French intelligence report reveals UAE behind record Elbit contract

A report by the French intelligence publication Intelligence Online has sparked controversy after revealing that the United Arab Emirates is behind what is described as the largest deal in the history of the Israeli defence firm Elbit Systems.

The report, however, has not been confirmed by any official source. Elbit Systems, the Israeli Ministry of Defence and UAE authorities all declined to comment when approached by Clash Report, the outlet that first published the story.

According to the report, publication restrictions were imposed at the request of the client, with warnings that revealing details could jeopardise the implementation of the agreement. As a result, any link between the contract and the UAE currently rests solely on foreign intelligence assessments.

The alleged deal has generated significant interest both inside Israel and internationally. Valued at approximately $2.3bn and spanning eight years, it would be the largest contract ever secured by Elbit Systems. It is also among the most opaque agreements in the company’s history.

In a filing to the stock exchange, Elbit Systems provided only a broad description of the transaction, referring to it as a “strategic solution” for an international client. The company did not disclose the identity of the buyer, the nature of the systems to be supplied, or the region in which they would be deployed.

At nearly $2.3bn, the contract surpasses any previous deal signed by the company. The long-term agreement guarantees revenue and production over an eight-year period, reflecting growing global demand for advanced defence and security capabilities.

The timing of the deal is also notable, having been concluded amid heightened regional security tensions and increased military spending by a number of states. Nevertheless, the scale of the contract has only intensified the secrecy surrounding it. Elbit Systems has not clarified whether the agreement involves air defence systems, intelligence and surveillance technology, electronic warfare capabilities, or other military platforms.

The continued silence over the client’s identity has fuelled speculation and competing interpretations, leaving key questions about the deal unanswered.