A Florida drone maker backed by Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump is trying to sell interceptor systems to Gulf states now under attack from Iran, according to the Associated Press, creating a new flashpoint in the debate over who profits when conflict widens in the Middle East. AP reported that Powerus, which recently brought the president’s two eldest sons aboard, is pitching its technology in several Gulf countries as those governments seek protection from Iranian drones and missiles. The company recently raised $60 million and is aiming for further financing through a reverse merger with a Trump-linked public company.
The company says it is selling a defensive product. Critics see a politically connected business positioned to benefit from a war being waged by the president’s own administration. AP quoted former White House ethics lawyer Richard Painter saying the arrangement risks turning wartime demand into private gain for the president’s family. Powerus co-founder Brett Velicovich told AP the company is conducting demonstrations across the Middle East and argued the technology can save lives. The incident does not prove illegality, but it does underscore how quickly military demand can create commercial openings for well-connected firms.
The broader defense sector, however, is not uniformly cashing in. A Reuters analysis of U.S. defense stocks found the NYSE Arca Defense Index fell nearly 8% in March, a steeper drop than the S&P 500, and analysts said any revenue gains from the conflict may take time because of long production cycles and capacity limits. That suggests the immediate winners are not necessarily the largest defense contractors, but niche firms with products tied directly to urgent battlefield needs, especially drone and missile defense. AP also noted that Powerus is targeting a Pentagon-backed push to build up the U.S. drone manufacturing base, including $1.1 billion set aside to expand domestic production after the administration moved to cut reliance on Chinese imports.
If one clear set of beneficiaries has emerged, it is in energy. Reuters reported that U.S. crude settled at $111.54 a barrel on Thursday, up 11.4% on the day, while Brent crude rose 7.8% to $109.03, after President Donald Trump said the United States would continue attacks on Iran. Traders have been pricing in the risk of prolonged disruption after Iran effectively shut the Strait of Hormuz, the narrow waterway through which roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas normally moves. In a separate report, Reuters said top OPEC producers Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates have cut output because of the closure, but that Saudi Arabia and the UAE still have export routes that bypass the strait. Saudi exports through Yanbu on the Red Sea have surged near capacity, and UAE exports from Fujairah rose sharply in March. That leaves some producers better positioned than others to capture elevated prices, even as the region absorbs the broader shock.
The war is also reshaping where money flows next. In an exclusive Reuters report, TotalEnergies, Shell, BP, Repsol and Chevron were described as among the companies showing interest in a major U.S. Gulf deepwater stake as the Middle East conflict boosts interest in North American energy assets. Reuters reported that one source involved in the process said the value of U.S. oil and gas assets has benefited from the war because oil prices are rising and those barrels are far from the conflict zone and can be shipped globally. In other words, not every winner is on the battlefield. Some are in boardrooms, deal rooms and export terminals.
What American households are seeing is very different. The average gasoline prices in the U.S. have already crossed $4 a gallon and could rise to $4.25 to $4.45 within days, with $5 gasoline possible within a month if there is no viable plan to reopen Hormuz. Diesel, which affects the cost of moving goods across the country, was already averaging $5.47 and is expected to climb closer to or beyond $6. There are also reports that the average 30-year fixed mortgage rate rose to 6.46%, its highest level since early September, as the war-driven spike in oil and fertilizer costs fed inflation fears and pushed Treasury yields higher.
That gap is the central point. The money generated by war does not move evenly through the economy. It tends to collect around weapons makers with the right product at the right moment, oil exporters with routes still open, and energy assets newly prized because they sit outside the conflict zone. The bill, meanwhile, shows up for Americans and people across the globe, at the gas pump, in shipping costs, in grocery prices, and in higher borrowing costs for households already stretched thin.
The Powerus story matters because it makes that larger reality easy to see. A war can produce genuine security needs and genuine moral hazards at the same time. Gulf states under attack may want better drone defenses. A startup may be eager to supply them. But when the president’s family stands to benefit from wartime demand, and when ordinary Americans are left with rising fuel and borrowing costs, the question is no longer only about defense technology. It is about who bears the burden of conflict, and who is positioned to turn it into business.
