How the military is using AI in war
The strategic landscape of modern warfare is undergoing a profound transformation, spearheaded by the rapid integration of artificial intelligence (AI). This shift is not merely incremental but represents a fundamental rethinking of military operations, from intelligence gathering to target engagement and logistical support. The recent upheaval surrounding Anthropic’s AI systems, which are being phased out of the Pentagon following an escalating dispute with the Trump administration and concerns over "supply chain risk," has opened a fiercely competitive arena. Major AI firms are now vying for a lucrative opportunity to shape the future of America’s military defense, eager to fill the void and embed their technologies at the core of national security infrastructure.
The removal of Anthropic’s AI technology from military operations within a six-month window underscores the high stakes involved. An internal Pentagon memo hinted at Anthropic’s artificial intelligence being deployed in critical national security domains, including nuclear weapons systems, ballistic missile defense, and sophisticated cyber warfare operations. Furthermore, sources familiar with the U.S. military’s AI deployments indicate that programs, including Anthropic’s, were likely active components in the U.S. operation against Iran, showcasing the technology’s deep integration into active conflict zones. While the Pentagon has maintained a degree of secrecy regarding the precise deployment methods, military experts and former officials offer crucial insights into the likely scenarios, painting a picture of AI’s pervasive influence.
Retired Navy Admiral Mark Montgomery, senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracy’s Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation, articulates the dramatic acceleration AI brings to military decision-making. "The military is now processing roughly a thousand potential targets a day and striking the majority of them, with turnaround time for the next strike potentially under four hours," he noted. This staggering pace illustrates how AI has compressed analysis that once took days into mere hours, enabling a scale of operations previously unimaginable. While a human element remains "in the loop" to maintain oversight and make final decisions, AI shoulders the immense burden of data processing and preliminary analysis, fundamentally altering the tempo of engagement.
The utility of AI in military contexts mirrors its civilian applications, albeit with vastly different stakes. The Pentagon leverages AI to summarize, distill, and contextualize colossal volumes of information. This includes analyzing documents, video feeds, and images streamed continuously from battlefields and surveillance assets. By rapidly synthesizing this diverse data, AI can construct detailed war-game scenarios, predicting potential outcomes, minimizing collateral damage and casualties, and identifying the most effective weapons systems for specific objectives. This capability is critical in today’s "military revolution driven by the digital revolution," as CBS News national security analyst Aaron McLean describes it. The sheer "explosion of data" from ubiquitous cameras, smartphones, and connected vehicles has inundated the modern battlefield with information far beyond human capacity to process.
AI’s role in contextualizing this overwhelming data deluge is paramount. It allows military personnel to grasp complex situations at speeds far exceeding traditional human analytical processes. McLean elaborates, "There’s now far more data than any room of analysts could process on timelines that matter. AI algorithms sift through it to build targeting packages, assign strike assets and assess damage — nearly instantly." This immediate analysis is transformative. He highlights the "Israel missile defense example" as a visceral illustration: "when hundreds of drones and missiles are inbound over a few hours, no human team can decide in real time which ones to intercept, with what, and when. That’s what AI is doing." In such high-pressure, time-sensitive environments, AI’s ability to process, prioritize, and recommend actions becomes not just an advantage, but a necessity for effective defense. Until its removal, Anthropic’s large language model, Claude, was the sole large-scale AI system operational on the Defense Department’s classified networks, underscoring its significant role.
Beyond the battlefield, AI also streamlines critical administrative functions. Josh Gruenbaum, commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service, points out its utility in research, policy development, and procurement. AI can sift through vast databases of regulations, technical specifications, and historical data to expedite the development of new policies, optimize procurement processes, and ensure compliance. This enhances efficiency and output for the American taxpayer, fostering an environment that encourages American innovators to contribute to government missions while ensuring responsible and lawful deployment of these powerful tools.
Crucially, AI does not operate in a vacuum on the battlefield. It functions as an intelligent layer that augments physical weapons systems and human operators. Legacy defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Boeing, and Lockheed Martin continue to produce the aircraft carriers, drones, and missiles that constitute the kinetic force of the military. AI’s large language models are not autonomously flying planes or firing missiles; instead, they perform extensive analysis before these actions are undertaken. This analytical support, as Montgomery explains, has dramatically "compressed operation time from days to hours," acting as "an important enabler in the military’s ability to rapidly plan and execute war fights." While human decision-makers remain central, AI is the engine that drives rapid, data-informed planning for potential strikes.
A source directly familiar with Anthropic’s Claude AI military capabilities revealed that its primary function was to process immense quantities of intelligence reports. This involved synthesizing complex patterns, summarizing findings, and rapidly surfacing critical information that would take human analysts significantly longer to identify. While Claude was permitted to analyze foreign intelligence under Anthropic’s U.S. Government Usage Policy, the terms of use explicitly mandated that humans retain full authority over military targeting decisions. This distinction highlights the ongoing debate and caution surrounding autonomous lethal weapons and the imperative of human oversight in matters of life and death. The question of whether Claude systems were involved in a February 28 strike on a girls’ school in Iran, for which the U.S. was likely responsible, remains unverified, underscoring the opacity that can surround AI deployments in conflict.
Despite its transformative impact, war could still be fought without AI, albeit with significantly reduced efficiency and effectiveness. Montgomery emphasizes that traditional prime contractors still provide "98% by weapons" used in conflict, performing "very well." However, he adds that fighting a war without AI would be "less desirable," affirming that its role "will probably only grow campaign after campaign after campaign." AI, therefore, is not merely an optional enhancement but an increasingly indispensable component of modern military strategy, offering an undeniable operational advantage.
The shifting landscape of big tech’s involvement in the military is fraught with legal and ethical complexities. The Pentagon’s initial $200 million contract with Anthropic to integrate Claude into its systems was a landmark deal, only to be canceled amidst a dispute over who dictates restrictions on AI usage by the military. Anthropic has since filed a lawsuit against the federal government, alleging retaliation and asserting that the government cannot "wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech." This legal battle has garnered significant support, with Microsoft, OpenAI, and Google filing amicus briefs in solidarity with Anthropic, highlighting the broader industry’s concerns about governmental overreach and the future of AI development for public sector use.
As Anthropic’s products are gradually phased out over a six-month off-ramp period – even while still reportedly being used in Iran despite the "supply chain risk" designation – other tech giants are rapidly moving to fill the void. Google recently announced the rollout of AI agents specifically designed for non-classified military applications, signaling its intent to deepen its engagement with the defense sector. Simultaneously, Sam Altman, CEO of Anthropic rival OpenAI, publicly explored the use of ChatGPT’s artificial intelligence models within the Pentagon’s classified networks. OpenAI subsequently clarified its position, outlining "three red lines" for AI usage: no autonomous lethal weapons, no mass surveillance of Americans, and no high-stakes automated decisions. These declarations reflect a growing industry awareness of the profound ethical implications of military AI and an attempt to proactively address concerns about responsible deployment.
The integration of AI into military operations marks a pivotal moment in the history of warfare. From accelerating intelligence analysis and optimizing targeting to streamlining logistics and enhancing defense systems, AI is redefining the capabilities and operational tempo of modern armed forces. However, this technological leap also brings forth critical challenges related to ethics, accountability, and the delicate balance between innovation and human control. The ongoing legal battles and the competitive scramble among tech giants underscore the immense strategic value and the complex regulatory landscape surrounding military AI. As AI continues to evolve, the global community faces the urgent task of establishing robust frameworks and ethical guidelines to ensure that these powerful tools are wielded responsibly, upholding humanitarian principles even amidst the exigencies of conflict, and ensuring that the human element remains the ultimate arbiter of war and peace.
