Key:
| Color | Product | Value ($) | Percent |
| Vehicles | 5,494,705,182 | 17.2% | |
| Aircraft | 5,381,215,028 | 16.9% | |
| Nuclear reactors, parts, etc. | 5,191,426,031 | 16.3% | |
| Pearls, precious stones, etc. | 4,467,588,658 | 14.0% | |
| Other | 11,360,841,353 | 35,6% |
Figures obtained from the U. S. Government Export Portal
Roughly one third of our Middle East trade is with Israel.
A significant portion of our trade with the Middle East is in arms, military equipment, and, as you can see, nuclear technology.
Our merchandise export trade with the Middle East accounts for roughly .27% of our GDP.
Our largest merchandise export trading partner in the region is Israel with roughly $10B in exports to Israel; our next largest merchandise export trading partner in the region is the United Arab Emirates at roughly $8.5B.
Our total merchandise export trade with Rwanda ($10B) is greater than our total merchandise export trade with the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (~$7B).
Our total Middle East merchandise export trade is less than the cost of maintaining our forces in Iraq.
I think there are a number of good reasons for maintaining our substantial commitment of forces to Iraq and to the Middle East, generally. These include the oil trade, humanitarian considerations, domestic political considerations, and the potential diplomatic costs of doing otherwise. Our export trade to the region isn’t one of them.
Interesting. When you brought this up in an earlier post I suggested it wouldn’t amount to another Belgium. For 2005 it seems we did about 31 billion (very round numbers) in trade with Belgium. Turned out (purely by accident) to be true.
You are aware, I am sure, that the Middle East data (on exports alone) there does not include the MENA region entire. Only Middle East (Levant plus Gulf).
I would add that it is, well, peculiarly mercantilist to look at exports as a statement of trade balance. Exports and imports makes more analytical sense, even if one wants to strip out hydrocarbons as distortive (although again it is, well, rather peculiar to try to look at trade without all components). I would add that it is also useful and intelligent to compare like to like with respect to per capita added value. The US is also generally and noticably weak in good exports generally now, the concept of basing FP on where you are strong in good exports seems, at best, perverse and again, mercantilist in conception.