For arms suppliers, the international trade in arms is simultaneously a lucrative source of foreign exchange and an effective bargaining tool in foreign policy. While all weapons exporters face this tradeoff, they differ in how they weigh strategic interests against the economic gains to be had from arms sales, with “vultures” putting relatively more weight on economic gains and “hawks” putting relatively more weight on strategic considerations. We document variation in the position of arms suppliers along this tradeoff using data on the international arms trade from 1950 to 2020 leveraging, among others, an important network feature: countries that supply to both parties of a conflict. We then devise a theoretical model that sheds lights on a series of mechanisms that may explain the observed variation, including economies of scope, commitment devices against time-inconsistent preferences, and strategic costs. We finally illustrate these mechanisms through a comparative case study of French and US arms trade policy.