***************************************************

Third, and perhaps most perniciously, the deal means that the United States is stepping up its support for Saudi Arabia’s proxy war against Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen, the poorest country in the Middle East, in which more than ten thousand civilians have already been killed, an unknown number of whom were blown to pieces by American-supplied bombs. In a piece published at the Hill, Kristine Beckerle, a researcher at Human Rights Watch, said her organization had documented eighty-one attacks by the Saudi-led coalition in Yemen over the last two years, many of which were “possible war crimes. In almost two dozen of these cases . . . we were able to identify the U.S. weapons that were used.”

Yemen’s civil war is a complicated conflict, rooted partly in tribal rivalries and religious differences: the Hadi government and most of its supporters are Sunni muslims, while the Houthis are Shiites. A couple of things are clear enough, though. The support that Saudi Arabia and Iran have supplied to their respective proxies has only intensified the conflict. And conditions on the ground are getting worse. Because the Saudi coalition has destroyed key bridges, airfields, and ports, many Houthi-controlled areas are running desperately short of food and medical supplies. ”With almost 19 million reliant on aid, #Yemen is the world’s single largest humanitarian crisis,” the International Committee of the Red Cross said in a tweet a few days ago. “Now it’s in the grip of a cholera outbreak.”

….In December, after the Saudi coalition bombed a funeral in Sanaa, killing about a hundred and forty people, the Obama Administration announced that it would no longer allow the Saudis to buy some precision-guided heavy bombs. Trump has now reversed this policy, agreeing to supply the Saudis with the very types of weapons they used in the deadly attack on the funeral. “Lifting the suspension on precision-guided munitions is a big deal,” William Hartung, the director of the Arms and Security Project at the Center for International Policy, told Mother Jones. “It’s a huge impact if it reinforces the Saudi bombing campaign in Yemen, and also the signal that it’s okay with us. It’s saying, ‘Have at it. Do what you want.’ ”

The Saudi-sponsored spread of Wahhabism, a fundamentalist brand of Islam, surely demonstrated that what the House of Saud wants isn’t necessarily good for the United States and other Western countries. In Yemen, the problem isn’t fundamentalist Saudi preachers; it is Saudi pilots dropping American-made bombs. An obvious concern is that, as a result of this deal, terrorist groups will find more recruits eager to strike the West.

“As we speak, millions of Yemenis are being radicalized against the country they blame for the civilian deaths,” Senator Chris Murphy, the Democrat from Connecticut, pointed out in a piece at the Huffington Post. A bill that Murphy has co-sponsored with Senator Rand Paul, the Kentucky Republican, would restore some limits on the sorts of weaponry that can be sold to Saudi Arabia, but it seems very unlikely to become law. “By selling the Saudis these precision-guided weapons morenot fewercivilians will be killed because it is Saudi Arabia’s strategy to starve Yemenis to death to increase their own leverage at the negotiating table,” Murphy went on in his piece. “They couldn’t do this without the weapons we are selling them.”

Trump and his colleagues are too busy boasting about, and exaggerating, the economic benefits of the new arms agreement to pause and consider its broader implications. But, as President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned more than half a century ago, what’s good for the military-industrial complex isn’t necessarily good for America, or the world.