Fact check: What was the economic impact of the US arms sales to Saudi Arabia during the Yemen war under Obama?

1. Summary of the results

The economic impact of US arms sales to Saudi Arabia during the Yemen war under Obama was substantial, with the Obama administration offering over $115 billion in arms sales to Saudi Arabia ^[1]. More specifically, the US agreed to sell over $64.1 billion worth of weapons to Riyadh between 2015 and 2020, averaging $10.7 billion per year ^[2].

Saudi Arabia spent a fortune buying arms from America to prosecute the war, which has resulted in the deaths of almost a quarter of a million people ^[2]. The arms sales included Boeing-made helicopters and Raytheon and Lockheed Martin manufactured missiles ^[3], demonstrating the direct financial benefits to major US defense contractors.

The defense industry wielded significant influence on US policy, with companies like Raytheon, General Dynamics, and Boeing spending millions on lobbying and campaign contributions ^[4]. This created a powerful economic incentive structure that benefited US weapons manufacturers while fueling the humanitarian crisis in Yemen.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

Several important contextual factors are missing from the original question:

• The surge in US arms sales to Saudi Arabia under Obama was partly strategic - designed to reassure the Saudi monarchy of US backing after the nuclear deal with Iran ^[5]. This geopolitical context shows the sales weren't purely economic but served broader foreign policy objectives.
• US arms manufacturers were actively seeking to boost sales, with recent deals specifically aimed at replenishing the Saudi arsenal depleted in the Yemen war ^[5]. This reveals how the conflict created a self-perpetuating cycle of weapons demand and supply.
• The Obama administration did take some steps to address concerns by limiting certain weapons transfers, including precision-guided air-dropped weapons and cluster munitions ^[6]. The administration also promoted the Arms Trade Treaty, which requires assessments of whether exported arms could be used to commit human rights violations ^[6].
• US weapons manufacturers spent millions on lobbying efforts to influence US policy on arms sales ^[4], highlighting how corporate interests shaped policy decisions during this period.

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question itself doesn't contain misinformation, but it lacks important context that could lead to incomplete understanding:

• The question focuses solely on economic impact without acknowledging the humanitarian cost - the war killed almost a quarter of a million people ^[2], which is directly connected to the economic benefits derived from arms sales.
• By framing the question around "economic impact," it potentially obscures the direct relationship between US economic gains and the humanitarian crisis in Yemen ^[4].
• The question doesn't acknowledge that the majority of the equipment from Obama's arms deals was yet to be delivered ^[1], meaning the full economic impact extended beyond Obama's presidency and continued to fuel the conflict.

The framing could benefit those who profit from arms sales by focusing attention on economic metrics rather than the human cost of these transactions.