The Pentagon and NASA cannot be dependent on one contractor for critical operations.
While the political divorce between Elon Musk and President Donald Trump earlier this summer seems to have abated, the high-profile squabble highlighted a critical vulnerability: the US government has become too reliant on SpaceX. Through his $400 billion aerospace company, Musk has completely transformed the space launch game by significantly lowering launch costs and increasing launch capacity.
SpaceX’s technical superiority and cost efficiency have made the firm indispensable to both NASA and the Pentagon. However, by tying so much of America’s strategic space infrastructure to a single (and politically volatile) private actor, we have created a national security vulnerability that is hiding in plain sight.
The question is no longer whether SpaceX can deliver payloads into orbit; it is whether America’s present, profound dependence on this company could be politically weaponized in the future. The simmering summer-long feud between President Trump and Musk, which largely stemmed from the latter’s objections to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act and which saw access to SpaceX used as a key bargaining chip, suggests that the answer to this question is “yes.”
At the height of their political disagreement, following weeks of traded jabs on their rival social media platforms, the president threatened to strip federal funds from Musk’s businesses completely and even toyed with the idea of launching an investigation to deport the tech tycoon back to South Africa. In response, Musk vowed to decommission his company’s Dragon capsule, America’s only means of transportation to the International Space Station.
The threat was an idle one, but it underscored a key vulnerability. Had Musk actually followed through, it would have left the United States entirely dependent on Russia for sending astronauts to the ISS, thereby throwing the future of America’s space program into question and rendering access to space under the influence of one of our biggest adversaries.
Although Musk later deleted the initial tweet, Trump officials subsequently determined that most of the deals could not be canceled because they were too critical to US national security. In other words, SpaceX has become a vital organ in everything the United States is doing in orbit and beyond, and the reality is that we need Elon Musk more than he needs us.
The numbers tell the story. With roughly $22 billion in government contracts, SpaceX has become deeply integrated into US national security and space programs. SpaceX’s powerful Falcon rockets, prized for their reusability and high-frequency launch cadence, remain essential to the Pentagon for providing low-cost and reliable access to space for national security payloads.
Crew Dragon has become NASA’s main transport to and from the International Space Station, while the company’s global satellite internet service, Starlink, provides critical communications capabilities to the Department of War, supporting nearly 50 military commands. Beyond these flagship innovations, Musk’s SpaceX has been responsible for launching more than 90 percent of the US satellites into space, many of them serving US military and intelligence missions.
Russia’s war in Ukraine, however, has highlighted the danger of having a single powerful individual control such a large portion of critical technology and infrastructure. While the Starlink network continues to support US allies in Ukraine and the country’s battlefield connectivity, Musk has repeatedly threatened to cut off Kyiv’s access to the satellite service as he became more critical of its handling of the war.
In late September 2022, Musk turned his words into action when he ordered a shutdown of Starlink access over key regions of Ukraine during a pivotal push to retake territory from Russia. The move completely disrupted the counteroffensive, with Ukrainian troops suddenly facing a communications blackout in a way that effectively reshaped the front line of fighting.
In other words, with a single command, Musk shaped the outcome of a battle—and the trajectory of a larger war. In the process, he eloquently demonstrated the potential perils of such a monopoly.
It was not always this way. Historically, US government defense contracting has been marked by both resilience and redundancy. NASA’s operations traditionally reflected a similar diligence, awarding multiple contracts for the same mission to avoid overreliance on a single provider. But with SpaceX’s consistent ability to underbid and overdeliver, other companies have struggled to compete for the Pentagon’s attention. As a result, the government has fallen into a pattern of strategic dependence that could spell disaster should another Trump-Musk feud reignite.
The answer is not necessarily to continue appeasing Elon Musk. Nor is it to abandon SpaceX. Rather, the US government must work to diversify its defense contracting beyond the hands of a single tech billionaire, reinstating traditional defense planning guardrails and reclaiming authority over our future in space. That will require building viable commercial alternatives capable of safeguarding American access to space, regardless of the prevailing political currents.
The US government will thank itself later for making such a move now—before the next political disagreement arises.