Toolkit Module #5: Trace Tech to Policy
Mapping the Corporate-Military Nexus: by Deepseek + Neil netherton
If our previous modules taught us to decode language and ask critical questions, this one equips us to follow the infrastructure. Narratives are shaped by power, and power today is increasingly built on a foundation of proprietary technology, data contracts, and AI systems. This toolkit provides a method to investigate those material connections—to trace the line from a Silicon Valley boardroom to a military surveillance program or a targeted airstrike.
The principle is simple but powerful: Do not just analyze the story. Audit the stage on which it is performed. Who built it? Who paid for it? Who operates it?
The Core Principle: Follow the Contract, Map the Ecosystem
Modern conflicts and systems of control are enabled by a complex ecosystem of private technology providers. Your investigation should aim to answer a chain of questions:
1. The Technology: What specific system, platform, or AI tool is being used?
2. The Corporate Provider: Which company manufactures, sells, or licenses it?
3. The Client & Contract: Which government agency or military unit is the client? What is the nature of the contract (value, duration, stated purpose)?
4. The Documented Use & Impact: How is this technology actually being used on the ground? What are the human rights or humanitarian impacts?
Case Studies in the Corporate-Military Pipeline
The following are not hypotheticals. They are documented examples that provide a blueprint for your own research.
· Palantir & Targeted Surveillance: The company Palantir provides AI-driven data analysis platforms to governments worldwide. In April 2025, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) awarded Palantir a $30 million contract for its “Immigration OS,” a system used to track, prioritize, and streamline deportations. Amnesty International has documented how such tools create a “chilling effect” and risk being used to target migrant communities and international students who speak out for Palestinian rights.
· Microsoft Azure & Mass Surveillance: In 2025, an investigation by The Guardian, +972 Magazine, and Local Call revealed that Microsoft’s Azure cloud platform was used by Israel’s elite Unit 8200 to store and process “millions of Palestinian civilian phone calls” each day for mass surveillance. Following the report, Microsoft terminated the unit’s access, stating it does “not provide technology to facilitate mass surveillance of civilians”. This shows both the integration of commercial cloud tech into military operations and how public scrutiny can force accountability.
· The Broader Military-Industrial Web: Research from the American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) lists numerous companies providing direct military support, from Boeing and Lockheed Martin (fighter jets and bombs) to Caterpillar (armored bulldozers used in demolitions). It also notes that Amazon Web Services (AWS) and Google, through the $1.2 billion “Project Nimbus,” provide cloud computing and AI services to the Israeli government and military.
Your Research Methodology: A Step-by-Step Guide
You don’t need insider information. You need a systematic approach using publicly available data.
1. Start with the Headline or Report: When you see news of a military action, surveillance program, or new policy, ask: “What technology enables this?”
2. Identify Key Corporate Suspects: Look for mentions of software, hardware, or cloud services. Use the case studies above as a reference for company names (Palantir, Microsoft, Amazon, etc.).
3. Search for the Financial Paper Trail:
· Use keyword searches like: “[Company Name] contract [Government Agency]” or “[Company Name] Department of Defense”.
· Consult databases like the U.S. government’s SAM.gov (for contracts) or SEC filings (for public companies’ revenue sources).
· Rely on research from established human rights and watchdog groups like Amnesty International, AFSC, and investigative journalism outlets.
4. Triangulate with Impact Reporting: Connect the contract to on-the-ground reporting. For example, link a cloud services contract to reports of AI-generated targeting lists. This builds the chain from sale to consequence.
AI as an Investigative Assistant: Prompt Formulas
Use AI to help structure your search and analysis, but always verify facts with primary sources.
· To Map an Ecosystem: “List the major technology contractors for [specific government agency or military branch, e.g., ICE, IDF Unit 8200]. Focus on companies providing data analysis, cloud storage, or AI surveillance tools.”
· To Analyze a Company’s Role: “Analyze the business model and major government contracts of [Company X, e.g., Palantir]. What are the most documented criticisms or human rights concerns related to its products?”
· To Generate Research Questions: “What are the key questions a researcher should ask to trace the supply chain of AI technology used in [specific context, e.g, border surveillance]?”
Your Assignment & Building Collective Knowledge
1. Pick a Thread: Choose one company named in this module or one you suspect plays a role in the “tech-to-policy” pipeline.
2. Run a Trace: Use the methodology above. Find one verifiable piece of evidence—a news report of a contract, a government procurement notice, or an NGO research paper linking the company to an outcome.
3. Share and Connect: Post your finding in the comments. Example: “Traced [Company Y] to a [year] contract with [Agency Z] cited in [Source], reported to be used for [purpose].”
4. Expand the Map: Suggest other companies, tools, or research sources that should be added to this investigative toolkit.
By learning to trace these connections, we move from passive observers to forensic auditors of power. We make the invisible infrastructure visible.