Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Elon Musk carries X Æ A-12 as President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, D.C., on Feb. 11, 2025.
Musk and Trump announce new executive order to reduce federal workforce
Donald Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday mandating federal agencies comply with Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, to slash their workforces – ordering agency heads to hire no more than one employee for every four who leave or are fired. The order does not apply to public safety, immigration, or law enforcement personnel.
The order was announced in a press conference between Trump and Musk on Tuesday night, where the world’s richest man faced questions about DOGE’s transparency and his own conflicts of interest. Musk rejected both accusations and claimed without evidence that he had uncovered billions of dollars of waste and fraud during his audit. At a minimum, eliminating 25% of federal employees would cut the federal budget by about 1%.
When it came to the judicial branch – which has stalled Trump’s “deferred resignation plan” and limited DOGE’s access to some of the government’s payment systems – Trump criticized the rulings but said that he would “always abide by the courts” though he is likely to appeal their findings up to the Supreme Court if they don’t go his way.
Elon Musk’s government takeover is powered by AI
Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency, aka DOGE, has sought massive cuts to the federal workforce, in particular targeting USAID, the Department of Education, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, among other agencies.
But Musk isn’t just seizing control of the executive branch; he’s using artificial intelligence as his weapon of choice.
At the Education Department, DOGE representatives have reportedly fed sensitive data, including personally identifiable student loan information, into AI software through Microsoft’s Azure cloud service. A group of students from the University of California sued DOGE in federal court on Friday for allegedly violating federal privacy rules and exceeding their statutory authority. Additionally, congressional Democrats have demanded answers about allegations of a private server used at the Office of Personnel Management; federal workers have sued to stop this, while OPM officials deny it violates the law. And a federal judge on Saturday temporarily halted DOGE access to taxpayer information at the Treasury Department because, the judge wrote, it risks disclosure of “sensitive and confidential information and the heightened risk that the systems in question will be more vulnerable than before to hacking.”
At the General Services Administration, a former Tesla engineer is pushing an “AI-first strategy” that involves building a custom chatbot called GSAi to help draft memos faster and adopting an AI coding agent such as the popular assistant Cursor to assist with software development.
Privacy and security advocates warn that the integration of AI software into the federal government could create significant risks — especially if not done carefully. “Using AI to cut spending or reform government operations is dangerous,” said Kit Walsh, the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s AI director. “AI isn’t magic; it is generated using data collected by humans and often categorized by humans. Then it provides a way to quickly (and often sloppily) try to reproduce the patterns and categories that have been given to it.”
Calli Schroeder, senior counsel at the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said there’s also the risk that AI gobbles up sensitive data and helps train its model on it. “Many AI systems use input data to expand their training datasets in addition to using it to generate a prompt response,” she said. “This not only means security risk if the raw training data is exposed, but also puts the data at risk for further misuse.”
Schroeder noted that these revelations raised fundamental questions about government security protocols if DOGE is indeed using unsecured systems. “Any halfway responsible business or organization has many security procedures and policies about what products you can and cannot connect with company devices,” she said. “It appears that our government either does not meet this incredibly basic level of responsibility and good practice, or no one is enforcing existing policies or procedures.”
The Education Department claims that there’s nothing to worry about with regard to DOGE staff overhauling the department’s systems. “They have been sworn in, have the necessary background checks and clearances, and are focused on making the Department more cost-efficient, effective, and accountable to the taxpayers,” a spokesperson said in a statement to the press. “There is nothing inappropriate or nefarious going on.”
But a lack of transparency has pervaded the entire Musk takeover without comprehensive congressional oversight and with DOGE staffers at times refusing to even give their names while interrogating civil servants. It’s wholly unclear what’s going on mere weeks into the administration with major changes at multiple government departments and agencies — all seemingly with an element of AI. “We deserve lawful, transparent, and accountable decisions in government operations,” Walsh said. “It’s difficult to imagine that the technology at work here is fit for the purpose of making spending and personnel decisions — and Americans deserve better than to have to guess at how those decisions are being made.”Tesla CEO and X owner Elon Musk addresses a stadium audience in Washington, DC, on Inauguration Day.
Hard Numbers: DOGE cuts boost Palantir stocks, Shooter rampages at Swedish school, Trump makes “rare” demand of Ukraine, Rebels in DRC announce ceasefire
10: At least 10 people were believed to be dead following a shooting at an adult education center in central Sweden on Tuesday. As of this writing, police have not released information about the shooter’s identity or motive, except to say that it was a man who is believed to have acted alone.
500,000: What does Donald Trump want in exchange for continuing to support Ukraine? Something rare. The US president suggested on Monday he wanted US access to Ukraine’s rare earths and critical minerals – those used in batteries, microchips, and other advanced technologies. China currently dominates the global supply. Ukraine has at least 15,000 hectares worth of deposits already mapped out, and 500,000 tons of Lithium which could be worth tens of trillions of dollars. Kyiv said it was “ready to work with America.”
900: After more than 900 people were killed last week in the battle for Goma, a key city in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Rwanda-backed M23 rebels who have wrested control of the city from the Congolese army announced a unilateral ceasefire on Tuesday. The move is meant to facilitate the arrival of humanitarian aid. DRC and Kenyan leaders are to meet next week in a fresh attempt to end the more than three-year-old conflict.A view of the USAID building in Washington, DC, on Feb. 1, 2025.
Musk says USAID is being shut down
The website for the US Agency for International Development, aka USAID, went dark without explanation Saturday following President Donald Trump’s freeze on foreign aid and a cryptic post on X by Democratic Sen. Chris Murphy of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee: “Watch USAID tonight,” he wrote Friday.
Democrats have been warning that Trump was planning to dismantle USAID and fold it into the State Department — a move they say he lacks the legal authority to make. Murphy called it an attempt to “steal taxpayers’ money to enrich [Trump’s] billionaire cabal,” including Tesla CEO and presidential advisor Elon Musk, who has referred to USAID’s potential dissolution as “efficiency.”
Early Monday, Musk announced on his social media site X that he and Trump were shutting down USAID. The White House has not yet responded, and it remains unclear whether Musk or Trump have the legal authority to take such a step.
The funding freeze has halted billions in US-funded humanitarian, security, and development programs around the world. Hundreds of USAID employees and contractors have been furloughed or put on paid leave, and thousands more jobs are at risk.
DOGE data dump? On Sunday, meanwhile, it was reported that the Trump administration has given Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency access to the federal payments system, which oversees the disbursement of trillions of dollars in government funds, including social security and welfare payments. The system also contains the personal data of hundreds of millions of Americans, raising concerns about potential misuse of the data.The European Union flag is displayed on a laptop screen and Elon Musk's account on X is displayed on a phone screen.
Musk vs. Europe: How far will each go?
Musk, the richest man in the world and owner of the social media platform X, formerly known as Twitter, used his money and social media muscle to help Trump become president again. Now, he’s turning his mind to European politics.
Musk is reportedly “probing how he and his right-wing allies can destabilize the UK Labour government” of Keir Starmer. Musk has been repeatedly sharing attacks on Starmer, alleging that he and his government have been complicit in covering up a child sex abuse scandal, although the evidence for that is not strong.
Musk favors the traditionally marginal right-wing Reform Party, although even its leader, Nigel Farage, has distanced himself from Musk’s celebration of Tommy Robinson, a far-right rabble-rouser in prison for contempt of court.
Before he can take down Starmer, though, Musk will host a conversation with the leader of the far-right Alternative for Germany.
European leaders are speaking out against Musk, and they have the power to prosecute him for election interference if they choose. But he is powerful enough and close enough to Trump to make that a forbidding prospect. Trump could punish them if they go after his friend, but not doing so could look like acquiescence to the tech titan.
They face a conundrum, and at the moment they are focused on discouraging Trump from invading Greenland.Photo illustration showing Elon Musk's post on X on a mobile phone, with a Union Jack in the background. Elon Musk has posted a stream of online attacks on British Prime Minister Keir Starmer on his platform X, formerly Twitter.
European leaders call out Elon Musk
Musk has referred to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who faces an election next month, as a “fool” and has argued that only the nativist Alternative for Germany party can “save Germany.” He has also offered the groundless suggestion that British Prime Minister Keir Starmer was “complicit” in a series of sex scandals that involved the “grooming” of young girls over many years in the UK.
In response, leaders in France, Britain, Germany, and Norway have each found their own ways of telling Musk to stay out of European politics. “Ten years ago, who would have imagined that the owner of one of the world’s largest social networks would be supporting a new international reactionary movement and intervening directly in elections, including in Germany,” asked French President Emmanuel Macron on Monday.
“I find it worrying that a man with enormous access to social media and huge economic resources involves himself so directly in the internal affairs of other countries,” said Norway’s prime minister, Jonas Gahr Støre. “A line has been crossed,” said Britain’s Starmer. “Don’t feed the troll,” warned Scholz.
This criticism looks highly unlikely to chasten Elon Musk, and Trump isn’t going to rein him in. But by calling Musk out publicly these European leaders hope to highlight his broader political agenda for undecided voters.
President-elect Donald Trump greets Elon Musk before attending a viewing of the launch of the sixth test flight of the SpaceX Starship rocket, in Brownsville, Texas, U.S., on Nov. 19, 2024.
Is Musk Trump’s muse – or his manipulator?
Is Elon Musk a 21st-century Svengali? Two weeks after being accused of acting like the president – instead of a presidential advisor – when he attempted to sway Congress to torpedo a spending bill, the tech magnate is wielding political influence once again – and enraging some supporters of President-elect Donald Trump.
At issue: the H-1B Visa program, which Musk says is crucial to attracting foreign tech talent, but which many Republicans claim takes jobs away from Americans. Last Friday, Musk and fellow Department of Government Efficiency head Vivek Ramaswamyfeuded publicly with GOP firebrand Laura Loomer, who posted to X Thursday, “Donald Trump promised to remove the H1B visa program and I support his policy.”
On Friday, Musk posted that “hateful unrepentant racists” – a swipe at MAGA anti-immigrant Republicans – must be removed from the Republican Party “root and stem.” The next day, Trump seemed to toe Musk’s line: Despite having previously criticized the H-1B program as “very bad” and “unfair” for US workers, Trump told the New York Post, “I’ve always liked the visas. I have always been in favor of the visas.” Hmm.
But it’s not clear just whose team Musk is playing for. While telling racists to leave the GOP and praising the contribution of foreign workers in the US, Musk declared his support for Germany’s far-right anti-immigrant party, Alternative for Germany, aka AfD, ahead of Deutchland’s February elections. Three state chapters of the AfD in the former communist East are classified as extremist – and are under surveillance by Germany’s domestic intelligence service.
But the contradictions don’t seem to bother Trump. “Where are you?” Trump posted on his Truth Social account Friday morning, entreating Musk to visit him and Bill Gates at Mar-a-Lago, aka “the center of the universe.”
For more on MAGA, the American dream, and immigration, check out Ian Bremmer’s latest Quick Take here.
A Politically Game-Changing Year for Better or Worse
This week we rolled out GZERO’s Top 10 Political Game Changers of the Year, which you can check out here.
Just hours ago, we named Donald Trump our No. 1 political game changer of the year. Elon Musk, whose net worth just topped a record-breaking $400 billion, is No. 2.
Let’s do a quick detour on that just to get some sense of proportionality: How much is $400 billion? It’s bigger than the nominal GDP of Musk’s birth country, South Africa, as well as countries like Belgium, Portugal, New Zealand, and Qatar (net worth and nominal GDP, of course, are not directly comparable measures but are used here to illustrated the scale of Musk’s wealth).In fact, his net worth is higher than the nominal GDP of all but about 40 countries in the world, but that’s not even why we chose him as a top game changer of the year. Musk’s crucial help in electing Trump, the influence of his social media platform, X, in the culture and political wars around the world, and his breathtaking innovations in space, electric cars, tech, and AI were all factors.
But something both Trump and Musk said this week about foreign aid merits inclusion in our game-changer discussions.
As the Assad regime dramatically fell this week, President-elect Trump declared, “THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT.” An aversion to foreign intervention and an America-first isolationism is not a surprising stance from Trump, and it’s one many Americans support. But Musk, who Trump tapped to lead the so-called Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, went even further: He expressed support for former Rep. Ron Paul’s desire to eliminate all US foreign aid. “Here’s an easy one for @DOGE !” Paul posted on X. “ELIMINATE foreign aid!”
Musk posted a reply: “Ron is not wrong.”
Musk’s partner in DOGE, Vivek Ramaswamy, picked up the baton, saying: “It’s an oxymoron that represents a waste of taxpayer dollars, but the real problem runs deeper: Americans deserve transparency on opaque foreign aid.”
There is a big difference between transparency in foreign aid and the elimination of it.
Transparency on all government spending is a net good, especially when it comes to foreign aid, so no issue there. But would eliminating foreign aid really save US taxpayers a material amount of money and make the world a safer place?
Again, some proportionality is in order.
The US budget in 2024 was about $6.75 trillion — roughly $1.8 trillion more than it collected in revenue, which is why there is such a structural deficit problem. But how much does foreign aid contribute to that? Only about $70 billion. That is less than 1% of the budget.
Some more perspective. After World War II, the US spent about 3% on the Marshall Plan to help rebuild Europe, which led to the longest era of peace and prosperity in world history.
That’s important because Musk and Ramaswamy are playing off the perception that foreign aid is a major drain on the US taxpayer. The truth is, if you run the newly minted DOGE and are looking for savings, foreign aid amounts to the old pennies you find between your couch cushions.
Where does US foreign aid money go?
According to a Brookings report, the US spends about 25% on humanitarian aid, like helping countries during earthquakes and disasters, and 65% on development aid, like food, education, and medical programs to stop the spread of disease. The smallest part is spent on security and helping governments in allied countries stay stable. It is one of the United States’ most fundamental expressions of soft power, and in a global world where viruses, climate change, and migration issues are all serious cross-border threats, this is a low-cost insurance policy.
Foreign aid is distributed mainly to US government agencies and nonprofit organizations. About 20% goes to multilateral organizations like, say, the UN. Some does go to foreign governments like Ukraine, and there is waste and some corruption, but overall, it is highly regulated, especially when dealing with a country with high levels of corruption.
“Accountability of U.S. economic assistance is high — the U.S. imposes stringent, some would say onerous, reporting and accounting requirements on recipients of U.S. assistance, and the General Accounting Office and agency inspector generals investigate possible misuse,” according to the Brookings Institution.
What harm could cutting it cause?
Eliminating foreign aid will produce negligible economic savings for the US economy but consequential negative results on US public safety.
Power abhors a vacuum, and if the US does not support governments or areas that are in crisis — like Syria — someone else will, like Russia, China, or Islamic State.
Closing your eyes to the global neighborhood won’t make global troubles go away. It simply limits Washington’s ability to prevent them from growing into genuine threats that will have to be dealt with one way or another. And worse, it cedes global influence to bad actors that will, eventually, also threaten US and Western stability.
A dramatic turn to US isolationism in a world of crisis would be a troubling, game-changing trend that would only make the US more vulnerable.
Elon Musk is the richest man in history and he’s in charge of government efficiency. He may cut many parts of government, but foreign aid is not the place to be penny-wise and policy-foolish.