The chief executive of Palantir Technologies, Alex Karp, has claimed he is on a Kremlin hitlist because of his company’s support for Ukraine’s military operations, marking a striking escalation in the controversy surrounding the use of artificial intelligence in modern warfare. Speaking to The Times UK, Karp said he believed Russia had targeted him personally due to Palantir’s role in supplying AI-driven systems that assist Ukrainian forces in processing intelligence and coordinating strikes. He offered no details on how he had learned of the alleged threat, but insisted the company’s technology had become central to how Ukraine conducts parts of its war effort against Russia.
Karp’s remarks come amid growing scrutiny of how Western technology firms are shaping the battlefield in Ukraine’s defence against Russia’s invasion. According to Ukrainian officials, Palantir’s systems are used to analyse vast streams of intelligence data in real time, helping the military identify targets, improve operational efficiency and support long-range strike planning. The software has been credited by Kyiv with “levelling the playing field” against a larger and better-resourced adversary. Karp, a Stanford-educated billionaire known for his outspoken views on geopolitics, first visited Kyiv in mid-2022 shortly after Russia’s full-scale invasion began, a trip he described as widely considered reckless at the time given fears that Ukraine’s capital could fall quickly.
During a recent visit, Karp met with Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Ukrainian officials, including digital transformation minister Mykhailo Fedorov, to discuss battlefield systems and civilian applications of Palantir’s technology. Zelenskyy later described the meeting as productive, while Ukrainian officials indicated that Palantir’s tools had been integrated into what they called “deep-strike operations planning”. These remarks, combined with Ukraine’s increasing use of long-range drones and missile systems against Russian oil and military infrastructure, have intensified speculation about how AI-assisted decision-making is influencing the pace and precision of the war.
Karp, however, declined to confirm any direct involvement in specific military strikes, including those inside Russian territory. Instead, he argued that Palantir’s role was foundational rather than operational, describing its systems as essential infrastructure for modern conflict management. “Our software infrastructure is crucial for the use of the kind of models you would need,” he said, while also adding that he was avoiding detailed commentary because of the alleged security threat against him. His comments underline a growing tension in Silicon Valley between companies providing dual-use technologies and the geopolitical consequences of their deployment.
The implications of that technology stretch beyond Ukraine. Palantir has become deeply embedded in US and allied defence ecosystems, with its Maven Smart System already used by the Pentagon for targeting support and operational analysis. The company’s tools have also been deployed in Israel’s military operations and in US border enforcement systems, raising persistent ethical concerns among critics who argue that AI-driven intelligence platforms are becoming inseparable from modern warfare and state surveillance. The debate intensified further after reports linked US military operations in the Middle East to civilian casualties, including an incident in Iran that remains under investigation by American authorities. While some lawmakers have questioned whether AI played any role in targeting decisions, US defence officials, including Secretary Pete Hegseth, have insisted that artificial intelligence does not make lethal decisions independently.
Karp has strongly rejected suggestions that Palantir systems were responsible for any such incidents, telling The Times UK that he did not believe the company was involved in controversial strikes abroad. He argued instead that Palantir’s mission is to reduce civilian harm by improving precision in military operations. “If you do not want to hit civilians, there is only one way to do it,” he said, referring to AI-informed targeting systems designed to increase accuracy and reduce collateral damage. Nevertheless, he acknowledged that the company’s global footprint means its tools are inevitably used in complex and morally contested environments.
That global reach has also extended into Europe and the United Kingdom. Palantir has secured major contracts with the UK Ministry of Defence and the National Health Service, positioning itself not only as a defence contractor but also as a major player in public-sector data infrastructure. In healthcare, its systems have been used to help manage hospital waiting lists and optimise patient flow, with government figures crediting the technology with improving efficiency in certain clinical operations. However, concerns have been raised among NHS staff and digital rights advocates about the scale of data access granted to the company and its broader involvement in defence and immigration systems.
Criticism has also emerged from civil society groups who argue that Palantir’s expansion into sensitive public services risks normalising surveillance-style data practices. Some UK health workers have refused to engage with its systems, citing ethical objections linked to the company’s work with military and border enforcement agencies. Despite this, Palantir maintains that its technology improves outcomes and efficiency, and company executives have dismissed opposition as ideologically driven misinformation that could undermine public services.
In Ukraine, Karp suggested that Palantir’s battlefield systems could eventually be expanded to support European and even British defence capabilities, particularly in counter-drone operations. He pointed to Ukraine’s experience in intercepting large-scale drone attacks as a model for future NATO-adjacent defence systems. According to him, the ability to integrate AI-driven situational awareness with rapid-response systems is becoming essential in modern warfare, where low-cost drones and precision munitions are reshaping the battlefield.
Karp’s broader worldview, often articulated in interviews and speeches, frames the company’s mission as part of a wider struggle between democratic and authoritarian systems. He has previously described Palantir’s work as helping to “defend the West” and has argued that technological superiority will be decisive in future conflicts. Yet his comments have also drawn criticism for their tone and political implications, with some lawmakers and commentators warning that private technology firms are becoming too influential in decisions of war and peace.
