Middle East Arms Triangle: The US, "Moderate" Arabs, & Israel

On 6 January, we reported that the Netanyahu government had concerns over Washington's sale of about $6 billion of arms to four "moderate" Arab states (Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and the United Arab Emirates) and Washington. We asked whether the Israelis were pursuing  the complaint to argue the argument that the regional balance of power would collapse because of the arms shipments, regardless of how "moderate" the Arabs states are.

The background to the current manoeuvres lies in Israel's concerns over a $20 billion arms deal between Saudi Arabia and the George W. Bush Administration. On that occasion, Tel Aviv used its concerns as leverage to receive advanced F-35 fighter jets and to limit American arms sales to Lebanon amidst the re-emergence of Hezbollah. So far, no arms deal with Israel have been signed under Obama, and there is the issue of  shipment of higher-tech arms under the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, which promised $30 billion to Tel Aviv over the following 10 years.

In that context, perhaps the immediate postures over the US-Arab deals should situated under the US-Israel strategic relationship. The Jewish Daily Forward has noted:

Leaders in Washington and Jerusalem have publicly locked horns over the issue of West Bank settlements. And Israeli public opinion has largely viewed America’s new administration as unfriendly. But behind the scenes, strategic security relations between the two countries are flourishing.

Israel Concerned over the U.S. Arms Deals with "Moderate" Arabs?

According to Haaretz, major arms deals signed between U.S.A and Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates have caused concern among Israeli officials; although Israel had already been informed about the scope and content of these agreements.

On the other hand, a report submitted to Congress by Pentagon states that none of the deals would "alter the military balance in the region." It is claimed that officials in Washington defended the arms deals on the basis that they will boost the moderate axis in the Middle East, deter Iran and in particular strengthen Saudi Arabia's military capabilities in its war against al-Qaeda in Yemen.

These are the contents of deals:

To Egypt:

• Four batteries of Harpoon Block II anti-ship cruise missiles (20 missiles).


• Four fast missile boats.


• 450 Hellfire antitank missiles.


• 156 jet engines for F-16 jets in the wake of a deal in October for the sale of 24 F-16 C/D fighter aircraft equipped with electronic warfare suites. It is stated that the F-16s supplied to Egypt are less advanced than the aircraft of similar type in Israel's arsenal.

To Saudi Arabia:

• 2,742 TOW-2 antitank missiles.

To Jordan:

• 1,808 Javelin antitank missiles with 162 launchers in the wake of a deal in September for more than 80 advanced rocket launchers, of types that have been sold to Israel in the past.

To UAE:

• Ordnance at a value of $290 million.


• 1,600 laser-guided "smart" bombs


• 800 one-ton bombs


• 400 bunker buster bombs.

It is also stated by the newspaper that although the UAE does not pose a threat to Israel and is not considered an enemy state, officials in Tel Aviv are concerned about this deal.

In the same report submitted to Congress, it is mentioned that there have been no arms deals since Barack Obama took office. So, what is really behind Israeli officials' concerns? Is it the fact that its neighbours are going to be armed with better high-tech devices, no matter how "moderate" they are? Or is it a subtle "protest"/"complaint" in order to use the argument that the 'balance of power' may tilt away from additional military aid to Israel from Washington following the 2007 Memorandum of Understanding, which promisws $30 billion to Tel Aviv over the following 10 years?