A free plane? Trump's Air Force One plan could be an expensive 'security nightmare.'
Trump wants a luxury aircraft gifted by Qatar's royal family to be his new Air Force One. Beyond the legal and ethical questions, there are a host of security concerns.
Air Force One is a call sign for any US Air Force aircraft the president flies on, but it most commonly refers to the well-known light blue and white plane used for presidential transport. The aircraft is custom-built to operate as a secure, self-sufficient flying command center if need be. Using a plane gifted by a foreign country to fill this role would demand significant work to deliver the necessary capabilities and mitigate potential security risks.
Marc Polymeropoulos, a former senior CIA operations officer who served multiple Middle East tours, said that there are standards that the US Air Force, Department of Defense, and Secret Service are required to uphold to move the president securely.
"It's going to cost an exorbitant amount of money to get that up to standard with a plane gifted by a foreign government," he told Business Insider.
Trump said on Sunday evening in a Truth Social post that the Defense Department will receive a 747 "free of charge" to temporarily replace his aging Air Force One. He said the US would take possession of it in what he described as "a very public and transparent transaction."
The specially configured version of Boeing's 747-200B built to transport the president of the United States is a highly recognizable aircraft with its iconic livery that has become synonymous with the Air Force One call sign. It is fitted with secure communications equipment and can refuel mid-flight.
The plane is also equipped with electronic warfare capabilities and missile countermeasures.
The Air Force has operated two of these militarized 747s, which the service designates as VC-25A, for 35 years. The tail numbers are 28000 and 29000. A new aircraft, the VC-25B, is set to replace these planes and has been in development since 2015. However, the program has faced a number of issues that have forced its start date to be pushed back from 2024 to 2027 at the soonest.
On Monday, Trump told reporters he was "very disappointed that it has taken Boeing so long to build a new Air Force One."
ABC News, which first reported Sunday on the gift, said that Trump would use the Qatari-donated 747 (which has an estimated price tag of $400 million) as the new Air Force One until just before he leaves office in 2029.
Asked Monday whether Qatar had asked for anything in exchange for the luxury 747, Trump said the US has provided the Gulf country with lots of security over the years. He described the gift as "a great gesture" and said he "would never be one to turn down that kind of an offer."
"I could be a stupid person and say, 'No, we don't want a free, very expensive airplane," he said.
The president said that the US has kept Qatar — and its neighbors, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates — secure and will continue to do so. "If it wasn't for us, they probably wouldn't exist right now. And I think this was just a gesture of good faith," he added. The US military operates out of several key bases in these three countries.
In response to further questions at the press conference, Trump said that he does not plan to use the 747 after he leaves office and that the plane would go directly to his presidential library foundation.
Beyond raising questions about the legality of accepting an expensive gift from another country, the Qatar 747 news quickly triggered criticism from some US lawmakers and stoked concerns about the potential security concerns of receiving such an important asset from a foreign state.
Connecticut's Rep. Joe Courtney, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services subcommittee that oversees Air Force One, said that "retrofitting a plane from Qatar would create huge costs & a security nightmare that would impede the work underway to deliver the actual AF1 by 2027."
Boeing, the US aerospace giant, reportedly built the 747 as a private jet for Qatar's royal family, which acquired the aircraft in 2012. It is significantly larger than the 757-200 "Trump Force One" that the president and his organization have been using as a personal plane.
Once the Qatari 747 is eventually received by the Air Force, it will be modified and essentially militarized by the Pentagon to meet the requirements of transporting a president — a high-stakes job that is unlikely to be cheap.
"The idea of getting it from a foreign government, you literally would have to tear it apart piece by piece," said Polymeropoulos, now a nonresident senior fellow at the Atlantic Council. He said acquiring this 747 isn't cost-effective because it will be expensive for the government and military to retrofit the aircraft to bring the plane up to the necessary standards.
"I suppose you can, but basically, you're building a whole new plane," he said.
BI asked the White House about addressing the security concerns and whether these surfaced during discussions of the aircraft's transfer. The administration pointed to Trump's remarks from the press conference earlier on Monday.
Qatar has stressed that a decision to transfer the aircraft is not final. A Pentagon spokesperson referred BI to the White House for questions about Air Force One procurement.
Joseph LaSorsa, a former Secret Service agent who protected several presidents during his 20-year-long career, identified multiple potential concerns with acquiring the 747.
LaSorsa, president and CEO of J.A. LaSorsa & Associates, told BI that these possible risks include sabotage to the 747's mechanical or operational features, tracking of the aircraft, and any surveillance through audio or video recording devices. He stressed that the American government will thoroughly examine the entire plane in a process that could take up to a year or longer.
"They're going to do their due diligence, if they do, in fact, use it," he said, but that's time and money.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Never use violence': Camp Pendleton Marines could be deployed to LA protests as governor continues to push back
SAN DIEGO (FOX 5/KUSI) — President Trump is deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles after two days of clashes between immigration authorities and demonstrators following several raids across the city, and the Secretary of Defense has put Camp Pendleton Marines on high alert to be deployed if needed. Governor Newsom has been vocal Saturday, taking to X to push back against President Trump's orders to deploy the state National Guard, saying, in part, 'This is the wrong mission and will erode public trust. Never use violence. Speak out peacefully.' Federal agents conducting immigration raid in Los Angeles County; protest quickly erupts While protestors and federal immigration authorities in riot gear continued to clash Saturday and tear gas and smoke filled the air on and off, the U.S. Secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth, posted on X Saturday night he was mobilizing the National Guard immediately to support federal law enforcement in Los Angeles, and placed active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton on high alert to be mobilized 'if violence continues.' Governor Newsom responded on X, saying, 'the Secretary of Defense is now threatening to deploy active-duty Marines on American soil against its own citizens. This is deranged behavior.' It began Friday when ICE and federal immigration authorities raided several businesses in the Los Angeles area and people took to the streets to push back. Large groups of protestors gathered near the site of the raids on Friday and again on Saturday. Trump deploying California National Guard over governor's objections to LA to quell protests Law enforcement in riot gear and gas masks were seen blocking streets, firing tear gas and smoke bombs as protestors continued to gather, in some cases throwing cement pieces and firing off fireworks. Watch a live feed of the scene of ICE activity in Paramount here. Viewer discretion is advised. This is developing. Stay with FOX 5/KUSI for the latest updates Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

37 minutes ago
What to know about Trump's deployment of National Guard troops to LA protests
President Donald Trump says he's deploying 2,000 California National Guard troops to Los Angeles to respond to immigration protests, over the objections of California Gov. Gavin Newsom. It's not the first time Trump has activated the National Guard to quell protests. In 2020, he asked governors of several states to send troops to Washington, D.C. to respond to demonstrations that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors he asked agreed, sending troops to the federal district. The governors that refused the request were allowed to do so, keeping their troops on home soil. This time, however, Trump is acting in opposition to Newsom, who under normal circumstances would retain control and command of California's National Guard. While Trump said that federalizing the troops was necessary to 'address the lawlessness' in California, the Democratic governor said the move was 'purposely inflammatory and will only escalate tensions.' Here are some things to know about when and how the president can deploy troops on U.S. soil. Generally, federal military forces are not allowed to carry out civilian law enforcement duties against U.S. citizens except in times of emergency. An 18th-century wartime law called the Insurrection Act is the main legal mechanism that a president can use to activate the military or National Guard during times of rebellion or unrest. But Trump didn't invoke the Insurrection Act on Saturday. Instead, he relied on a similar federal law that allows the president to federalize National Guard troops under certain circumstances. The National Guard is a hybrid entity that serves both state and federal interests. Often it operates under state command and control, using state funding. Sometimes National Guard troops will be assigned by their state to serve federal missions, remaining under state command but using federal funding. The law cited by Trump's proclamation places National Guard troops under federal command. The law says that can be done under three circumstances: When the U.S. is invaded or in danger of invasion; when there is a rebellion or danger of rebellion against the authority of the U.S. government, or when the President is unable to 'execute the laws of the United States,' with regular forces. But the law also says that orders for those purposes 'shall be issued through the governors of the States.' It's not immediately clear if the president can activate National Guard troops without the order of that state's governor. Notably, Trump's proclamation says the National Guard troops will play a supporting role by protecting ICE officers as they enforce the law, rather than having the troops perform law enforcement work. Steve Vladeck, a professor at the Georgetown University Law Center who specializes in military justice and national security law, says that's because the National Guard troops can't legally engage in ordinary law enforcement activities unless Trump first invokes the Insurrection Act. Vladeck said the move raises the risk that the troops could end up using force while filling that 'protection' role. The move could also be a precursor to other, more aggressive troop deployments down the road, he wrote on his website. 'There's nothing these troops will be allowed to do that, for example, the ICE officers against whom these protests have been directed could not do themselves,' Vladeck wrote. The Insurrection Act and related laws were used during the Civil Rights era to protect activists and students desegregating schools. President Dwight Eisenhower sent the 101st Airborne to Little Rock, Arkansas, to protect Black students integrating Central High School after that state's governor activated the National Guard to keep the students out. George H.W. Bush used the Insurrection Act to respond to riots in Los Angeles in 1992 after the acquittal of white police officers who were videotaped beating Black motorist Rodney King. National Guard troops have been deployed for a variety of emergencies, including the COVID pandemic, hurricanes and other natural disasters. But generally, those deployments are carried out with the agreements of the governors of the responding states. In 2020, Trump asked governors of several states to deploy their National Guard troops to Washington, D.C. to quell protests that arose after George Floyd was killed by Minneapolis police officers. Many of the governors agreed, sending troops to the federal district. At the time, Trump also threatened to invoke the Insurrection Act for protests following Floyd's death in Minneapolis – an intervention rarely seen in modern American history. But then-Defense Secretary Mark Esper pushed back, saying the law should be invoked 'only in the most urgent and dire of situations.' Trump never did invoke the Insurrection Act during his first term. But while campaigning for his second term, he suggested that would change. Trump told an audience in Iowa in 2023 that he was prevented from using the military to suppress violence in cities and states during his first term, and said if the issue came up again in his next term, 'I'm not waiting.' Trump also promised to deploy the National Guard to help carry out his immigration enforcement goals, and his top adviser Stephen Miller explained how that would be carried out: Troops under sympathetic Republican governors would send troops to nearby states that refuse to participate, Miller said on 'The Charlie Kirk Show,' in 2023. After Trump announced he was federalizing the National Guard troops on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said other measures could follow. Hegseth wrote on the social media platform X that active duty Marines at Camp Pendleton were on high alert and would also be mobilized 'if violence continues.'

41 minutes ago
Travel ban may shut door for Afghan family to bring niece to US for a better life
IRMO, S.C. -- Mohammad Sharafoddin, his wife and young son walked at times for 36 hours in a row over mountain passes as they left Afghanistan as refugees to end up less than a decade later talking about their journey on a plush love seat in the family's three-bedroom suburban American home. He and his wife dreamed of bringing her niece to the United States to share in that bounty. Maybe she could study to become a doctor and then decide her own path. But that door slams shut on Monday as America put in place a travel ban for people from Afghanistan and a dozen other countries. 'It's kind of shock for us when we hear about Afghanistan, especially right now for ladies who are affected more than others with the new government,' Mohammad Sharafoddin said. 'We didn't think about this travel ban.' President Donald Trump signed the ban Wednesday. It is similar to one in place during his first administration but covers more countries. Along with Afghanistan, travel to the U.S. is banned from Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. Trump said visitors who overstay visas, like the man charged in an attack that injured dozens of demonstrators in Boulder, Colorado, earlier this month, are a danger to the country. The suspect in the attack is from Egypt, which isn't included in the ban. The countries chosen for the ban have deficient screening of their citizens, often refuse to take them back and have a high percentage of people who stay in the U.S. after their visas expire, Trump said. The ban makes exceptions for people from Afghanistan on Special Immigrant Visas who generally worked most closely with the U.S. government during the two-decade war there. Afghanistan was also one of the largest sources of resettled refugees, with about 14,000 arrivals in a 12-month period through September 2024. Trump suspended refugee resettlement on his first day in office. It is a path Sharafoddin took with his wife and son out of Afghanistan walking on those mountain roads in the dark then through Pakistan, Iran and into Turkey. He worked in a factory for years in Turkey, listening to YouTube videos on headphones to learn English before he was resettled in Irmo, South Carolina, a suburb of Columbia. His son is now 11, and he and his wife had a daughter in the U.S. who is now 3. There is a job at a jewelry maker that allows him to afford a two-story, three-bedroom house. Food was laid out on two tables Saturday for a celebration of the Muslim Eid al-Adha holiday. Sharafoddin's wife, Nuriya, said she is learning English and driving — two things she couldn't do in Afghanistan under Taliban rule. 'I'm very happy to be here now, because my son is very good at school and my daughter also. I think after 18 years they are going to work, and my daughter is going to be able to go to college,' she said. It is a life she wanted for her niece too. The couple show videos from their cellphones of her drawing and painting. When the Taliban returned to power in 2021, their niece could no longer study. So they started to plan to get her to the U.S. at least to further her education. Nuriya Sharafoddin doesn't know if her niece has heard the news from America yet. She hasn't had the heart to call and tell her. 'I'm not ready to call her. This is not good news. This is very sad news because she is worried and wants to come,' Nuriya Sharafoddin said. While the couple spoke, Jim Ray came by. He has helped a number of refugee families settle in Columbia and helped the Sharafoddins navigate questions in their second language. Ray said Afghans in Columbia know the return of the Taliban changed how the U.S. deals with their native country. But while the ban allows spouses, children or parents to travel to America, other family members aren't included. Many Afghans know their extended families are starving or suffering, and suddenly a path to help is closed, Ray said. 'We'll have to wait and see how the travel ban and the specifics of it actually play out,' Ray said. 'This kind of thing that they're experiencing where family cannot be reunited is actually where it hurts the most.' The Taliban have criticized Trump for the ban, with their top leader Hibatullah Akhundzada saying the U.S. was now the oppressor of the world. 'Citizens from 12 countries are barred from entering their land — and Afghans are not allowed either,' he said on a recording shared on social media. 'Why? Because they claim the Afghan government has no control over its people and that people are leaving the country. So, oppressor! Is this what you call friendship with humanity?'