US senators seek to block Trump's UAE, Qatar defence deals
A group of United States senators is trying to halt $3.5bn in weapons sales to the United Arab Emirates and Qatar over concerns that the deals will personally benefit the family of US President Donald Trump.
Two 'resolutions of disapproval' were submitted on Thursday in the US by Democratic Senators Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, Brian Schatz and Tim Kaine, along with Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent who often votes with Democrats.
The legislators also issued statements accusing President Trump, who is concluding a trip to the Middle East, of actively engaging in the 'corruption of US foreign policy' over the timing of the sales and recent investment deals.
The Department of State this week approved the $1.6bn sale to the UAE of Chinook helicopters and equipment, F-16 aircraft components, and spare and repair parts to support Apache, Black Hawk and Chinook helicopters. Initial reporting cited the figure as close to $1.3bn, but the $1.6bn figure was used in a statement from the legislators. The lawmakers are also seeking to block $1.9bn in sales to Qatar of MQ-9B Predator drones and associated equipment, which was approved by the State Department in March.
The legislators accuse Trump of accepting favours in exchange for the deals, citing news from April that the Emirati investment firm MGX would use a stablecoin – a cryptocurrency whose value is pegged to another asset – issued by the Trump family-backed World Liberty Financial to finance a $2bn investment in the cryptocurrency exchange Binance.
The Trump family is reported to have made millions off niche cryptocurrencies like the $TRUMP 'meme coin' since the president returned to the White House in January.In addition to business dealings, the senators also expressed fears that US weapons sent to the UAE could end up in the hands of Sudan's paramilitary Rapid Support Forces, which is allegedly backed by the UAE and has played a critical role in Sudan's civil war.
'The US should not be delivering weapons to the UAE as it aids and abets this humanitarian disaster and gross human rights violations,' Van Hollen said, citing Sudan's civil war.
The senators also cited Qatar's offer of a Boeing 747 jumbo for the president's temporary use as Air Force One. The offer has drawn criticism from both Democrats and some Republicans because it would be the most expensive foreign gift ever exchanged between a foreign government and an elected US official.
'There's nothing Donald Trump loves more than being treated like a king, and that's exactly why foreign governments are trying to buy his favour with a luxury jumbo jet and investments in Trump's crypto scams,' Murphy said in a statement.
When asked about the offer of the aircraft, Trump blamed Boeing's lack of progress in building a new Air Force One and said he would be 'stupid' to refuse a free plane.
'It's not a gift to me, it's a gift to the Department of Defense,' he said.
It is unclear when a vote will happen on the joint 'resolutions of disapproval', but the US political news outlet The Hill said that due to the nature of the bills, Democrats will likely force them to the floor of the Senate.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Al Jazeera
2 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
De-escalating to escalate: Ceasefire is no longer on the horizon in Ukraine
For a while now, the Ukraine-Russia war has been compared by various pundits to the Korean War of the early 1950s. That conflict, which split the Korean Peninsula in two, ended without a clear victor. Hostilities ceased with the signing of an armistice in 1953, but no formal peace treaty ever followed. The Korean Peninsula remains technically at war, suspended in an uneasy truce and still divided along the 38th parallel. Could Ukraine be heading toward a similar outcome? In many respects, today's deadlock echoes the dynamics of the Korean War. North Korea relied on support from China and the Soviet Union, while South Korea was backed by a United States-led coalition. Following a series of offensives and counteroffensives, the conflict slowed down to a war of attrition, which dragged out the negotiation of a ceasefire for two years. Today, Russia, bolstered by China's backing, is fighting in Ukraine, whose army is sustained by its Western allies. In the past year, the conflict has slowed down, and the map of the front line no longer sees dramatic changes. But unlike in the Korean War, the prospects of a ceasefire here appear slim after three years of fighting. The diplomatic and pressure politics offensive by US President Donald Trump to force the two sides to put down their weapons has borne no fruit. Both sides talk about ceasefire, but act as if they want the war to continue. On Sunday, a fresh dose of fuel was poured into the fire. Ukraine launched a series of precise, destructive, and strategically painful strikes against Russian military airfields. The damage inflicted reportedly amounts to $7bn. Forty-one aircraft — about one-third of Russia's strategic bomber fleet — were hit. In parallel, two bridges collapsed in two Russian regions bordering Ukraine, derailing trains; the local authorities said they suspected sabotage. A week before that, Russia sent a swarm of more than 900 drones and dozens of missiles – killing at least 16 civilians, including three children – across Ukraine. On Monday, the Russian army sent a barrage of missiles deep into Ukrainian territory, hitting a training camp for soldiers and killing 12. The timing of these attacks appears to have been deliberately chosen. They came just ahead of the latest stage of peace talks — raising questions about whether such gestures are intended to strengthen each side's negotiating position or derail the process altogether. It is not the first time that the two sides have stepped up attacks when talks have come up. Last year, precisely as Moscow and Kyiv were about to start negotiating a partial ceasefire, Ukraine launched its incursion into Kursk. The efforts to bring the two sides to the negotiating table fell through. This time, Russia chose to downplay Sunday's explosions deep inside its territory. The Russian Defence Ministry grudgingly acknowledged that 'several units of aircraft caught fire', but made no overt threat of retaliation. Rather than lodging a formal protest, Russian delegation members proceeded to Istanbul for negotiations with their Ukrainian counterparts. On Monday, the two sides met and managed to reach agreement on two issues: a prisoner exchange of at least 1,000 soldiers each, and the possible return of 10 abducted Ukrainian children by the Russian authorities. There was no progress on a ceasefire agreement. It was clear that neither Moscow nor Kyiv was ready for serious talks. The leadership in both capitals has its reasons for avoiding the order to put down weapons. Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown, time and again, that he will not allow others to dictate terms to him; he prefers to set them himself. As the principal architect of this war, he is getting everything he wants: expanding political influence, territorial gains, and a drawn-out conflict that bolsters his image at home. He seems ready to torment Ukraine for as long as either it — or he — survives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, for his part, is not the kind of man to yield or retreat. Setting aside his courage and stubbornness, it's clear the war has given him what peace never could: enduring popularity, a steady flow of international aid, and a firm grip on power. If Ukrainians see a truce concluded with Russia as a form of capitulation, Zelensky's presidency might not last months — perhaps not even weeks. That danger weighs heavy on him. Meanwhile, the West seems willing to supply resources to continue the war effort, which is giving Kyiv more confidence. On June 3, the Ukrainian army struck the Kerch Bridge in Crimea — a structure constructed by Russia after its illegal annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula. The bridge is both a symbol of Putin's imperial ambition and a strategic artery linking Russia to occupied Crimea. An attack on it is certain to provoke a response. What form that response will take, we will likely know very soon. Ukraine's gamble on Western backing has raised the stakes. The war may be entering a new, more dangerous phase: one defined not by front lines, but by symbolic attacks and overwhelming retaliation. For many ordinary Ukrainians, the fragile hope that the fighting can come to a stop has given way to a grim sense that the war will drag on for months, if not years. Among us are optimists who firmly believe that Ukraine will ultimately prevail. At the other end are pessimists who argue that defeating an enemy vastly superior in size, military power, and enormous revenues from hydrocarbon sales is simply impossible. Politics and war are not about fairness, justice, or morality. War feeds on human lives. It endures as long as leaders turn a blind eye to the suffering of their people. At present, there is no sign that the Ukrainian and Russian leaderships are ready for compromise. And that does not bode well for the ordinary Ukrainians who bear the brunt of this war. The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial stance.
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
Is free speech under attack in the US?
In a country that prides itself on democracy, freedom of speech, and the right to protest, a chilling question is emerging: Who gets to speak, and who is being silenced? More than 1,000 international students and recent graduates across the United States have reportedly had their visas revoked or their legal status altered. Meanwhile, American citizens have faced detentions at airports and border crossings, been interrogated about their political beliefs, and had their phones searched for content against President Donald Trump. Are we witnessing a quiet erosion of First Amendment rights? Presenter: Stefanie Dekker Guests: Nora Benavidez – Civil rights lawyer Conor Fitzpatrick – Senior lawyer at Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression Tamara Turki – Student at Columbia University
Al Jazeera
5 hours ago
- Al Jazeera
What's in Trump's ‘big, beautiful' budget bill?
NewsFeed What's in Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill? What's in Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill? Al Jazeera's Heidi Zhou-Castro breaks down the bill that Donald Trump claims will usher in an economic golden age, whilst others warn it could add significantly to the national debt.
