Quick summary
• Stephen Feinberg, co-founder of Cerberus Capital, reportedly offered the deputy defense secretary position by Trump.
• Feinberg’s firm owns Tier 1 Group, which trained members of the Saudi team responsible for Jamal Khashoggi’s murder.
• Critics highlight Feinberg’s investments in defense contractors with lucrative Pentagon contracts as a conflict of interest.
• Feinberg’s nomination adds to concerns about the revolving door between the defense industry and government.
• Trump has faced backlash for defending Saudi Arabia despite U.S. intelligence linking Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman to Khashoggi’s murder.
• Advocacy groups warn that corruption and corporate influence under Feinberg could harm public trust and national security.
• Civil rights organizations oppose attempts to bypass Senate confirmation processes for controversial nominees.
President-elect Donald Trump has reportedly offered the deputy defense secretary position to Stephen Feinberg, a billionaire investor whose private equity firm has controversial ties to the murder of Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi and the military-industrial complex. The potential nomination has sparked widespread criticism and raised serious ethical concerns about the prioritization of corporate interests in the Pentagon.
Feinberg, the co-founder and co-CEO of Cerberus Capital Management, is no stranger to the defense industry. His firm owns Tier 1 Group, which trained members of the Saudi elite team responsible for Khashoggi’s assassination. Critics warn that Feinberg’s close ties to the defense sector and his financial investments in Pentagon contracts present a clear conflict of interest, exacerbating concerns about corporate influence in the Trump administration.
Stephen Feinberg built his reputation as the co-leader of Cerberus Capital Management, a private equity powerhouse with a sprawling portfolio. Under Feinberg’s leadership, Cerberus has maintained significant investments in defense contractors, including hypersonic missile technology and private military firms. One such firm, Tier 1 Group, provided paramilitary training to four Saudis involved in Khashoggi’s murder in 2018.
The training, approved by the U.S. State Department, took place in 2017, around the same time that Saudi Arabia’s secretive operations to suppress dissent were intensifying. According to The New York Times, these activities were directed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (MBS), Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, who U.S. intelligence confirmed ordered the killing of Khashoggi.
“The instruction occurred as the secret unit responsible for Mr. Khashoggi’s killing was beginning an extensive campaign of kidnapping, detention, and torture of Saudi citizens,” The Times reported.
Feinberg’s nomination comes at a time when the Trump administration is facing criticism for appointing corporate executives and lobbyists to high-level government positions. If confirmed as deputy defense secretary, Feinberg would wield significant influence over Pentagon operations, including defense procurement—a sphere where he has substantial financial interests.
The potential conflict of interest is compounded by Feinberg’s status as a major Trump donor. Critics argue that his financial support for the president raises questions about the motivations behind the nomination.
Jeff Hauser, executive director of the Revolving Door Project, characterized Trump’s Cabinet choices as “chaotic evil” and warned of dire consequences for the American public. “Corruption is not only bad in and of itself,” Hauser stated. “It’s also a bad thing that makes other terrible things more likely to happen.”
While Feinberg’s potential appointment is controversial, experts note that his ties to the defense industry highlight a broader issue: the revolving door between government and private industry. This practice, in which individuals cycle between corporate and governmental roles, has long drawn criticism for allowing private interests to influence public policy.
Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign policy adviser to Senator Bernie Sanders, called Feinberg’s nomination part of a systemic issue. “Having this revolving door of people who sit on boards of major defense contractors and then cycle in and out of the Pentagon is a problem that did not begin with Trump, but is a problem nonetheless,” Duss said.
Feinberg’s connections to private military firms, including Cerberus’s past ownership of DynCorp, further complicate the picture. DynCorp, a contractor with a history of controversial government contracts, underscores the risks of placing business executives in positions of governmental authority.
The murder of Jamal Khashoggi sent shockwaves around the globe, drawing condemnation from human rights advocates and governments alike. A U.S. resident and journalist for The Washington Post, Khashoggi was a vocal critic of the Saudi regime. His brutal killing in Istanbul’s Saudi consulate was carried out by a team that had received training in the U.S. through Tier 1 Group, financed by Feinberg’s Cerberus Capital Management.
Trump’s relationship with Saudi Arabia has added another layer of controversy to Feinberg’s nomination. Despite overwhelming evidence of MBS’s involvement, Trump publicly defended the Saudi regime, citing the economic benefits of U.S.-Saudi arms deals. His administration’s defense of Saudi leadership and the training provided to Khashoggi’s killers through a U.S.-linked firm underscore concerns about prioritizing profits over human rights.
Critics argue that Feinberg’s nomination could have far-reaching implications for both ethics and national security. His financial ties to Pentagon contractors could skew decision-making, prioritizing corporate profits over the public good. Furthermore, Feinberg’s association with the Khashoggi scandal risks undermining U.S. credibility on human rights issues.
The Washington Post noted that Feinberg’s firm “has investments in defense companies that maintain lucrative Pentagon contracts,” a fact that heightens concerns about impartiality if he assumes a key role in the Department of Defense.
Feinberg’s potential appointment is emblematic of a broader trend in the Trump administration, which critics say undermines public trust and accountability. Trump’s nominees often face accusations of conflicts of interest, and Feinberg is no exception. Civil rights and pro-democracy organizations have expressed alarm over Trump’s use of recess appointments to bypass Senate confirmation procedures, raising questions about the transparency and integrity of the administration’s selection process.
“Corruption is not only bad in and of itself. It’s also a bad thing that makes other terrible things more likely to happen,” Hauser warned. “If you corrupt the enforcement of environmental protection laws, people will be poisoned by the water they drink and air they breathe.”
As Feinberg’s nomination moves forward, advocacy groups and lawmakers are likely to continue scrutinizing his record, raising critical questions about the intersection of private profit and public service.
To track all of Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks, click here.
COMMENTS