Recent developments show that artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly becoming a central component of contemporary warfare. From military planning to targeting systems, AI technologies are increasingly integrated into operational infrastructures. The use of systems such as Anthropic’s Claude and the MavenSmart System in recent U.S. and Israeli operations in Iran illustrates how digital tools are no longer peripheral but embedded in core military decision-making processes.
At the same time, these developments reveal a growing dependency on private technology companies. The confrontation between the Pentagon and AI company Anthropic demonstrates how governments increasingly rely on privately developed models for defense purposes. As Nadibaidze and Vanderborght explained in a recent blogpost, this dependency became visible when the U.S. government pressured Anthropic to remove its internal restrictions on military use of its AI model. When the company refused, it faced immediate consequences, highlighting how corporate autonomy is limited when it conflicts with national security priorities. This raises fundamental questions about the role of tech companies in military contexts, particularly regarding their autonomy and the ethical limits they seek to impose.
PlatformWars researchers Marijn Hoijtink and Robin Vanderborght have recently commented on these developments in Belgian and Dutch media, offering critical insights into the evolving relationship between digital platforms and military power.
In interviews with RTLNieuws and DeMorgen, Hoijtink emphasizes that technology companies are increasingly positioned as strategic actors within geopolitical competition. What appears as a commercial sector is, in practice, becoming deeply entangled with state security agendas. As she explains, companies like Anthropic are not operating in isolation, but within a context where political pressure and national security concerns shape their decisions. This fundamentally challenges the idea that private firms can independently define ethical boundaries around the use of their technologies.
Hoijtink further highlights how this shift reflects a broader transformation in how states perceive technological infrastructures. Rather than viewing them as neutral or purely economic assets, governments increasingly treat them as integral to military capability and geopolitical influence. As a result, the autonomy of private actors becomes constrained, as refusal to cooperate with defense initiatives may carry political or economic consequences.
In an interview with VRTNWS, Hoijtink provides additional context by situating these developments within a wider transformation of warfare itself. Contemporary conflicts, she argues, are increasingly organized around digital infrastructures and interconnected platforms. AI systems are not isolated tools, but part of complex networks integrating data from drones, sensors, satellites, and intelligence systems. This integration raises urgent questions about accountability, control, and the risks associated with automation in military decision-making.
These concerns are further developed in an opinion piece for De Standaard, where Vanderborght and Hoijtink reflect on the structural implications of these trends. They argue that digital platforms should be understood as infrastructures embedded in geopolitical and security dynamics, rather than neutral technological systems. This perspective challenges dominant narratives that frame AI as a purely technical innovation, instead highlighting its role in reshaping power relations at the global level.
From this perspective, the increasing involvement of companies such as Anthropic in military ecosystems is not an anomaly, but a structural feature of contemporary geopolitics. As Hoijtink argues in DeMorgen, technological infrastructures are becoming key sites where economic, political, and military interests converge. This helps explain why debates around AI extend far beyond innovation or ethics, and instead touch upon fundamental questions of power, governance, and security.
Taken together, recent media coverage reinforces a core insight of the Platform Wars research agenda: the growing fusion of digital platforms and military power. The integration of AI into warfare is not a future scenario, but an ongoing transformation. Understanding this shift requires moving beyond a focus on technology alone and instead examining how digital infrastructures are embedded within broader geopolitical dynamics.
This blogpost was written byVinoja Thevarajah
