by Miceál O’Hurley
WASHINGTON, D.C. — For years, entrepreneur turned political operative Elon Musk has exerted an outsized role on political policy at home and abroad owing solely to the influence attached to his wealth. With his extraordinary contributions to Donald Trump’s election efforts exceeding $277m Musk became, according to the Federal Elections Commissions whose duty it is to track political donations, the largest-single donor to either party or candidate during the 2024 election.
Consequently, Musk has styled himself the “First Buddy” to President-elect Trump, has resided in a cottage at Trump’s Mar a Lago resort since before election night and is routinely filmed and photographed next to Trump at personal and political events. Trump has adopted Musk’s concept to establish a commission euphemistically called the “Department of Government Efficiency” and appointed Musk its co-leader along with former Presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, all part of his efforts to “clean-up Washington” and “drain the swamp”.
There is immense irony in appointing an oligarch like Musk to such a post designed to rid America of special interest influence. Musk is one of America’s greatest beneficiaries of government contracts and including him in the new President’s inner-circle is the epitome of encouraging corrupt practices and leading a virtual ‘swamp preservation project’.
Much of Musk’s wealth is derived from government contracts to provide communications services to the Department of Defense, Homeland Security, National Security and other U.S. government agencies through his satellite-based internet provider Starlink. According to the Wall Street Journal, Musk and his SpaceX corporation are the beneficiaries of a $1.8b national security contract for additional un-specified services to the U.S. government. Given the technical nature of Musk’s work and investments in defense and security related firms, these amounts may not approach the multitude of other government contract allocations from which Musk personally benefits.
With an estimated personal wealth of some $415.8b, based on early 2025 data, a lion’s share which is derived from government contracts, Musk stands to personally benefit from the very leadership of the Department of Government Efficiency over which he was appointed. His ability to challenge or impede competitors to secure government contracts will represent the epitome of self-dealing. Not since former Russian felon turned oligarch Yevgeny Prigozhin was able to capitalise on his personal relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin to steer lucrative, non-bid government catering contracts (amongst others) to his Concord catering company (earning him the sobriquet “Putin’s Chef”) has a single individual been allowed to parlay their personal relationship with a president to person enrichment.
Not since President F.D.R. appointed Joseph P. Kennedy to head the newly formed Securities and Exchange Commission has an appointee like Musk so invoked the analogy, “Its like putting the fox in charge of the hen house”.
Aside from the benefit of direct government contracts, Musk has ridden Trump’s political return to further personal enrichment. His electric car company Tesla’s stock rose an extraordinary 29% in the week following Trump’s November 11th election, all despite Trump pledging to remove financial supports for electric car production and research. Additionally, both the S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average futures rose by 0.4% and 0.5%, respectively, increasing post-election share gains for Tesla shares to a whopping 37%. One need not be an economist to perceive the market decided the astounding jump in Tesla’s value had nothing to do with Tesla’s ability to innovate and compete successfully with competitors, the majority being foreign manufacturers, but rather the belief that being “First Buddy” would ensure Musk would benefit nor from his or Tesla’s merit but from competition exclusion imposed by Trump sanctions and other policies.
Where Trump’s sanctions would not benefit Musk and Tesla, his co-leadership of the newly devised Department of Government Efficiency could effectively thwart competition providing Musk with a near-monopolistic control of the U.S. electric vehicle market by his own device. After all, it was Musk who floated the notion of the Department of Government Efficiency and not only got Trump to embrace it but appoint him as co-leader of its administration.
Not since President F.D.R. appointed Joseph P. Kennedy to head the newly formed Securities and Exchange Commission has an appointee like Musk so invoked the analogy, “Its like putting the fox in charge of the hen house”. Undoubtedly, Trump, beholden to Musk for his $277m lavished on Trump’s re-election bid, has decided to engage in what appears to be a quid pro quo by giving Musk access, power and influence, specifically aligned to areas promising Musk untold personal benefit.
Beyond the deplorable ethical landscape arising from Trump bringing Musk into the inner circle of his leadership team this dynamic poses significant difficulties for US foreign policy. Traditional Republican and Democratic administrations adopted stringent policies of ensuring the Secretary of State acted as the primary voice for administration policy. With Musk styling himself the “First Buddy” and being constantly photographed at Trump’s side, even taking part on telephone calls to foreign heads of State, the extent to which Musk’s musings on his “X” social media platform and comments to the media reflect Trump Administration policy remains uncertain.
The chances for misunderstanding and the US suffering from a diffused foreign policy message loom large. Lindsay Gorman, Managing Director and Senior Fellow at the German Marshall fund summed it up succinctly when speaking with CNN last week, “Will Musk be carrying out Trump’s foreign policy agenda, acting as a personal ambassador of Trump to everywhere? Or, will Musk be advancing his own vision for global affairs, which may align with Trump in some ways, but not in others. And then what will be the power dynamics between those two?”
More questions than answers are available at present leaving international partners perplexed in how best to deal with one of their oldest and most critical partners on the world stage.
British Prime Minister Kier Starmer grew so alarmed about Musk’s insults and innuendo that he as head of Britain’s prosecution service Starmer facilitated roving gangs of child molesters across the UK in grooming young girls that he took the unusual step of confronting Musk and his 11m “X” followers regarding the allegations.
French President Emmanuel Macron lashed out by asserting Musk was leading an “international reactionary movement” meant to realign French voters against traditional French parties and policies.
Musk has also been courting and supporting the ultra-nationalist AfD movement in Germany which is politically aligned with Russia and vehemently anti-EU in constitution.
In Ireland, citing a single case, now 23-years old in which a judge commented during sentencing that being an asylum seeker from Algeria led to his decision to reduce his term of incarceration to 6-years (rather than 10 years) owing to servitude in an Irish jail would be more difficult and alien for him than for an Irish citizen, Musk sought to fan the flame of rising anti-immigrant sentiment in Ireland. By seeking to up-end the new Irish Government of an Taoiseach Micheál Martin by promoting anti-immigrant sentiment at a time when Europe has been providing housing and benefits to millions of Ukrainians under the EU Temporary Protection Directive or consider asylum claims as required by international law and treaties, Musk is creating enemies in Ireland and across the EU.
Lindsay Gorman, Managing Director and Senior Fellow at the German Marshall fund summed it up succinctly when speaking with CNN last week, “Will Musk be carrying out Trump’s foreign policy agenda, acting as a personal ambassador of Trump to everywhere? Or, will Musk be advancing his own vision for global affairs, which may align with Trump in some ways, but not in others. And then what will be the power dynamics between those two?”
Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre seemingly sent up a flare warning that Musk, by his business dealings, military and other government contracts in the US and across the globe and by virtue of controlling the outsized, influential social media platform “X” is in danger of bestowing un-checked and un-elected powers in the hands of a private individual capable of exercising significant political and financial sway over independent States thereby undermining democratic norms. He is not wrong.
All this has caused the EU to warn both Trump and Musk that it is a crime to breach EU laws on amplifying harmful content or spread racist hate speech. Unquestionably, the EU Commission will more vigorously monitor Musk to see if he coopts “X” algorithms to artificially promote content, including his own statements, posts and interviews as a was of influencing the EU electorate and EU elections. Musk, true to form, claimed, the “[EU] … must really hate democracy” which invoked former EU commissioner Thierry Breton to accuse Musk of “lying like hell”.
Musk, like so many of his generation, continue to parse the concept that rights carry responsibilities and accountability. A showdown with the EU and its constituent States seem inevitable given Musk’s character and Trump’s erratic policy history.
Good foreign relations demand that the US be clear in its policies and leadership structures so its partners have some certainty in how to best engage in bilateral and multilateral relations with the Trump Administration. Such certainty will remain fleeting until it is clear if Musk’s attacks on the UK, France,
Trump will quickly need to either better define Musk’s role and put in-place guardrails to keep him from warping US policy and causing continued international consternation or risk further alienating longstanding US partners and providing comfort to its enemies by sewing discord. Given Trump’s mercurial nature and opportunistic policies only time will tell if Musk turns out to be working for his own agenda, Trump’s, the United States’ or simply feels himself entitled to play at statecraft by virtue of being America’s preeminent oligarch with direct access to the incoming President.
