The deployment of AI tools for mass surveillance and weaponry that may kill without human control is being opposed by an increasing number of current and former employees of Google and OpenAI who have joined a joint petition.
A combined open letter titled “We Will Not Be Divided”, an online petition, asks both firms’ current and past workers to oppose what they see to be risky AI deployment strategies. Signers have the option to be anonymous and must be validated.
As of Friday, over 220 Google and OpenAI employees have signed the petition: 176 from Google and 47 from OpenAI oppose the expansion of military AI use without ethical controls.
As of mid-2025, Google employs over 187,000 people worldwide, compared to thousands at OpenAI.
A high-stakes dispute between the US Pentagon and Anthropic, another top AI lab, set off this trend.
“The Pentagon is negotiating with Google and OpenAI to try to get them to agree to what Anthropic has refused,” the petition continued, adding that the Department of War is threatening to use the Defence Production Act to compel Anthropic to give its AI model to the military and “tailor its model to the military’s needs”, possibly labelling the company a “supply chain risk” if it refuses.
The petition follows Axios’ Tuesday revelation that Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth had given Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei a deadline to provide the US military broad access to the company’s AI model, threatening dire repercussions if he didn’t.
A Defence official told Axios, “The only reason we’re still talking to these people is we need them, and we need them now.” “The problem for these guys is they are that good.”
Hegseth called the development of AI a “wartime arms race” and called for the quicker deployment of state-of-the-art models for military applications during a visit to Elon Musk’s SpaceX in January. Hegseth declared, “We will not use AI models that prevent you from fighting wars.”
In a blog post on Thursday, Anthropic stated that it would not permit its technology to be used to power weapons that operate without human supervision or to conduct widespread surveillance of Americans.
Referring to the Department of War, the petition stated, “They’re trying to divide each company with fear that the other will give in. That strategy only works if none of us know where the others stand.” In the face of tremendous pressure from the Department of War, this letter helps to foster mutual understanding and unity,” it said.
“We urge our leaders to unite across party lines and take a firm stand against the Department of War’s request for unrestricted use of our models in domestic mass surveillance and autonomous weapons systems.”
“Definitely in unexplored territory,” in a report published Thursday, experts told the members of the press that threatening to use emergency national security powers to exert pressure on a private AI company is a novel and mainly untried strategy.
Dean Ball emphasised that they are absolutely in uncharted territory, and a fellow for the Foundation for American Innovation and a former senior policy advisor for the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
According to Ball, as he stated further, Anthropic stands to lose, as it could be forced out of business, or it could be quasi-nationalised, as the stakes are huge for them.
Ball suggested the episode might serve as a cautionary tale for the tech industry, signalling that government partnerships carry significant risks.
Based on the context of the standoff,
- Pentagon Pressure: According to reports, Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth gave Anthropic a deadline to grant unlimited access to their models.
- Government Retaliation: President Donald Trump and the Pentagon announced intentions to phase out Anthropic’s technology and label the firm a “supply chain risk”, a term often reserved for foreign adversaries like Huawei, in response to Anthropic’s rejection.
- The CEO of OpenAI, Sam Altman, has openly voiced his support for Anthropic’s worries, saying he doesn’t think the Pentagon should compel compliance with threats like the Defence Production Act.
