Follow us on social

Shutterstock_1664656051-scaled

Feds sign off on controversial L3Harris purchase of Aerojet Rocketdyne

Critics worry ‘merger will hurt the American people and our common defense by further weakening competition.’

Reporting | Military Industrial Complex

Military contractor L3Harris said in a letter to investors that it plans to finalize its acquisition of Aerojet Rocketdyne on Friday, just two days after the company announced that the Federal Trade Commission would not block the deal.

The news ends months of questions over whether the acquisition would be allowed to go through. The FTC had previously blocked Lockheed Martin from buying Aerojet, citing concerns that the purchase would further consolidate an already centralized military industry. Prior to the acquisition, Aerojet was the only independent company capable of producing rocket motors — a key component in a wide variety of weapons systems — at scale.

The acquisition is sure to draw scrutiny from military spending watchdogs, who argue that the deal risks driving up costs for taxpayers. Rep. Chris Deluzio (D-Penn.) told RS last week that he is “concerned this merger will hurt the American people and our common defense by further weakening competition in the defense industrial base.”

The motor manufacturer “already holds a monopolistic role in the market, as companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing depend on products produced only by Aerojet,” Deluzio argued. “A merger with L3Harris would put it in the position to leverage their control over those products.”

Notably, Aerojet Rocketdyne makes motors that are crucial to the products of L3Harris’s competitors. Raytheon and Lockheed Martin rely on Aerojet systems to propel Javelin missiles, a shoulder-launched weapon that has seen heavy use in Ukraine. Its motors are also crucial to Raytheon’s Stinger missiles and Boeing’s intercontinental ballistic missiles, which make up much of America’s nuclear arsenal.

The weapons industry has consolidated dramatically since the 1990s, according to a recent Pentagon report. While the Department of Defense used to do business with 51 “prime” contractors that could lead major programs, now only five military firms can fill that role.

The word salad of military contractor names is a testament to this history. Lockheed Martin came about following the 1995 merger of Lockheed Corporation and Martin Marietta. Northrop Corporation merged with Grumman corporation in 1994 to form Northrop Grumman. 

Some are more subtle than others: Raytheon Technologies — a seemingly normal name for a company — is actually a mash-up of Raytheon Company and United Technologies, which came together in 2020.

L3Harris is among the most unusual of these zombie titles. As RS has previously reported, it started off as L-3 Communications in 1997 and began buying up defense companies of all stripes. Given its diverse portfolio, executives at the company renamed it to L3 Technologies in 2016. Then, following a 2018 merger with Harris Corporation, the L3Harris name came to be.

The Pentagon has the authority to block military contractor mergers and acquisitions, as Deluzio and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) noted in a letter to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin earlier this month.

“[T]his deal would threaten competition and national security, increase prices, reduce innovation, and reduce product quality and create production delays for the defense industrial base,” Deluzio and Warren argued.

But DoD has apparently not been swayed. The Aerojet Rocketdyne website already redirects to L3Harris, signaling that the acquisition is all but done. “I’m excited about the next phase of L3Harris,” CEO Christopher Kubasik told investors.


(Shutterstock/ JHVEPhoto)
Reporting | Military Industrial Complex
Ohio-class ballistic-missile submarine
Top image credit: The Ohio-class ballistic-missile submarine USS Tennessee (SSBN 734) gold crew returns to its homeport at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Georgia, following a strategic deterrence patrol. The boat is one of five ballistic-missile submarines stationed at the base and is capable of carrying up to 20 submarine-launched ballistic missiles with multiple warheads. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication 2nd Class Bryan Tomforde)

More nukes = more problems

Military Industrial Complex

These have been tough years for advocates of arms control and nuclear disarmament. The world’s two leading nuclear powers — the United States and Russia — have only one treaty left that puts limits on their nuclear weapons stockpiles and deployments, the New START Treaty. That treaty limits deployments of nuclear weapons to 1,550 on each side, and includes verification procedures to hold them to their commitments.

But in the context of the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, the idea of extending New START when it expires in 2026 has been all but abandoned, leaving the prospect of a brave new world in which the United States and Russia can develop their nuclear weapons programs unconstrained by any enforceable rules.

keep readingShow less
 Netanyahu Ben Gvir
Top image credit: Israel Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Itamar Ben Gvir shake hands as the Israeli government approve Netanyahu's proposal to reappoint Itamar Ben-Gvir as minister of National Security, in the Knesset, Israeli parliament in Jerusaelm, March 19, 2025 REUTERS/Oren Ben Hakoon

Ceasefire collapse expands Israel's endless and boundary-less war

Middle East

The resumption of Israel’s assault on the Gaza Strip and collapse of the ceasefire agreement reached in January were predictable and in fact predicted at that time by Responsible Statecraft. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, driven by personal and domestic political motives, never intended to continue implementation of the agreement through to the declared goal of a permanent ceasefire.

Hamas, the other principal party to the agreement, had abided by its terms and consistently favored full implementation, which would have seen the release of all remaining Israeli hostages in addition to a full cessation of hostilities. Israel, possibly in a failed attempt to goad Hamas into doing something that would be an excuse for abandoning the agreement, committed numerous violations even before this week’s renewed assault. These included armed attacks that killed 155 Palestinians, continued occupation of areas from which Israel had promised to withdraw, and a blockade of humanitarian aid to Gaza that more than two weeks ago.

keep readingShow less
Iraq war Army soldiers Baghdad
Top photo credit: U.S. Army Soldiers assigned to weapons squad, 1st Platoon, C Company, 1st Battalion, 504th Parachute Infantry Regiment, pose for a photo before patrolling Rusafa, Baghdad, Iraq, Defense Imagery Management Operations Center/Photo by Staff Sgt. Jason Baile

The ghosts of the Iraq War still haunt me, and our foreign policy

Middle East

On St. Patrick’s Day, March 17, 2003, President Bush issued his final ultimatum to Saddam Hussein. Two nights later, my Iraq War started inauspiciously. I was a college student tending bar in New York City. Someone pointed to the television behind me and said: “It’s begun. They’re bombing Baghdad!” In Iraq it was already early morning of March 20.

I arrived home a few hours later to find the half-expected voice message on my answering machine: “You are ordered to report to the armory tomorrow morning no later than 0800, with all your gear.”

keep readingShow less

Trump transition

Latest

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.