The Pentagon Has a Secret Plan in Case of a War With China. The Problem Is in Who It Might Have Told: Elon Musk

The Pentagon reportedly arranged a briefing for Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Thursday. Up to that point, everything seemed relatively “normal.” In the end, he’s assumed a governmental role since President Donald Trump returned to the White House. However, according to The New York Times, the meeting’s purpose was to bring Musk up to speed on the secret military plans that the U.S. has in place for a possible war with China.

The situation has escalated to the point where the Pentagon is now seeking to identify the source of the leak.

Presidential denial. After the Times article broke, Trump publicly denied that Musk had access to secret military plans related to a potential conflict with China. The outlet reported that Musk was scheduled for a high-level briefing at the Pentagon regarding U.S. military strategies against China, which raised concerns due to Musk’s extensive business ties with the country.

Trump dismissed the existence of the briefing. He said that while Musk is significantly assisting the government by identifying “waste, fraud, and abuse,” sharing highly sensitive information with him wouldn’t be appropriate. The president emphasized that Musk himself would likely not want to find himself in that position.

A visit to the Pentagon. On Friday, the day after the Times article was published, Musk visited the Pentagon. He held a private meeting for over an hour with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Admiral Christopher Grady, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

According to two officials quoted by the Times, Musk was initially supposed to meet in the Tank, a high-security conference room within the Pentagon, to discuss defense strategies in the event of a confrontation with China. The outlet also reported that Admiral Samuel Paparo, head of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, was supposed to be present.

However, the Pentagon seems to have canceled the meeting following the Times article. In the end, Musk met in Hegseth’s office, which likely had limited access to classified material.

Ambiguity. During a recent event in the Oval Office, Trump and Hegseth announced a new defense contract for the Air Force’s fighter jet. Both denied the Times’ account, labeling it as “fake.” Hegseth insisted that the visit was informal and mainly concerned issues of government efficiency.

Trump claimed to have first learned of the reported classified session through the newspaper. He also said that he called his chief of staff and Hegseth to confirm the information, both of whom dismissed it as absurd. Despite this, Trump used the opportunity to highlight that, due to Musk’s business dealings in China, sharing sensitive military plans with him would be unwise. If true, this draws one of the clearest lines yet regarding the relationship between Musk and the administration.

More from Xataka On

Elon Musk’s Dad Thought His Son Had Too Much on His Plate. Tesla’s Latest Setback Proves Him Right

Lack of clarity. The New York Times reported in a subsequent article that there were ambiguities surrounding the meeting. Neither Musk nor Hegseth answered questions from the press after their recent event concluded. When a Times reporter inquired about the content of Musk’s briefing, Hegseth responded dryly, “Why would I tell you?” before walking away without providing any clarification.

An anonymous senior defense official told the outlet that Musk attended the meeting to give, not receive, a briefing focused on industrial policy and to share insights regarding his companies. Trump later supported this version, claiming that the meeting was tied to Musk’s efforts to reduce government size and improve public spending efficiency.

Tensions. The Department of Defense has initiated a formal investigation, including polygraph tests, to identify individuals responsible for leaking Musk’s purported recent visit to the Pentagon.

This decision was prompted after Musk publicly demanded in an X post “the prosecutions of those at the Pentagon who are leaking maliciously false information” about his relationship with the military.

Criminal implications. Joe Kasper, Hegseth’s chief of staff, announced immediate investigation to uncover unauthorized leaks of national security information. In a memo issued on March 21, Kasper said the investigation would compile a complete record of unauthorized disclosures within the DOD. He added the investigation would also issue recommendations for enhancing confidentiality protocols.

Those found responsible will be referred to the appropriate criminal authorities for prosecution. This level of investigative action, including lie-detector interrogations, represents an unprecedented response within the U.S. defense framework. Ultimately, it reflects the significant concern generated by the leaks.

Tesla and China. The controversy is far from trivial. Musk’s Tesla has greatly benefited from Chinese policies that favor electric vehicles. Its factory in Shanghai is the largest and most productive, accounting for around 37% of the company’s global sales.

Tesla has received incentives, regulatory approvals, and privileged market access to operate fully in China, including authorizations to deploy autonomous driving technology.

SpaceX and China. Meanwhile, SpaceX and its Starlink satellite system are essential to DOD operations, placing Musk in a dual role. Musk is both a key supplier for U.S. national security and an entrepreneur with significant interests in a rival power.

Notably, Musk previously referred to Taiwan as “an integral part of China” and proposed a reintegration model similar to Hong Kong. These ideas have been welcomed in Beijing but sharply criticized by Taipei and U.S. officials.

Concerns in Congress. The Washington Post reported that both Republican and Democratic lawmakers have expressed worries about how the Chinese Communist Party could exploit Musk’s influence in U.S. politics. Experts have noted that Musk has publicly echoed pro-Beijing sentiments on sensitive issues, such as Taiwan and the Uighurs, which could render him a strategic asset for China.

Congressman John Moolenaar (R-Michigan), chairman of the Select Committee on China, warned that the Chinese regime will seek to exploit any opportunity for influence. Meanwhile, Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-Illinois) added that Beijing might view Musk as a means to bypass tough figures within the Trump administration, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and National Security Advisor Mike Waltz.

Looking ahead. The question of whether the reported briefing took place or if Musk has access to classified war plans might never be confirmed. However, this case serves as a litmus test for the limits of transparency, national security, and public-private collaboration in sensitive sectors.

It also highlights the growing friction between the need for efficiency and the obligation to maintain confidentiality at a time when figures like Musk are challenging the traditional roles of entrepreneur, advisor, and state contractor.

The internal investigation will set the tone for how the Pentagon addresses future tensions of this nature. Additionally, it’ll spark a broader debate about who should have access to the nation’s top secrets.

Image | Thomas Hawk

Related | The Last Time the U.S. Invaded Panama, It Used an Unexpected Strategy: Guns N’ Roses as Psychological Warfare