Google and the Use of AI in Israeli Defense Projects: A Whistleblower Complaint to the SEC

In 2024, Google may have departed from its publicly stated restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence by providing assistance to an Israeli military contractor involved in the analysis of drone video footage. This is outlined in a confidential whistleblower complaint submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and reviewed by American media.

According to the complaint, Google’s cloud services division received a customer support request in July 2024 from an account using an Israel Defense Forces email address. The name associated with the request matches that of an employee of the Israeli technology firm CloudEx, which the complaint describes as a contractor working with Israel’s defense establishment. The request reportedly concerned improving the reliability of Google’s Gemini AI system in identifying objects such as drones, armored vehicles, and personnel in aerial surveillance footage.

Internal documents attached to the complaint allege that Google employees went beyond providing a routine response and offered guidance and conducted internal testing related to the request. At the time, Google’s publicly available AI principles stated that the company would not apply artificial intelligence to weapons-related uses or to surveillance activities that could violate internationally accepted norms.

The whistleblower argues that the assistance described in the documents contradicted these principles and that the discrepancy between Google’s public commitments and its internal actions may constitute a violation of securities laws. The complaint asserts that by including its AI principles in official filings and public disclosures, while allegedly acting in ways inconsistent with them, the company may have misled investors and regulators.

The former Google employee who filed the complaint did so anonymously, citing concerns about potential retaliation. According to the statement attributed to the whistleblower, Google’s internal AI ethics review processes were generally applied rigorously, but were not enforced in the same way in matters related to Israel and the conflict in Gaza.

Google has rejected the allegations. A company spokesperson stated that the interaction amounted to a general support response comparable to what any customer would receive, without specialized technical assistance. The spokesperson also emphasized that the account in question had minimal spending on AI services, arguing that such a level of usage would not allow for meaningful application of the technology.

The SEC declined to comment, noting that complaints filed with the agency are confidential and do not automatically result in investigations. Neither the Israel Defense Forces nor CloudEx provided public responses to requests for comment.

The allegations arise amid broader scrutiny of the role of major U.S. technology companies in military and security-related projects. In 2024, CloudEx participated in industry events where Israeli military officials discussed the growing importance of cloud computing in ongoing operations. Google has previously stated that its work with the Israeli government does not involve sensitive or classified military activities.

In recent years, Google has gradually adjusted its approach to government and defense-related contracts. After declining to renew a Pentagon project in 2018, the company adopted explicit restrictions on military uses of AI. However, it later expanded cooperation with state institutions, including through large-scale cloud contracts, a shift that sparked internal protests and employee dismissals.

In 2025, Google revised its AI principles, removing explicit prohibitions on military and surveillance applications and citing the need to adapt to evolving global conditions. The whistleblower complaint, however, concerns actions that allegedly took place before these policy changes, when the earlier restrictions were still formally in effect.

The case adds to ongoing debates about the consistency between public ethical commitments by technology companies and their operational decisions in geopolitically sensitive contexts, particularly during armed conflicts.