As the Pentagon pushes for battlefield AI, some military leaders urge
caution
[June 01, 2026]
By KONSTANTIN TOROPIN
TAMPA, Fla. (AP) — The Trump administration is pushing to unleash the
power of artificial intelligence for the U.S. military while facing
calls to put up guardrails around the rapidly developing technology from
some companies — and even notes of caution from top leaders in uniform.
Adm. Frank Bradley, head of U.S. Special Operations Command, told
attendees of a recent annual special forces conference in Tampa,
Florida, that troops “have to be very careful about how we come to
(AI’s) employment and its inspiration into the delivery of lethality.”
Bradley said he can see a future where AI determines what targets to hit
but that “we, as humans, have to have the confidence that ... it's going
to deliver violence only where we intend it to be delivered.”
The remarks from Bradley, who oversees the units that handle the
military’s most difficult and dangerous operations, about the need to
ensure safeguards come as his boss, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, is
pushing to rapidly evolve the military through AI. It is a push that has
led to clashes with some tech companies worried about safety measures.
Hegseth has insisted that the Pentagon be allowed to use the technology
any legal way it sees fit. He told an audience of SpaceX employees in
January he would reject any AI models “that won’t allow you to fight
wars” and that his vision for the technology was systems that operate
“without ideological constraints that limit lawful military
applications.”
AI's use in the military is part of the Republican administration's
larger push to grow the capability it sees as a unique American
advantage even as it faces pressure to ensure responsible safeguards.
President Donald Trump abruptly called off plans to sign a new AI
executive order hours before an expected White House ceremony over
concerns the measure could dull America’s edge on AI technology.
“We’re leading China, we’re leading everybody, and I don’t want to do
anything that’s going to get in the way of that lead,” Trump told
reporters.
Two differing AI worlds within the military
When asked about Bradley's remarks, a Pentagon official said efforts are
focused on using AI to create “functional battlefield tools” that can
help troops come up with and identify targets more quickly and, as a
result, speed up strikes on those targets. The official spoke on
condition of anonymity to offer more candid remarks.
Officials at U.S. Special Operations Command talked about AI not as
something that will help eliminate targets but rather as a tool that can
offer troops more time to focus on their mission.
Sgt. Maj. Andrew Krogman, the top enlisted official for U.S. Special
Operations Command, said at the conference that he sees AI handling
administrative tasks to free up operators or helping modernize how the
command does business.
Melissa Johnson, the top acquisition official for the command, said AI
should be “reducing the cognitive workload on mundane tasks.”
“We’re leveraging AI more and more, but it’s not to replace operator
judgment, it’s to enhance it,” she added.
Helen Toner, interim executive director at Georgetown University’s
Center for Security and Emerging Technology, said those differing
descriptions about AI in the military are both true.
[to top of second column]
|
U.S. Navy Adm. Frank Bradley testifies before the Senate Committee
on Armed Services on Capitol Hill in Washington, April 28, 2026. (AP
Photo/Cliff Owen, File)
“There are a huge number of potential uses for AI in these kinds of
bureaucratic settings, which the U.S. military is actively
exploring,” Toner said.
Lt. Gen. Michael Conley, head of Air Force Special Operations
Command, told a congressional committee in May that his troops used
AI “bots” to convert top secret intelligence down to a secret
classification within seconds to make it easier to share with drone
operators on the ground during the Iran war.
However, there is no doubt that AI also is helping the military find
and strike targets.
The center that Toner oversees published a case study two years ago
on how the Army's 18th Airborne Corps used AI to target artillery
strikes “just as efficiently as the best unit in recent American
history" and with 2,000 fewer service members.
“Human operators are still the ones making crucial decisions, but AI
... is making it possible to operate with a new level of speed and
scale,” she said.
AI safety has created a public dispute between the Pentagon and
Anthropic
The clash over the integration of AI into the military, who
ultimately controls the technology and the ethics behind its use has
played out in unusually public fashion during the Trump
administration.
Hegseth and Anthropic are embroiled in a bitter contract dispute
over the company's concerns about unchecked government use of its
technology, including the dangers of fully autonomous armed drones
and of AI-assisted mass surveillance that could track dissent.
After CEO Dario Amodei refused to back down over concerns about how
the chatbot Claude is used in classified Pentagon networks, both
Trump and Hegseth accused Anthropic of endangering national
security.
The Pentagon formally labeled the San Francisco-based company a
supply chain risk — ending its $200 million defense contract and
prohibited other government contractors from working with the
company.
Anthropic sued, claiming the Pentagon is illegally retaliating by
stigmatizing the company with a designation meant to protect against
sabotage of national security systems by foreign adversaries. The
Pentagon has since emphasized its turn to Anthropic rivals —
including Google, OpenAI and SpaceX — to secure AI technology that
can “augment warfighter decision-making in complex operational
environments.”
Toner, a former OpenAI board member ousted after a clash with CEO
Sam Altman, said “the general public often seems to underestimate
the caution with which the U.S. military approaches new
technologies.”
“Commanders want their missions to succeed, which means both being
able to create lethal effects at scale, and avoiding unintended
effects like friendly fire, civilian casualties, or simply
identifying targets incorrectly,” she said.
All contents © copyright 2026 Associated Press. All rights reserved |
