Is it safe to put sophisticated American weapons, such as F-35 fighter-bombers, in the hands of an Arab dictatorship such as Qatar?
According to the latest news reports, discussions have taken place about the possible future transfer of advanced American military stealth fighter jets to Qatar. The historical record points to three dangers that raise serious questions about whether such a move would be wise if it were ever to occur.
The first danger is that Qatar’s current ruler could one day be overthrown and replaced by someone even more hostile to the United States and Israel. The Islamic-Arab world has a long history of revolutions and violent coups.
There were coups in Egypt in 1952, 1954, and 2013. Syria had them in 1949, 1951, 1954, 1961, 1963, 1968, and 1970. Algeria experienced coups or major political upheavals in 1962, 1992, and 1995. Libya saw a coup in 1969, and Tunisia in 1957 and 1987. In the Persian Gulf region, where Qatar is located, coups occurred in Oman in 1970 and in Yemen in 1962, 1974, and 2018. What guarantee is there that Qatar would permanently defy these historical patterns and remain under the same political leadership indefinitely?
Providing weapons to a stable democracy is generally safer because democratic systems contain institutional safeguards that ensure continuity. Even when a new party comes to power, free nations usually honor the treaty obligations of their predecessors. There are exceptions, of course, but this norm is essential to international diplomacy.
Agreements with dictatorships, by contrast, are inherently risky. When such arrangements involve the world’s most advanced fighter aircraft, the potential consequences of political upheaval could be severe.
The second danger is that Qatar might, under certain circumstances, transfer some of those weapons to another country or even an international terrorist group. A historical precedent illustrates this risk. During the Lebanon War, a New York Times report dated July 11, 1982, stated: “Israel has given United States intelligence officials documents and other information obtained in Lebanon concerning what they considered the surprisingly large stores of weapons seized by Israeli troops in Lebanon. Among those weapons, the Israelis said, were American M-16 rifles that had been sold to Saudi Arabia.”
American combat rifles obtained by PLO terrorists
How did those American combat rifles end up in the hands of the PLO terrorist organization in Lebanon? Were they stolen, sold, or transferred? The details remain unclear. What is clear is that weapons supplied to a supposedly moderate American ally eventually appeared in the hands of anti-American, anti-Israel forces far from their intended destination.
Transferring rifles is obviously far easier than transferring F-35 aircraft. Nevertheless, the underlying principle remains the same. Once advanced weapons leave American control and enter the arsenal of an authoritarian regime, there is no absolute guarantee that they will remain where they were intended.
The third danger is that Qatar itself could, over time, adopt a position of direct confrontation with Israel. History again offers a precedent. In the 1960s, the Kennedy and Johnson administrations each described King Hussein of Jordan as moderate and approved the transfer of advanced American weapons to his regime, including M-47 and M-48 Patton tanks.
Despite these assurances, Jordan joined the Arab war against Israel in 1967. Lenny Ben-David, a former senior Israeli diplomat in Washington, describes the consequences in a study for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs: “The Jordanian army moved US-supplied M-47 and M-48 Patton tanks, long-range Long Tom artillery, and mechanized infantry into the West Bank to face Israel.”
When the war began, Jordanian artillery and tanks shelled Israeli positions in Jerusalem and northern Israel, while Jordanian aircraft bombed civilian and military targets. American-supplied tanks were later used in major engagements against Israeli forces, resulting in significant casualties for the IDF.
Whether through a future coup, an unauthorized weapons transfer, or a shift in political alignment, it is conceivable that Israel could one day face American-made F-35 aircraft in hostile hands, just as it once faced American-made Patton tanks. For these reasons, critics cited in news reports and policy analyses argue that providing such advanced aircraft to Qatar, if such a transfer were ever to occur, would carry serious risks, ones that are not worth taking.
The writer is national chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel (www.AFSI.org), a leading pro-Israel advocacy and education organization.