Zahra-Niazi-wes-Tec-War-Oped-thumbnail

For the better part of the century, traditional defence powerhouses – the likes of Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Raytheon Technologies – had been at the forefront of receiving billions of dollars in defence contracts. Today, they are no longer the exclusive recipients in this arena, as the changing character of conflicts, relying heavily on technological innovations, has led to a whole new class of beneficiaries – tech titans and corporations.

To illustrate this better, one may note that the top five contracts awarded by the US military and intelligence agencies to major tech firms from 2019 to 2022 had contract ceilings totaling at least USD 53 billion. Out of this, Microsoft received a contract in 2021 worth USD 22 billion – more than the value of contract funds awarded by the U.S. Department of Defense in fiscal year 2021 to traditional defence and aerospace companies individually, except Lockheed Martin and just around the value of the contract funds awarded to Boeing in that year. In fact, this may be the tip of the iceberg, as not all contracts with tech companies are disclosed or made directly rather are done through a subcontractor, such as a ‘passthrough’ company.

Just as defence industries have profited from wars, today’s conflicts also benefit tech firms supplying products to war zones – often expanding their influence, even if not directly fuelling violence. The wars in Ukraine and Palestine, which are dubbed as the first AI wars or commercial space wars, have contributed to an increase in demand for the products and services of the Western tech industry. For instance, Palantir Technologies, which specialises in big data analytics, has provided data analytics and intelligence support to Ukraine and Israel, while ClearView AI  provided its facial recognition services. Tech titans, such as Google, Amazon, and Microsoft, have all worked to provide cloud migration services for the Israeli and Ukrainian governments and defence establishments. Planet Labs, Maxar Technologies, and BlackSky technology have offered Ukraine Earth data analytics and satellite imagery services. Moreover, Palantir Technologies and even smaller European and American companies, most of which are focused on autonomous drones, have formally expanded their setups in Kyiv amid the war.

Details of the defence revenues of tech companies or the valuations of their wartime service contracts have not been made public, but correlative patterns suggest wartime gains. The most prominent example is Palantir Technologies. In June 2022, the company announced a deal with the Ukrainian government to provide its data analytics services. By early 2023, its CEO stated that the company was responsible for much of the support in identifying targets in Ukraine’s war efforts. Three months after the initial announcement, the company’s stock surged by 75%, and by the end of 2023, its stock price had risen by 167%, significantly outperforming the S&P 500 Index’s SPX gain of 25%.As of this writing, the Palantir’s stock remains strong. Additionally, the war in Gaza since early October 2023 also contributed to an increase in the demand for Palantir’s services. While other factors, such as the firm’s release of a new AI platform in 2023, may have also played a role in these gains, the potential impact of its wartime deals cannot be underestimated.

Beyond that, much like wars throughout history have been catalysts for experimental advancements, the battlegrounds in Ukraine, Gaza, and Lebanon are likely to yield long-term benefits for Western tech corporations. By securing contracts in these regions, these companies gain opportunities to refine and enhance their technologies and systems in real-world conditions. In the words of one expert, ‘Ukraine is a living laboratory in which some of these AI-enabled systems can reach maturity through live experiments and constant, quick reiteration.’

The present wars are not only enabling Western tech corporations to expand their roles within the defence sector ecosystem as profit-driven actors but also positioning them to further embed themselves in political processes, aiming to create a heightened demand for their conflict-related products. As long as wars persist, so too will this elevated demand. Reports suggest that Big Tech is already investing heavily in lobbying efforts to sway government decisions in their favour.

More than ever, the world urgently needs those who actively cultivate and sustain peace. For tech corporations, this presents a profound moral responsibility: to resist the allure of profiting from conflict, to ensure that all wartime projects are geared toward promoting stability and addressing humanitarian needs, and to channel their innovations toward preventing future conflicts and fostering lasting peace.

Zahra Niazi is a Research Assistant at the Centre for Aerospace & Security Studies (CASS), Islamabad, Pakistan. She can be reached at [email protected].


Share this article

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn

Recent Publications

Browse through the list of recent publications.

The Cover-up: IAF Narrative of the May 2025 Air Battle

Even after one year since the India-Pakistan May war of 2025, the Indian discourse regarding Operation Sindoor remains uncertain under its pretence of restraint. The Pahalgam attack on 22 April, which killed 26 people, triggered an escalatory spiral. New Delhi quickly accused Pakistan-linked elements, while Islamabad refuted the allegation and demanded an independent investigation. On 7 May, India launched attacks deep inside Pakistan under what it later termed as Operation Sindoor. The political motive was intended to turn the crisis into coercive signalling by shifting the blame onto the enemy and projecting a sense of military superiority.
This episode, however, began to fray immediately as war seldom follows the intended script. Within minutes PAF shot down 7 IAF aircraft including 4 Rafales. On 8 May, Reuters reported that at least two Indian aircraft were shot down by a Pakistani J-10C, while the local government sources reported other aircraft crashes in Indian-occupied Jammu and Kashmir

Read More »

Why the IAF’s Post-Sindoor Spending Surge is a Sign of Panic

After Operation Sindoor, India is spending billions of dollars on new weapons. This is being taken by many people as an indication of military prowess. It is not. This rush to procure weapons is in fact an acknowledgement that the Air Force in India had failed to do what it was meant to do. The costly jets and missiles that India had purchased over the years failed to yield the promised results.

Sindoor was soon followed by India in sealing the gaps which the operation had exposed. It was reported that Indian Air Force (IAF) is looking to speed up its purchases of more than 7 billion USD. This will involve other Rafale fighter jets with India already ordering 26 more Rafales to the Navy in 2024 at an estimated cost of about 3.9 billion USD. India is also seeking long-range standoff missiles, Israeli loitering munitions and increased drone capabilities. Special financial powers of the Indian military were activated to issue emergency procurement orders. The magnitude and rate of these purchases speak volumes.

Indian media and defence analysts have over the years considered the Rafale as a game changer. When India purchased 36 Rafales aircrafts at an approximate cost of 8.7 billion USD, analysts vowed that the aircraft would provide India with air superiority over Pakistan. Operation Sindoor disproved all those allegations. Indian aircraft did not even fly in Pakistani airspace when the fighting started. India solely depended on standoff weapons that were launched at a safe distance. The air defence system of Pakistan, comprising of the HQ-9 surface-to-air missile system and its own fighters, stood its ground.

Read More »

May 2025: Mosaic Warfare and the Myth of Centralised Air Power

Visualise a modern-day Air Force commander sitting in the operations room, miles away from the combat zone, overseeing every friendly and enemy aircraft and all assets involved in the campaign. In a split second, he can task a fighter, reposition a drone, and authorise a strike. In today’s promising technological era, he does not even need an operations room; a laptop on his desktop will suffice. The situation looks promising as it offers efficiency, precision, and control. The term used for such operational control is ‘centralisation’, which has been made possible with advanced networking, integrating space, cyber, surveillance, artificial intelligence, and seamless communication, enabling a single commander to manage an entire campaign from a single node. Centralised command and control, championed by the Western air forces and then adopted by many others, has thus been seen as a pinnacle of modern military power.
The concept of centralisation, enabled by state-of-the-art networking, may seem promising, but it is nothing more than a myth.

Read More »