Ending U.S. Arms Sales to Saudi Arabia and the Russia Pivot
Hey delegates! As a follow up to my earlier post about U.S. military aid to Saudi Arabia, I want to bring up some analysis of the implications of the U.S. ending its arms sales to Saudi Arabia.
As previously established, the U.S. is one of the greatest contributors of military aid to Saudi Arabia, primarily in the form of selling weapons, aircrafts, spare parts, and more. This has primarily been used to fuel the current war and humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen, with 15 million on the brink of famine. But what would happen if the U.S. were to put a stop to this sale of arms?
For one, Derek Chollet of Foreign Policy writes in November that ending arms sales would make Saudi Arabia pivot away from the United States and establish a stronger alliance with Russia, who would step in and supply them with weapons. This pivot to Russia would be very problematic for 2 main reasons.
First, rather than continue to mediate peace talks as the U.S. is pursuing, Chollet continues that without the U.S. there to guide Saudi actions, Saudi Arabia would no longer feel the need to acquiesce to U.S. requests to avoid civilian casualties. Instead, Axe of the Daily Beast reports in 2015 that Russia has been known to use highly inaccurate cluster bombs that indiscriminately kill innocent civilians instead of the precision guided munitions that the U.S. uses. For example, in Syria, Russia used cluster munitions that literally kill thousands of civilians. Overall, The Independent finds that when Russian weapons were used in Syria, civilian casualties rose by 34 percent. The same would happen in Yemen if Russian weapons are used.
Second, Russia's approach to mediating the conflict in Yemen would preclude peace in Yemen. Professor of InternationalConflict Resolution Fraihatat the Doha Institute writes in June that “Russia’s conflict-mediation approach [is] effective in freezing conflicts rather than resolving them,” as was the case with Russian intervention in Syria, Georgia, Palestine, Crimea, and Chechnya. This is for three reasons:
A) Russia tends to end conflicts “by creating a severe imbalance of power”
that decimates one side so completely that peace is forced upon them, as they
did in Syria. Unfortunately, Fraihat
finds that “solutions achieved under a severe power imbalance are difficult to
sustain [and are] likely erupt again.”
B) Fraihat continues that “resolving conflicts in a lasting manner requires a serious financial commitment,” something that Russia has historically never done but the U.S. has.
C) Fraihat finds that “Russia’s military and diplomatic involvement rewards dictators who serve Russia’s interests rather than citizens’ calls for freedom and justice, thereby exacerbating the tensions that led to [war] in the first place.”
As is such, it is important to fully understand the implications of the U.S. ending arms sales to Saudi Arabia. While it is definitively true that U.S. arms are tragically contributing to the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, would the role of another actor like Russia make matters worse?
As previously established, the U.S. is one of the greatest contributors of military aid to Saudi Arabia, primarily in the form of selling weapons, aircrafts, spare parts, and more. This has primarily been used to fuel the current war and humanitarian catastrophe in Yemen, with 15 million on the brink of famine. But what would happen if the U.S. were to put a stop to this sale of arms?
For one, Derek Chollet of Foreign Policy writes in November that ending arms sales would make Saudi Arabia pivot away from the United States and establish a stronger alliance with Russia, who would step in and supply them with weapons. This pivot to Russia would be very problematic for 2 main reasons.
First, rather than continue to mediate peace talks as the U.S. is pursuing, Chollet continues that without the U.S. there to guide Saudi actions, Saudi Arabia would no longer feel the need to acquiesce to U.S. requests to avoid civilian casualties. Instead, Axe of the Daily Beast reports in 2015 that Russia has been known to use highly inaccurate cluster bombs that indiscriminately kill innocent civilians instead of the precision guided munitions that the U.S. uses. For example, in Syria, Russia used cluster munitions that literally kill thousands of civilians. Overall, The Independent finds that when Russian weapons were used in Syria, civilian casualties rose by 34 percent. The same would happen in Yemen if Russian weapons are used.
Second, Russia's approach to mediating the conflict in Yemen would preclude peace in Yemen. Professor of InternationalConflict Resolution Fraihatat the Doha Institute writes in June that “Russia’s conflict-mediation approach [is] effective in freezing conflicts rather than resolving them,” as was the case with Russian intervention in Syria, Georgia, Palestine, Crimea, and Chechnya. This is for three reasons:
B) Fraihat continues that “resolving conflicts in a lasting manner requires a serious financial commitment,” something that Russia has historically never done but the U.S. has.
C) Fraihat finds that “Russia’s military and diplomatic involvement rewards dictators who serve Russia’s interests rather than citizens’ calls for freedom and justice, thereby exacerbating the tensions that led to [war] in the first place.”
As is such, it is important to fully understand the implications of the U.S. ending arms sales to Saudi Arabia. While it is definitively true that U.S. arms are tragically contributing to the humanitarian crisis in Yemen, would the role of another actor like Russia make matters worse?
Seeing as the United States has dedicated $89 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia in the past 10 years, Mali is concerned over the dependency associated between these two nations as well as their effects in the nation of Yemen.
ReplyDeleteMali is cognizant of the major humanitarian crisis within Yemen, as the Saudi led coalition attempted to regain control in the region by conducting thousands of airstrikes since 2015, causing thousands of innocent civilians to die. These airstrikes have also led to Yemen being declared by some as the worst humanitarian crisis in the world. With 22 million people in direct need for humanitarian aid, and 500 people having died in the first nine days of August 2018, Mali believes that it is imperative for nations to evaluate the consequences of providing military aid to Saudi Arabia.
Seeing as Russian airstrikes in Syria have killed 18,000 people as of 2018, Mali fears that Russian influence in the situation in Yemen through military aid with Saudi Arabia will only escalate tensions and cause more humanitarian issues. Mali believes that further foreign intervention in Yemen will only cause more problems to the already devastating crisis as there will be “too many cooks in the kitchen.”
Mali believes that it is imperative that situations such as the horrible humanitarian crisis in Yemen are not escalated further through nation’s intervention by providing military aid to actors in such conflicts. Mali urges nations to be more cognizant of who they are providing military aid to so they do not get involved with conflicts.
The Delegation of Mali
Miller, Andrew, and Richard Sokolsky. “What Has $49 Billion in Foreign Military Aid Bought
Us? Not Much.” Carnegie Endowment for International Peace,
carnegieendowment.org/2018/02/27/what-has-49-billion-in-foreign-military-aid-bought-u
s-not-much-pub-75657.
“Why Is Yemen the World's Worst Humanitarian Crisis?” International Rescue Committee (IRC),
15 Oct. 2018, www.rescue.org/article/why-yemen-worlds-worst-humanitarian-crisis.
Deutsche Welle. “Russian Airstrikes in Syria Reportedly Killed 18,000 People | DW |
30.09.2018.” DW.COM,
www.dw.com/en/russian-airstrikes-in-syria-reportedly-killed-18000-people/a-45702091.
Saudi Arabia believes it plays a vital role in keeping and preserving the peace in the Middle East by whatever means necessary. As noted before, if the U.S. were to stop it's arms deals to us, there would be detrimental consequences in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia must pivot fast to find a new ally to help end the humanitarian crisis in Yemen and restore the importance of their government. In Riyadh, King Salman and Putin collaborated and support ideas of fighting terror and making peaceful negotiations in the Middle East ("Historic Russia"). It is the kingdoms responsibility to ensure the safety of it’s citizens. It is important that this war does not continue any longer than it has. Many countries question Saudi Arabia's ethics in this war. But is it better that Iran gain another piece of land just like it has done with Iraq, forcing it's ideas onto it's people and encouraging terrorist groups such as the Houthi Rebels, or that Saudi Arabia end this war once and for all?
ReplyDelete-The Delegation of Saudi Arabia
“Saudi King, Putin Agree Deals on Historic Russia Trip.” GCC News | Al Jazeera, Al Jazeera, Oct. 2017, www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/10/saudi-king-putin-sign-deals-historic-russia-trip-171005102100641.html.
While China sees the importance of providing Saudi Arabia with weapons, it completely understands the United State’s personal decision to walk back on its arms deals with Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia does important work in the fight against terrorism in the Middle East, therefore there should be a steady flow of assistance to this key ally. Ultimately, it does not matter what country is providing Saudi Arabia with these weapons because Saudi Arabia will have final authority on what the weapons are used for. If the U.S. would rather rescind its arms deals with Saudi Arabia, it has complete right and authority to do so, just as much authority as Russia would have to go in a take its place. To reiterate, the facts is that Saudi Arabia will ultimately do whatever it chooses or deems necessary to use their weapons for, therefore whichever country ends up being the distributor of these weapons will not matter.
ReplyDelete- The Delegation of China
Andorra believes that Saudi Arabia is an essential bulwark in the Middle East as a powerful representative of western countries. If the United States were to withdraw from arms deals with Saudi Arabia, the influence of Russia would result in a situation of chaos and instability similar to what has occurred in the Crimean Peninsula after Russian intervention and brutality. An increase in civilian casualties from the use of Russian cluster bombs would increase local animosity to not just Russian but all foreign powers. Despite their funding of various extremist groups, Saudi Arabia is a powerful competitor that prevents the entire region from disintegrating into chaos despite their promotion of fighting in Yemen. The United States' military support of Saudi Arabia is essential to keeping it as such. Andorra wishes that the war in Yemen could be easily ended, but when forced to choose between increased civilian casualties, hostility to foreign powers, and increased instability versus the use of United States weaponry by Saudi Arabia against Iran-backed troops in Yemen, Andorra certainly believes that the latter is a far better situation in Yemen than the alternative.
ReplyDeleteThe delegation of Andorra looks forward to working with our fellow UN delegations on this issue.