The latest report from SIPRI (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute), a leading center for monitoring global defense expenditures, reveals that 75% of global arms sales are divided among five countries: the United States, followed by France, Russia, China, and Germany. The share of Western countries in this trade has risen to 72% over the past five years, compared to 62% during the 2014-2018 period, with the United States accounting for 42% of this share, an increase of 17% from the earlier period.
Where has most of the U.S. arms sales gone? They have largely gone to the Middle East, comprising 38% of total U.S. arms sales. This distribution is mainly allocated to four countries:
- Saudi Arabia: 15%
- Qatar: 8.2%
- Kuwait: 4.5%
- Israel: 3.6%
The remaining 6.7% is distributed among other Arab countries in the region.
As for France, 34% of its military sales have gone to Middle Eastern countries. German sales to the region account for 39%, while Russian sales to the Arab region make up 13%, primarily due to the repercussions of the Ukrainian war. Algeria has been the largest importer of Chinese arms in the region, though its share is less than 3%.
Looking at total arms sales (with 66 countries involved), the Arab region absorbed 30% of global arms sales between 2019 and 2023.
Among 170 countries, three Arab countries rank as follows in terms of arms purchases: Saudi Arabia is second globally, Qatar is third, and Egypt is seventh. In the subsequent ten countries, Kuwait is twelfth, the UAE is fourteenth, and Israel is fifteenth. Between the twentieth and thirtieth ranks, Algeria is twenty-first, and Morocco is twenty-ninth.
Examining defense spending as a percentage of GDP, four Arab countries are among the top ten globally. The total Arab defense spending is approximately $164 billion, equivalent to six times what Israel spends, and represents 6.7% of global defense spending.
Despite this, there is no tangible value to these expenditures, as these countries have failed to repel any military action against them, whether from Arab or non-Arab entities. The region is marked by high instability and significant autocratic governance.
In contrast, Arab policy towards the ongoing crisis has been characterized by the following:
No Arab country has dared to take any military action (neither launching attacks nor allowing volunteers or arms smuggling), nor have they taken any economic measures (instead, trade with Israel has increased with most normalization countries). The official Arab role has been limited to “statements of condemnation, regret, and denunciation,” predominantly characterized by “diplomatic tokenism” or “civil defense diplomacy” by providing medical aid that does not match the scale of casualties and destruction, according to all international governmental and non-governmental organizations. Politically, the actions behind the “veil” reveal a desire to eliminate Palestinian resistance and restore security coordination to Gaza, as indicated by the speeches and activities of its leaders.
The effective Arab response has been limited to the parties of the Axis of Resistance. This response has inflicted Israeli casualties (close to 18,000 dead and wounded civilians and military personnel) and economic losses approaching $70 billion as of yesterday. There has also been near paralysis in its maritime trade, a depletion of tourism resources, a significant slowdown in incoming migration, and a rapid increase in outgoing migration. On the diplomatic and media fronts, Israel’s standing is undeniably deteriorating. Some studies estimate that social fragmentation, political strife, and instability levels are currently the highest in Israel since the establishment of the Zionist entity.
Imagine if someone promising to build a structure on the Temple Mount were a minister from a country disfavored by the United States, or if the attack on Gaza came from a nation at odds with the United States. In such cases, you would see calls for jihad, the opening of volunteer centers, and the creation of support funds. Isn’t this what happened in Afghanistan? Therefore, to understand Arab policies, you must follow the traces of American footsteps. Arab regimes have extensive experience in “tracing footprints” or “tracking.” Following the American trace will lead you to find Arab leaders waiting at the end of the path. The main reason is that the interests of the regime take precedence over those of the state, society, and even the entire region.
The Gaza war has highlighted that Arab countries are akin to “fiefs” or enclaves, characterized by hatred, political maneuvering, and sick elitism. They are neither aligned with historical legacy nor equipped to tackle the challenges of current reality, and they have no concern for the future. The dormant have no time, and the impotent do not bear fruit.
