The CIA has worked closely with Ukraine’s intelligence services since Russia’s 2014 invasion, growing a partnership built on assistance and training into a two-way exchange of intelligence, according to Forbes. However, the relationship nearly collapsed in February 2025, when a contentious Oval Office meeting between President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy ended with Washington temporarily cutting off the flow of intelligence and weapons to Kyiv.

But Sen. Mark Warner, D-Va., the Senate Intelligence Committee’s ranking member, said this month that the two countries have moved past previous hurdles and returned to a strong intelligence partnership.

“I don’t want to get into any specifics, but it has improved,” Warner told Politico.

The CIA has spent more than a decade and millions of dollars training and equipping Ukrainian intelligence officers, building around a dozen secret forward-operating bases along the Russian border, ABC News reported in January 2025, citing former U.S. officials.

The senator said the current arrangement has helped Kyiv gain an edge, with long-range drones and missiles now hitting targets far inside Russia.

While American weapons deliveries have taken the spotlight in what Washington gives Ukraine, intelligence is the one U.S. asset Kyiv cannot replace, especially for the long-range strikes now making headlines.

That intelligence reaches directly into the strike campaign, including “the targeting packages for strikes on Russian-troop positions in Ukraine and on energy infrastructure inside Russia,” The Atlantic reported, citing American and Ukrainian sources.

Those sources called intelligence “the one thing the United States still provides free of charge,” crediting CIA Director John Ratcliffe with keeping it that way.

Zelenskyy seems to have risen in Trump’s estimation as Ukraine increasingly fights on its own terms, redefining modern warfare by crafting new tech and strategies, clawing back territory and taking the war deep into Russia — leaving Kyiv looking less dependent and more like an ally with something to trade.

“Trump doesn’t like losers,” one Western intelligence official told the outlet.

Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas, another intelligence committee member, and Roger Wicker, R-Miss., who chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, told Politico they see a direct connection between the White House’s view of Ukraine’s battlefield successes and Kyiv’s access to intelligence.

“It sure seems like that,” Cornyn said. “Everybody loves a winner and looks like Ukraine has turned the tide.”

The strengthening relationship between Washington and Kyiv is apparent on multiple fronts.

Trump’s negotiators to end the war, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, plan to head to Ukraine for the first time later this month, a trip that coincides with the country’s independence celebrations, according to Radio Free Europe.

The intel trade is going both ways, with Zelenskyy stating publicly as early as March that Kyiv had proof of Moscow passing intelligence to Iran that he later promised to put in front of Trump.

“We have irrefutable evidence that the Russians continue to provide intelligence to the Iranian regime,” Zelenskyy wrote on X. “Russia is using its own signals intelligence and electronic intelligence capabilities, as well as part of the data obtained through cooperation with partners in the Middle East.”

The deals cover avionics and ejector assemblies Boeing supplies to prime contractor Raytheon, an RTX business, for both the SM-3 Block IB and the newer Block IIA. Both variants operate with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System to destroy incoming missiles outside the atmosphere.

“These agreements ensure our Warfighters get the munitions they need to win,” Michael P. Duffey, under secretary of war for acquisition and sustainment, said in the Pentagon release. “We are stabilizing our supply chains, expanding munitions production and putting our entire defense industrial base on a wartime footing.”

The frameworks run for seven years and allow Boeing to start building components before a contract is in place, while the three sides negotiate a multiyear deal. The long-term commitment is intended to give suppliers enough certainty to invest in added capacity. Neither the Pentagon nor Boeing released dollar figures or quantities.

“This gives us a clear demand signal to build and deliver SM-3 interceptors at the levels needed to counter threats,” Bob Ciesla, vice president of Boeing Precision Engagement Systems, said in a company statement. “The SM-3 is an essential part of the layered air and missile defense architecture that protects the U.S. and its allies worldwide.”

The approach mirrors a seven-year deal Boeing struck in April to triple production of PAC-3 Missile Segment Enhancement seekers, part of a broader Pentagon effort to lock in supply from key subcontractors alongside the prime contractors.

Earlier this month, the Missile Defense Agency awarded Raytheon a $745 million contract to produce fully assembled SM-3 Block IIA interceptors for the United States and Japan.

Demand for the interceptor traces back to April 2024, when Navy destroyers first fired SM-3s in combat, helping to thwart an Iranian ballistic missile attack on Israel. Far more interceptors have been launched since, including those fired in Operation Epic Fury.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies estimated the SM-3 inventory at 414 as of December 2025. A May analysis from the center put wartime expenditures between 130 and 250 missiles and warned that replenishment will take years.

Congress has stepped in to keep the Block IB line open, the cheaper of the two variants covered by Friday’s agreements, after the Missile Defense Agency proposed ending new purchases in the fiscal 2025 budget request.

American officials are backpedaling too. Trump on July 20 told the Financial Times that the U.S. has to be “a little bit careful of who we license to.” Despite that, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Saturday posted on X that the two sides have “now reached an agreement.”

The glacial progress may reflect American defense giants’ fear that Kyiv could become a defense industry competitor — rather than posing risk to technology or intellectual property — a Republican official on Capitol Hill told The Atlantic.

“Their real worry is that the Ukrainians will find a way to improve the Patriot and then produce them at scale faster and for much less money than what the existing production lines in the U.S. could do,” the official said, adding that the companies will publicly frame their concerns around “IP theft and tech transfer” instead.

Ukraine’s weapons industry, honed by nearly five years of Russia’s full-scale invasion, has been booming since the U.S.-Israel war with Iran began in the spring. The conflict with Iran has drained an estimated two-thirds of America’s pre-war Patriot interceptor inventory, sparking discussion about inventory and strategy.

Some defense partners are eager to work with Ukraine, a country with rare recent experience fighting a large-scale land war, and have shown strong interest in collaborating with Kyiv to develop and field cheaper, faster-to-produce alternatives to million-dollar weapons.

The race toward competition is problematic for the defense giants, the official said — not because Ukraine might steal the Patriot — but because the country’s partners might outbuild it, cutting into the current monopoly on antiballistic capabilities and profits.

Trump first pledged the license at the July NATO summit in Ankara, promising Ukraine permission to produce Patriot missiles for the first time.

“We’re going to give a license to you to make Patriots. That’s pretty cool. This way, you can’t complain that we’re not giving ‘em enough,” Trump said, adding that the companies had not yet been consulted on the plan.

Zelenskyy said the next day that the question had been “resolved politically,” telling reporters that technical teams needed to start work “without delay, so that we can get licenses very quickly and start production in Ukraine as soon as possible.”

Five days after Trump’s pledge, Ukraine, nine European countries and defense heavyweights including Eurosam, Leonardo, Thales and Saab launched a coalition in Paris to field Freyja, an entirely new antiballistic system built around a Ukrainian interceptor priced at roughly one-fifth of a Patriot round.

A week after that, Lockheed unveiled its own cheaper, faster-to-produce Patriot missile at the Farnborough International Airshow, advertising the PAC-3 ACE at roughly $2 million a round – less than half the price of the round Ukraine fires at Russian ballistic missiles today.

The Patriot line rarely moves that fast. Its current top round, the PAC-3 MSE, was first accepted by the U.S. Army in 2015 and took until 2018 to reach full-rate production, per the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance.

On July 21, one day after the ACE debut, Tim Cahill, president of Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control, described production talks with Ukraine as simply “early,” telling reporters the company will “support the US Army and the [Trump] administration on what they want to go do,” according to Breaking Defense.

Raytheon’s process “has just started,” with the company working with the U.S. government “to determine what is feasible and what is best for Ukraine,” its president of land and air defense systems, Tom Laliberty, said at the same show.

Two days later, Zelenskyy wrote in a post on X that he was “grateful for the company’s readiness to take our partnership to an even higher level, where Ukraine would co-produce, together with Raytheon, some of the most vital air defense assets – Patriot interceptors,” after meeting representatives of the group.

But when Zelenskyy asked Trump for “several hundred” interceptors at a July 28 Oval Office meeting, the president refused, citing America’s shrunken stocks, The Atlantic reported.

Three days later, Trump reversed course on the license entirely.

“We have not agreed to that,” he said at a Camp David Cabinet meeting. “We’re talking about it, but it’s a hard thing to give away that kind of technology.”

Then, U.S. NATO Ambassador Matthew Whitaker dampened expectations further on Aug. 3, telling Fox News that “we do not allow anybody but US manufacturers to make those in the United States,” adding that a long-term production agreement “will not be concluded before this winter,” per Euronews.

The deal’s current status is unclear.

“The decision has been made,” Zelenskyy said during an interview on Ukrainian television over the weekend, according to United24. “It was made by the President of the United States and other important American government institutions.”

American officials have yet to respond to Zelenskyy’s latest comments.

Task Force Falcon Strike will utilize one-way attack drones composed of unmanned systems from above, on and below the sea, managed by U.S. military support staff and regional partners, according to a Thursday release.

The move to launch this unit follows CENTCOM’s establishment of Task Force Scorpion Strike in December 2025, a Middle East-based task force equipped with one-way attack drones as the military strived to integrate drone technology across the services.

“Task Force Falcon Strike will expand on Scorpion Strike’s success given the tremendous innovation happening among our regional allies and partners,” Adm. Brad Cooper, CENTCOM commander, said in the release. “Integrating and deploying our new capabilities together will help us rapidly realize the new possibilities that are on the horizon.”

Scorpion Strike was the first to launch an aerial attack drone from a U.S. Navy warship last December, the month of its announcement. The unit also deployed one-way unmanned aerial systems during Operation Epic Fury and during strikes on Iranian port facilities in July with unmanned attack vessels at sea, the statement highlights.

CENTCOM began consulting with and officially inviting regional partners to join Falcon Strike, aiming to expand attack-drone capabilities across the Middle East into a “unified multi-domain, multinational deterrent.”

“The United States military has a lot of strong partnerships and friends in the region,” Cooper said. “We are collectively stronger when we integrate and deploy new capabilities together.”

The release did not specify which regional partners CENTCOM is working with on the unit.

Personnel from the U.S. Special Operations Command Central, located at MacDill Air Force Base, Florida, will lead Falcon Strike’s staff of U.S. and regional representatives after it launched Scorpion Strike, the release states.

The announcement comes as the U.S. continues its war with Iran, which has depleted the U.S. munitions stockpile and caused military leaders to weigh the possibility of developing cheaper anti-drone technology at a faster pace.

Following a NATO summit in Ankara, Trump was transferred from Air Force One to a military plane via a catering truck in an extraordinary deception prompted by an Iranian assassination threat, U.S. media reported.

The White House did not disclose the change, and it remained a secret until The Washington Post first reported it on Monday. Some media commentators questioned whether the operation left Trump’s aides and journalists traveling with him at risk aboard the plane presumed to be carrying the president.

“I think actually the plane that I flew on was at greater risk,” Trump told reporters on Tuesday. “I think it was at greater risk because that would be the plane I think that they would be more likely to go for.”

Trump was accompanied by several close aides when he secretly transferred from Air Force One to a smaller military aircraft in Turkey last month, The Washington Post reported on Wednesday.

White House deputy chief of staff Dan Scavino, executive assistant Natalie Harp and Oval Office operations director Walt Nauta made the move in the catering truck with Trump, along with several lower-profile aides, the Post reported. No Cabinet officials joined Trump in the truck, according to the newspaper.

After a day of social media memes portraying Trump as hiding out in the catering truck, the image-conscious president, who often promotes memes of himself as a bold and courageous leader, said he was following the direction of the Secret Service, the agency that protects the president.

“Well, it’s only up to Secret Service. I just follow what they’d like to do, so I go by Secret Service and the military,” Trump said.

“I guess there was a threat out there. I didn’t really ask too much about it. I get a lot of threats,” Trump said.

The White House said at the time that the president was flying aboard Air Force One from Turkey to Britain. But moments after Trump boarded the plane, he left it in secret via the catering truck and boarded another aircraft for the flight to Britain, the Post said on Monday, quoting unnamed sources.

Trump had taken a newly renovated Qatari-donated jet to Ankara for the NATO summit but unexpectedly announced he would use an older Air Force One when departing the country, a move that prompted questions about the newer plane’s security.

The trip to NATO was the first international travel for the new plane, whose speedy upgrades triggered questions over its cost and security, and took place as hostilities escalated with Iran, which borders Turkey.

Department of War Undersecretary for Policy Elbridge Colby made the remarks in Manila on Monday amid growing concerns that China has been narrowing the gap — or eclipsing — U.S. military capabilities, as its demands in the Middle East have potentially drained stockpiles.

“There’s been a lot of news about the United States military being stretched. Please don’t be misinformed,” Colby told Manila’s defense and security elites at a closed-door event organized by the Stratbase Institute think tank.

“The United States military, and especially including those [maritime and aerospace] capabilities, are ready and capable of filling the priority missions that the president has given to them,” Colby said.

Colby, one of the Pentagon’s leading strategists, has pushed to prioritize the Indo-Pacific and East Asia over the Middle East and Europe. The Manila stop is the first in a week-long Southeast Asian tour that includes visits to Indonesia, Thailand and Cambodia.

His visit also comes amid an increasingly tense period between Manila and Beijing following a confrontation in Second Thomas Shoal on July 20, when Chinese personnel hit and wounded a Philippine Navy sailor in the head.

The incident triggered another tit-for-tat between Manila and Beijing over the contents of a highly classified “provisional agreement” reportedly signed in 2024 that allows Philippine vessels to safely deliver supplies to troops stationed aboard the BRP Sierra Madre floating outpost.

After last month’s incident, officials noted that China has appeared more assertive, indicating a shift in how China perceives the implications of the mutual defense treaty.

Tensions have also intensified as China has routinely deployed carrier strike groups in the West Philippine Sea, and last month, fired a submarine-launched ballistic missile toward the Pacific.

While military deterrence forms one component of the U.S. strategy in the Indo-Pacific, Washington is employing a “strategy of strong, clear, but quiet” action designed to address the challenge without altering the status quo, according to Colby.

“In terms of our relationship with China, I think we’ve been able to communicate…our approach directly to Chinese counterparts,” Colby said.

“We combine a clear diplomatic line, a policy of respect towards the People’s Republic [of China], clarity about…our being in favor of the status quo, along with…strength in terms of being willing to defend our interests and those of our allies like the Philippines,” he added.

Apart from strengthening the U.S.’ forward posture and fielding combat-credible forces, Colby noted that measures are being set up, albeit quietly, to allow for the U.S. to come to the Philippines’ aid.

Colby described the U.S. approach to the region as “defensive” and “aligns with the interests of regional states.”

“We’re not trying to dominate this whole region. It’s a strategy of denial, designed to deny any state the ability to become the regional hegemon,” Colby said.

The visit comes a week after the Pacific Command and the Philippine armed forces signed an eight-point partnership plan for 2027, which includes an undisclosed series of joint military exercises, and before President Xi Jinping’s state visit to the U.S. in September.

“If you are trying to project power, whoever you are, into the aerospace and maritime environment in the Indo-Pacific, you are going to come up against the very best military in the world at its apex predator status,” Colby concluded.

Deputy Defense Secretary Steve Feinberg told defense-industry leaders in an Aug. 5 memo that they have 21 days to submit plans for “significantly faster, more aggressive delivery schedules and/or increased production for critical capabilities.”

“Years-long development cycles are not acceptable,” Feinberg wrote. “We must dramatically accelerate our program schedules and expand our production capacity now.”

The memo also asks companies to propose specific capital investments and facility expansions and to explain how they would work with the Pentagon to increase weapons production. Feinberg also called on industry to demonstrate its willingness to “put skin in the game.” Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said the responses will help inform the department’s fiscal 2028 budget request.

The increased demand comes as the U.S. has used large quantities of advanced munitions during the conflict with Iran, with recent estimates showing declines in stocks of key missile interceptors.

A Center for Strategic and International Studies analysis estimated that U.S. stocks of Patriot interceptors fell from 2,330 before the war with Iran, to between 759 and 827 after the latest round of operations. THAAD interceptor stocks fell from 452 to between 234 and 278.

The Pentagon’s challenge is not identifying how many interceptors have been used, but how quickly they can be replaced. CSIS estimates the delivery timeline for Patriot PAC-3 MSE interceptors at about 42 months and about 53 months for THAAD.

The urgent 21-day deadline was communicated to arms manufacturers like Boeing, Lockheed Martin and RTX.

RTX said in July that it had received its first U.S. domestic production order for GEM-T Patriot interceptors in more than 30 years, in a roughly $442 million Army contract. The order comes as the Pentagon not only seeks to increase production of newer Patriot and THAAD interceptors but also to expand its capacity for the components required to build them.

On July 27, the department announced seven-year framework agreements with industry to expand production of key propulsion components for PAC-3 MSE and THAAD interceptors. L3Harris said its PAC-3 agreement will nearly triple production of a range of propulsion products supporting the interceptor, while its THAAD agreement is intended to quadruple production of key propulsion components.

Feinberg’s memo asks companies to identify the areas where they can increase and accelerate production and delivery, and what would be required from the Pentagon in order to make that happen. The department will use the responses to determine what industry can deliver faster and what additional resources may be needed.

The memo’s scope extends beyond weapons used in the Iran conflict. Feinberg identified 16 critical programs under consideration for accelerated production or increased procurement in the fiscal 2028 review, including the Next Generation Interceptor, the National Advanced Surface-to-Air Missile System (NASAMS), a mobile air defense radar system and a space-based missile-tracking system.

The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found the contract was never terminated; no work was removed, there was no reduction in its scope or value, and no funds were deobligated, according to a GAO review released on Aug. 6.

GAO’s review found that after DHA officials discussed the contract with DOGE, DOGE agreed that no action should be taken to terminate it, yet the $1.76 billion savings claim remains on DOGE’s Wall of Receipts.

DOGE’s April 14, 2025 entry identifies A1FedImpact and “Geographic Service Providers.” Data reported by DOGE and provided to Military Times by GAO shows about $1.83 billion listed as the total contract value and $1.76 billion in savings, with $62 million listed as the amount currently obligated.

DOGE’s Wall of Receipts says contract savings are calculated as the difference between a contract’s total value and the amount currently obligated. But GAO could not determine how DOGE arrived at those figures because DOGE did not respond to the watchdog’s requests for meetings or documentation.

DHA program and acquisition officials told GAO there were no savings associated with the contract because nothing was canceled or deobligated, and no work was removed.

The contract, HT001523D0002, was one of six awards made by DHA in 2023 under a multiple-award, indefinite-delivery/indefinite-quantity (IDIQ) vehicle with a $2.4 billion ceiling. The vehicle was designed to provide standardized enterprise information technology support to medical treatment facilities and other lines of business across the Defense Health Agency in the United States and overseas.

Its scope includes IT service desks, database, application and web development, identity management and desktop support, data center operations, information assurance, network operations, telecommunications, clinical informatics and information business operations.

DHA managed 736 medical facilities in the United States and overseas in fiscal year 2023, according to GAO. Those facilities included hospitals, medical centers, ambulatory and occupational health clinics and dental clinics.

The $2.4 billion figure is separate from the roughly $1.83 billion “Total Contract” figure displayed in DOGE’s record for the A1FedImpact entry.

On April 10, 2025, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth issued a memorandum directing the termination of several Defense Department contracts as part of an effort to eliminate what the department characterized as wasteful spending.

The memorandum said the identified terminations represented $5.1 billion in spending and nearly $4 billion in estimated savings. It included a Defense Health Agency consulting-services contract among the identified actions.

Four days later, DOGE posted the A1FedImpact Geographic Service Providers entry on its Wall of Receipts, reporting $1.76 billion in savings.

DHA officials subsequently met with DOGE to discuss the work being performed under the contract. After that discussion, DOGE agreed that no action should be taken to terminate it, according to GAO.

GAO reviewed contract documentation and federal procurement data and found no complete or partial termination, no reduction in scope or value and no deobligation of funds. GAO concluded that no savings were achieved on the contract.

GAO also found no evidence that DOGE later removed, revised or corrected the $1.76 billion claim. GAO told Military Times that the claim remains reported on the Wall of Receipts, which DOGE last updated Jan. 1, 2026. The site remained live as of July 7, when GAO completed its review period.

GAO found broader discrepancies in DOGE’s contract-savings reporting. DOGE reported more than $61 billion in savings associated with 13,476 contracts it identified as terminated.

Of those contracts, GAO found that 2,503 of them, representing $27.4 billion in reported savings, had no termination action recorded in federal procurement data. GAO also found that DOGE did not use its stated methodology to calculate the majority of reported contract savings.

Military Times asked DHA what its officials told DOGE, whether the agency sought correction of the savings claim and whether the contract continued after DOGE reported the savings. DHA had not responded by publication time.

The White House was asked how DOGE arrived at the $1.76 billion figure and whether the administration stands by it as actual savings. The White House had not responded by publication time.

Military Times also asked A1FedImpact whether it was notified of a termination or reduction and whether work continued under the DHA vehicle. The company had not responded by publication time.

Seeking to counter concerns about Washington’s reliability, Elbridge Colby, undersecretary of Defense for Policy, reiterated the U.S. interest in the region as he called for greater burden-sharing and “partnership, not dependency.”

“America is definitely not disengaging from Asia,” Colby said in a speech in Manila. “We are not leaving; in fact, we are digging in, to ensure a favourable balance of power where it matters most.”

The Philippines, the United States’ oldest treaty ally in Asia, is the first stop on a Southeast Asian trip that also will take Colby to Indonesia, Thailand and Cambodia.

Colby said maintaining a favorable balance of power in the Indo-Pacific required a “posture of deterrence by denial along the First Island Chain” and pointed to what he said was a growing U.S. military commitment in the region.

The First Island Chain refers to an area stretching from Japan down to Taiwan, the Philippines and Borneo.

The strategy could not rest on American forces alone, he said, arguing that allies should invest more in their security.

“When we ask our allies and partners to step up, to invest more in their own defense, and to take responsibility for their own sovereign security, we are not signaling abandonment,” Colby said. “We are looking for partners, not protectorates.”

“When our partners are strong, deterrence is strong,” he added.

The marketplace was developed by the Joint Interagency Task Force 401, or JIATF 401, which leads the Defense Department’s effort to connect government agencies with companies developing counter-drone technology.

U.S. Army Maj. Mike Hapner, the C-UAS marketplace lead for JIATF 401, said the marketplace is intended to deliver “the right counter-UAS capabilities to the right users at the right time.”

Promotional materials make the marketplace look like a basic e-commerce website, but it is designed to do more than simply catalog products.

According to Kaizen Laboratories, which JIATF 401 contracted to build the platform, buyers can browse, filter and search products based on specific tactical needs, evaluate system performance data and submit acquisition requests.

Nikhil Reddy, Kaizen’s co-founder and chief executive officer, described the platform as “first-class digital tools that move with the threat environment, not behind it” and “a win for the entire defense ecosystem.”

JIATF 401 awarded Kaizen a $15 million contract to build the marketplace in May 2026 through an Other Transaction Agreement, a contracting mechanism often used to accelerate the development and acquisition of new technology.

Although the website is live, access is limited to approved buyers and sellers. According to the marketplace website, eligible buyers include federal procurement officers, military commands and pre-cleared allied or partner-nation defense ministries.

Vendors, meanwhile, must apply and complete a vetting process that allows program staff to verify their businesses, review export controls and evaluate their products. Once approved, vendors can publish listings and respond to buyer inquiries.

The marketplace is part of the Defense Department’s effort to streamline the acquisition of drone-related technology, and is its second sales platform.

In 2020, the department launched the Blue UAS List to catalog approved drones and drone components, giving military units an easier way to acquire systems without going through the lengthy procurement process typically associated with new equipment.

Then, alongside the Drone Dominance program, an effort to invest $1.1 billion to boost the commercial drone industry in the United States, the Defense Department revamped the Blue UAS List to encourage greater procurement of drones.

The counter-UAS marketplace takes a similar approach but focuses on the technology needed to defeat drones rather than operate them.

Brig. Gen. Matt Ross, the director of JIATF 401, called the marketplace necessary because “drones are a defining threat of our time.”

“The proliferation of small systems and small drones and the threat that they pose both to critical infrastructure and to defense critical assets requires us to move faster in this space,” he said.