War Profiteering or Jobs Creation?
“There can be no profit in the making or selling of things to be destroyed in war. Men may think that they have such profit, but in the end the profit will turn out to be a loss”
– Alexander Hamilton, American military officer, statesman, and Founding Father who served as the first U.S. secretary of the treasury from 1789 to 1795
In a recent podcast with Joe Rogan, presidential candidate Donald Trump mentioned that he defeated ISIS in a matter of weeks when the powers that be in Washington DC had indicated the task would take years.
This actually brings to question or at least to this author, are some companies looking to profiteer from enabling conflicts to drag on? Whatever your end answer is, we are now asking yet again, will the latest calls by the US on “quiet” China to use its sway over Russia and North Korea just another pre-election political stunt or are they for real this time? After all, we are almost heading into year 3 of the Russia-Ukraine conflict!
The US and South Korea have called on China to use its influence over Russia and North Korea to prevent escalation after Pyongyang sent thousands of troops to Russia to aid Moscow’s war against Ukraine. North Korea has promised to increase its soldiers into Russia from 3,000 to 10,000 by year end. Beijing has so far stayed quiet.
In a rare meeting earlier this week, three top US diplomats met with China’s ambassador to the United States to emphasise US concerns and urge China to use its sway with North Korea to try to curtail the cooperation, according to a State Department official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said Thursday that the sides had a robust conversation just this week” and that China knows US expectations are that they’ll use the influence that they have to work to curb these activities.” But I think this is a demand signal that’s coming not just from us, but from countries around the world, he said at a news conference in Washington with Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin and their South Korean counterparts. Liu Pengyu, spokesman for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, said in a statement that China’s position on the Ukraine crisis is consistent and clear.
China strives for peace talks and political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. This position remains unchanged. China will continue to play a constructive role to this end, Liu said. Beijing has forged a no limits partnership with Moscow, and while it has also been a major ally for Pyongyang, experts say Beijing might not approve of the closer military partnership between Russia and North Korea because it sees it as destabilizing in the region. Beijing has forged a no limits partnership with Moscow, and while it has also been a major ally for Pyongyang, experts say Beijing might not approve of the closer military partnership between Russia and North Korea because it sees it as destabilizing in the region. Let’s hope this is indeed the case. It’s unclear if Beijing was informed of Pyongyang’s move in advance, Victor Cha said, Korean chair at the Centre for Strategic & International Studies. Beijing also could fret over Russia gaining more influence than China over North Korea, Cha said.
Austin said Thursday that China should be asking Russia some hard questions at this point and whether it intends to broaden this conflict by this kind of behaviour.
Deputy Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Dan Kritenbrink and Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs James O’Brien met with Chinese envoy Xie Feng in Washington on Tuesday, according to the State Department official, who would not detail the Chinese response. Irrespective of any sways or influence.
China might have on its neighbours, there is no feasible nor discussion of any end date to the war.
In comes the Trump train, promising to end the conflict if made President, within 24 hours. Is it any wonder then, the mainstream media is all out for the Democrats?
Let’s not forget about the other war that is way into its 2nd year now, in the Middle East. Here’s a taste of how much the US is profiteering from Israe’s war on Gaza and its peripherals.
It is reported that Washington has provided some $23 bln in aid to Israel since October 2023. However, a staggering 80% has come back to US weapons manufacturers. How?
Israel’s war on Gaza is proving to be a shot in the arm for the US economy, with up to 80 percent of its all-time high military aid to Tel Aviv in the last 12 months routed back to American companies.
US spending on Israeli military and related operations in the Middle East since October 7, 2023, is nearly $23 billion, substantially higher than in any other year since Washington began granting military aid to Israel in 1959, according to a research paper released by the Costs of War project by Brown University’s Watson Institute.
The terms of military aid require the Israeli government to divert most of that money back to the US for buying weapons from American companies.
The condition ensures a “steady flow” of income for US weapons firms that, in turn, provide “stable manufacturing jobs” in small and midsize communities across the country.
“The foreign military assistance programme requires most purchases to be from US companies. This is a longstanding arrangement, and the US makes this point in its arguments in favour of such assistance,” Harvard University professor Linda J Bilmes, who co-authored the research paper, tells TRT World (dd. 9Oct2024).
Israel is one of the few countries that are allowed to buy arms directly from US companies with “minimal” oversight.
Bilmes says the Biden administration has “openly justified” its foreign aid spending for Israel in the name of “creating jobs for Americans” as US weapons makers hire workers to “replenish” the depleting stockpiles of arms and ammunition.
In the budget for 2025, the White House made a case for its $92 billion emergency supplemental request for urgent national security needs—including those relating to Israel—on the pretext that it would create and sustain jobs in “dozens of states across America”.
This becomes especially important in the political context, with the Democrats facing a stiff challenge from Republican candidate Donald Trump in this year’s presidential elections.
Trump has made the “failing American economy” under President Biden the centrepiece of his campaign, along with immigration.
Bilmes lists six big companies that are supplying arms and other equipment to Israel – Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed.
Martin, Northrop Grumman, RTX (formerly Raytheon) and equipment producer Caterpillar.
These firms, along with their suppliers and financial institutions, have maintained “longstanding commercial relationships” with Israel, which is their “important customer”.
Whilst Presidential hopeful Trump has made his stance on the Russia-Ukraine conflict clear, his views on the Gaza situation remains aloof. According to the Times of Israel, Trump told Netanyahu he wants the Gaza war over by the time he enters office BUT ex-Trump aide and Israeli officials are revealing that the request has a timeline attached to it. But the Prime Minister indicated on Monday (28/10/24) that Israel is not yet at the conflict wrap-up stage, telling Likud MKs in a quickly leaked recording from a faction meeting that he cannot agree to Hamas’s demand to end the war in exchange for the 101 hostages it still holds.
The definition therefore of war profiteering OR job creation now becomes one of whether it is ethically or morally correct to be pursued.
Disclaimer The law allows us to give general advice or recommendations on the buying or selling of any investment product by various means (including the publication and dissemination to you, to other persons or to members of the public, of research papers and analytical reports). We do this strictly on the understanding that: (i) All such advice or recommendations are for general information purposes only. Views and opinions contained herein are those of Bordier & Cie. Its contents may not be reproduced or redistributed. The user will be held fully liable for any unauthorised reproduction or circulation of any document herein, which may give rise to legal proceedings. (ii) We have not taken into account your specific investment objectives, financial situation or particular needs when formulating such advice or recommendations; and (iii) You would seek your own advice from a financial adviser regarding the specific suitability of such advice or recommendations, before you make a commitment to purchase or invest in any investment product. All information contained herein does not constitute any investment recommendation or legal or tax advice and is provided for information purposes only.
In line with the above, whenever we provide you with resources or materials or give you access to our resources or materials, then unless we say so explicitly, you must note that we are doing this for the sole purpose of enabling you to make your own investment decisions and for which you have the sole responsibility.
© 2024 Bordier Group and/or its affiliates.