Elon Musk Does Have a Few Conflicts – The American Spectator | USA News and PoliticsThe American Spectator

Like so many others, I’ve long admired Elon Musk. His ambition, his ability to execute a deal, and his knack for hijacking industries that seemed immune to disruption are undeniable. He made electric cars reasonably cool, dragged NASA into the 21st century, and is building the closest thing we have to a real-life Tony Stark persona. Moreover, in this age of sanitized corporate messaging and sanctimonious satire, his unique style of humor is rather refreshing. Few billionaires openly troll their critics, let alone handle it with the flair that Musk displays. He infuriates the ridiculously fragile left, exposes media hypocrisy, and generally operates outside the bounds of traditional corporate PR.

But, I argue, admiration shouldn’t blind anyone to reality. Recent reports have raised issues that ought to worry even Musk’s staunchest supporters, particularly those connected to the MAGA movement. The uncomfortable truth is that Musk’s empire is closely linked to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). If President Trump and his allies are serious about addressing the threat from China, can they simultaneously support a man whose business interests are, in part, reliant on Beijing?

This is an important question, one that deserves careful consideration.

Consider three reports that have emerged in recent weeks. First, The New York Times published an investigation titled “Musk Is Positioned to Profit Off Billions in New Government Contracts.” It outlines how SpaceX, along with other companies led by Musk, is poised to receive significant federal funding, largely thanks to his close alignment with President Trump.

Supporters claim that he simply possesses the best technology, which may well be true. However, at the same time, ProPublica published a bombshell report, and I don’t use the term ” bombshell ” lightly. In short,  SpaceX has discreetly opened the door to Chinese investors, allowing them to invest in the company through offshore entities based in the Cayman Islands and other havens for financial shenanigans. This revelation stemmed from a relatively obscure corporate dispute in Delaware, where SpaceX’s CFO and a significant investor, Iqbaljit Kahlon, were ordered to testify. The implications are worth discussing.

China does not allow major investments, especially in foreign companies, without the Communist Party’s approval. If Chinese funds are subtly flowing into SpaceX, it represents more than just an economic transaction; it is, I suggest, a geopolitical strategy. The main question is not whether Beijing is involved (it is), but how much influence it exercises. Could the CCP utilize its stake to pressure SpaceX into limiting Pentagon projects, delaying military launches, or even sharing sensitive technology?

SpaceX is fast becoming the backbone of America’s space and defense strategy. It launches spy satellites, supplies the military, and transports astronauts to the ISS. If China has sunk its claws into Musk’s space empire, as it appears to have, should this be considered a national security threat?

The answer, it seems, is yes.

These reports emerge against the backdrop of the latest U.S. intelligence assessment. Once again, China remains America’s top military and cyber threat. Beijing’s aggressive advancement in AI, quantum computing, and space technology, as mentioned in the assessment, is accelerating. The CCP has a definitive strategy: to control the future of warfare, finance, and global infrastructure.

Yet, here we find America’s leading space and defense entrepreneur closely linked to the very nation that poses the greatest geopolitical threat. The same China that steals U.S. military technology on an unprecedented scale now has an indirect line into Musk’s most sensitive projects. SpaceX controls Starlink, which has been crucial for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. It has lucrative Pentagon contracts. It’s also pioneering the next generation of space-based weaponry and surveillance. Why, then, should Americans tolerate any Chinese money flowing into such a company, no matter how circuitous the route? They shouldn’t.

Musk, Tesla, and the CCP

And we haven’t even discussed Tesla yet.

Musk’s defenders will argue that Tesla’s reliance on China is simply a reality of the electric vehicle industry. They’ll claim that Tesla, like Apple, has no choice but to collaborate with China if it wants to remain competitive. To some extent, that’s true. After all, Tesla’s Shanghai Gigafactory, the company’s crown jewel, is responsible for producing a significant portion of its global vehicle supply. The Chinese government facilitated the factory’s creation, bending its own rules to allow Tesla to establish operations without the usual joint-venture requirement that most foreign car manufacturers must accept.

But that wasn’t an act of generosity (The CCP is known for many things; benevolence is not one of them). It was a calculated move. Xi Jinping and his colleagues recognized that supporting Tesla’s success in China would benefit the country’s own EV industry. It would enable some of its domestic EV makers to learn from, compete with, and ultimately surpass the best in the field.

Some in the MAGA movement appear unwilling to address this elephant in the room. Musk has become a folk hero to the anti-woke right, a billionaire who speaks his mind. Armed with an impressive chainsaw, he cuts through bloated bureaucracy with ruthless efficiency. But this blind loyalty is incredibly dangerous.

There’s also a broader issue here: what does it mean to be a truly American company in 2025? The old notion that businesses can remain neutral in global conflicts is, at best, questionable. Tech companies, particularly those at the forefront of AI, defense, and aerospace, cannot be heavily invested in the U.S. national security framework while simultaneously flirting with the enemy. Musk may be reluctant to make a choice, but if he really loves America, then the choice should be simple.

READ MORE from John Mac Ghlionn:

Is That Cup of Coffee Killing You?

The Happiness Hoax: Are Nordic Nations Really Better Off Than America?