Latest news with #YomKippurWar
India Today
14 hours ago
- Business
- India Today
Dollars all the way: How the US has ‘financed' Israel over the years
The United States stands behind Israel as the nation exchanges strikes with Iran. Donald Trump has demanded Iran's unconditional surrender ( and has even explicitly threatened Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei ( is in line with the US backing Israel for years, both economically and militarily. According to the US Foreign Assistance database, Israel has been receiving American aid since 1951. In the initial years, the aid was entirely 1951, Israel received just $0.96 million in economic obligations from the US. This assistance continued throughout the 1950s and early 1960s, averaging between $0.4 and $0.6 billion annually. Military aid remained absent or negligible during this period. A shift began in the early 1970s. In 1971, military aid rose sharply to $3.20 billion, while economic assistance stood at $0.33 billion. By 1974, following the Yom Kippur War, military aid spiked to $12.45 billion, overtaking economic assistance, which remained at $0.26 billion. This marked the beginning of a long-term trend in which military assistance became the dominant form of US support to Israel. advertisement After 2008, economic assistance was nearly phased out. In contrast, military support remained stable, $3.29 billion in 2009, $3.83 billion in 2010, and continuing at over $3 billion annually through the 2024, military assistance reached $6.64 billion, while economic aid was just $0.01 billion. Cumulatively, between 1951 and 2024, Israel has received $305.5 billion in total from the US, of which $221.68 billion was military funding and $83.8 billion was economic support. Military assistance accounts for over 72 per cent of the total aid given to THIS THE SAME FOR OTHER COUNTRIES?Among the countries that have received significant US foreign assistance, several of them show a clear tilt toward military funding. Egypt and Afghanistan, for instance, have received high volumes of military aid — $93.93 billion and $109.88 billion, a major share of their total assistance. Vietnam, Ukraine, and Iraq also fall into this category, with military aid constituting more than half of their total US support. However, countries like India and Bangladesh have primarily received economic assistance. India has received $86.1 billion in total aid, of which only $1.18 billion was military, while Bangladesh has received $21.8 billion, with just $0.35 billion in military MILITARY RELATIONSadvertisementAccording to the Council on Foreign Relations ( a large share of Israel's military aid from the United States comes through the Foreign Military Financing programme, under which Israel receives approximately $3.3 billion annually in of October 2023, the Joe Biden administration reported that Israel had nearly six hundred active Foreign Military Financing cases, with a combined value of approximately $24 billion. Arms sales data from the US Department of Defence shows that from 1950 to 2022, Israel purchased a total of $53 billion in US weapons, making it one of the top recipients globally, second only to Saudi Arabia, which received $164 billion over the same InMust Watch IN THIS STORY#Israel#Iran
New Statesman
2 days ago
- Business
- New Statesman
Will Iran inflict oil inflation on the West?
Fire and smoke rise into the sky after an Israeli attack on the Shahran oil depot in Tehran. PhotoMeetings are best avoided, as a rule. They take up valuable time, they achieve little, and they're often just a pretext for one person's terrible idea to be foisted on everyone else. And every now and then, a meeting takes place that sets world history on a dramatic and frightening new course. On 16 October 1973, the oil-producing nations of the Opec cartel met at the Sheraton Hotel in Kuwait City and agreed to almost double the price of crude oil. In doing so they divided the world along new lines. Economic growth in the West was effectively halved, while the autocracies from which the oil came – Saudi Arabia, Russia – received huge, long-term increases in their current accounts. The US, UK and Europe have spent decades trying to recapture the glory days before that fateful meeting, to rebuild the Western consumer dream that cheap energy had bought – using cheap labour (offshoring, globalisation, historic levels of immigration) and cheap money (privatisation, financialisation, historic levels of borrowing). From a single meeting, the modern dichotomy between oil-rich dictators and debt-laden democracies was agreed. Of course, the 1973 meeting was really just when the petrostates chose to exercise the power that Western dependence on oil gave them. It was retribution for America's support for Israel in the Yom Kippur War that October; unable to triumph in battle, Opec turned instead to the oil weapon. Now, as then, Iran may decide that Israel's military success will be paid for with inflation and recession in the West. This is made possible by geography. On Iran's southern coast the Persian Gulf narrows to a channel, 21 nautical miles across at its thinnest, through which 20 million barrels of oil and more than ten billion cubic feet of liquefied natural gas (LNG) are shipped each day. If Iran begins attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz, it could threaten a fifth of the world's supply of oil and LNG. Ukraine's recent drone attack on Russian bombers demonstrated the power of relatively cheap, easily hidden hardware to wreak havoc on larger targets. Mines, drones and missiles in the strait could effectively close energy exports from Qatar and Kuwait, while exports from Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and Oman would be restricted. Buyers around the world – especially in China, which buys Iranian oil and Qatari gas – would rush to secure new supply, pushing prices up. Matt Gertken, chief strategist at BCA Research, and Ben May, director of global macro research at Oxford Economics, both predict a major spike in the oil price, which could almost double to around $130 per barrel if Iran decided to block the strait. The result for Britain, the US and the eurozone would be higher inflation – and therefore higher interest rates to tame it – coupled with lower growth. The effects would be felt first at the petrol station, then in costlier shopping. Oil and gas are not just oil and gas – they are the plastic that most of the things we buy are made from or packaged in (or both); they are also fertiliser and heat and refrigeration and delivery. The price of energy is the price of pretty much everything, from goods made in Chinese factories to produce grown on British farms. In the UK, people, businesses and the government itself are still feeling the effects of the energy price shock of 2022. Our economy has been nudged even closer to recession by Trump's tariffs. The consequence of a doubling of the oil price would, says Gertken, 'very likely be a global recession'. At time of writing, the markets didn't seem particularly fussed about this suggestion; after a brief spike following Israel's initial attack on Iran on 13 June, the oil price had begun to decline again. Optimists point to the 'tanker war' of the 1980s, in which 55 ships were sunk or significantly damaged by Iran and Iraq, but which did not cause an oil shock. But Gertken says this is a 'mispricing' of the risk, because Israel is not just targeting Iran's nuclear programme but its domestic energy infrastructure. It is, he says, aiming not only to defang Iran's military but to cause unrest and regime change, to depose its 86-year-old Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei. The current Iranian regime therefore has little to lose by escalating a situation in which Israel is already an unrestrained aggressor, and Iran has shown an appetite for targeting international shipping through proxy groups such as the Houthis in Yemen. Gertken puts the likelihood of a major oil shock at 50 per cent. Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Who wins from this? While drivers in the US would be dismayed by prices at the petrol pump, Americans would be relatively well insulated from the shock because the US is the world's biggest producer of fossil fuels and a net exporter of energy. Russia, too, would benefit from a higher oil price, because fossil fuel exports are a major component of the Kremlin's revenues. China and Europe, which rely more on manufacturing, are far more exposed to a slump in global demand. Faced with another wave of inflation, European countries might find it harder to impose sanctions on Russian energy, and a ceasefire on Vladimir Putin's terms might become more likely. Global politics will continue to be redrawn – crudely, messily, and in black – until we can give up our fatal addiction to oil. [See also: Labour needs to be honest about tax rises] Related
Telegraph
6 days ago
- Politics
- Telegraph
Netanyahu's race against the clock to go ‘full Hezbollah' on Iran
'I must govern the clock, not be governed by it.' So said Golda Meir, one of Israel's founders and its first and only female prime minister. Now, some 50 years later, the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) may have realised her insight. Indeed, they have taken the clock and blown it to smithereens, neutralising its power to contain them once and for all. For the mullahs of Iran, this could spell curtains, or at least a long and painful 'Hezbollah-isation' stretching over weeks and months. The clock has always been central to Israeli military planning, with its strategists at the Kirya in central Tel Aviv long regarding it as important as guns and manpower. There are two big drivers. First, the IDF is reliant on reservists, so once a war starts there is an immediate social and economic imperative to move quickly. But much more influential – since the Yom Kippur war of 1973 and the global oil crisis it sparked – has been the 'diplomatic clock' and Israel's reliance on the US and its allies for military and diplomatic support. Once any new conflict started, the clock of international opinion would start ticking, with the US generally moving to bring things to a close as soon as possible. The prospect of the Middle East going up in flames and oil prices spiking ruinously has always trumped Israel's longer term security interests. Even after the Oct 7 massacre, Israel's military establishment feared it had only a limited window to deal with Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in the north. Manuel Trajtenberg, then executive director of the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) in Tel Aviv, told The Telegraph at the time that the IDF was racing against 'several different clocks, all of them ticking down'. 'There's the military clock itself in terms of manpower and capacity but also the hostages, international pressure and even economic pressures,' he said. Looking back now, it's hard to determine what the worry was. While the 1967 Arab-Israeli War was famously wrapped up in six days, the latest conflict has been raging for nearly two years. Hamas has all but been blasted to extinction, ditto Hezbollah in Lebanon. The IDF is acting at will against anything it judges a threat in Syria and moves with impunity over Yemen. Now Iran – 'the head of the octopus' – is firmly in its sights. Part of what's changed things is the psychological shock of Oct 7 and the sense of existential crisis in Israel it has created. 'The diplomatic clock is a fraud, and Israel's leaders must see through it', urged Nave Dromi, director of the Israel Victory Project in the wake of the massacre. 'There can be no specific time limitations on responding to the murder, rape and butchery of 1,200 people, the wounding of thousands of others and the vicious kidnapping and humiliation of 240 Israelis and foreigners'. But as important in the destruction of the clock is Benjamin Netanyahu and his willingness to take on US presidents – a theme since he confronted Barack Obama over his 2015 nuclear deal with Iran from the floor of the US Congress. The Israeli prime minister then tied Joe Biden in knots over Gaza, and then Lebanon, for the final 15 months of his term. And he has now almost certainly cocked a snook at Donald Trump, who, by most accounts, wanted more time to renegotiate a nuclear deal with Tehran. 'Trump had sought additional time from Netanyahu for nuclear talks, and Netanyahu did not give it to him,' said Daniel Shapiro who served as US ambassador to Israel from 2011 to 2017, in an interview with Foreign Affairs magazine on Friday. For Iran, Netanyahu's great foe of more than 30 years, this could be very bad news indeed, with nothing obvious to stop Israel's bombing campaign against it grinding on for weeks and months. Sima Shine, a senior researcher at INSS, said there was 'no significant international pressure' to wrap things up – quite a thing for a former Mossad official and Iran specialist who spent decades battling the clock. 'There is little sympathy for the Iranian regime', she said. 'Everyone recognises its negative role in the war in Ukraine, its involvement in the Middle East conflicts, its brutal suppression of protesters – especially women – and the fact that no one wants to see it possess nuclear weapons.' At a briefing for journalists on Saturday, a senior IDF official turned things around 180 degrees, conjuring up a very different figurative clock. 'We are prepared for more … an aerial road to Tehran has effectively been opened', he said. 'Our goal in these operations is to remove an existential threat; to remove a ticking time bomb.'
CNBC
7 days ago
- Business
- CNBC
Where oil prices may go next, based on a history of Middle East conflicts
The spike in oil prices may soon stall and reverse course if the Israel-Iran conflict does not widen, according to historical data examined by TD Securities. Daniel Ghali, a senior commodity strategist at the firm, said in a note to clients that the initial moves in oil markets already put this week's developments on par with the average comparable event since the 1980s. "Historically, geopolitical risks typically faded within one month, and completely evaporated within six months, in line with subsequent macroeconomic headwinds and deployment of spare capacity. Expanded wars (incl. involving USA) have a more significant impact," Ghali said. In 14 similar events since 1948 identified by TD, it took an average of 2.36 months for oil prices to peak, with an average increase of 17%. However, that includes a 135% spike around the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Focusing only on events after 1980 shows a smaller average advance for oil prices. By comparison, West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures rose more than 8% on Friday. Prices have risen by more than 20% in all of June thus far, and some of the run-up before the conflict could be due in part to traders anticipating rising tensions. What happens over the weekend could play a big role in whether the spike in oil continues. Oil prices moved higher intraday Friday after Iran launched retaliatory missiles toward Israel. In particular, traders will be looking to see if oil infrastructure such as production platforms, pipelines or refineries are damaged in any back-and-forth exchanges between the two nations. Most Wall Street commentary from major investment banks pointed toward a narrow conflict and a short, limited move in oil prices. One outlier was Piper Sandler's global energy strategist Jan Stuart, who said in a note to clients, "we would not fade any oil price rally; this is war." Another variable to consider is the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. A change in production from this group could offset or exacercebate the price impact of an Israel-Iran conflict. "Iranian crude grades may be replaced by Middle Eastern grades, but given regional politics, OPEC nations may hesitate to capitalize on weaker Iranian exports by ramping up the speed at which voluntary production cuts are unwound," Ghali said. — CNBC's Michael Bloom contributed reporting.
Yahoo
12-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Lockheed's Unit Wins a Contract to Support the C-5M Super Galaxy Jets
Lockheed Martin Corporation's LMT business unit, Aeronautics, recently secured a $56 million contract to support the C-5M Super Galaxy fleet. Per the terms of the deal, Lockheed will provide sustainment and logistical support services required for the C-5M fleet modified by the avionics modernization program and reliability enhancement and re-engining program. The award has been provided by the C-5 Galaxy Contracting Branch, Robins Air Force Base, work related to this deal will be executed in Marietta, GA. The contract is expected to be completed by May 31, 2026. LMT's C-5M Super Galaxy, the modernized variant of C-5 Galaxy jets, is the U.S. Air Force's largest and only strategic airlifter. It can carry more cargo over longer distances than any other aircraft and delivers twice the load capacity of other airlifters. C-5 has played a key role in major missions like the Yom Kippur War and Desert Storm and continues to serve as a vital part of U.S. military operations around the world. Increasing warfare situations across the globe have been boosting the usage of military transport aviation for airlifting troops, medical evacuation, firefighting and rescue missions in harsh environments. This, in turn, has been bolstering the demand for jets like C-5M and also must have prompted the IMARC group to project that the global military transport aircraft market will witness a CAGR of 2.4% during the 2025-2033 growth opportunities offered by the military transport aircraft market are likely to benefit jet manufacturers like Lockheed. The company's product portfolio includes a handful of notable transport aircraft like the C-130 Hercules (and its various variants), the C-141 Starlifter, in addition to the family of C-5 Galaxy jets. Other defense companies that are likely to benefit from the expanding global military transport aircraft market are discussed Boeing Company BA: Its C-17 Globemaster III boasts the ability to carry large equipment, supplies and troops directly to small airfields in harsh terrain anywhere in the world. It serves as the primary strategic lift aircraft for the U.S. Air Force for the global transport of troops and company has a long-term earnings growth rate of 18.1%. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for BA's 2025 sales indicates year-over-year growth of 25.6%.Embraer S.A. ERJ: Its C-390 Millennium is a new-generation military multi-mission transport aircraft with unrivaled mobility and operational flexibility in a single platform. This aircraft provides air forces with optimal fleet performance generated by a cost-effective combination of high availability and company boasts a trailing four-quarter average earnings surprise of 150.60%. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for ERJ's 2025 sales indicates year-over-year growth of 15.9%.Airbus Group EADSY: Its C295 is a highly versatile tactical transport aircraft that is tailored for missions ranging from carrying troops and cargo, maritime patrol, airborne warning, surveillance and reconnaissance to signals intelligence, armed close air support, medical evacuation, VIP transport and airborne firefighting. Currently, more than 200 C295 jets are in operation company has a long-term earnings growth rate of 4%. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for EADSY's 2025 sales indicates year-over-year growth of 10.4%. In the past three months, shares of Lockheed have lost 2.3% against the industry's 14.8% growth. Image Source: Zacks Investment Research Lockheed currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today's Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here. Want the latest recommendations from Zacks Investment Research? Today, you can download 7 Best Stocks for the Next 30 Days. Click to get this free report The Boeing Company (BA) : Free Stock Analysis Report Lockheed Martin Corporation (LMT) : Free Stock Analysis Report Embraer-Empresa Brasileira de Aeronautica (ERJ) : Free Stock Analysis Report Airbus Group (EADSY) : Free Stock Analysis Report This article originally published on Zacks Investment Research ( Zacks Investment Research Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
