Follow us on social

2016-03-09t120000z_947728267_d1aesrnygcaa_rtrmadp_3_usa-army-scaled

House hearing showcases UAE and Bahrain funding at the witness table

All three witnesses on the 'Abraham Accords' have connections and/or financial ties to signatories of the deal.

Reporting | Washington Politics

At 2pm today, the House Foreign Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on “Expanding the Abraham Accords.” All of the witnesses appearing before the committee work at organizations with institutional and/or financial ties to the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain.

The 2020 Accords, which marked the normalization of relations between Israel and both the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain, also opened the floodgates for a wave of new weapons sales in the region, particularly from Israel to UAE, Bahrain and Morocco. The hearing will also be a showpiece for how foreign funding has permeated Washington’s think tanks and how little disclosure is done of these potential conflicts of interest.

Ret. Gen. Joseph L. Votel, is a distinguished fellow at the Middle East Institute, a group that counts the UAE as its single biggest funder and Bahrain as a lower level donor. 

Votel, appearing in his capacity as a MEI fellow, chose not to reveal that information in his Truth in Testimony disclosure, a disclosure required of all nongovernmental congressional witnesses, attesting that MEI received no payments "originating with a foreign government related to the subject of the hearing.”

After I tweeted  about his failure to disclose the UAE connection last night, Votel updated his form this morning, disclosing “grants or donations that could be tangentially related” to the hearing on the Abraham Accords. He disclosed funding from the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar,, and Oman. 

Votel isn’t the only witness affiliated with groups with financial ties to Abraham Accords signatories.

Former U.S. Ambassador to Israel, and current Atlantic Council Distinguished Fellow Daniel B. Shapiro attested that “I am representing myself and my personal viewpoints” and indicated that he is not representing an institution that receives payments “originating with a foreign government related to the subject of the hearing.” 

The Atlantic Council, like MEI, counts the UAE as one of its top funders and Bahrain as a lower level donor. 

Shapiro, while claiming that he is only representing himself, submitted written testimony that identifies him as a “Distinguished Fellow, Atlantic Council” and spoke extensively about work he has undertaken at the Atlantic Council.

The third and final witness is Robert Greenway, president and CEO of the Abraham Accords Peace Institute. Greenway also said that his organization has received no “payment originating with a foreign government related to the subject of the hearing.”

Funding of his group is a mystery since the Institute doesn’t disclose information about its funding. But a 2021 Axios article described the Emirati and Bahraini ambassadors in Washington as cofounders of the institute. 

[Jared] Kushner is founding the institute with former White House envoy Avi Berkowitz, who helped negotiate the agreements; Israeli-American businessman and Democratic donor Haim Saban; and three heavy hitters from the region: the Emirati and Bahraini ambassadors to Washington, Yousef Al Otaiba and Abdulla R. Al-Khalifa, and Israeli Foreign Minister Gabi Ashkenazi.

Today’s hearing offers a case study in how Emirati and Bahraini funding has become omnipresent at major foreign policy think tanks. It also reveals the low standards for disclosures of potential conflicts of interest held by House committees and their witnesses. And both of these issues come at a time when the U.S. intelligence community has reportedly become increasingly concerned about UAE meddling in U.S. politics. 

Others are even more scathing about the witness lineup and their financial ties. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace visiting scholar and former foreign policy advisor to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Matt Duss, tweeted, the hearing’s witness lineup is a good example of “the corruption that everyone in DC agrees to pretend isn’t corruption.”

Atlantic Council did not respond to a request for comment.

UPDATE: Rachel Dooley, MEI's deputy director of communications, told Responsible Statecraft:

The Middle East Institute does not adopt or advocate positions on particular policy issues. MEI's scholars retain complete intellectual independence, and their work, including testimony, represents their own views. MEI accepts funding only from donors who value its expertise and agree to this policy on independence.

UPDATE II: A representative of the Abraham Accords Peace Institute told Responsible Statecraft:

The Abraham Accords enjoy broad bi-partisan support in the U.S., and AAPI is committed to its ongoing work to support the Accords and strengthen ties among signatories.  No foreign national founded AAPI and it receives no funding from any foreign source.


U.S. Army General Joseph Votel (L) testifies during a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on Votel’s nomination to be commander of the U.S. Central Command on Capitol Hill in Washington March 9, 2016. Army Lt. Gen. Raymond Thomas (R) was testifying on his nomination to be general and commander of the U.S. Special Operations. REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque
Reporting | Washington Politics
Eisenhower and Nasser
Top photo credit: President Eisenhower and Egyptian President Nasser on sidelines of UN General Assembly in Waldorf Astoria presidential suite, New York in 1960. (public domain)

If Israel goes it alone is it risking another 'Suez'?

Middle East

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants to accelerate his war against Iran with direct, offensive assistance from Washington — at a moment when there is less support for it than ever among the American people.

Netanyahu must expect that Washington will be compelled to accommodate and, if necessary, implement Israel’s expansive war aims – notably the complete destruction of Iran’s nuclear program, its ballistic missile capabilities, and even regime change itself. U.S. assistance is widely considered to be critical to Israel’s success in this regard.

keep readingShow less
US Navy Taiwan Strait
TAIWAN STRAIT (August 23, 2019) – US Naval Officers scan the horizon from the bridge while standing watch, part of Commander, Amphibious Squadron 11, operating in the Indo-Pacific region to enhance interoperability with partners and serve as a ready-response force for any type of contingency. (U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Markus Castaneda)

Despite setbacks, trends still point to US foreign policy restraint

Military Industrial Complex

It’s been only a few days since Israel first struck Iranian nuclear and regime targets, but Washington’s remaining neoconservatives and long-time Iran hawks are already celebrating.

After more than a decade of calling for military action against Iran, they finally got their wish — sort of. The United States did not immediately join Israel’s campaign, but President Donald Trump acquiesced to Israel’s decision to use military force and has not meaningfully restrained Israel’s actions. For those hoping Trump would bring radical change to U.S. foreign policy, his failure to halt Israel’s preventative war is a disappointment and a betrayal of past promises.

keep readingShow less
iraqi protests iran israel
Top photo credit: Iraqi Shi'ite Muslims hold a cutout of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as they attend a protest against Israeli strikes on Iran, in Baghdad, Iraq, June 16, 2025. REUTERS/Ahmed Saad

Iraq on razor's edge between Iran and US interests in new war

Middle East

As Israeli jets and Iranian rockets streak across the Middle Eastern skies, Iraq finds itself caught squarely in the crossfire.

With regional titans clashing above its head, Iraq’s fragile and hard-won stability, painstakingly rebuilt over decades of conflict, now hangs precariously in the balance. Washington’s own tacit acknowledgement of Iraq’s vulnerable position was laid bare by its decision to partially evacuate embassy personnel in Iraq and allow military dependents to leave the region.

This withdrawal, prompted by intelligence indicating Israeli preparations for long-range strikes, highlighted that Iraq’s airspace would be an unwitting corridor for Israeli and Iranian operations.

Prime Minister Mohammed Shia’ al-Sudani is now caught in a complicated bind, attempting to uphold Iraq’s security partnership with the United States while simultaneously facing intense domestic pressure from powerful, Iran-aligned Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF) factions. These groups, emboldened by the Israel-Iran clash, have intensified their calls for American troop withdrawal and threaten renewed attacks against U.S. personnel, viewing them as legitimate targets and enablers of Israeli aggression.

keep readingShow less

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.