Skip to main content

How the military is using AI in war

▶ Watch Video: Pentagon memo orders removal of Anthropic AI technology from key national systems

With Anthropic’s AI systems being ushered out of the Pentagon, a battle is brewing among other major artificial intelligence firms looking to capitalize on this potentially lucrative opening and shape the way AI is integrated into America’s military defense.

Earlier this month, the Pentagon called for Anthropic’s AI technology to be removed from military operations within six months — the result of an escalating feud between the company’s chief executive and the Trump administration. An internal Pentagon memo hinted that Anthropic’s artificial intelligence was being used in key national areas of national security, including nuclear weapons, ballistic missile defense and cyber warfare.

Sources familiar with the U.S. military’s use of artificial intelligence tell CBS News that AI programs — including one created by Anthropic, which the Trump administration has deemed a supply chain risk — are likely being deployed as part of the U.S. operation against Iran.

While the Pentagon has not said exactly how AI tools are being deployed, CBS News spoke with several experts with knowledge of military operations who described the likely scenarios. 

“The military is now processing roughly a thousand potential targets a day and striking the majority of them, with turnaround time for the next strike potentially under four hours,” said  retired Navy Admiral Mark Montgomery, senior director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracy’s Center on Cyber and Technology Innovation. “A human is still in the loop, but AI is doing the work that used to take days of analysis — and doing it at a scale no previous campaign has matched.”

How AI is used by the military

The Pentagon uses AI in the ways many consumers do — to summarize and distill lots of information at once. According to former Pentagon officials, by analyzing documents, video, and images coming in from the battlefield, AI can help the military war-game out scenarios to minimize casualties and determine which weapons can be most effective.  

“We’re living through a military revolution driven by the digital revolution,” said CBS News national security analyst Aaron McLean. “Today’s revolution is driven by the explosion of data: cameras everywhere, smartphones, connected cars. The battlefield is now flooded with information in ways that were unimaginable a generation ago.” 

With so much data available, AI has become instrumental in contextualizing it for military personnel at a speed far beyond traditional human analysis. 

“There’s now far more data than any room of analysts could process on timelines that matter. AI algorithms sift through it to build targeting packages, assign strike assets and assess damage — nearly instantly,” McLean said. 

“The Israel missile defense example makes this visceral: when hundreds of drones and missiles are inbound over a few hours, no human team can decide in real time which ones to intercept, with what, and when. That’s what AI is doing.” 

So far, Anthropic’s large language model, Claude, is the only large-scale AI system that’s been operational on the Defense Department’s classified systems. 

AI is also used for other administrative functions like research, policy development and procurement, according to Josh Gruenbaum, the commissioner of the Federal Acquisition Service, a government agency which helps decide which goods and services to use. 

“Our goal has been, and remains, to help agencies become comfortable using this technology and turbocharging output and efficiencies for the American taxpayer, while maintaining an evenhanded approach that welcomes American innovators who strengthen agency missions and enable the lawful deployment of these tools by government without inappropriate impediment,” Gruenbaum told CBS News. 

How AI works with physical weapons

AI doesn’t exist in a vacuum on the battlefield — there is still plenty of human oversight and physical tech, including everything from aircraft carriers to drones, from legacy defense contractors like Northrop Grumman, Boeing and Lockheed Martin. The large language models that power AI are not flying the planes or firing the missiles, but they are being used to do a lot of analysis before those things are done. 

According to Montgomery, this advancement has compressed operation time from days to hours. 

“It’s an important enabler in the military’s ability to rapidly plan and execute war fights,” Montgomery told CBS News, emphasizing that there are still humans in the process, but that AI is used to help plan potential strikes. 

A source directly familiar with the military capabilities of Anthropic’s Claude AI told CBS News the main task Claude is doing is sifting through large amounts of intelligence reports, like synthesizing patterns, summarizing findings and surfacing relevant information faster than a human analyst could. 

The targeting process remains human-driven, the source said. While Anthropic’s U.S. Government Usage Policy does allow the Defense Department to use Clause for analyzing foreign intelligence, the terms of use require humans to make any decisions on military targets.

CBS News has not been able to independently verify whether Claude systems were used in a Feb. 28 strike that hit a girls’ school in Iran for which the U.S. was likely responsible. 

AI is a significant boost to operations, but war could still be fought without it. More traditional legacy contractors still make the vast majority of weapons, according to Montgomery. 

“This war is being fought by weapons, 98% by weapons provided by the traditional primes, and they’re doing very well,” Montgomery said. He added that you could fight a war without AI, but it would be “less desirable.” “It definitely is playing a role that will probably only grow campaign after campaign after campaign,” he said. 

Big tech’s role in the military — and what’s changing

In July, the Pentagon signed a $200 million contract with the artificial intelligence company  Anthropic to integrate Claude into Pentagon systems. That contract has since been canceled following a dispute between the Pentagon and Anthropic’s leaders about who should have final say in setting restrictions on how Claude is used by the military. 

Now, the company is suing the federal government, alleging retaliation.”The Constitution does not allow the government to wield its enormous power to punish a company for its protected speech. No federal statute authorizes the actions taken here,” Anthropic said in the lawsuit. 

Microsoft and workers from OpenAI and Google have filed amicus briefs in support of Anthropic’s lawsuit. 

The Pentagon has a six-month off-ramp period to remove Anthropic’s products from its system, and is still using them in Iran, despite the supply chain risk designation. 

Meantime, other companies are getting in on the action. Google announced in a blog post on Tuesday that it is rolling out AI agents for non-classified military uses. On the heels of Anthropic’s fallout with the Defense Department in late February, Sam Altman, CEO of Anthropic rival OpenAI, posted on X about using the ChatGPT maker’s artificial intelligence models in the Pentagon’s classified network. The company then posted about language in their deal with the Pentagon honoring what they refer to as their three red lines on using AI: autonomous lethal weapons, mass surveillance of Americans, and high-stakes automated decisions. 

Darline Graham’s race in South Carolina is a test of Trump’s chutzpah

(CNN) — President Donald Trump’s endorsement has never looked as feeble as it has in the month of August 2026. Already six of his chosen candidates have been defeated.But Tuesday’s special primary runoff for US Senate in South Carolina is an especially big test of not just his endorsement and domination of his party, but also his chutzpah.That’s because Trump has put his reputation on the line like he rarely has before — even as his fortunes with his party have ebbed — and for seemingly relatively little upside.South Carolina’s voters will decide between Rep. Ralph Norman and the Trump-backed candidacy of appointed Sen. Darline Graham, the political neophyte sister of Sen. Lindsey Graham, who died last month.It’s difficult to say who has the edge, given the dearth of quality polling and the rapid turnaround from the first round of the primary just two weeks ago.But those results made it clear Graham was no shoo-in. She took 32.7% to Norman’s 24.6%, and there are plenty of signs the South Carolina GOP has been reluctant to accede to Trump’s advice. The president’s super PAC, MAGA Inc., has also now spent more than $800,000 — perhaps a sign of his political operation’s uncertainty.And if it doesn’t pay off, it will be a real unforced error for Trump.The situation looks somewhat accidental. After Lindsey Graham’s death, Trump recommended Darline Graham as the appointee to replace him, and Gov. Henry McMaster complied. That seemed relatively harmless; the seat, after all, was up for election in November.Darline Graham was widely expected to be a placeholder while a coterie of ambitious South Carolina Republicans tangled over a full term. But things suddenly shifted. Just three days after she was sworn in, Trump began talking her up as a candidate for a full term. And she soon said she would run.All of this despite Graham having been almost anonymous politically, until about a month and a half ago.There are a number of ways in which this was brazen.For one, by trying to anoint Graham, Trump effectively thumbed his nose at a bunch of South Carolina Republicans who have been waiting a long time for an open Senate seat. The last vacancy was also filled by an appointee who later ran for and won the seat, Sen. Tim Scott. Before then, the last vacancy was in 2004.It would be one thing for Trump to endorse in a crowded primary; it’s another to try to help someone leapfrog experienced politicians who have been building their brands for years.And that brings us to a related point: Trump is basically asking his voters just to trust him — and Graham.Because Graham has been such a political nonentity, she has almost no track record. Graham doesn’t even seem to have thought through her positions on some of the big issues, as evidenced by her recent remarks at a debate about whether Taiwan is a national security concern for the United States.So when it comes to what she believes in and would do, voters might reason it will be similar to what her brother did or what Trump wants, but how can they be sure? With someone like Norman, they can at least gauge him by what he’s done previously.What’s more, even those shortcuts might not accrue to Graham’s benefit.While there is surely some goodwill toward the sister of a senator who recently died, her brother was not a beloved figure in the South Carolina Republican Party. His past support for comprehensive immigration reform — some to his right labeled him “Grahamnesty” — haunted him over the years.He got less than 57% of the primary vote in June before his death, despite not facing a very formidable and well-known challenger. That was the lowest of any incumbent GOP senator running in a primary besides Texas’ John Cornyn and Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy, who both lost.And finally, it’s brazen from Trump because it seems somewhat pointless. It’s not clear what he gets out of the deal. It’s not like the seat is in serious jeopardy in the general election and Republicans need a strong candidate. And it’s not like whoever wins a South Carolina GOP primary wouldn’t be a pretty strong Trump ally.Trump also inserted himself in the process even as it was clear his fortunes with his party were waning somewhat.The president actually did this just a couple of weeks after his endorsed candidate for South Carolina governor, Lt. Gov. Pamela Evette, crashed and burned in the primary runoff. (Trump endorsed the other candidate, too, apparently to save himself too much embarrassment.) What better time to roll the dice again?A Graham loss would also be an especially big setback for the president because true Trump loyalists would seem to have a reason to reject Norman. After all, he initially endorsed former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley over Trump in the 2024 presidential primary. (Norman later backed Trump when Haley’s campaign fizzled)That kind of apostasy is usually all GOP voters need to vote against you. But imagine voters pick a non-Trump-endorser over a Trump-endorsed candidate.GOP voters also generally abide by Trump’s wishes in federal races — and especially Senate races. While a series of Trump-backed candidates for governor and other statewide office have lost primaries, only three Trump-endorsed Senate candidates have — and only one since 2018.That’s the potential rebuke Trump has set himself up for. And if it arrives, it will be the latest in a really curious succession of political moves.The-CNN-Wire™ & © 2026 Cable News Network, Inc., a Warner Bros. Discovery Company. All rights reserved.
Read Next Story