Some Social Security number requests are not optional. Federal reporting systems rely on the SSN as a primary identifier.

Employment offers the clearest example. Employers collect your SSN to report wages and file taxes, including Form W-2 submissions. The Social Security Administration credits your earnings record with it. The IRS uses it to match payroll taxes with reported income. Federal agencies also require your SSN when you apply for certain benefits or meet tax obligations. If you refuse to provide your SSN in these situations, you can delay processing or lose access to services.

However, not every form carries that authority. Landlords, medical offices, schools, gyms and retailers often include an SSN field by default. In those cases, ask why they need it and whether another identifier will work. So how do you tell when your SSN is truly required and when you can push back?

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

Examples of when you need to share your SSN

Certain U.S. laws and federal regulations require an SSN because it functions as the official taxpayer or benefits identifier.

The IRS requires individuals who qualify for an SSN to use it as their taxpayer identification number on Form 1040 and related filings. The IRS uses the number to match income statements, credits and refunds to the correct taxpayer record.

IRS regulations require employers to include each employee’s SSN on Form W-2. Employers submit the form to both the IRS and the SSA so agencies can record earnings and reconcile payroll taxes.

Applications for Social Security benefits require an SSN so the SSA can retrieve the applicant’s earnings history and calculate eligibility and payment amounts.

U.S. citizens and eligible noncitizens applying for federal student aid must provide a valid SSN on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA). The number is verified against SSA records during processing.

Financial institutions must obtain a taxpayer identification number — usually an SSN for individuals — to report interest income to the IRS on Form 1099-INT.

In each of these cases, the requirement stems from tax administration statutes or federal benefits law. The SSN is used to link records across agencies and systems.

When you don’t need to share your SSN

Beyond tax filings, wage reporting and federal benefits, many SSN requests come from internal company policy rather than statute. Private businesses are generally allowed to ask for your SSN. In most everyday transactions, there is no federal law forcing you to provide it.

Landlords often request an SSN to run credit checks. Federal housing law does not mandate collecting a tenant’s SSN to lease property. Screening is conducted through consumer reporting agencies, and alternative verification methods may be available.

Healthcare providers routinely include an SSN field. Federal law does not require patients to disclose an SSN for treatment. Since 2018, Medicare cards have used randomized beneficiary identifiers instead of SSNs. These Medicare Beneficiary Identifiers (MBI) don’t include your SSN.

Public schools may request a student’s SSN, but students cannot be denied enrollment for refusing to provide one. Institutions tend to assign their own identification numbers.

Power companies, mobile carriers and gyms sometimes request an SSN to evaluate credit risk or secure payment agreements. This is a risk management choice, not a statutory requirement.

In these cases, the request may feel routine. The legal footing is different from tax or benefits administration. You can ask what authority requires it and whether another form of identification will suffice.

What to ask before you hand over your SSN

If the request comes from a government agency, look for a Privacy Act disclosure statement. Federal law requires agencies to state whether providing your SSN is mandatory or voluntary, cite the legal authority for the request, and explain how it will be used. If the request comes from a private company, ask direct questions:

Is this required by federal or state law?

What will the SSN be used for?

Can you accept the last four digits instead?

Is there an alternative way to verify identity?

You can also ask how the number will be stored, whether it is encrypted and who has access to it. Collecting only what is necessary is a recognized security practice, but not every organization follows it.

What actually happens when your SSN is leaked

A leaked or stolen SSN can be used anywhere that number is treated as proof of identity.

In tax administration, the IRS processes returns based on the SSN attached to them. If a fraudulent return is filed first, the legitimate taxpayer’s electronic filing may be rejected because the number has already been used. Fixing it means paper filing and identity verification while the IRS reviews the case. The agency’s Identity Protection PIN program was introduced after years of SSN-based tax fraud.

Credit reporting works the same way. Under the Fair Credit Reporting Act framework, credit bureaus use the SSN to build and match consumer files. If credit is issued using your SSN, that account can attach to your report until you dispute it. It stays there while bureaus and lenders investigate.

Federal benefit systems also depend on the number. The SSA warns that criminals use stolen SSNs to impersonate beneficiaries and create fraudulent online accounts. An SSN does not expire or reset. Once exposed, it can continue appearing in tax filings, credit applications, or benefit records until you flag it.

How identity monitoring services help you respond faster

Identity monitoring services attempt to detect suspicious activity tied to your personal information as early as possible. Many services track credit activity across all three major U.S. bureaus and alert you to new inquiries, accounts and report changes. Some also scan known data breach datasets for exposed identifiers, including Social Security numbers.

Certain plans include identity theft insurance to cover eligible recovery costs, along with fraud resolution support to guide you through disputes and paperwork if something goes wrong.

No service can prevent every type of identity theft. The real value is early warning, knowing when and where your SSN is being used so you can act quickly before damage spreads.

How to check if your personal information was exposed

If you are unsure whether your personal information has been compromised, take action. Start with a reputable breach scan to see whether your email or other identifiers appear in known leaks. Early detection gives you more control and helps you respond before fraud escalates.

See my tips and best picks on Best Identity Theft Protection at Cyberguy.com.

Kurt’s key takeaways

Lawmakers created the Social Security number to track earnings and administer benefits, not to unlock every part of your life. Yet today, many companies treat it like a universal key. In some situations, you must provide your SSN. Taxes, employment and federal benefits depend on it. However, many everyday requests come from internal company policies, not federal law. That distinction matters. Before you share your number, pause and ask why the business needs it. Ask how they store it. Ask whether another form of identification will work. Small questions can prevent big problems. If someone has exposed your SSN, act quickly. Monitor your credit. Set up alerts. Report suspicious activity right away. Early action limits damage and protects your identity. Your Social Security number does not change. But you control when, where and how you share it.

Have you ever been asked for your Social Security number in a situation that didn’t feel necessary, and did you push back? Let us know by writing to us at Cyberguy.com.

Get my best tech tips, urgent security alerts and exclusive deals delivered straight to your inbox. Plus, you’ll get instant access to my Ultimate Scam Survival Guide – free when you join my CYBERGUY.COM newsletter.

Copyright 2026 CyberGuy.com. All rights reserved.

Related Article

Illinois DHS data breach exposes 700K residents’ records

As U.S. and Israeli military pressure on Iran intensifies, and President Donald Trump signals support for Kurdish forces, Kurdish opposition groups along the country’s western frontier tell Fox News Digital they are watching closely for an opportunity to strike back against the Islamic Republic, which they have fought for decades.

Kako Aliyar, a member of the leadership committee of the Kurdish opposition party Komala, told Fox News Digital from an undisclosed location in Iraq that the Kurdish movements are ready to act if conditions allow. 

‘Kurds have been waiting for a moment to do something,’ Aliyar said. ‘We believe that those moments are not far from us.’

But Aliyar said Kurdish forces cannot yet move against the regime because Iran still retains the ability to launch missile and drone attacks, which opposition fighters would struggle to defend against.

Aliyar said Iranian forces continue to target Kurdish opposition bases across the border in Iraq’s Kurdistan region.

Trump signaled support for Kurdish fighters launching an offensive against Iran, saying in a telephone interview with Reuters Thursday that he would back such a move. 

‘I think it’s wonderful that they want to do that — I’d be all for it,’ Trump said. 

Asked whether the United States would provide air cover for a Kurdish offensive, Trump declined to elaborate. 

‘I can’t tell you that,’ he said.

Aliyar said Kurdish groups remain under pressure from Iran and continue to face attacks on their bases across the border in Iraq’s Kurdistan region. 

‘Our camps, the Kurdish political parties, are still under attack by the Iranian regime, and we can’t go into detail,’ he said. 

Still, he indicated that if the opportunity arises, Kurdish fighters would attempt to return to Iranian territory. 

‘If we get an opportunity to go back to our own country, we will use it,’ he said.

Kurdish opposition signals unity

The comments come as Iranian Kurdish opposition groups attempt to present a united front against Iran.  

In February, several factions formed the Coalition of Political Forces of Iranian Kurdistan, bringing together parties including Komala, the Democratic Party of Iranian Kurdistan (PDKI), PJAK and the Kurdistan Freedom Party.

Aliyar said the coalition is still organizing itself but carries an important political message.

‘Politically, it’s a huge message for the Kurdish people inside the country and the international community that Kurds are united,’ he said. ‘We are working together, and we are trying to reach our goals together.’

Kurdish groups have long fought the Iranian government. Armed clashes between Kurdish militants and Iranian forces date back to the years following the 1979 Islamic Revolution, when Kurdish factions sought autonomy and were violently suppressed by Tehran.

Today, many Kurdish opposition groups operate from neighboring Iraqi Kurdistan, where they maintain political offices and limited military forces.

Waiting for Iran’s military capabilities to weaken

Aliyar suggested Kurdish forces would only be able to move if Iran’s military capabilities are significantly degraded. 

‘I believe those missile and drone abilities have to be more weakened or totally removed because we are not able to defend ourselves against them,’ he said.

Iran’s ability to launch missiles and drones remains one of the regime’s strongest deterrents against internal or external challengers. 

‘They can still launch missiles and they can still kill people,’ Aliyar said.

If those capabilities were reduced, he believes Kurdish forces could attempt to exploit the moment. 

‘I think everyone has the capacity to do so because Kurdish political parties have huge legitimacy among the people,’ he said. ‘People support them, people support us.’

However, Aliyar cautioned that no one can predict how events will unfold. 

‘When a war starts, you are trying to find a way to use it in your best way, but you cannot predict what happens tomorrow,’ he said.

Kurdish resistance rooted in decades of struggle

Kurds in Iran represent one of the country’s largest ethnic minorities and have historically maintained organized opposition movements. 

Kurdish parties developed armed wings and political networks decades ago, giving them a level of organizational structure that many other Iranian opposition movements lack.

Jino Victoria Doabi, an international political analyst focused on Iran and Kurdistan, told Fox News Digital that ‘Kurds inside Iran have their own history and tradition of struggle and resistance with political parties and armed forces.’

Doabi said that Kurdish forces are unlikely to move without clear backing from Washington.

‘For that to happen, they need assurance from America, both politically but also security-wise,’ Doabi said.

‘Kurds have learned that they cannot just do it for the good cause anymore, because that’s going to cause civilians a lot of pain and destruction and killings.’

Discussions about the idea of Kurdish involvement may have been underway long before the recent escalation, according to Doabi. 

‘I don’t think this has happened overnight,’ she said. ‘I think this has been discussed for a long time.’

Regional complications

Despite the growing attention on Kurdish groups, Aliyar emphasized that Iraqi Kurdish authorities are not directly involved in any potential campaign. 

‘Iraqi Kurds are not part of it,’ he said. ‘I am not Iraqi, so I cannot comment on that.’

Analysts say Kurdish insurgents alone are unlikely to topple the Iranian regime. But if internal unrest spreads and Kurdish forces coordinate with broader opposition movements, Iran’s western frontier could become a serious pressure point for Iran. 

For Aliyar and other Kurdish leaders, however, the goal remains clear after decades of opposition to the Islamic Republic.

‘We have had this desire for 47 years,’ he said. ‘If we get an opportunity, we will use it.’

Related Article

If Khamenei falls, who takes Iran? Strikes will expose power vacuum — and the IRGC’s grip

House GOP leaders have asked embattled Rep. Tony Gonzales, R-Texas, to drop his bid for re-election.

‘The Ethics Committee has announced an investigation into Congressman Tony Gonzales’s conduct, and we urge them to act expeditiously. Congressman Gonzales has said he will fully cooperate with the investigation,’ the statement by Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and other top Republicans reads.

‘We have encouraged him to address these very serious allegations directly with his constituents and his colleagues. In the meantime, Leadership has asked Congressman Gonzales to withdraw from his race for re-election.’

Gonzales’ re-election bid has been plagued by scandal for weeks ever since allegations emerged that he had an affair with his late aide and sent her sexually explicit text messages.

The same aide, Regina Santos-Aviles, committed suicide by setting herself on fire outside her home late last year.

National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) Chairman Richard Hudson, R-N.C., leader of the House GOP campaign arm, told Fox News Digital, ‘I agree with the Speaker and the rest of leadership, Tony should withdraw from the runoff and allow the Ethics process to move forward while focusing on his family and serving his constituents for the remainder of his term.’

Gonzales suggested the affair did occur on the conservative ‘Joe Pags Show’ on Wednesday evening but gave no indication he would drop out.

‘I made a mistake and I had a lapse in judgment, and there was a lack of faith, and I take full responsibility for those actions. Since then, I’ve reconciled with my wife Angel. I’ve asked God to forgive me, which he has, and my faith is as strong as ever,’ the Texas Republican said.

He previously fought back against any accusation of impropriety and accused Santos-Aviles’ husband of extortion.

‘During my six years in Congress, not a single formal complaint has been levied against my office. Now days away from an election, coordinated political attacks reign in. IT WON’T WORK. Halfway through early voting and the intensity resides w/ TG voters. I’d rather be us than them,’ he posted on X in late February.

The House Ethics Committee opened an investigation into Gonzales on Wednesday, one day after he advanced to a runoff in his re-election bid.

Gonzales is facing Brandon Herrera, a social media influencer and firearms activist who previously challenged the incumbent lawmaker in 2024. Herrera lost to Gonzales by less than 2% in the previous election cycle.

This time, however, neither clinched an outright majority in the race and will now face off again in late May, if Gonzales does not drop out.

Fox News Digital reached out to Gonzales’ congressional office for comment.

Meanwhile, the growing scandal has prompted several of Gonzales’ fellow House Republicans to call for his resignation before the end of his term.

‘I would encourage him to consider resigning,’ Rep. Anna Paulina Luna, R-Fla., told reporters last week.

His fellow Texas lawmaker, Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, urged Gonzales not to run for re-election. ‘America deserves better. Tony should drop out of the race,’ he posted on X.

Gonzales previously told reporters he had no intention of resigning.

Fox News Digital reached out to Gonzales’ congressional office and campaign for comment.

Related Article

Republican congressman accused of affair with late aide to face runoff election

Europe is ramping up its nuclear defenses, as France expands its arsenal and Poland signals interest in closer nuclear coordination with allies. 

‘I have decided to increase the numbers of warheads of our arsenal,’ French President Emmanuel Macron said Monday. 

He also said France will no longer disclose the size of its nuclear arsenal, reversing previous transparency.

‘To be free, one needs to be feared,’ the French president concluded.

France’s shift comes as Europe faces its most volatile security moment in decades, with Russia’s war in Ukraine grinding on, repeated nuclear threats from Moscow, and renewed questions in European capitals about the long-term reliability of U.S. security guarantees. Recent U.S. military strikes against Iran have added to a sense of global instability.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk, meanwhile, signaled his country eventually will try to obtain nuclear weapons. 

‘Poland takes nuclear security very seriously,’ he said Tuesday. ‘As our autonomous capabilities grow, we will strive to prepare Poland for the most autonomous actions possible in this matter in the future.’

Polish President Karol Nawrocki, who frequently finds himself at odds with Tusk, said he is ‘a big supporter of Poland joining the nuclear project.’

Poland is a signatory of the nuclear nonproliferation treaty from the 1960s, meaning it is officially committed not to obtaining nuclear weapons. 

Tusk said Monday that Poland was in talks with France after Macron offered to deploy nuclear-capable fighter jets to allied countries. 

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022 shattered long-standing assumptions about conventional deterrence on the continent and has been accompanied by repeated nuclear saber-rattling from Moscow, including threats tied to Western military support for Kyiv. Russian officials have periodically warned of escalation if NATO deepens its involvement, keeping nuclear deterrence at the forefront of European security planning.

At the same time, questions have resurfaced across European capitals about the long-term durability of U.S. security guarantees, even as Washington continues to lead NATO and maintain nuclear forces stationed in Europe under long-standing alliance arrangements.

Several European governments have sharply increased defense spending since the start of the Ukraine war. 

Germany announced a historic military buildup after decades of underinvestment. Poland has become one of NATO’s top defense spenders as a percentage of GDP, rapidly expanding its conventional forces. And leaders in Paris and elsewhere have revived calls for greater ‘strategic autonomy’ — the idea that Europe must be capable of defending itself if the United States shifts its focus elsewhere.

France is the only nuclear-armed nation in the European Union and maintains an independent deterrent separate from NATO’s U.S.-led nuclear umbrella. Any expansion of its arsenal or broader coordination with European partners marks a significant moment in the continent’s post-Cold War security architecture.

Globally, only nine countries are widely believed to possess nuclear weapons: the United States, Russia, China, France, the United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, North Korea and Israel.

The renewed nuclear focus in Europe is also unfolding as global tensions escalate beyond the continent. The U.S. recently carried out major military strikes against Iran, raising fears of a wider regional conflict and stretching U.S. military attention across multiple theaters.

For some European leaders, the combination of Russia’s aggression and instability in the Middle East reinforces arguments that the continent must be prepared to shoulder more of its own defense burden — including strengthening deterrence at the highest level.

Related Article

World enters uncharted era as US-Russia nuclear treaty expires, opening door to fastest arms race in decades

The highest-ranking Minnesotan in Congress is calling for a deeper investigation into allegations that leaders in his state government knowingly ignored evidence of welfare fraud, and he called for those leaders to even face incarceration if proven true.

‘People are sick and tired of elected officials having a double standard, being treated differently than they are. They’re held accountable for things that they should be held accountable for, when their elected officials are not,’ House Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., told Fox News Digital. 

‘If these two guys are dirty, they should be held accountable, and they should serve jail time.’

He was referring to Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and state Attorney General Keith Ellison, two of several witnesses at a high-profile hearing on fraud conducted by the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.

Both Walz and Ellison insisted that they were serious about prosecuting fraud in the state’s social programs and that they took action to stop it once it was brought to their attention.

But Emmer cited a report by the House Oversight Committee that accused them both of knowing about the fraud earlier than previously thought and delaying public accountability for fear of political retribution from progressives in the state — particularly the Somali community in Minneapolis, who Republicans have accused of taking advantage of the state’s welfare system.

‘They might have been able to qualify it enough that it wasn’t black and white, but if they lied to the committee this morning about knowing about the fraud and when they knew about the fraud and the FBI investigation, that is a criminal act of its own,’ Emmer told Fox News Digital.

‘So I do believe, depending on this report and what else the majority staff is doing, they very well may want to call them back in and depose them under oath.’

He added at another point, ‘You have maybe 80 to 100,000 Somalis in Minnesota. Tim Walz won with 52%. They made a difference. Keith Ellison won by less than 1%. I think it was 20,000 votes. Makes a difference. So if those are connected, yeah, I mean, this is campaign fraud.’

‘I’ve taken accountability for this. I’m not going to run again. I need to spend the time fixing this,’ Walz said during the hearing. ‘This does undermine trust in government. Do I wish there were things that could have happened earlier? Yes. But in this job, ‘wish’ didn’t do it. I’m looking into where I see it.’

At another point, Walz attributed the rise in fraud statistics to an increase in prosecutions, telling Republicans, ‘When you catch people and prosecute them, it shows up as a fraud increase.’

He also dismissed accusations that he kept whistle-blowers quiet over fear of being seen as Islamophobic, ‘I can’t speak to it because it’s not anything I would say.’

Ellison, meanwhile, said he was happy to work across bipartisan lines to prosecute fraud.

‘I am here to work to improve this system, and there are improvements that can be made,’ he said. ‘If we can get out of fixing the blame and get to fixing the problem, that would be an enormous thing for me.’

But Emmer, who maintained that further investigation was needed, suggested he doubted their intentions.

‘It’s power. They want power. In order for them to get power, they need to be elected. In order for them to get elected, they have to cheat in different ways. And that is exactly what they did,’ Emmer said. ‘If the Somali community is being used by these public officials to get themselves into office…it sure does look suspect, it needs to be investigated.’

Related Article

GREGG JARRETT: If Walz is charged in Minnesota fraud scandal, his best defense is incompetence

I spent decades inside the Pentagon watching technology reshape warfare. I saw precision munitions change the battlefield. I watched satellites compress decision cycles. But nothing compares to what is happening now.

Artificial intelligence has moved the lab to the kill chain.

And the showdown between Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and AI firm Anthropic is not a contract dispute. It is the opening battle over who controls the most powerful military technology of the 21st century.

AI is already transforming war

Look at Ukraine.

Western officials report that drones now account for roughly 70-80% of battlefield casualties in that war. But the real revolution occurs when AI is added. Reports indicate AI-guided navigation can increase drone strike accuracy from 10–20% to as high as 70–80%.

That is not incremental change. That is a transformation in battlefield lethality.

The same dynamic is emerging in U.S. operations involving Iran and other theaters. AI tools are being used for intelligence analysis, targeting refinement, pattern recognition, and operational simulations. These systems compress time, reduce uncertainty and accelerate decisions.

AI is not theoretical. It is operational.

Which brings us to Washington.

What the Hegseth–Anthropic standoff is really about

On Feb. 27, Hegseth designated Anthropic a ‘supply chain risk to national security.’ President Donald Trump ordered federal agencies to cease using its Claude AI model after Anthropic refused to remove two guardrails:

A prohibition on fully autonomous weapons.

A prohibition on mass domestic surveillance.

Artificial intelligence has moved the lab to the kill chain.

The Pentagon argues that military commanders must be able to use AI tools for all lawful defense purposes without seeking permission from a private company in real time.

Anthropic argues that removing safeguards could enable autonomous killing systems or unconstitutional domestic spying.

Both concerns are legitimate.

But here is the deeper problem: America has outsourced strategic control of its most sensitive military algorithms to private contractors.

That is unsustainable.

Draw the right line

Let me be clear about what must not happen.

We must not expand domestic surveillance of American citizens under the banner of AI efficiency. The Fourth Amendment does not disappear in the age of algorithms.

Second, we must keep a human being in the kill chain. I served under lawful command authority. Life-and-death decisions carry moral accountability. They cannot be delegated entirely to autonomous systems.

Those are firm boundaries.

But here is the other boundary: no private corporation should hold an effective veto over how America defends itself.

Washington’s contractor addiction

For decades, the federal government has grown dependent on contractors for critical defense functions — logistics, cyber infrastructure, analytics and intelligence support. AI is simply the next frontier in that pattern.

But frontier AI models are not spare parts or uniforms. They are strategic infrastructure. They influence targeting, operational tempo and potentially deterrence modeling.

That level of sensitivity cannot remain under corporate ownership.

During World War II, the United States built the atomic bomb through the Manhattan Project under centralized national authority. It was not governed by venture-backed boards setting independent usage policies. It was directed by the U.S. government with a clear strategic mandate.

We need a similar mindset for our most sensitive AI systems.

Government must own core military algorithms. Not lease them. Not subscribe to them. Own them.

AI tools are being used for intelligence analysis, targeting refinement, pattern recognition, and operational simulations. These systems compress time, reduce uncertainty and accelerate decisions.

If AI is the new strategic high ground, America cannot subcontract the high ground.

China isn’t hesitating

As I argue in ‘The New AI Cold War,’ Beijing does not struggle with these dilemmas.

China fuses AI development directly to the state. There are no Silicon Valley executives in Beijing refusing military access. AI is treated as national infrastructure.

Russia and other nations are moving in similar directions. They are not debating internal guardrails while field-testing AI-enabled systems.

Strategic competition does not pause while we litigate contract language.

What must happen next

First, Congress must draw bright lines: no AI-enabled mass domestic surveillance of Americans without strict constitutional safeguards.

Second, codify meaningful human control over lethal force decisions.

Third — and most critically — build sovereign AI capacity inside government.

That means:

• Government-controlled AI research for classified applications
• Government ownership of core defense algorithms
• Reduced reliance on private frontier labs for sensitive military systems
• Long-term pipelines of cleared AI engineers

Anthropic argues that removing safeguards could enable autonomous killing systems or unconstitutional domestic spying.

Private industry will continue to innovate. But America’s most sensitive warfighting tools cannot remain dependent on companies whose corporate policies can override national defense requirements.

The real issue is sovereignty

The Pentagon–Anthropic feud is not about personalities. It is about sovereignty.

Who controls the algorithms that guide American force?

Who owns the code?

Who decides how it is used?

In the new AI Cold War, power will belong to those who control the models — not merely those who rent access to them.

America must protect liberty. We must reject AI-driven domestic surveillance. We must preserve human moral accountability in the use of force.

First, Congress must draw bright lines: no AI-enabled mass domestic surveillance of Americans without strict constitutional safeguards.

But we must also end the illusion that venture-backed firms can function as ultimate gatekeepers of national defense.

The AI Cold War is not hypothetical. It is unfolding on battlefields abroad and in policy fights at home.

This moment is not about one company. It is about whether the United States will treat artificial intelligence as strategic national infrastructure — or as a contractor service.

The answer will shape the next generation of warfare.

And history will not wait for us to decide.

Related Article

Trump admin sought redactions on key China war game report warning of US military readiness gaps

Iran launched a new wave of attacks on Thursday, with explosions reported in the region and Tehran threatening that the U.S. would ‘bitterly regret’ sinking an Iranian warship.

Iran’s strikes on Thursday targeted Israel, American bases and countries in the region. Israel announced multiple incoming missile attacks as air raid sirens blared in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Defense on Thursday said Iran used unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) in an attack on Nakhchivan International Airport and other civilian infrastructure. The ministry said the details of the attack and the capabilities of the UAVs were being investigated.

‘The Ministry of Defense of the Republic of Azerbaijan strongly condemns the attacks carried out by the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran against civilian infrastructure on the territory of Azerbaijan in the absence of any military necessity. The Islamic Republic of Iran bears the entire responsibility for the incident,’ the ministry’s statement read.

Iran has not acknowledged targeting Azerbaijan, despite the country’s ministry of defense pointing the finger at Tehran.

Qatar evacuated residents near the U.S. Embassy in Doha on Thursday, with its Ministry of Defense confirming that the country was ‘subjected to a missile attack’ and that its air defense systems were able to intercept it. The ministry urged the public to remain calm and avoid unofficial information.

Abu Dhabi announced that its authorities were responding to an incident involving falling debris in ICAD 2, which is part of the Industrial City of Abu Dhabi. Six people, identified by Abu Dhabi as Pakistani and Nepali nationals, suffered minor to moderate injuries.

Iran has carried out retaliatory strikes since the launch of Operation Epic Fury, with the latest wave coming one day after the U.S. sunk an Iranian warship, killing at least 87 Iranian sailors. Sri Lankan navy spokesman Cmdr. Buddhika Sampath said 32 people were rescued from the wreck and were admitted to a hospital.

Secretary of War Pete Hegseth defended the move during a news briefing at the Pentagon.

‘An American submarine sunk an Iranian warship that thought it was safe in international waters. Instead, it was sunk by a torpedo — Quiet Death. The first sinking of an enemy ship by a torpedo since World War II. Like in that war, back when we were still the War Department, we are fighting to win,’ Hegseth said.

Iranian leaders condemned the attack, with Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi accusing the U.S. Navy of committing ‘an atrocity at sea.’ Meanwhile, Ayatollah Abdollah Javadi Amoli appeared on state television and called for the shedding of Israeli and ‘Trump’s blood.’

‘Fight the oppressive America, his blood is on my shoulders,’ he said in a rare call for violence from an ayatollah, one of the highest ranks within the clergy of Shiite Islam.

The U.S. and Israel launched the war on Saturday with strikes targeting Iran’s leadership, including the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who was killed. Iran’s missile arsenal and nuclear facilities were also hit.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.

Related Article

Israel hammers Iranian internal security command centers to open door to uprising

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz and Attorney General Keith Ellison faced a barrage of tough questions from Republicans during a Wednesday House hearing on the massive fraud scandal in the state, with most of the questions focused on one key theme: What did they know, and when did they know it?

Walz and Ellison were asked multiple times for specifics regarding when they were first made aware of the fraud problems and faced sharp rebukes from Republican members, including Rep. Virginia Foxx.

‘You did not do your job, you did not do your job,’ Foxx told Walz. ‘You did not protect taxpayer dollars. You allowed massive fraud. You and Mr. Ellison allowed massive fraud to go on in the state of Minnesota. It is unfortunate, as somebody said, that you can’t be held personally responsible at this stage in the game.’

An exchange between GOP Rep. Jim Jordan and Walz sparked immediate pushback from conservatives on social media. 

‘Why didn’t you tell the truth about why you restarted the payments?’ Jordan asked during a House Oversight Committee hearing on Minnesota fraud on Wednesday.

The exchange centered on Walz’s past public statements that a judge ordered the Minnesota Department of Education to continue reimbursements in April 2021 after the agency had halted payments over fraud concerns.

Jordan pointed to a 2022 court-authorized news release from then-Ramsey County District Court Judge John H. Guthmann that disputed the governor’s characterization of the events.

‘So either you’re lying or the court’s lying. And I’m just asking you which one is it?’ Jordan said.

One of the most contentious exchanges came during questioning from GOP Rep. Nancy Mace when she pressed Walz for specific numbers on how many children are in his state, the massive increase in autism care spending and why that occurred without getting specific numbers back from Walz.

‘Ok, so your excuse before — that you didn’t know what the 2017 autism numbers were — because you were not governor, and today you can’t answer the numbers about 2024 as governor, and you still said you prepared for this hearing today. It’s unbelievable.’

Walz shot back that he wouldn’t be a ‘prop’ for Mace, and she eventually said, ‘I expect you to know this information. Thank God you’re not vice president of the United States.’

GOP Rep. Clay Higgins confronted Ellison in another heated moment asking him to say he was ‘leading’ the fight against rooting out corruption without getting the specific answer he was looking for, prompting him to call for Ellison’s resignation. 

‘I’m not talking about Medicaid fraud, don’t hide behind that,’ Higgins said, interrupting Ellison. ‘You have the authority to prosecute anything criminally that the governor asks you to, and this thing is big. I’m giving you an opportunity sir, are you leading the criminal investigative effort into this massive fraud across the board…or not?’ Higgins pressed.

‘We are following the law,’ Ellison said before Higgins cut him off again.

‘You are not leading, I’m going to say, Mr. Chairman, that the attorney general of the state of Minnesota should resign,’ Higgins said.

At the close of the hearing, things became tense again when GOP Rep. Nick Langworthy suggested that Walz, who is still serving as governor despite dropping out of his re-election bid due to the fraud scandal, should be impeached for ‘malfeasance,’ citing Minnesota’s own state Constitution. 

Fox News Digital’s Ashley Carnahan contributed to this report.

Related Article

Walz accused by Jordan of trying to ‘hide behind’ court order in Feeding Our Future payments

Iran’s tyrannical and ruthless regime is disintegrating. After yet again massacring thousands of its own citizens for voicing their dreams for liberty and better governance, the Iranian regime meantime resumed pursuing nuclear capability and its aggressive ICBM program. The regime’s overconfidence in U.S. inaction cost it its leader and its core military capabilities are going up in smoke. Against this backdrop, the conflict has spread to the Gulf, threatening the Strait of Hormuz, a chokepoint for roughly one-fifth of the world’s petroleum, and forcing the rest of the world to rethink how it prices energy risk and political alignment.

This is not another regional flare-up. This is a rupture of an old equilibrium in which sanctioned oil, shadow fleets and calibrated escalation kept markets stable enough to function. That equilibrium is now breaking. A rapid political-military shift in the Middle East is unfolding alongside a restructuring of the global energy order.

When I was in Afghanistan during the surge, Tehran’s active support for the insurgency fighting the United States and Afghan forces fomented instability and amplified violence for which civilians paid the biggest price, a dynamic that so many across several nations have tragically encountered for decades. But Iran was never a contained regional problem.

While its terrorism was widely perceived as a Middle East issue, its cyber and intelligence operations spanned continents, with assassination plots that included the American president. As to global effects, Iran’s energy has always made its regime globally significant.

At this stage of the conflict, the most economically significant and immediate geography is the Strait of Hormuz which Iran is working to choke off. Roughly one-fifth of global petroleum and a substantial portion of liquefied natural gas move through that narrow corridor. As strikes intensified, vessels paused transit, insurers reassessed exposure and operators rerouted cargoes. Markets adjusted immediately. Energy security and geopolitical stability are now inseparable; maritime risk has become the pressure valve through which regional conflict spills into global consequence. 

This realignment did not begin in the Gulf this weekend. It started with U.S. actions in Venezuela. Caracas holds the world’s largest proven crude reserves — about 303 billion barrels — and even marginal normalization under a more U.S.-cooperative government alters the supply calculus for Washington and its allies.

The new U.S.–Venezuela arrangement has already generated roughly $2 billion in transactions in just weeks, pulling Venezuelan barrels back into wider circulation and altering the discount ecosystem Moscow had grown accustomed to. Stack that with a post-crisis Iran re-entering markets on different terms, and the shadow ecosystem of discounted, sanctioned crude — Russia, Iran, Venezuela — begins to fracture and reprice simultaneously.

But the most consequential energy recalibration runs through Beijing. China is essentially Iran’s oil export market. In 2025, China bought more than 80% of Iran’s shipped oil, averaging ~1.38 million barrels per day, about 13.4% of China’s seaborne crude imports—meaning Beijing is simultaneously Tehran’s economic lifeline and its strategic choke chain.

By turning a sanctioned producer into a quasi-captive supply relationship — sustained through gray-market routing, reflagging and intermediary hubs — Beijing secured discounted barrels in normal times and leverage in crisis. Any sustained disruption of Iranian flows forces China into replacement buying that tightens global markets and exposes China’s own energy security; Iran exports about 1.6 million bpd mainly to China and such disruptions pushes Beijing to pivot to alternatives.

The relationship is therefore best understood as a dependency loop: Iran needs China for revenue and sanctions relief-by-proxy; China uses Iran as a discount supplier and as a pressure valve in the sanctioned crude system — one that can be tightened or loosened depending on Beijing’s broader negotiation posture with Washington and its appetite for risk in the Gulf. That Iran-China dependency is no longer stable.  With Iranian oil flows disrupted, China faces a choice between turning to alternative suppliers at higher cost or even tapping strategic reserves. Tightening global crude markets resulting from U.S. actions in Venezuela and now Iran give Washington leverage in energy pricing.

Beyond the tanker decks, this shift underscores the larger theme of reconfiguration: resources once bundled to manage sanctions are now subject to heightened geopolitical risk, forcing China to rethink dependencies while the U.S. and its partners are positioning to shape the post-conflict energy order. Energy supply patterns will restructure global power relations. And where China is recalibrating exposure, Russia is recalculating opportunity.

The same forces reshaping China’s calculations are altering Moscow’s. As India trims Russian purchases, Moscow has been pushing more barrels into China, and Reuters reports China’s Russian crude imports hitting new records in February while Russian sellers widened discounts to keep demand — Urals trading roughly $9–$11 below Brent for China deliveries, and other Russian grades also cutting hard as sellers chase Chinese refiners.

The new U.S.–Venezuela arrangement has already generated roughly $2 billion in transactions in just weeks, pulling Venezuelan barrels back into wider circulation and altering the discount ecosystem Moscow had grown accustomed to. 

This matters because China is also the anchor buyer for sanctioned Iranian crude; the ‘discount market’ is not infinite, so Russia and Iran are now competing for the same limited pool of Chinese buyers, driving deeper concessions and leaving cargoes idling — exactly the kind of sanctions-economy dynamic.

Add the West’s tightening focus on Russia’s ‘shadow fleet’ and the risk of seizures or insurance denial, and you get an energy chessboard where coercion moves from rhetoric to logistics: who can ship, insure and clear payments reliably becomes as strategic as who can produce.

In that context, Russia’s loud warnings about Hormuz disruption are not just diplomacy, they are a reminder that Moscow profits from volatility, but also needs a functioning gray-market channel to China, and Iran’s crisis threatens to scramble the very discount ecosystem Russia has used to finance its war in Ukraine. Structural realignment threatens the very gray-market architecture on which Moscow has relied.

Energy is only one layer of a global shift. Strategic minerals remain critical. The Trump administration has increased economic and maritime pressure on Cuba, tightening an effective oil blockade that choked off fuel imports. President Donald Trump has authorized tariffs targeting countries supplying oil to Havana.

This is not simply punitive policy. It reflects a broader strategic doctrine: deny adversarial regimes energy lifelines while repositioning the Western Hemisphere’s resource base toward U.S. leverage. Oil is only one domain. Rare earth elements are a strategic asset. Cuba’s nickel and cobalt output, combined with China’s tightening grip through rare-earth export controls indicates that leverage is not just oil fields but also supply chains. America achieving rare earth elements sovereignty will remain a strategic goal and such a global realignment on this front is much needed.

By the close of the first weekend, Iran appeared intent on accelerating its own collapse by compounding strategic error with strategic error. Iran felt it wise to respond to U.S. and Israeli strikes by pushing a half dozen other nations against it. On Saturday afternoon, Feb. 28, Iran launched attacks on seven sovereign nations – Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, Jordan and Israel. It added Oman shortly after.

These nations now have a legal and political basis to deepen security ties with the U.S. and Israel that they could never have justified domestically before today. Iran has arguably done more to consolidate the anti-Iran regional architecture in one afternoon than a decade of American diplomacy. Watch for accelerated Abraham Accords-adjacent normalization with Saudi Arabia in the coming weeks.

Any sustained disruption of Iranian flows forces China into replacement buying that tightens global markets and exposes China’s own energy security…

After massacring thousands of its own citizens for demanding better governance, the regime’s long-standing presumption of U.S. inaction cost the 1979 Revolution its dream of ruling over Iranians perpetually. After 47 years, its leader is gone, and its core military capabilities are being dismantled.

The lesson is not simply that the Iranian regime is falling. It is that when it falls amid energy chokepoints and great-power competition, supply chains, alliances and leverage structures shift simultaneously. Iran’s collapse is not the end of the story; it is the catalyst for a broader redistribution of power across energy, alliances, and great-power leverage. America should exploit these shifting dynamics fully. 

The views expressed here are his and do not reflect the policy or positions of the Department of Homeland Security, Homeland Security Advisory Council, U.S. Army or Department of Defense. 

Related Article

Gas prices could jump as Middle East tensions threaten global oil supply