Lockheed Martin and Friends Don’t Want You to Know What They’re Up To
The boards of defense companies like Lockheed Martin and Boeing are encouraging their shareholders to vote against transparency measures. Maybe the US government shouldn’t fund companies whose profits would be harmed by the collection of human rights data?

A US soldier fires an FGM-148 Javelin missile during a combined arms live fire exercise in Jordan on August 27, 2019. (Sgt. Liane Hatch / US Army via Wikimedia Commons)
Today Lockheed Martin, the world’s largest weapons manufacturer, will host its annual shareholder meeting. Next week, Raytheon Technologies will hold its own, with Boeing, General Dynamics, and Northrop Grumman following hot on their heels.
Like most annual shareholder meetings, those in attendance are being asked to vote on a set of proposals. The boards of the respective companies suggest how they should vote and make a case for why. The boards have an obligation to help shareholders make more money from their investments; hearing their advice on proposals is part of that deal.
But what does it mean to profit from an investment in a weapons manufacturer? Raytheon CEO Greg Hayes responded to the escalation of tensions in Ukraine a few months ago by saying, “I fully expect we’re going to see some benefit from it.” The Joe Biden administration announced on April 13 that the United States would send $800 million more in military aid to Ukraine — the package includes five hundred Javelin anti-tank missiles jointly manufactured by Raytheon and Lockheed Martin. When it comes to the defense industry, we can’t separate out profits from war.