US Greenlights F-35s for Saudi Arabia, Citing 'Regional Stability' (Again)
When the Trump administration greenlit the sale of F-35 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia, as reported by The Hill, the official line was 'regional stability.' This isn't just a former administration's folly; it's a bipartisan tradition. This same 'stability' argument was deployed when the US backed Saudi Arabia's devastating war in Yemen which, according to the UN, created one of the world's worst
humanitarian crises. The narrative conveniently omits that these advanced weapons don't just sit in a hangar; they're deployed, often with catastrophic civilian consequences. (Funny how 'stability' often looks a lot like carnage from the ground). Selling stealth bombers to a monarchy with a documented human rights record, particularly its involvement in the Yemen conflict, raises questions about
whose stability is truly being prioritized. Is it the stability of the region, or the stability of defense contractor profits? Lockheed Martin, the F-35 manufacturer, boasts a robust lobbying presence, spending millions annually. The narrative of strategic necessity conveniently overshadows the very real human cost, turning advanced warplanes into mere diplomatic bargaining chips, irrespective of
where they eventually rain fire.