WASHINGTON —
Reports that billionaire Elon Musk has been talking on a consistent basis with Russian President Vladimir Putin are still reverberating among current and former U.S. officials, almost a week after news of the conversations first surfaced.
Musk, who owns electric car maker Tesla and the X social media platform, also owns SpaceX, a commercial spaceflight company that has numerous contracts with the U.S. government, doing work for the Department of Defense and U.S. space agency NASA.
Some of that work is so sensitive that the United States has given Musk high-level security clearances due to his knowledge of the programs, raising concerns among some that top secret U.S. information and capabilities could be at risk.
According to current and former U.S., European and Russian officials who spoke to The Wall Street Journal, such concerns may be warranted.
During one conversation, those officials said, Putin allegedly asked Musk not to activate Starlink, a SpaceX subsidiary that provides satellite internet services, over Taiwan as a favor to China.
“I think it should be investigated,” NASA administrator Bill Nelson told the Semafor World Economy Summit on Friday, a day after The Journal published its report.
“I don’t know that that story is true,” Nelson said, adding, if it is, “I think that would be concerning, particularly for NASA, for the Department of Defense, for some of the intelligence agencies.”
Russia and Musk deny frequent calls
Musk has previously denied frequent calls with Putin. In 2022, Musk said he had spoken to the Russian leader just once, but The Journal said there have been repeated conversations since then.
Musk has not commented or responded to the Journal article on X. Russia has also denied there have been frequent conversations between Putin and Musk.
The Pentagon has so far declined to refute or confirm the allegations.
“We have seen the reporting from The Wall Street Journal but cannot corroborate the veracity of those reports,” Defense Department spokesperson Sue Gough told VOA in an email late Friday.
“[We] would refer you to Mr. Musk to speak to his private communications,” Gough said, adding that, by law, the department does not comment on the details or status of anyone’s security clearance.
“We expect everyone who has been granted a security clearance, including contractors, to follow the prescribed procedures for reporting foreign contacts,” she said.
Former U.S. intelligence officials who spoke to VOA said the reported conversations, since confirmed by other U.S. news organizations citing their own confidential sources, raise significant questions.
“There is no doubt that Russia is cultivating many possible channels of influence in the United States and other Western countries,” said Paul Pillar, a former senior CIA officer who now teaches at Georgetown University.
“Russia would regard a wealthy and influential business mogul such as Musk as potentially a highly useful channel and thus a relationship worth nurturing,” he said.
Larry Pfeiffer, a former CIA chief of staff and former senior director of the White House Situation Room, is also wary.
“It does get the spider-sense tingling,” he told VOA.
“If the reports of Musk’s repeated conversations with Vladimir Putin are true, I would definitely have some concerns,” Pfeiffer said. “Russia under Putin will cultivate support wherever it can be bought, cajoled or coerced.
“Putin has equal opportunity security services that will take advantage of any opportunity to get foreign business leaders to influence their governments to align with Russian interests,” he said.
Concerns don’t equal wrongdoing
Former officials like Pillar and Pfeiffer, though, caution there is a difference between concerns and actual wrongdoing.
Other former officials note that even if Musk engaged in conversations that could make some in government uncomfortable, just having those conversations is not necessarily illegal.
“Americans are allowed to talk to essentially whomever they want,” said a former national security prosecutor, who spoke to VOA on the condition of anonymity. “There’s no inherent limitation.”
And in the case of a high-profile individual who oversees companies with global reach, conversations with foreign officials could be unavoidable.
“For a businessman, there may be commercially legitimate reasons to have those communications,” the former prosecutor said. “It’s when a businessman is having those communications, perhaps for political reasons or even proto-diplomatic reasons, that it gets probably more concerning from a counterintelligence perspective.”
There also may not be any legal issues with a potential failure by someone like Musk to voluntarily disclose conversations with foreign leaders. Hiding such conversations when asked about them, however, could wade into criminal territory.
Still, given the value the U.S. gets from Musk’s companies, U.S. officials may feel like they have little recourse.
“It is one of those unfair things in life that if the government has a unique need for you, you can get away with more and still get a security clearance,” the former prosecutor said. “Someone who has unique value is going to get more accommodation.”
This post was originally published on here
