The Tech Arms Race is Reshaping Our Lives — and Threatening Democracy

Earlier this year, Europe saw a milestone: three defense start-ups reached unicorn status, each valued at over €1 billion. These companies, building a range of ‘products’ from autonomous drones to robotic systems — even equipping real cockroaches with micro-backpacks — are part of a growing wave of defense-tech innovation. Europe is now racing to catch up with the United States and China, where defense-tech start-ups have already been attracting significant venture capital and government backing. But this isn’t just about military competition. It’s about a deeper transformation that’s already reshaping our societies.

A new doctrine is emerging: technological dominance at any cost. What we’re witnessing is not just an arms race — it’s a race of technological dependency where civil and military infrastructures are fusing, and the battlefield is no longer “over there.” It’s here, embedded in our cities, our homes, and our daily lives.

Personal data is the critical resource underlying much of this innovation. In turn, the paradigm of rights-based data protection laws is now competing with one driven by national security, to protect ‘our citizens’ personal data’ from hostile exploitation. This distinct shift from protecting “everyone’s personal data” is now “our people’s data,” which implies something different for “their data.”

Tech as a tool of global power

Technology has never been more central to geopolitical strategy. China’s ‘Digital Silk Road’ exports surveillance systems, data laws, and cyber governance models to countries like Myanmar — both before and after the junta seized power. Russia uses private military groups like the Wagner Group to extend influence across Africa. Israel has long tested surveillance and military technologies in Palestine, later exporting them to conflict zones such as South Sudan. Even European aid programs are being redirected to support border externalization policies, expanding surveillance capabilities far beyond the European continent.

These examples show how these technologies are far from neutral. They are tools in the arsenal of global powers — shaping not just warfare, but diplomacy, development, and domestic policy.

Militarization by design

Defense budgets are now ballooning. The US defense budget for 2025 is nearing $850 billion. The UK government announced deep cuts to foreign aid to fund a £6 billion annual increase in defense spending. The Dutch government is slashing its aid budget by 30%. These shifts are happening amid global economic uncertainty, diverting resources from social services, foreign aid, and infrastructure, which are investments that could improve lives rather than end them.

Meanwhile, governments are also racing to integrate artificial intelligence into military operations — from logistics and intelligence gathering to autonomous weapons. Proponents promise efficiency and cost savings. And they also promise readiness for a new form of warfare.

Yet the transformation underway goes far beyond the battlefield.

Civil-military fusion

Big tech companies are abandoning previous commitments not to build AI for surveillance or warfare. Industry’s previous commitments weren’t just some forms of nobility: they protected their business models that were reliant upon people’s data and trust. As they shift their business models towards national security, they still sit upon hordes of people’s data.

And it is paying well. The Chief Digital and Artificial Intelligence Office (CDAO) of the US Department of Defense has announced partnerships with Anthropic, Google, OpenAI, and xAI — each with contracts up to $200 million — to develop and prototype frontier AI technologies for national security.

In parallel, while tech giants chase defense contracts, defense contractors are entering civilian markets. Palantir, known for its work with intelligence agencies and the military sector, already partnered with the World Food Programme to “transform” humanitarian aid. It’s also embedded in the UK’s healthcare system, centralizing patient data for large-scale analysis. This convergence creates a dangerous overlap — where military logic and commercial incentives jointly shape the technologies that govern our lives.

While military tools are being embedded into public infrastructure, civilian technologies are also being militarized. We’re all becoming accustomed to seeing military tools on our streets, whether it is London’s police force's armored vehicles that were tested in occupied Palestinian territories, or the US police departments receiving over $7 billion in military-grade equipment through the Department of Defense’s 1033 Program. But civilian technology is becoming a target for war, too. In Israel, the National Cyber Directorate urged citizens to disconnect home security cameras over fears of Iranian cyber exploitation. Russia issued similar warnings near the Ukrainian border, highlighting how everyday devices can become tools of intelligence and targeting.

The blurring line between security and society

The fusion of civil and military technologies raises urgent concerns. These systems are not confined to war zones. They are being deployed in cities, schools, hospitals, and homes — often without public debate or oversight. And they bring with them three interlocking risks:

These systems rely on continuous monitoring to function. They are designed to detect deviations from “normal” behavior — but who defines what’s normal? In conflict zones, this logic has led to profiling, targeting, and repression. When applied to civilian life, it turns entire populations into targets of suspicion. Surveillance becomes the default, not the exception.

Governments are increasingly outsourcing core functions to private firms. From healthcare to defense, public-private partnerships are becoming the norm. This creates massive opportunities for companies — and massive risks for citizens.

Tech giants want what defense firms have: regulatory freedom to experiment. Defense firms want what tech companies have: access to vast datasets — our biometrics, health records and education histories. For both, militarization offers a path to profit. But for society, it threatens transparency, accountability, and human rights.

As defense budgets grow, public services shrink. The prioritization of military needs over societal well-being is not just a budgetary issue — it’s a policy choice with societal consequences. It signals a shift in values, where security is defined narrowly and enforced aggressively, rather than built through education, healthcare, and opportunity.

In the process, the militarization of tech undermines democratic principles. It enables unchecked government power, facilitates repression, and concentrates control in the hands of a few. Authoritarian regimes have long used these tools to silence dissent and manipulate public opinion. Now, democratic governments are adopting similar tools and tactics.

A future we don’t want

We are being pushed into a future where surveillance is constant, dissent is dangerous, and the line between civilian and combatant is blurred. A future where military logic governs public life, and democratic safeguards are eroded in the name of security.

This is not inevitable. But resisting it requires awareness, debate, and action.

Red lines must be drawn and not crossed: governments and companies must not design or deploy surveillance technologies without having first demonstrated their capacity to comply with human rights. Laws and effective oversight must be enacted to mitigate the risks surveillance technologies pose to society.

Policymakers must ensure transparency in public contracts, especially those involving surveillance, AI, or autonomous systems. In addition, civil applications of military tech should undergo rigorous procurement and scrutiny. Governments should fund civic tech initiatives that strengthen democratic engagement, while requiring companies to separate and disclose military uses of dual-purpose technologies clearly.

Governments and civil society must foster citizen assemblies, public forums, and digital literacy efforts to help people understand and shape the governance of emerging technologies. Civil society should build cross-sector alliances to develop shared knowledge, counter harmful trends, and inform public discourse around tech militarisation.

The technologies we build today will shape the societies we live in tomorrow. Let’s make sure they reflect our values — not just our fears.