Follow us on social

Former NSA chief revolves through OpenAI's door

Former NSA chief revolves through OpenAI's door

General Nakasone was just appointed to the board — which doesn't inspire confidence in the company's 'non-military' future

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex

Prominent artificial intelligence research organization OpenAI recently appointed newly retired U.S. Army General and former National Security Agency (NSA) director Paul M. Nakasone to its board of directors.

Nakasone will join the Board’s newly announced Safety and Security Committee, slated to advise OpenAI’s Board on critical safety- and security-related matters and decisions.

Established following an exodus of OpenAI higher-ups concerned about the company’s perceived de-prioritization of safety-related matters, the new Safety and Security Committee is OpenAI’s apparent effort to reestablish a safety-forward reputation with an increasingly wary public.

AI safety concerns are of the utmost importance, but OpenAI should not use them to ram through an appointment that appears poised to normalize AI’s militarization while spinning theever-revolving door between defense and intelligence agencies and Big Tech.

The ‘revolving door’ strikes again

Following his 38-year military career, including over five years heading U.S. Army Cyber Command, Nakasone’s post-retirement OpenAI appointment and shift to the corporate sector mimics the military-industrial complex’s ever-“revolving door” between senior defense or intelligence agency officials and private industry.

The phenomenon manifests itself in rampant conflicts of interest and massive military contracts alike: according to an April 2024 Costs of War report, U.S. military and intelligence contracts awarded to major tech firms had ceilings “worth at least $53 billion combined” between 2019 and 2022.

Quietly lifting language barring the military application of its tech from its website earlier this year, OpenAI apparently wants in on the cash. The company is currently collaborating with the Pentagon on cybersecurity-related tools to prevent veteran suicide.

A slippery slope

OpenAI remains adamant its tech cannot be used to develop or use weapons despite recent policy changes. But AI’s rapid wartime proliferation in Gaza and Ukraine highlights other industry players’ lack of restraint; failing to keep up could mean losing out on lucrative military contracts in a competitive and unpredictable industry.

Similarly, OpenAI’s current usage policies affirm that the company’s products cannot be used to “compromise the privacy of others,” especially in the forms of “[f]acilitating spyware, communications surveillance, or unauthorized monitoring of individuals.” But Nakasone’s previous role as director of the NSA, an organization infamous for illegally spying on Americans, suggests such policies may not hold water.

In NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden’s words: “There is only one reason for appointing an[NSA] Director to your board. This is a willful, calculated betrayal of the rights of every person on Earth.”

Considering the growing military use of AI-powered surveillance systems, including AI-powered reconnaissance drones and AI-powered facial recognition technology, the possible wartime surveillance implications of OpenAI’s NSA hire cannot be ruled out.

Meanwhile, OpenAI’s scandal-laden track record, which includes reportedly shoplifting actor Scarlett Johansson’s voice for ChatGPT, CEO Sam Altman’s failed ousting, and previously restrictive, often lifelong non-disclosure agreements for former OpenAI employees, remains less than reassuring.

All things considered, Nakasone’s OpenAI appointment signals that a treacherous, more militarized road for OpenAI, as well as AI as a whole, likely lies ahead.


Director, General Paul Nakasone, National Security Agency, appears before a Senate Committee on Intelligence hearing to examine worldwide threats, in the Hart Senate Office Building in Washington, DC, USA, Wednesday, March 8, 2023. Photo by Rod Lamkey/CNP/ABACAPRESS.COM via REUTERS

Analysis | Military Industrial Complex
First order of House business: Protect Israel’s Netanyahu?
Top Photo: U.S. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and Senate Foreign Relations Chair, Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD), listen as Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addresses a joint meeting of Congress at the U.S. Capitol in Washington, U.S., July 24, 2024. REUTERS/Craig Hudson

First order of House business: Protect Israel’s Netanyahu?

QiOSK

UPDATE 1/9: On Thursday, the House voted 243-to-140 — with 45 Democrats joining all Republicans — to support the bill sanctioning the ICC and anyone who has directly engaged in or otherwise aided any effort by the International Criminal Court to investigate, arrest, detain, or prosecute a protected person (in this case Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu). Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) voted "present."


keep readingShow less
Elon Musk Donald Trump
Top Image credit: Elon Musk gives a tour to U.S. President-elect Donald Trump and lawmakers of the control room before the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket, in Brownsville, Texas, U.S., November 19, 2024 . Brandon Bell/Pool via REUTERS

Will Trump keep promise to rein in War, Inc.?

Military Industrial Complex

President-elect Donald Trump likes to posture as a tough guy, and he’s not above veiled threats of military action against stated adversaries as a tool of influence. But at times he can be quite harsh in his rhetoric about the big weapons makers and their allies in the political sphere, too, as he was in a September speech in Milwaukee:

“I will expel the warmongers from our national security state and carry out a much needed clean up of the military industrial complex to stop the war profiteering and to always put America first. . . . We’re going to end these endless wars.”

keep readingShow less
Roubles
Oil pump on background of russian rouble
Oil pump on background of russian rouble

We can't 'ban' talk of Russian resilience to sanctions

Europe

Robin Brooks, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institute, took to X recently to declare that "there needs to be a ban on any academic papers that interpret Russia’s resilient GDP as a sign that sanctions aren’t working." I found it remarkable that he should acknowledge the unexpected resilience of Russia’s economy yet try to disbar analysis which might suggest, therefore, that sanctions had failed.

Brooks produces some interesting analysis, and at the heart of his statement lies an important argument that others have taken up recently: that Western powers didn’t impose tough enough sanctions on Russia at the start of the Ukraine crisis, but could still impose such a catastrophic economic cost on Russia that Putin will, for the first time, be forced to back down.

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.