|
How Musk threatens America’s national security, and what must be done
His incitement to assassinate America’s commander-in-chief is only the most recent illustration
 |
Friends,
Shortly after the apparent second assassination attempt against Trump, Elon Musk responded in a now deleted post: “And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala 🤔 ????”
Musk later said his post was intended as a joke. But it could be interpreted as a call to murder Biden and Harris — at least by one of the 198 million followers of Musk who initially received it. Presumably this is why the Secret Service is investigating it.
Under 18 U.S. Code Section 871, threatening a president or vice president or inciting someone to harm them is a felony that can result in a large fine and up to five years in prison.
Yet even as Musk posted a potential death threat against the sitting commander-in-chief, his multiple defense contracts with the U.S. government have given him access to highly sensitive information.
Reportedly, Musk has been given security clearance notwithstanding his admitted use of drugs (Musk says he has submitted to random drug testing at the request of the government), including smoking weed in public and using ketamine (for which he claims to have a prescription).
Quite apart from the drugs, when was the last time the U.S. government gave access to sensitive national security information to someone who posted a potential death threat against the president and vice president, even if he later called it a joke?
Underlying this is a broader question: When in history has one unelected individual held such sway over American national security?
Musk’s SpaceX has nearly total control of the world’s satellite internet through its Starlink unit. With little regulation or oversight, Musk has already put more than 4,500 Starlink satellites into orbit around the globe, accounting for more than half of all active satellites. Musk plans to have as many as 42,000 satellites in orbit in coming years.
Space X and its Starlink system have become strategically critical to American security. Starlink is providing connectivity to the U.S. Navy. The U.S. Space Force signed a $70 million contract late last year to provide it with military-grade low-earth-orbit satellite capabilities. According to Reuters, the National Reconnaissance Office, which oversees U.S. spy satellites, has a $1.8 billion contract with SpaceX.
This gives Musk — the richest person in the world — remarkable power. Single-handedly, he can decide to shut down a country’s access to Starlink and the internet. He also can also gain access to sensitive information gathered by Starlink. “Between, Tesla, Starlink & Twitter, I may have more real-time global economic data in one head than anyone ever,” Musk tweeted in April 2023.
Meanwhile, NASA has increasingly outsourced spaceflight projects to SpaceX, including billions in contracts for multiple moon trips and $843 million to build a vehicle that will take the International Space Station out of commission.
Conflicts of interest between Musk’s ventures around the world and U.S. national security abound, and they are multiplying.
When Putin attacked Ukraine, Musk and SpaceX’s Starlink provided Ukraine with internet access, enabling the country to plan attacks and defend itself. (This was not a charitable move by Musk; most of the 20,000 terminals in the country were funded by outside sources such as the U.S. government, the United Kingdom, and Poland).
But in the fall of 2022, when Ukraine entered territory contested by Russia, Musk and Space X abruptly severed the connectivity. Musk explained at the time that “Starlink was barred from turning on satellite beams in Crimea at the time, because doing so would violate U.S. sanctions against Russia!”
But who was Musk to decide what actions would or would not violate U.S. sanctions?
In fact, Musk was trying to push Ukraine to agree to Russia’s terms for ending the war.
At a conference in Aspen attended by business and political figures, Musk appeared to support Putin. “He was onstage, and he said, ‘We should be negotiating. Putin wants peace — we should be negotiating peace with Putin,’” Reid Hoffman, co-founder and executive chairman of LinkedIn, recalled. Musk seemed to have “bought what Putin was selling, hook, line, and sinker.”
Soon thereafter, Musk tweeted a proposal for his own peace plan, calling for referenda to redraw the borders of Ukraine and grant Russia control of Crimea. In subsequent tweets, Musk portrayed a Russian victory as virtually inevitable and attached maps highlighting eastern Ukrainian territories, some of which, he argued, “prefer Russia.”
U.S. foreign policy experts also worry about conflicts of interest posed by Musk’s acquisition of Twitter (now X), given his business relationships and communications with the Chinese government. China has used X for disinformation campaigns.
Some are concerned that China may have leverage over Musk due to his giant Tesla factory in Shanghai, which accounts for over half of Tesla’s global deliveries and the bulk of its profits, and the battery factory he’s building there. “Elon Musk has deep financial exposure to China,” warned Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, who chairs the Senate Intelligence Committee.
Most of these concerns, by the way, came before Musk reactivated the accounts of conspiracy theorists and white nationalists on X and began pushing his own right-wing narrative on the platform, and before he announced his support for Trump in the upcoming election and posted a potential incitement to assassinate Biden and Harris.
Elon Musk poses a clear and present danger to American national security. The sooner the U.S. government revokes his security clearance, terminates its contracts with him and the entities he controls, and builds our own alternatives to Starlink and Space X, the safer we will be.
