Follow us on social

Shutterstock_463663361-scaled

DoD: Retired US officers marching into work for foreign governments

DoD laundry list exposes how much money is on offer for military brass looking to cash in on their connections and influence

Analysis | Reporting | North America

Members of Congress have obtained a list of former military officers who have done paid work for foreign governments since 2012. It may be a surprise — or not — that the list includes 77 senior officials (Generals and Admirals), and that the countries that employed them represent some of the most repressive governments in the world (Saudi Arabia, Egypt and the UAE).

Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) and Charles Grassley (R-Iowa) requested the information from the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the list was included in a broader memo of responses to their questions relating to the activities of retired officers. According to the OSD, there were 450 notifications of employment for foreign governments from 2012 through 2022. Of them, 12 were denied, 21 were administratively closed or withdrawn, and 11 are pending State or DoD approval.

The top country of employment? The UAE. Of the 47 different nations listed in the report, more than half of the approvals were for work with the Emirates, either with the country directly or with contractors working on behalf of the country. Of the total UAE jobs, only 35 disclosed their compensation. The remaining 185 are listed as “not available” or “not reported.”

The UAE’s prominence in this list is especially notable because, while these DoD officials were working for the UAE, its government was masterminding a number of schemes to illegally meddle in U.S. politics and elections. These provocations and the UAE’s enormous legal influence operation in the U.S. did not go unnoticed by the U.S. intelligence community which, last fall, briefed lawmakers on a classified intelligence report outlining UAE efforts to meddle in American politics and bend U.S. foreign policy to its will, as first reported by John Hudson at the Washington Post.

Despite all of this, the Department of Defense reported to Warren and Grassley that just two requests (less than 1 percent) for work with the UAE government were denied.

Some of the senior officials listed here were real go-getters, gaining permission to work for multiple foreign governments at the same time. For example, Major General Charles J. Dunlap Jr. received eight separate approvals to work for foreign governments, including three for the UAE, as well as Canada, Denmark, Israel, and Scotland. 

Former NSA head General Keith Alexander was the next highest with five  total approvals for work with foreign governments — three with the government of Singapore, one with Saudi Arabia, and one with Japan. (As the Washington Post pointed out yesterday, the Saudi Arabia deal was for $700,000 and was inked after the murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018).

“There seems to be a high demand for retired senior military officers to work for foreign governments, particularly autocracies,” noted our colleague and investigative journalist Eli Clifton.

“The obvious question is: What are these former officers bringing to the table in exchange for six-figure paydays? Is it just their experience? Or is it their connections, influence and stature back in Washington?”

There are some other high profile retirees on this list, too. In 2019 Lt. Gen. Douglas Lute had a contract as a senior adviser from the Jones Group International/Libya for $15,000 a month. Lt. General James Clapper worked for the Office of National Intelligence in Australia for an undisclosed amount. H.R. McMaster, former Trump national security adviser, worked on behalf of the Japanese government at the Hudson Institute, beginning in 2019, for $250,000 annually, according to the list.

In addition, former Trump defense secretary Gen. James Mattis served as a conference presenter in the UAE less than a year after leaving office and separately as an adviser for the UAE, both for an undisclosed amount. Adm. William Fallon, who served as the commander of U.S. Central Command from 2007-2008, is listed as part- owner of the Global Alliance Advisors consulting firm, which was expected to get more than $23 million from the government of Qatar (his own compensation was “in excess of $250,000”).

The OSD responses were shared with Responsible Statecraft in addition to Senator Warren’s new report, “Pentagon Alchemy: How Defense Officials Pass through the Revolving Door and Peddle Brass for Gold,” which will be released during today’s Armed Services Subcommittee on Personnel, which she chairs.

The report details some 672 former government officials, military officers, legislative staff and members of Congress working for the top 20 defense contractors in 2022. Of that number, 91 percent were serving as lobbyists.

The top five contractors in the revolving door are no surprise, either — Boeing (85 hires), Pfizer (73 — which also had a lot of defense contracts during COVID), Raytheon (64), General Dynamics (57), and Lockheed Martin, (53).

Critics say both lists  — the revolving door stateside and work for foreign governments — highlight the need for reform. On the foreign employment side, hundreds  of the names were blocked out as, per DoD rules, the names of individuals with ranks 0-6 and below are withheld. Additionally, while these DoD forms require applicants list their expected compensation for foreign government work, in more than half of all applications this information wasn’t provided.  Needless to say, more transparency is necessary. 

Stateside, Sen. Warren has proposed legislation that would put a four-year ban on major contractors  hiring senior DoD officials or any former employers who worked on their contracts while in government, along with a number of other measures. Quincy Institute defense analyst Bill Hartung says so many of these relationships are brokered to influence U.S. policy and to create business for the military industrial complex, prioritizing “war and preparations for war over dialogue and diplomacy.” 

“The more that can be done to rein in these widespread conflicts-of-interest, the better chance we will have of crafting a foreign policy that serves the interests of the public, not self-interested corporations and foreign entities.”


(Tianyu Han/Shutterstock)
Analysis | Reporting | North America
US Marines
Top image credit: U.S. Marines with Force Reconnaissance Platoon, Maritime Raid Force, 31st Marine Expeditionary Unit, prepare to clear a room during a limited scale raid exercise at Sam Hill Airfield, Queensland, Australia, June 21, 2025. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Cpl. Alora Finigan)

Cartels are bad but they're not 'terrorists.' This is mission creep.

Military Industrial Complex

There is a dangerous pattern on display by the Trump administration. The president and Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth seem to hold the threat and use of military force as their go-to method of solving America’s problems and asserting state power.

The president’s reported authorization for the Pentagon to use U.S. military warfighting capacity to combat drug cartels — a domain that should remain within the realm of law enforcement — represents a significant escalation. This presents a concerning evolution and has serious implications for civil liberties — especially given the administration’s parallel moves with the deployment of troops to the southern border, the use of federal forces to quell protests in California, and the recent deployment of armed National Guard to the streets of our nation’s capital.

keep readingShow less
Howard Lutnick
Top photo credit: Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick on CNBC, 8/26/25 (CNBC screengrab)

Is nationalizing the defense industry such a bad idea?

Military Industrial Complex

The U.S. arms industry is highly consolidated, specialized, and dependent on government contracts. Indeed, the largest U.S. military contractors are already effectively extensions of the state — and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick is right to point that out.

His suggestion in a recent media appearance to partially nationalize the likes of Lockheed Martin is hardly novel. The economist John Kenneth Galbraith argued for the nationalization of the largest military contractors in 1969. More recently, various academics and policy analysts have advocated for partial or full nationalization of military firms in publications including The Nation, The American Conservative, The Middle East Research and Information Project (MERIP), and The Seattle Journal for Social Justice.

keep readingShow less
Modi Trump
Top image credit: White House, February 2025

Trump's India problem could become a Global South crisis

Asia-Pacific

As President Trump’s second term kicked off, all signs pointed to a continued upswing in U.S.-India relations. At a White House press conference in February, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi spoke of his vision to “Make India Great Again” and how the United States under Trump would play a central role. “When it’s MAGA plus MIGA, it becomes a mega partnership for prosperity,” Modi said.

During Trump’s first term, the two populist leaders hosted rallies for each other in their respective countries and cultivated close personal ties. Aside from the Trump-Modi bromance, U.S.-Indian relations have been on a positive trajectory for over two decades, driven in part by mutual suspicion of China. But six months into his second term, Trump has taken several actions that have led to a dramatic downturn in U.S.-India relations, with India-China relations suddenly on the rise.

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.