Proposed US Tank Sale to Saudi Arabia
The Obama administration notified Congress of its intent to sell battle tanks and other major weapons systems to Saudi Arabia on August 8. On August 29, 64 members of the House of Representatives asked the President to withdraw the sale. On September 7, a bipartisan group of 4 Senators introduced Senate Joint Resolution 39 to block the sale, which received 27 votes on September 21, thereby not blocking the sale. On September 20, House Joint Resolution 98 was introduced with the similar intent. More than 40 national organizations (also Amnesty International USA, Human Rights Watch, Oxfam America) have opposed the sale. The American Bar Association has found that United States "has an obligation to suspend further delivery of security assistance" at this time (Sept 14).
The following Forum on the Arms Trade-listed experts* may be quoted as below and are available to talk with media about this topic
The following Forum on the Arms Trade-listed experts* may be quoted as below and are available to talk with media about this topic
William Hartung Director, Arms and Security Project, Center for International Policy (see also authored Security Assistance Monitor brief) - September 21, 2016
"Today's vote on blocking the a tank sale to Saudi Arabia is just the latest example of growing Congressional opposition to Saudi Arabia's brutal war in Yemen, and the U.S. role in enabling it. The fact that the vote occurred at all is a sign of waning Saudi influence in the face of its commission in Yemen of what many independent observers see as potential war crimes. The battle to force Saudi Arabia to stop its targeting of civilians in Yemen is far from over. If it chooses to do something about it, the Obama administration has considerable leverage available to press the Saudis to stop their unconscionable behavior in Yemen. The Saudis could not wage an air war of this magnitude without U.S. arms and assistance."
"Today's vote on blocking the a tank sale to Saudi Arabia is just the latest example of growing Congressional opposition to Saudi Arabia's brutal war in Yemen, and the U.S. role in enabling it. The fact that the vote occurred at all is a sign of waning Saudi influence in the face of its commission in Yemen of what many independent observers see as potential war crimes. The battle to force Saudi Arabia to stop its targeting of civilians in Yemen is far from over. If it chooses to do something about it, the Obama administration has considerable leverage available to press the Saudis to stop their unconscionable behavior in Yemen. The Saudis could not wage an air war of this magnitude without U.S. arms and assistance."
Sunjeev Bery Advocacy Director, Middle East North Africa, Amnesty International USA - September 21, 2016
“Today’s vote is the latest example of a growing trend of dissent in Congress when it comes to the United States’ military alliance with Saudi Arabia. U.S. officials know that the Saudi government continues dropping bombs on civilian communities and yet the Obama Administration continues selling them weapons. This arms deal is bad for the people of Yemen, bad for the region and bad for U.S. foreign policy. President Obama should cancel it immediately.”
“Today’s vote is the latest example of a growing trend of dissent in Congress when it comes to the United States’ military alliance with Saudi Arabia. U.S. officials know that the Saudi government continues dropping bombs on civilian communities and yet the Obama Administration continues selling them weapons. This arms deal is bad for the people of Yemen, bad for the region and bad for U.S. foreign policy. President Obama should cancel it immediately.”
Cole Bockenfeld Deputy Director for Policy, Project on Middle East Democracy - September 21, 2016
“Today's debate on U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia demonstrates an unprecedented level of scrutiny of the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and the U.S.-Saudi relationship more broadly. While today's bill fell short of the votes needed to block this arms sale, the message to Saudi Arabia and the administration is clear: the U.S. Senate is growing increasingly uneasy with the Saudis' prosecution of this war in Yemen, with U.S. support fueling the Saudi war machine, and of the value and efficacy of the U.S.-Saudi relationship more broadly. This vote should be a wake up call to Saudi Arabia that its behavior must change if it wishes to preserve its relationship with the United States in the long term.”
“Today's debate on U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia demonstrates an unprecedented level of scrutiny of the Saudi-led war in Yemen, and the U.S.-Saudi relationship more broadly. While today's bill fell short of the votes needed to block this arms sale, the message to Saudi Arabia and the administration is clear: the U.S. Senate is growing increasingly uneasy with the Saudis' prosecution of this war in Yemen, with U.S. support fueling the Saudi war machine, and of the value and efficacy of the U.S.-Saudi relationship more broadly. This vote should be a wake up call to Saudi Arabia that its behavior must change if it wishes to preserve its relationship with the United States in the long term.”
Rachel Stohl Senior Associate, Managing Across Boundaries, Stimson Center (see also authored Breaking Defense oped) - September 21, 2016
“Today’s vote on a resolution of disapproval for arm sales to Saudi Arabia was an important step in stopping U.S. complicity in human rights abuses and the massive humanitarian crisis in Yemen. The resolutions’ failure is not a defeat. Rather the debate around continued U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia means the administration can no longer legitimize the Saudi government’s actions and conduct business as usual. The administration must now utilize its leverage to influence Saudi behavior to stop indiscriminate bombing and continued human suffering.”
“Today’s vote on a resolution of disapproval for arm sales to Saudi Arabia was an important step in stopping U.S. complicity in human rights abuses and the massive humanitarian crisis in Yemen. The resolutions’ failure is not a defeat. Rather the debate around continued U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia means the administration can no longer legitimize the Saudi government’s actions and conduct business as usual. The administration must now utilize its leverage to influence Saudi behavior to stop indiscriminate bombing and continued human suffering.”
Jeff Abramson Senior Fellow, Arms Control Association (see also authored Arms Control Association Issue Brief) - September 21, 2016
“The effort to bring actual U.S. arms transfer practice up to its highest ideals continued today when the Senate considered blocking a proposed sale of tanks and other equipment to Saudi Arabia. It is positive that a bipartisan group of Senators, backed by a strong call from civil society, sought to put human security and humanitarian law at the center of arms sales decisions. Saudi activity, including its use of U.S.-provided weapons, will remain under a spotlight and must improve. So too must U.S. practice. Additional opportunities exist to act up until the time of delivery, which the President and Congress should consider on this and other arms that are yet to be transferred, so that U.S. weapons are not supplied to forces using them irresponsibly to target civilians and violate human rights.”
“The effort to bring actual U.S. arms transfer practice up to its highest ideals continued today when the Senate considered blocking a proposed sale of tanks and other equipment to Saudi Arabia. It is positive that a bipartisan group of Senators, backed by a strong call from civil society, sought to put human security and humanitarian law at the center of arms sales decisions. Saudi activity, including its use of U.S.-provided weapons, will remain under a spotlight and must improve. So too must U.S. practice. Additional opportunities exist to act up until the time of delivery, which the President and Congress should consider on this and other arms that are yet to be transferred, so that U.S. weapons are not supplied to forces using them irresponsibly to target civilians and violate human rights.”
The following analysis was offered before the September 21 Senate vote.
William Hartung Director, Arms and Security Project, Center for International Policy (see also authored Security Assistance Monitor brief) - September 15, 2016
"The Congressional opposition to the $1.15 billion offer of tanks to Saudi Arabia is just the latest sign that key members of Congress are no longer willing to accept a business as usual approach to arming Riyadh given its unacceptable behavior in Yemen. Independent human rights groups and members of Congress believe that Saudi actions in Yemen are tantamount to war crimes. The administration's policy of verbally opposing Saudi Arabia's indiscriminate bombing campaign without imposing any further consequences is clearly not working. The debate over the tank deal with Saudi Arabia is about more than just tanks. It is about whether the United States will continue to fuel the Saudi war effort without demanding, at a minimum, that the Saudis demonstrate a serious commitment to preventing civilian casualties. Given the central role of the United States in sustaining the Saudi military setting conditions on arms sales may be the best leverage we have to influence their conduct in Yemen."
"The Congressional opposition to the $1.15 billion offer of tanks to Saudi Arabia is just the latest sign that key members of Congress are no longer willing to accept a business as usual approach to arming Riyadh given its unacceptable behavior in Yemen. Independent human rights groups and members of Congress believe that Saudi actions in Yemen are tantamount to war crimes. The administration's policy of verbally opposing Saudi Arabia's indiscriminate bombing campaign without imposing any further consequences is clearly not working. The debate over the tank deal with Saudi Arabia is about more than just tanks. It is about whether the United States will continue to fuel the Saudi war effort without demanding, at a minimum, that the Saudis demonstrate a serious commitment to preventing civilian casualties. Given the central role of the United States in sustaining the Saudi military setting conditions on arms sales may be the best leverage we have to influence their conduct in Yemen."
Cole Bockenfeld Deputy Director for Policy, Project on Middle East Democracy - September 15, 2016
“This sale comes just as the Saudi-led coalition has escalated its offensive against Houthi and affiliated forces in Yemen. If the administration wants to be taken seriously in its efforts to broker an end to the conflict, then the United States can't be arming one side while calling for political negotiations at the same time. Moving forward with this sale of tanks and other equipment - even if those tanks won't be delivered for another year or two - is seen on the ground as a sign of unconditional U.S. support to the Saudi intervention in Yemen. If we want this war to end, we need to delay further arms sales to Saudi Arabia until a peace is secured, and the United States won't be seen as an honest broker in that process until we do.”
“This sale comes just as the Saudi-led coalition has escalated its offensive against Houthi and affiliated forces in Yemen. If the administration wants to be taken seriously in its efforts to broker an end to the conflict, then the United States can't be arming one side while calling for political negotiations at the same time. Moving forward with this sale of tanks and other equipment - even if those tanks won't be delivered for another year or two - is seen on the ground as a sign of unconditional U.S. support to the Saudi intervention in Yemen. If we want this war to end, we need to delay further arms sales to Saudi Arabia until a peace is secured, and the United States won't be seen as an honest broker in that process until we do.”
Jeff Abramson Senior Fellow, Arms Control Association (see also authored Arms Control Association Issue Brief) - September 15, 2016
“It is past time for the United States to live up to its noblest goals and bring responsibility to the arms trade. In revising U.S. conventional arms transfer policy in January 2014, the President included the goal ‘Ensuring that arms transfers do not contribute to human rights violations or violations of international humanitarian law.’ The United States is also a signatory to the landmark Arms Trade Treaty, which requires consideration of whether transferred arms would be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law. Withdrawing the recently proposed sale to Saudi Arabia and holding delivery on those in the works is an opportunity to signal to Riyadh that it must act responsibly and ensure that future U.S. arms transfers are not used to target civilians and violate human rights.”
“It is past time for the United States to live up to its noblest goals and bring responsibility to the arms trade. In revising U.S. conventional arms transfer policy in January 2014, the President included the goal ‘Ensuring that arms transfers do not contribute to human rights violations or violations of international humanitarian law.’ The United States is also a signatory to the landmark Arms Trade Treaty, which requires consideration of whether transferred arms would be used to commit or facilitate serious violations of international humanitarian or human rights law. Withdrawing the recently proposed sale to Saudi Arabia and holding delivery on those in the works is an opportunity to signal to Riyadh that it must act responsibly and ensure that future U.S. arms transfers are not used to target civilians and violate human rights.”
Rachel Stohl Senior Associate, Stimson Center (see also co-authored Breaking Defense oped) - September 16, 2016
"While proponents of continued sales to Saudi Arabia provide numerous justifications, many of those do not hold up. Indeed, the oft-heard refrain, 'if we don’t sell, someone else will' is used repeatedly – but just because we can doesn’t mean we should. Complicity in contributing to human rights abuses and a massive humanitarian crisis is not in the U.S. interest, even if the U.S. could lose sales (itself a specious argument). If the Chinese or Russians want to sell weapons that they know will be used to kill civilians, let them. The United States holds an estimable position and a certain moral authority when it comes to the global arms trade – in both its robust (and restrictive) arms transfer control system and its attentiveness to potential risks – and should not negate its core principles when confronted with potential competition."
"While proponents of continued sales to Saudi Arabia provide numerous justifications, many of those do not hold up. Indeed, the oft-heard refrain, 'if we don’t sell, someone else will' is used repeatedly – but just because we can doesn’t mean we should. Complicity in contributing to human rights abuses and a massive humanitarian crisis is not in the U.S. interest, even if the U.S. could lose sales (itself a specious argument). If the Chinese or Russians want to sell weapons that they know will be used to kill civilians, let them. The United States holds an estimable position and a certain moral authority when it comes to the global arms trade – in both its robust (and restrictive) arms transfer control system and its attentiveness to potential risks – and should not negate its core principles when confronted with potential competition."
* Inclusion on the Forum on the Arms Trade expert list does not indicate agreement with or endorsement of the opinions of others. Please contact experts directly for further comments.
