Should the U.S. continue providing arms and financial support to Saudi Arabia?
A bipartisan bill would essentially end American support for what has traditionally been one of America’s top partners in the volatile Middle East.
Context and what the bill does
Washington Post opinion columnist Jamal Khashoggi was murdered by the government of Saudi Arabia in early October, in response to writings criticizing the regime. Khashoggi was a Saudi citizen with permanent residency in the U.S. due to having been forced into exile, with three American citizen children.
As punishment for his murder, H.R. 7082 would ban all U.S. military sales and aid to Saudi Arabia.
The bill was introduced in the House on October 23 by Rep. Jim McGovern (D-MA2).
A prior version, H.R. 7070, was introduced October 16, but a press release issued at the time said that lead sponsor Rep. McGovern “is prepared to introduce stronger legislation should reports clearly indicate that the Saudi Government is responsible for Khashoggi’s disappearance.”
Alas, that didn’t take long. Saudi Arabia acknowledged on October 19 that Khashoggi had been killed inside their consulate. That promised stronger version of the legislation, the one summarized in this article, was introduced mere days later on October 23.
What supporters say
Supporters argue the legislation punishes a country that we’ve supported financially and militarily for decades, despite them opposing a number of American values.
“The American people deserve to know the facts. They deserve to know that their government will not bankroll any regime that engages in despicable human rights violations,” Rep. McGovern said in a press release. “If Mr. Khashoggi was indeed murdered by the Saudi Government, it would be a brazen and alarming violation of international norms to which the United States must respond.”
“From Saudi royal family members financially backing 9/11 hijackers, to the probable murder of U.S. based-journalist and democracy advocate Jamal Khashoggi, it is clear that Saudi Arabia does not share America’s values,” Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC3) said in the same press release. “Taxpayers should not be forced to continue to subsidize this regime.”
What opponents say
President Trump had indicating he likely believed — or at least was amenable to — Saudi Arabia’s initial denials, and that the U.S. has important geopolitical strategic goals especially in the Middle East that can best be achieved with Saudi Arabia as a partner.
“Well, I think we have to find out what happened first. You know, here we go again with, you know, you’re guilty until proven innocent. I don’t like that. We just went through that with Justice Kavanaugh. And he was innocent all the way. So I was unconcerned,” Trump told the Associated Press before Saudi Arabia confirmed the killing. “But I will say they were very strong in their denial about themselves knowing.”
Even after the killing was confirmed, Trump refused to back down on arms deals with the nation. “Probably the people around this table have the vast percentage of the $110 billion order from Saudi,” Trump said during a roundtable discussion with defense executives. “Almost 100 percent of it would be sitting right around this table… “I don’t want to look over and tell Marillyn [Hewson, CEO of Lockheed Martin] or Dennis [Muilenburg, CEO of Boeing], ‘By the way, we’re going to take $25 billion worth of sales away from you.’ because that would mean a lot of jobs ”
While Saudi Arabia does buy weapons from the U.S., the actual number is only a fraction of what Trump claimed, totalling about $9 billion between 2013 and 2017.
Odds of passage
H.R. 7082 has attracted stronger support from Democrats but not from across the aisle. The current version has 26 bipartisan House cosponsors: 23 Democrats and three Republicans.
It awaits a possible vote in the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
Like our analyses? Want more? Support our work!
