Senator Bob Menendez's (D-N.J.) federal indictment for bribery, and failure to register as an agent of Egypt, raises broader questions about the influence exerted by other nations over U.S. foreign policy. While Cairo's alleged bribing of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair to facilitate a $99 million arms deal is a flagrant example of foreign interference, it is hardly the first. The Gulf states, particularly Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United Arab Emirates (UAE) spend vast sums contracting legions of lobbyists and funding prominent foreign policy think tanks to advance their objectives in Washington.
Despite occasional feuds, the monarchies share an interest in buying armaments and keeping the U.S. entangled in the Middle East indefinitely with defense commitments. However, only 7 percent of Americans support more U.S. military involvement abroad. As the Israel-Hamas war escalates regional strife and threatens the safety of 30,000 American soldiers in the region, Washington faces pivotal decisions over the future of military involvement in the Middle East. Gulf state agendas are markedly distinct from U.S. national interests, and the former should not be allowed to obscure the latter with lavish influence operations.
Between 2016 and 2022, Saudi Arabia paid $142 million to U.S. public relations companies, while the UAE dispersed $64 million to lobbying agencies from 2021 to 2022. Gulf states lobbied legislators to approve $23 billion in arms to the UAE, support Gulf intervention in Yemen, prevent accountability for Jamal Khashoggi's dismemberment, and ban the families of 9/11 victims from suing Saudi Arabia.
A stunning report by the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft found that 25 UAE-retained firms lobbied the House of Representatives 4,346 times, the Senate 2,905 times, and 500 news outlets 2,889 times from 2021-2022. They also contributed $1.65 million to 450 congressional campaigns in the same period, with one donating $528,461 to more than 100 congresspeople after they were lobbied on behalf of the UAE. Although the Federal Election Commission prohibits foreign governments from contributing to political campaigns, their agents can if they affirm the donations were made independently with their own funds. Lobbying is the most blatant tactic used by Gulf states to influence Washington, but far from the most insidious.
The conventional image of a prestigious D.C. think tank is an independent institution that conducts evidence-based studies and publishes analytical reports that inform decision-makers. This technocratic veneer belies the corrosive influence of petrodollars, which has compromised the autonomy of some of the nation's most influential foreign policy foundations.
The true extent of Gulf state funding is unknowable because nonprofit think tanks are not required to disclose their donors, and many use funding categories such as $1,000,000 and above. Until its disaffiliation after a related scandal, the Brookings Institution had a branch in Qatar established with a $14.8 million grant from Doha, which donated at least $2 million annually from 2016 to 2021. During his job interview, a visiting fellow at the Brookings Doha Center was reportedly told not to take positions critical of Qatar. A leaked agreement revealed that the Center's director had to "engage in regular consultations" with Qatar's foreign ministry and submit programs for approval.
The Middle East Institute (MEI) receives substantial funding from the Gulf, with UAE ambassador Yousef Al Otaiba covertly channeling $20 million to the foundation through a third party. As chair of MEI's board, Richard Clarke personally solicited Riyadh's ambassador and walked out of the Saudi Embassy with a $500,000 check. Perhaps unsurprisingly, MEI has stridently advocated for strengthening U.S.-Gulf security ties.
A causal relationship between foreign donations and think tank output is difficult to prove, but leaked emails between the Center for a New American Security's (CNAS) CEO Michele Flournoy and Al Otaiba suggest precisely that. Washington restricts access to sophisticated drones under the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), limiting exports to member nations. Al Otaiba paid $250,000 to commission a CNAS paper recommending the UAE's admission into the MTCR. The study earned praise from Al Otaiba, who emailed Flournoy, "I think it will help push the debate in the right direction." CNAS published a report several months later that reached the same conclusion. The paper does not address how supplying Reaper drones would impact Yemen's civilian population, 19,000 of whom have been killed or maimed by Gulf coalition airstrikes.
Washington should take action to decrease Gulf state influence on U.S. foreign policy. Amending the Foreign Agents Registration Act to prohibit political contributions by lobbying firms retained by foreign powers would reduce the potential for election interference. Think tanks should be obligated to publicly disclose their donor funding and banned from accepting commissions from foreign governments. Accountability could be incentivized by revoking the tax-exempt status of think tanks receiving over $500,000 annually from a foreign government. Reform is vital to protect the autonomy of U.S. foreign policy and mitigate the ability of Gulf states to obfuscate America's national interests.
Jack McGrath is a Marcellus Policy Fellow at the John Quincy Adams Society. He holds a bachelor of arts in political science with a history minor from George Washington University. He is an alumnus of Southern Maine Community College.
The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.
Uncommon Knowledge
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
Newsweek is committed to challenging conventional wisdom and finding connections in the search for common ground.
About the writer
To read how Newsweek uses AI as a newsroom tool, Click here.
