The U.S. government placed technology firm Anthropic on a national security blacklist after the company refused to allow its AI models to be used by the U.S. military for domestic surveillance and fully autonomous weapons, according to an AP report cited by Reuters. This move underscores the state's escalating demand for advanced surveillance and lethal autonomous technologies, mirroring the digital and physical militarization of borders across Europe that criminalises movement and excludes those seeking safety. The report detailed that Anthropic, a company preparing for an Initial Public Offering (IPO), clashed with the U.S. government over the deployment of its models.
The Militarization of Control
Anthropic's Mythos model reportedly found vulnerabilities in classified U.S. government systems, according to the same AP report. The firm's refusal to permit its AI for domestic surveillance highlights a critical tension between technological development and state power, particularly concerning tools that can be repurposed for internal repression. The U.S. government's subsequent blacklisting of Anthropic demonstrates the lengths to which states will go to control technologies deemed essential for national security, a concept frequently invoked to justify the expansion of border enforcement.
The potential for artificial intelligence to be integrated into systems of control extends beyond national security to the very infrastructure of Fortress Europe. The EU's border regime increasingly relies on sophisticated technologies for surveillance, data collection, and deterrence. Autonomous systems, like those Anthropic refused to develop for the U.S. military, could be deployed at external borders or within member states to monitor migrant populations and solidarity networks. The criminalisation of movement is thus amplified by technological advancements, creating a more impenetrable and surveilled environment for those seeking asylum or better lives.
Corporate Power and State Repression
The conflict between Anthropic and the U.S. government, described as "rocky" by the Reuters article, reveals the complex relationship between private corporations and state apparatuses. Anthropic's preparation for an IPO signals its pursuit of market expansion and profit, yet its refusal to engage in specific military applications for surveillance and autonomous weapons indicates a boundary, however limited, to its cooperation with state power. This dynamic is crucial in understanding the "migration industry," where private entities often profit from border enforcement, detention centres, and deportation logistics.
While some corporations may resist direct involvement in the most egregious forms of state repression, the broader trend sees technology firms developing tools that are readily adopted by border agencies like Frontex. These tools, ranging from biometric databases to drone surveillance, contribute to the dehumanisation and criminalisation of migrants. The state's desire to control and deploy such technologies, as evidenced by the U.S. government's blacklisting of Anthropic, reflects a global push towards technologically enhanced authoritarianism, with migrants often serving as the primary targets of these new capabilities.
Fortress Europe's Digital Frontier
The implications of this U.S.-centric report resonate deeply within the European context, where the EU's border regime is continuously fortifying its digital and physical frontiers. The development and deployment of AI for surveillance and control directly impacts the lives of asylum seekers and undocumented migrants. The ability to track, identify, and deter individuals through advanced technology reinforces the racist logic of border policy, which prioritises exclusion over human rights and solidarity.
The EU's new Migration Pact, for instance, relies heavily on data sharing and rapid screening processes that could be augmented by AI, further streamlining the deportation machine. The double standard in Europe's asylum system, where Ukrainian refugees received immediate temporary protection while Syrians, Afghans, and Eritreans face pushbacks and detention, could be exacerbated by AI-driven systems that automate discriminatory processes. The underlying principle remains the same: capital moves freely, while human beings are criminalised for crossing the same lines, now with the added layer of sophisticated technological control. The struggle for open borders and migrant solidarity must therefore also confront the digital infrastructure of Fortress Europe.