive debt and has been suspended from major international lending markets.
Whenever the war in Ukraine does finally end, it seems unlikely that the country will be able to use its own natural resources to get back on its feet.
According to Al Arabiya, the UAE and Saudi Arabia are both contenders to host a meeting between Trump and Putin for Ukraine peace talks.
In the New York Times, Russian sources said yesterday that they have established contact with the Trump administration about potential talks. This was confirmed by President Trump. “And we are talking to the Russians. We are talking to the Ukrainians,” he said.
Trump's team is apparently split over how to approach ending the war, according to NBC, with some members (including National Security Advisor Mike Waltz and General Keith Kellogg) favoring applying pressure on Russia through sanctions and tariffs. Other advisors want to pressure Ukraine by threatening to withdraw military support.
Russia and Ukraine completed a major exchange of captured prisoners in a deal brokered by the UAE, further cementing the UAE's role as a mediator in the conflict, according to France 24,
And in Ukraine, many humanitarian aid groups have halted operations following Trump's aid freeze, says the New York Times.
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.