US Senate permits arms sales to Qatar, UAE amidst controversy over jet gifted to Trump
The resolutions failed 39-56, allowing the deal to proceed.
Democrats had introduced legislation in the Republican-controlled Senate to block weapons sales to the two Gulf states over allegations of corruption.
Lawmakers alleged that the Pentagon's acceptance of a $400m Qatari jet and an Emirati firm's recent investment in a Trump-affiliated cryptocurrency had compromised the integrity of the sales.
The resolutions sought to stymie a $1.9bn weapons sale to Qatar and a $1.3bn weapons sale to the UAE.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
The Qatar sale consisted of eight MQ-9 Reaper drones, a model previously employed by the US in Gaza and Yemen, along with Hellfire II missiles and 227-kg bombs.
The second resolution opposed the sale of six Chinook helicopters to the UAE.
Arms sales to the UAE have previously faced criticism over the UAE's support for the Rapid Support Forces, a Sudanese faction accused by some, including the US State Department, of committing acts of genocide.
Corruption accusations
Democrats say the weapons sales are tainted with corruption.
Qatar recently gifted the Pentagon a $400m jet, which will be refurbished to serve as Air Force One before being retired to US President Donald Trump's presidential library.
The jet had become the centre of political controversy after Democrats likened the gift to a bribe.
How Turkey and Qatar are playing an outsized role in Trump's new Middle East Read More »
Additionally, last month, an Emirati firm invested $2bn in a Trump-affiliated cryptocurrency.
Democratic Senator Chris Murphy, who backed the resolution opposing the arms sales, alleged that these deals compromised the integrity of the sales.
'My case is that so long as the relationship is corrupted by the gifts to Trump, we can't move forward on these arms sales… there are legitimate underlying policy debates on the two sales, but my case here is you should look beyond the merits of the sale and really focus on the corruption,' Murphy stated earlier this week.
The resolutions to block the arms sales failed, however, with five Democrats joining Republicans to support the sales.
Senate Republicans dismissed the resolutions as political theatre, with Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair Jim Risch saying they 'make arms sales to some of our closest allies in the Middle East about partisan politics'.
Republican Senator Rand Paul voted "present" on the resolutions.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Arabian Post
42 minutes ago
- Arabian Post
U.S. Tariffs Surge Above 20% as Trump Tests Market Limits
U. S. consumers now contend with an effective tariff rate exceeding 20%, marking the steepest level observed since the early 1900s, according to estimates by the International Chamber of Commerce following the latest round of import levies introduced under President Trump's administration. This escalation stems from a newly implemented baseline tariff of 10%, supplemented by selective duties—up to 50% on copper and 200% on pharmaceuticals—pushing the overall rate to unprecedented heights. Andrew Wilson, deputy secretary-general of the ICC, explained that the administration appears to be calibrating tariff levels to maximise revenue without triggering a full-scale market meltdown. Despite wide-ranging rates, Wall Street has shown remarkable composure, a stark contrast to the sharp sell-off experienced in April when the initial import duties were announced. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed that customs collections have reached approximately $100 billion so far, with projections forecasting up to $300 billion by year-end. Legal and legislative challenges are emerging in response. A federal appeals court struck down the 'Liberation Day' tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, declaring the move exceeded executive authority, though the ruling is presently stayed pending appeal. Meanwhile, Congress is contemplating legislation aimed at curbing unilateral tariff powers, and trade negotiations with major trading partners—namely Japan, the EU, the U. K. and Canada—could moderate or delay certain duties. ADVERTISEMENT Since April, the U. S. has extended tariffs to a broad array of countries. Canada faces a general increase from 25% to 35% on non‑USMCA imports beginning 1 August, with additional duties on steel and aluminium already in place. Meanwhile, Brazil has been targeted with a 50% tariff, linked in part to political tensions, and levels between 25% and 40% are set for nations including Japan, South Korea, Thailand, Malaysia, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, South Africa and others. A hold‑and‑test strategy allows a window until August 1 for targeted trade deals. Market participants have noted this restrained approach: a 10% baseline is broadly absorbed, but steeper duties serve as leverage. The administration appears comfortable testing thresholds before escalating further. Economists caution that importers and consumers will bear the brunt of these changes. A Yale Budget Lab analysis determined that U. S. tariffs to date equate to a 24.6 percentage‑point rise in the average effective rate—potentially reaching 27% absent substitution effects. These duties could elevate consumer prices by roughly 2.9%, reducing household purchasing power by about $4,700 annually. Substitution toward non‑Chinese suppliers later moderates the rate to approximately 18.5%, the highest since 1933. A Harvard Business School study corroborates these dynamics: between March and June, import prices rose ~3%, and domestically produced goods competing with imports increased by ~2% due to elevated component costs and altered supply chains. Similarly, U. S. apparel imports from China fell to the lowest in 22 years in May, as buyers shifted to suppliers in Southeast Asia and Latin America. While equities appear resilient—with the S&P 500 near record highs—analysts warn that bond and currency markets may signal latent stress. UBS expects household and business inventories to help absorb short‑term shocks, but flags a possible 0.7 percentage‑point drag on GDP growth in 2025 if tensions persist. Businesses represented by the ICC, covering some 45 million firms, have voiced concern: 60% of respondents to an ICC pulse survey consider the tariffs negatively, citing cost inflation, supply chain uncertainty and the risk of retaliation as principal worries. Despite this, the ICC insists negotiators must prioritise de‑escalation and multilateral engagement. Secretary‑General John Denton called the policy shift 'a watershed moment in American trade policy' that could inflict systemic harm on the global economy, noting the effective U. S. tariff rate now eclipses levels last seen during the Smoot–Hawley era of the 1930s.
Arabian Post
5 hours ago
- Arabian Post
Indian Foreign Policy Under Narendra Modi Is In Shambles
By Prakash Karat The infamy that the Narendra Modi government's foreign policy has earned in the recent period, is something that cannot be understated. On June 13, the United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution moved by Spain calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire in Gaza. The resolution accused Israel of using 'starvation of civilians as a method of warfare'. Of the 193 member states, 149 voted for the resolution, 12 opposed while 19 abstained. India did not vote for the resolution, but abstained. This was the most shameful stance given that the urgency for a ceasefire was glaringly evident in the background of the continuing genocidal war by Israel on Gaza and the weapon of mass starvation inflicted on 2 million people. India's justification for the abstention vote was lame and deceitful – that 'durable peace can only emerge through direct negotiations'. Deceitful because it was Israel which had broken the last ceasefire and imposed a total blockade on all supplies into Gaza. The abstention in the vote was contrary to the stand India had taken six months ago, in December 2024, when a resolution calling for ceasefire in the UN General Assembly was adopted, in which India voted for the resolution. India and Timor-Leste were the only two Asian countries to abstain. All other Asian countries voted for the resolution, even staunch allies of the United States like Japan and South Korea. The Modi government has been emboldened to come out with a clearer pro-Israeli stance in the wake of President Trump's full support to Netanyahu's plan to obliterate the Palestinians. The Trump administration has also indicated that it does not support the two state solution anymore. The slavish attitude of aligning with Trump at all cost has led to the complete abandonment of India's principled support to the Palestinian cause and siding with the colonialist-genocidal policies of the Israeli regime. That the foreign policy has been mortgaged to the US-Israeli axis became evident once again when India distanced itself from the statement issued by the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO), on June 14, which condemned the Israeli military attacks on Iran calling it a violation of international law and the United Nations Charter. The Indian government was quick to announce that it was not consulted while issuing the statement. Even the fact that Iran is a fellow member of the SCO and was subjected to aggression did not weigh with the government. On its part, the Modi government did not criticise or condemn Israel's military aggression against Iran, a friendly country with whom India has a strategic partnership. This stand can be contrasted with the response of Japan which is a close ally of the United States and a member of the QUAD. The Japanese government strongly condemned the Israeli attack on Iran calling it a flagrant violation of international law and Iran's sovereignty. When the United States bombed the three nuclear installations in Iran on June 22, in blatant violation of all international laws and norms, India kept silent. Prime Minister Modi, in a telephone call to the Iranian President expressed concern and called for de-escalation. This was an advice to the victim of aggression, not to take any steps to defend oneself. In the BRICS Leaders Summit held in Rio de Janeiro, Modi in his speech avoided any criticism of the Israeli attack on Iran and the U.S. bombing of its nuclear sites. But the joint statement issued by the Summit roundly condemned the aggression on Iran. Obviously, the ten other member countries of BRICS do not share India's views on the matter. The further rightward lurch in foreign policy stems from the eagerness to curry favour with President Trump and to appease his outrageous demands. The Quad Foreign Ministers' meeting held in Washington on July 1, came out with a sharper focus on China as a security threat and to counter its growing economic clout. India is bent upon ensuring that Trump attends the Quad Leaders' Summit to be held in Delhi, later this year. India has also to come to terms with Trump's demands on the trade and tariff front. Here again, the Modi government is unable to take a firm stand. All indications are that India was prepared to make major concessions to ensure that the interim trade deal is finalised before the July 9 deadline, when the 90 days pause in reciprocal tariffs announced by Trump is due to end. However, the negotiations held so far could not lead to a satisfactory conclusion. That India's foreign policy is in shambles has become clear in the post 'Operation Sindoor' period. Trump has succeeded in hyphenating India and Pakistan, and presenting the United States as the arbiter in India-Pakistan relations. At the root of the fiasco lies the Modi regime's determined pursuit to cement its junior partnership with the United States. A renewed ten year defence framework agreement is to be signed when the Defence Minister Rajnath Singh is to next meet his American counterpart. Already India had committed to buy U.S. military equipment on a large scale during Modi's visit to Washington in February. The U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, once again in June, expressed unhappiness about India buying weapons from Russia but added significantly that these concerns have been addressed and that 'India is starting to move towards buying military equipment from the United States'. What all this amounts to is a surrender of India's vital interests, whether it pertains to economic sovereignty, foreign policy or strategic autonomy. (IPA Service)
Gulf Today
8 hours ago
- Gulf Today
VIDEO: Liberians confused and angry after Trump's praise for their leader's English
Liberians reacted with a mix of anger and weary resignation on Thursday after discovering that the leader of their country's closest bilateral partner does not appear to know what language they speak. At a meeting at the White House on Wednesday, US President Donald Trump responded to brief remarks from his Liberian counterpart, Joseph Boakai, by marvelling at his "beautiful" English. But Trump did not stop there. "Where did you learn to speak so beautifully?" he continued, as Boakai murmured a response. "Where were you educated? Where? In Liberia?" English has been the west African nation's official language since the 1800s. Government statements are published in standard English while spoken Liberian English reflects influences from pidgin and indigenous languages used across the country of around 5.5 million people. Liberians sometimes refer to the US as their "big brother," but not everyone was surprised that Trump's knowledge of the country did not seem to reflect that closeness. Fatumata Binta Sall, a Liberian feminist activist who travels frequently to the US, told Reuters that Trump's amazement at Boakai's English fluency was all too familiar. "Many times, I've had Americans ask me whether I studied abroad or where I learned to speak 'so well'," she said. Such remarks, she said, indicate her country "isn't visible in the minds of many Americans." She attended international conferences "to remind the world that Liberia exists." William V.S. Tubman III, a Liberian writer and grandson of former President William Tubman, voiced frustration at what he described as Trump's lack of respect. "Praising an African head of state for speaking English 'so beautifully' isn't a compliment, it's a reflection of how deeply colonial thinking continues to shape expectations," he said. "What Trump said wasn't ignorance. It was disrespect and entitlement disguised as praise." Massad Boulos, Trump's senior adviser for Africa, said no one in the room was bothered by Trump's remark. "I was in the meeting and everyone was deeply appreciative of the President's time and effort," Boulos said in a statement. The White House shared a separate statement from Liberia's foreign minister, Sara Beysolow Nyanti, stressing that Boakai himself also took no offence. Liberian President Joseph Boakai greets relatives of slain officials in Monrovia, Liberia. File / Reuters "What President Trump heard distinctly was the American influence on our English in Liberia, and the Liberian president is not offended by that," she said. "We know that English has different accents and forms, and so him picking up the distinct intonation that has its roots in American English for us was just recognising a familiar English version." LIBERIA SCORES 'BIGLY' Some residents of the Liberian capital Monrovia also chose to highlight what they saw as the positive aspects of the visit. Boakai's inclusion on the guest list gave him an opportunity to tout Liberia's mineral assets and history of democratic elections. And his status as the only anglophone — in a group that also included leaders of Senegal, Guinea-Bissau, Gabon and Mauritania — clearly made an impression on his host. "In terms of his grammar, the way that he spoke, I think it shows that Boakai has a solid foundation in his education in Liberia," radio journalist Augustus Caine said. A front-page story in The Analyst newspaper said Boakai had been "eloquently conveying Liberia's critical interests" and "attracting the host's admiration." The headline featured a rarely used English word that Trump himself was credited with reviving during his first run for the White House in 2016. "Trump's Invite of Liberia Scores 'Bigly," it read. Reuters
