Google experiences resignation backlash over AI military contracts

Google faces employee backlash over AI military contracts

Google is confronting criticism from some employees over the company’s use of its AI technology in military settings.

The BBC spoke with several tech workers who have either recently left Google DeepMind, Google’s AI company, or are in the process of departing, because of concerns about the firm’s military contracts.

One of them is Sofia Liguori, a London-based research engineer. She resigned from Google DeepMind this week and, despite a contract that restricts her from speaking publicly, she shared her concerns exclusively with the BBC.

“Realising my company is pushing more and more for AI systems in military operations makes me feel ashamed to work at Google,” Liguori said, speaking in a personal capacity.

A Google spokesperson responded to the BBC: “We work with public sector organisations worldwide and follow a consistent process for reviewing and entering these contracts, including compliance with our acceptable use policies and AI principles.”

“We also have dedicated channels for employees to safely raise any concerns - ranging from business ethics to misconduct - and have strict workplace policies in place to prevent retaliation of any kind.”

Google is among several tech companies that signed contracts with the US military earlier this year to deploy AI across classified military environments.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has made integrating AI into the armed forces a major priority, saying the Trump administration will become an “AI-first warfighting force”.

But AI is advancing quickly, and critics question whether it is dependable enough for warfare without more testing, stronger safeguards and human oversight.

After three years at the company, Liguori said she chose to resign because of Google’s growing work with the US and Israeli militaries. “I don’t agree with this direction and this has led me to lose faith in my company being true to its stated ethical values,” she said.

, include implementing AI with “human oversight” and aligning the technology with “international law and human rights”. But former and current staff at the company, and experts the BBC spoke to, said they were concerned about the level of human oversight at critical moments.

US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said in January that the US “will become an ‘AI-first’ warfighting force”

The tech workers said they are especially troubled by the AI military deals signed this year, since they significantly expand the range of what the Pentagon can use the technology for.

Andreas Kirsch, an AI researcher, also left Google DeepMind earlier this month because of his concerns.

Kirsch told the BBC that he believes “Google’s governance and oversight are not sufficient or meaningful enough to deploy AI safely and responsibly in military and classified settings” or “to develop superintelligence safely in the future.”

“Google seems to have no right to control or veto how the Pentagon uses its AI and also seems to have limited visibility into how it’s being deployed,” he added.

Over the past few years, the US military has introduced several AI-enabled technologies to strengthen its warfighting capabilities.

The best-known example is Maven Smart Systems, the Pentagon’s main software platform for organising intelligence and data.

Built by US defence company Palantir, it uses AI to help personnel choose and identify targets to strike. Palantir has incorporated technology from several major AI companies into Maven, speeding up some processes significantly.

Retired Lieutenant General Jack Shanahan, the former director of Project Maven, said the “philosophy” appears to be: “Go as fast as possible to deploy [AI technology] as widely as possible, potentially at the expense of the rigour and discipline of test and evaluation.”

The Pentagon, however, has said that adopting AI technologies is vital to winning wars. “Speed defines victory in the AI era,” said Emil Michael, an under secretary in the US Department of Defense, in a statement earlier this year.

The agreement says Google’s AI models can be used for “any lawful government purpose” and “should not be used for domestic mass surveillance or autonomous weapons (including target selection) without appropriate human oversight and control”.

Similar contracts were signed by OpenAI, Amazon, Microsoft, SpaceX, Oracle, Nvidia, and the start-up Reflection, allowing AI technology to be used in a variety of military contexts such as transport, planning and battlefield operations.

As the technology develops rapidly, worries are increasing about AI’s use in war zones.

“AI compresses the time an operator has to make a decision because it works much faster than a person, and that’s especially risky in a high-stress environment,” said Sarah Shoker, formerly head of OpenAI’s Geopolitics team.

“When you have hundreds of targets that are selected by AI and a short amount of time, it is almost impossible for a human operator to meaningfully review the AI’s outputs for errors.”

Google employees have told the BBC that staff are afraid to speak out about AI safety and its use in warfare because their employment contracts bar them from publicly criticising the company.

“In principle I’m not allowed to criticise Google for the duration of my life,” Sofia Liguori told the BBC. But she chose to do so “because I believe it’s important for these things to be known and I also think that talking about facts is not criticising”.

Liguori added that at Google “people are scared of retaliation and putting their career at risk. You feel you are being watched, you can’t speak.”

A current Google DeepMind employee, who asked not to be named for fear of retaliation, told the BBC that “a lot of motivated employees who signed up for [the company’s] original mission could leave – but there’s also a pipeline of people at the start of the careers who could fill those positions. It could be a changing of the guard.”

Another Google DeepMind worker, who also wanted to remain anonymous, told the BBC: “A lot of people have left the company that feel strongly about this [how Google DeepMind has changed its ethics position].”

“Some people are putting up a fight, others are thinking: ‘it’s a big company. What do you expect to change?’”, the employee said.

Google’s deals with Israel have also drawn controversy. In 2024, the company was criticised by staff over a joint contract with Amazon worth $1.2bn (£960m) called Project Nimbus, which gives Israel’s government and military AI technology and cloud computing infrastructure. At the time, Google said Project Nimbus “is not directed at highly sensitive, classified, or military workloads relevant to weapons or intelligence services”.

In addition, Israel’s AI capabilities in warfare have been debated after they were highlighted in a recent documentary, Naza, which looks at the role of AI-powered targeting systems in bombing the Gaza Strip, causing high civilian casualties. An Israeli government minister said the film’s claims were false and distorted.

Former Google employee Andreas Kirsch said he does not believe AI warfare technology is ready for the battlefield. “Current AI models are not robust enough, and I don’t think they have been trained for such tasks either,” he said.