Jordan: Suspension of U.S. Military Assistance During Gulf Crisis

NSIAD-92-343 September 25, 1992
Full Report (PDF, 24 pages)  

Summary

The United States has kept up favorable relations with Jordan because of its stabilizing influence in the Middle East and its efforts to reach a peace settlement in the region. Since 1951, the United States has earmarked about $3.5 billion in foreign economic and military aid to Jordan. During the Persian Gulf war, however, King Hussein--confronted with a sizable Palestinian population loyal to Saddam Hussein--became openly critical of the United States and Operation Desert Storm. Although arguing that Iraq should withdraw from Kuwait, Jordan distanced itself from the allied effort to free Kuwait and continued to import Iraqi oil. Early in the conflict, reports surfaced of transshipments of defense material from Jordan to Iraq. This report: (1) reviews the policy on the delivery of defense articles to Jordan under the security assistance program from August 1990 through August 1991; (2) determines whether deliveries were ended at any time during that period; (3) identifies the number and types of defense articles delivered; (4) identifies defense articles procured but not delivered and their status today; and (5) examines whether Congress was adequately informed of these actions.

GAO found that: (1) actions taken by the State Department to suspend military assistance to Jordan were of short duration and not well implemented; (2) while State placed a hold on the approval of all new Foreign Military Sales (FMS) letters of offer and acceptance for Jordan, 12 new letters were approved after the hold; (3) State did not suspend all licenses and other written approvals for the export of defense articles to Jordan until February 6, 1991, and the suspension only remained for 1 month; (4) State's failure to provide written instructions to the Defense Security Assistance Agency (DSAA) caused delays and confusion as to the full scope and intent of the suspension; (5) military depots continued to deliver defense articles to Jordan's freight forwarder while the suspension was in effect; (6) State did notify the Customs Service in writing of its decision to suspend defense article exports to Jordan, but failed to notify Jordan's freight forwarder, as applicable regulations required; and (7) although State was not legally required to notify Congress of its actions, officials inaccurately described the timing and scope of their actions to halt military assistance to Jordan.