Follow us on social

google cta
2018-01-23t145212z_247529158_rc1e8e660980_rtrmadp_3_afghanistan-airforce-scaled

Not so fast, say lawmakers who suspect lame duck Trump is expediting UAE weapons deal

Bipartisan effort would try to block sale of F-35s, drones, and bombs to known human rights abusers.

Analysis | Washington Politics
google cta
google cta

The grumbling over the Trump administration’s plan to sell the United Arab Emirates over $23 billion in new weapons, ostensibly in return for its agreement to normalize relations with Israel, has reached a strident pitch, as lawmakers from both sides of the aisle prepare legislation to make sure it never happens.

Democratic Senators Bob Menendez and Chris Murphy, along with Republican Senator Rand Paul, are expected to introduce four joint resolutions of disapproval this week to block the sales, which include not only 18 Reaper drones, but 50 F-35 strike fighters, and $10 billion worth of bombs and other munitions.

Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar introduced similar legislation in the House Thursday that would prohibit the sales.

A cacophony of criticism followed the August revelation that the Trump administration had secured this deal as part of their larger UAE-Israel “peace” agreement. The Israelis and their supporters in Congress, including Sen. Menendez, declared that the sale of F-35s would hurt the country’s “qualitative military edge.” In fact, he and Sen. Dianne Feinstein already introduced a bill in October that would slow down the sale of the F-35s. 

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (which is part of the DoD) announced the sales officially in notices to Congress on Nov. 10. The contractors that stand to benefit from these sales are familiar names among the top 10 arms manufacturers in the United States and the world: Northrop Grumman, Lockheed Martin, and Raytheon. Incidentally, the outgoing Secretary of Defense Mark Esper is a former lobbyist for Raytheon. The Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy is a former executive at Lockheed Martin, where he worked exclusively on the F-35 program.

Israeli leaders have since quieted their opposition to the deal as Washington promised Tel Aviv new and better weapons sales to compensate

Meanwhile, others decried the sale over human rights issues, pointing to the UAE as contributing to the deaths of Yemeni civilians in that war, using U.S. weapons and assistance. They insist that the weapons will likely be deployed in further conflict there, rather than for the “regional security,” i.e., countering Iran, as widely suggested by proponents of the deals.

“The UAE continues to maintain a contingent of forces in Yemen, and to arm and train militias that have engaged in systematic human rights abuses,” writes William Hartung and Elias Yousef in a recent Security Assistance Monitor brief.  They also point to the UAE’s use of drones in Libya, which is in violation of a United Nations embargo.

Rep. Omar said in a statement Thursday that "we should be investing in our own communities here at home, not selling weapons to help dictators commit human rights abuses.”

The Senators are reportedly accusing the administration of trying to leapfrog Congress in an attempt to plough through the deal while Trump still has two months in office.

“A sale this large and this consequential should not happen in the waning days of a lame duck presidency, and Congress must take steps to stop this dangerous transfer of weapons,” Sen. Murphy told Politico. 

According to Politico and sources who spoke to Responsible Statecraft the senators are charging the Trump administration with circumventing the standard protocols within the congressional review period under the Arms Export Control Act before the sales are approved. They say they have  questions about “specific national security risks inherent in the proposed sale,” that have yet to be answered. The 30-day review period started ticking on Nov. 10. 

But arms control experts say that the barriers to reverse a sale are so high under the act that Congress has never been able to kill a deal. Right now both chambers would have to vote in the next month to “disapprove” the sales, and override a presidential veto, otherwise the administration is clear to finalize it.

Activists who have been watching this particular weapons sale unfold say their best bet is to convince the incoming Biden administration to stop it, as long as a Letter of Acceptance (contract) is not signed by then. The next task is reforming the Arms Export Control Act to give Congress more authority in future deals, including a requirement that lawmakers have to “approve” sales, rather than registering “disapproval” before the clock runs out. Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) has introduced legislation in this vein before, and sources say he is working on a new proposal for the incoming Congress. 

In the meantime, keeping the weapons out of the hands of the UAE should be imperative, say critics who spoke with Responsible Statecraft.

"It's welcome news that Senators Menendez, Murphy, and Paul are working to block Trump's attempt to ram through $23 billion in weapons sales to the United Arab Emirates during the lame luck,” said Hassan El-Tayyab, Legislative Manager for Middle East Policy at Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL).

“For years, the UAE has been a leading driver of violence in the world's worst humanitarian crisis in Yemen and it's critical the United States not endorse even more violence. The incoming Biden administration should listen to this bipartisan message from Congress and commit to blocking delivery of these weapons and future weapons sales to known human rights abusers." 


U.S. service member passes in front of a MQ-9 Reaper drone, one of the weapons that the Trump administration wants to sell to the UAE. (REUTERS/Omar Sobhani)
google cta
Analysis | Washington Politics
Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade
Top image credit: U.S. President Donald Trump talks to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Roberts on the day of his speech to a joint session of Congress, in the House Chamber of the U.S. Capitol in Washington, D.C., March 4, 2025. (REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque)

Why SCOTUS won’t deter Trump’s desire to weaponize trade

QiOSK

In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today ruled against the White House on a key economic initiative of the Trump administration, concluding that the International Economic Emergency Powers Act (IEEPA) does not give the president the right to impose tariffs.

The ruling was not really a surprise; the tone of the questioning by several justices in early November was overwhelmingly skeptical of the administration’s argument, as prediction markets rightly concluded. Given the likelihood of this result, it should also come as no surprise that the Trump administration has already been plotting ways to work around the decision.

keep readingShow less
Trump Iran
Top image credit: Lucas Parker and FotoField via shutterstock.com

No, even a 'small attack' on Iran will lead to war

QiOSK

The Wall Street Journal reports that President Donald Trump is considering a small attack to force Iran to agree to his nuclear deal, and if Tehran refuses, escalate the attacks until Iran either agrees or the regime falls.

Here’s why this won’t work.

keep readingShow less
As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base
TOP IMAGE CREDIT: An aerial view of Diego Garcia, the Chagossian Island home to one of the U.S. military's 750 worldwide bases. The UK handed sovereignty of the islands back to Mauritius, with the stipulation that the U.S. must be allowed to continue its base's operation on Diego Garcia for the next 99 years. (Kev1ar82 / Shutterstock.com).

As Iran strikes loom, US and UK fight over Indian Ocean base

QiOSK

As the U.S. surges troops to the Middle East, a battle is brewing over a strategically significant American base in the middle of the Indian Ocean.

President Donald Trump announced Wednesday that he would oppose any effort to return the Chagos Islands to Mauritius, arguing that a U.S. base on the island of Diego Garcia may be necessary to “eradicate a potential attack by a highly unstable and dangerous [Iranian] Regime.” The comment came just a day after the State Department reiterated its support for the U.K.’s decision to give up sovereignty over the islands while maintaining a 99-year lease for the base.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.