U.S. lawmakers, Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Sara Jacobs, are attempting to block a $1.2 billion arms deal with the UAE due to accusations of the UAE supplying weapons to Sudan’s RSF, exacerbating the country’s conflict. They seek to ensure that U.S. arms do not contribute to violence and instability in Sudan, amidst resistance in Congress where the UAE is viewed as a crucial ally.
Two Democratic lawmakers in the United States, Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Sara Jacobs, are advocating for the cessation of a proposed $1.2 billion arms deal with the United Arab Emirates (UAE). They accuse the UAE of supplying weapons to Sudan’s paramilitary group, the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). To advance their resolution, they are demanding that the Biden administration provide confirmation that the UAE is not assisting in arming the RSF before any arms sales can proceed.
Senator Van Hollen emphasized the need for accountability, stating, “The UAE is an important partner, but the United States cannot sit idly by as it aids and abets the disaster in Sudan.” Allegations regarding the UAE’s involvement in the Sudanese conflict have been raised by various parties, including the Sudanese Armed Forces and civil activists, supported by United Nations monitors. However, the UAE has consistently denied these claims, branding them as groundless.
Recently, during a UN Security Council meeting, Sudan’s Permanent Representative, El Harith Idriss Mohamed, accused the UAE of exacerbating the crisis in Sudan. The UAE acknowledged supplying arms prior to the onset of conflict but refuted claims of supplying arms post-April 15, 2023. Representative Jacobs, after visiting Sudanese refugees in Chad, remarked, “The UAE is one of the biggest outside actors fuelling the violence in Sudan, and yet the U.S. is on the brink of selling the UAE another $1.2 billion in weapons that could end up in the hands of the RSF.”
Despite their efforts, the proposals to block the deal are not expected to gain sufficient support within Congress, where the UAE is regarded as a key ally. Both resolutions require approval from both legislative chambers and may face a presidential veto. This follows President Biden’s recognition of the UAE as a “major defense partner” after recent meetings with the UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed. The arms deal under consideration includes missiles and rockets produced by Lockheed Martin, leading to increasing pressures to reevaluate the UAE’s connections with the RSF and address the deteriorating situation in Sudan.
The proposed arms deal with the UAE has drawn scrutiny due to allegations regarding the Gulf state’s involvement in the conflict in Sudan, notably through its support of the Rapid Support Forces (RSF). The RSF has been implicated in various human rights violations and actions contributing to instability in Sudan. As the situation escalates, U.S. lawmakers are urging a reassessment of military support to nations potentially fuelling conflicts abroad, highlighting the importance of ensuring that U.S. arms do not contribute to such crises. This arms deal comes on the heels of diplomatic engagements between the U.S. and UAE, emphasizing their strategic partnership in defense.
The efforts by Senator Chris Van Hollen and Representative Sara Jacobs to block the $1.2 billion arms deal with the UAE reflect a growing concern over the implications of U.S. military sales contributing to conflicts abroad. Their calls for accountability are tied to the wider issue of U.S. foreign policy responsibilities regarding arms exports, particularly in regions experiencing turmoil like Sudan. As the legislative process unfolds, it remains unclear whether these resolutions will impact the administration’s position on the deal, as the UAE maintains its assertion of non-involvement post-conflict escalation.
Original Source: www.dabangasudan.org
