Follow us on social

google cta
Shutterstock_424153798-scaled-e1613512615828

Don't stop with Saudis — Biden must cut off weapons to UAE, too

The pending $23 billion deal to the Emirates threaten to fuel conflict in Yemen and Libya and reward bad behavior.

Analysis | Middle East
google cta
google cta

President Biden took the occasion of his first foreign policy speech on February 4 to make a pledge to end “all American support for offensive operations in the war in Yemen, including relevant arms sales.” The administration has since indicated that it will put an indefinite pause on two bomb sales to Saudi Arabia that the Trump administration announced in late December. 

The administration’s new policy should include a review of all U.S. sales to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), the nations that are primarily responsible for the humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen. It is important that sales to the UAE receive the same scrutiny given to Saudi arms offers. 

In late November last year, the Trump administration notified Congress of offers of F-35 combat aircraft, MQ-9 armed drones, and bombs and missiles to the UAE worth a total of over $23 billion — the largest U.S. arms package ever offered to the Emirates. Senate votes to block the sales failed by a small margin, with nearly every Democratic Senator voting for two separate resolutions to stop aspects of the package from going forward.

These weapons deals with the UAE threaten to increase violence and fuel conflict at a time when the Biden administration should prioritize ending the wars in the greater Middle East. Not only should the Biden administration rescind these offers, but it should also reconsider the nature of the U.S.-UAE alliance to align it with emerging U.S. security objectives in the Middle East and North Africa.

This is no time to be offering a flood of new weaponry to the Emirates, given its role in fueling the wars in Yemen and Libya, its diversion of past U.S.-supplied arms to extremist groups, and its record of internal repression. The UAE, along with the militias it arms and trains, has also engaged in torture and detention-related abuses in Yemen, and its arms transfers and drone strikes on behalf of Gen. Khalifa Haftar’s forces in Libya are a blatant violation of a United Nations arms embargo on that nation.

The $23 billion package is far from the first major arms offer to the UAE. Over the past decade, the United States has pushed a total of $59 billion in arms sales to the Emirati regime, for everything from attack helicopters and armored vehicles to tens of thousands of precision-guided bombs, many of which have been used in the brutal Saudi/UAE intervention in Yemen that has resulted in over 100,000 deaths and pushed millions of Yemenis to the brink of starvation.

The United States is far and away the largest arms supplier to the UAE, accounting for over two thirds of its arms imports between 2015 to 2019, the most recent period for which full statistics are available. In addition, the majority of the regime’s current Air Force consists of U.S.-supplied F-16 combat aircraft. A cutoff of arms exports, spare parts and maintenance support would have a major impact on the UAE’s war machine and would provide substantial leverage in changing its reckless conduct in the greater Middle East.

As noted above, the UAE is responsible for large numbers of civilian deaths as a result of its central role in the war in Yemen, where it has deployed ground forces and taken part in the coalition’s aerial campaign and naval blockade. The UAE has also diverted U.S.-supplied weaponry to extremist groups in Yemen, including militias allied with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). In February 2020, the UAE announced that it had pulled back most of its troops in Yemen, but it continues to arm, train and back militias involved in the war, which total 90,000 members in all. It also continues to be implicated in abuses ranging from indiscriminate artillery shelling to torture to recruitment of child soldiers. The UAE is still a major player in Yemen, despite its claims to the contrary, and it should be held accountable for its role there.

The UAE has also been among the most influential foreign players in the civil war in Libya, supplying weapons to the opposition forces of Gen. Khalifa Haftar and carrying out air and drone strikes in support of his military campaigns, in blatant violation of a UN embargo and U.S. support for the internationally-recognized government in Libya.  Haftar’s forces have engaged in extensive human rights abuses in the war, including killing scores of civilians.

The UAE also has a record of severe human rights abuses at home. As Human Rights Watch has noted: “UAE residents who have spoken about human rights issues are at serious risk of arbitrary detention, imprisonment, and torture. Many are serving long prison terms or have left the country under pressure.”

Over 80 progressive organizations and individuals, led by Win Without War, MADRE, Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation, Yemen Alliance Committee, the Project on Middle East Democracy and the Center for International Policy have called on the Biden administration to permanently cancel dozens of arms deals with Saudi Arabia and the UAE, worth tens of billions of dollars, even as it presses for accountability for violations of International Humanitarian Law (IHL) committed in Yemen. Their appeal urges an immediate ceasefire and an inclusive peace process that includes all sectors of Yemeni society, not just the armed parties prosecuting the war.

Reversing all of Trump’s arms sales to the UAE and Saudi Arabia would be an excellent first step towards fulfilling President Biden’s desire to end the war in Yemen, as well as a  step towards reorienting U.S. policy in the broader Middle East towards promoting peace and reconciliation rather than war and confrontation.


Prime Minister of UAE and the Ruler of Dubai Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum (Kertu/Shutterstock)
google cta
Analysis | Middle East
Dan Caine
Top photo credit: Secretary of War Pete Hegseth and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff U.S. Air Force Gen. Dan Caine conduct a press briefing on Operation Epic Fury at the Pentagon, Washington, D.C., March 4, 2026. (DoW photo by U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Alexander Kubitza)

Did Caine just announce the Morgenthau option for Iran?

QiOSK

Gen. Dan Caine’s formulation of American war aims in Iran is remarkable not because it is bellicose, but because it is strategically incoherent.

In a press conference Tuesday morning, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff did not describe a limited campaign to suppress missile fire, blunt Iran’s naval threat, or even impose a severe but bounded setback on Tehran’s coercive instruments. He described a campaign against Iran’s “military and industrial base” designed to prevent the regime from attacking Americans, U.S. interests, and regional partners “for years to come.” In an earlier briefing he put the objective similarly: to prevent Iran from projecting power outside its borders. Rather than the language of a discrete coercive operation, this describes a war against a state’s capacity to regenerate power.

keep readingShow less
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

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.