Palantir

London, United Kingdom – Should Andy Burnham enter Downing Street as early as July 17, if he is confirmed unopposed as Labour leader, one of his most consequential early decisions will have nothing to do with defence spending, immigration, or the economy.

It will concern a seven-year 330-million-pound ($440m) contract between NHS England and Palantir Technologies, a leading defence and intelligence software firm in the United States that received no contracts from Burnham’s Greater Manchester administration during his nine years as mayor.

The ramifications of such a decision could extend well beyond the NHS.

Media reports surfaced last week that Burnham is minded to hold that line with Palantir across all of the UK government when he arrives in Downing Street.

When approached by Al Jazeera, an Andy Burnham spokesperson said: “We’re not going to comment on individual government procurement contracts or companies and there are legal processes that must be followed.

“However, in general, Andy’s guiding principles on procurement are that we need to be getting value for money for the taxpayer and that we need to be safeguarding people’s data and British interests.”

For a company that has spent six years embedding itself across several public sector entities – the NHS, the Ministry of Defence, the Home Office, the Financial Conduct Authority – that posture is a real shift from the outgoing Labour administration led by Keir Starmer.

Starmer’s government actively courted US-based AI companies championed by the former UK ambassador to Washington, Peter Mandelson.

According to the Financial Times, which cited people briefed on the discussions, Burnham’s advisers, including former tech minister Josh Simons, are working with researchers Antonio Weiss and Martha Dacombe on a new AI strategy prioritising British companies and workers.

The story of how we got here runs through Manchester.

The Manchester precedent

Burnham served as Mayor of Greater Manchester from 2017 until June, when he returned to Westminster via the Makerfield by-election.

Under his leadership, the Greater Manchester Combined Authority issued no contracts to Palantir. Greater Manchester Police has separately confirmed it did not have a Palantir contract in the past five years.

The more instructive precedent, though, is in the NHS – an institution Burnham has no direct mayoral authority over, but shaped politically through Greater Manchester’s landmark health devolution settlement.

Rather than adopt the NHS England-mandated Federated Data Platform, built on Palantir’s Foundry software, Greater Manchester’s NHS leaders spent six years building their own analytics infrastructure instead. That became a proof of concept, which allies now cite nationally: effective NHS data management, they argue, does not require Palantir.

In May, Al Jazeera spoke to the Good Law Project about its concerns that Palantir was a “potential security risk”.

Some campaigners have interpreted recent political signalling from Burnham’s camp as supportive of their position, although a Good Law Project spokesperson said it has had no direct contact with him or his team.

The political context

In his first major speech since returning to Westminster as an MP, Burnham said he wanted social value to weigh more heavily in government procurement decisions. The reasoning, according to those close to him, is as much political as ethical.

Reports have described concern within his camp that “unfettered tech boosterism” risks alienating voters already uneasy about how much of the state now runs on American software.

Underneath that concern sits a more specific worry: that a company built to serve defence and intelligence clients does not necessarily share the values of an institution built to treat patients.

“A defence company has inherently different values than a healthcare organisation like the NHS,” said Duncan McCann, Technology and Data Lead at the Good Law Project, which has led legal action seeking greater transparency over the contract. “That’s where I think this concern was created.”

Palantir is not unique in this respect. Its origins in US defence and intelligence contracting are shared, to varying degrees, by most of the US AI firms now supplying British government departments – a lineage that, for critics like McCann, taints the whole category rather than one company alone.

What’s next?

The NHS contract is the most visible, but it is unlikely to be the only one making headlines this year.

A parallel battle is already under way in London, where Palantir has launched a High Court challenge after Mayor Sadiq Khan blocked a 50-million pound ($67m) Metropolitan Police contract, arguing the decision amounts to stifling free speech.

Khan’s office has since approved a smaller arrangement – a partial reversal that has done little to settle the underlying tension.

For campaigners who have spent years pushing for greater scrutiny of Palantir’s role in British public life, Burnham’s ascent could be the moment the tide finally turns. The NHS break clause falls in March 2027, but a decision needs to be made by December.

Burnham is expected in Downing Street later this month. He will soon decide whether Palantir has a future in Britain’s health service – and, by extension, in the rest of the UK’s public sector.

Al Jazeera reached out to Palantir for comment but had not received a response at the time of publishing.

June 26 (Asia Today) — Japan’s Defense Ministry plans to expand the use of artificial intelligence in the Self-Defense Forces’ command-and-control operations, potentially bringing AI into the process through which commanders assess battlefield conditions and direct military units.

The move would mark a new stage in Japan’s defense transformation, shifting its focus beyond acquiring more weapons and equipment toward digitally supported battlefield decision-making.

The Asahi Shimbun reported Friday, citing multiple government officials, that Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi’s government plans to include the expanded use of command-and-control AI in three revised national security documents expected by the end of the year.

The documents are the National Security Strategy, National Defense Strategy and Defense Buildup Program.

The Defense Ministry is also considering including some related expenses in its fiscal 2027 budget request, according to the report.

Japan has used AI for some defense-related functions, but it has not placed the technology at the center of the Self-Defense Forces’ operational command structure.

A command-and-control system allows commanders to assess enemy threats, friendly forces, unit locations and intelligence assets before planning operations and issuing orders.

AI could rapidly organize and analyze large volumes of surveillance, reconnaissance, communications and sensor data before presenting commanders with possible courses of action.

One system reportedly under consideration is the Maven Smart System developed by U.S. data analytics company Palantir Technologies.

Maven analyzes information from satellites, drones, radar systems, battlefield sensors and intelligence reports. It can identify potential threats and targets and help commanders compare possible operational responses.

The U.S. Defense Department has expanded its use of the system and is moving to establish it as a formal long-term military program.

Adopting Maven could improve interoperability between the Self-Defense Forces and the U.S. military, allowing them to process and share operational information more quickly during joint missions.

The proposal, however, has also raised questions about data control, technological dependence and Japan’s authority over its own military command systems.

Command and control is not an ordinary administrative function. It is the highest-level structure through which a government decides how and when to use military force.

Reliance on software and algorithms supplied by a foreign private company could require Japan to establish clear rules covering military data management, access to source technology, system control, wartime operating authority and alternatives in the event of a malfunction or service disruption.

The introduction of foreign software would not formally transfer command authority to the company or the United States. Japanese commanders would retain responsibility for operational decisions.

The debate instead centers on how much of the information-processing infrastructure behind those decisions should depend on technology that Japan does not fully own or control.

Calls for domestically developed defense AI have consequently grown within Japan’s government and ruling-party circles.

One proposal would allow Japan to use a U.S. system initially while developing an independent platform through Japanese technology companies and the country’s defense industrial base.

Japan could eventually replace the foreign system or operate domestic and U.S. technologies together.

Developing a military-grade AI command system capable of immediate operational deployment would be difficult, however. A combined approach using both American and Japanese technology is therefore considered more likely in the near term.

The Defense Ministry identified seven priority areas for military AI in a policy issued in 2024: target detection and identification, intelligence collection and analysis, command and control, logistics, unmanned systems, cybersecurity and administrative efficiency.

The policy states that AI should assist rather than replace human judgment and that meaningful human involvement must be maintained.

The ministry has since established a team to accelerate AI adoption and has called for greater cooperation with Japanese defense companies and technology startups.

Japan’s consideration of command-and-control AI also carries implications for South Korea.

During a conflict or regional emergency, information sharing and operational coordination among the U.S. military, the Self-Defense Forces and South Korea’s military could become increasingly rapid and automated.

AI-assisted command systems could improve coordination in responding to North Korean missile launches, Chinese military activity or a crisis in the Taiwan Strait.

The same technology could also accelerate errors.

Incorrect intelligence, incomplete data or biased algorithms could cause an AI system to present commanders with misleading threat assessments or inappropriate operational choices.

Human commanders would remain responsible for final decisions, but the speed and complexity of AI-supported operations could make errors more difficult to identify before action is taken.

Japan’s plan therefore represents more than a military technology upgrade. It raises broader questions about who controls defense data, how allied systems should be connected and who bears responsibility when AI influences a military decision.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260626010009431

Just weeks after Justin Bieber’s well-received Coachella headline gig, the singer played a small private event for tech, entertainment and defense industry moguls. Executives at controversial firms, such as surveillance tech giant Palantir, were also on the bill.

Bieber was a headliner at WNDR, entertainment executive Jeffrey Katzenberg’s invitation-only confab at the Rosewood Miramar in Montecito last week. The programming for the event was first reported by Puck.

The ultra A-list talks and guests included director James Cameron and former Disney CEO Bob Iger, YouTube CEO Neal Mohan, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, Oprah Winfrey and Julia Roberts, comedians Chris Rock and Trevor Noah and artist Jeff Koons on a panel discussion with LACMA chief Michael Govan.

Bieber, meanwhile, performed a Wednesday poolside set for attendees at the Rosewood. The “Swag” singer reportedly became the highest-paid headliner in Coachella history last month, and its most lucrative merch seller.

Representatives for Bieber did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

While there was lighter programming (like a karaoke party with pop producers StarGate and a talk about snacks with chef Nancy Silverton), the bill included talks and cameos from major weapons and surveillance technology firms noted for their support for — or deep engagement with — the Trump administration.

One panel featured Anduril Industries’ Palmer Luckey, who recently welcomed Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth to its Southern California headquarters. “We are rebuilding the Arsenal of Freedom,” Hegseth said after the Anduril visit.

Palantir Chief Executive Alex Karp led another talk. Palantir’s AI-driven defense and surveillance software has faced scrutiny around how tech like its Maven Smart System may have been used to target civilians in the Iran war.

Karp also published a recent book, “The Technological Republic,” where he wrote that “We must resist the shallow temptation of a vacant and hollow pluralism. We, in America and more broadly the West, have for the past half century resisted defining national cultures in the name of inclusivity. But inclusion into what?”

Katzenberg’s WNDR conference is one of several recent multi-discipline, ultra-elite gatherings hosted by CEOs, including Jeff Bezos and Eric Schmidt. Katzenberg founded his investment firm WndrCo in 2017.