Military Aid to Israel Now a Defining Issue in Democratic Politics

Jewish Politics & Power is published every other week. Sign up for our newsletter for updates.

1. Understanding the Dems vote on arms sales to Israel

Independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has long sought to limit U.S. arms sales to Israel. For years, the progressive Jewish lawmaker tried to use legislative measures to send Israel a message that it should not take U.S. military aid for granted and that it should expect consequences if it uses American weapons in a manner that does not adhere to U.S. laws and values. These efforts were mostly viewed by pro-Israel advocates in the United States as no more than a bump in the road, as a reminder that there is a small progressive minority that opposes giving Israel carte blanche but that cannot muster the votes to actually make a difference.

Until a recent April 15 Senate vote. 

Sanders proposed legislation that would have blocked the delivery of two previously approved arms shipments to Israel: one of 1,000-lb. bombs, the other of armored bulldozers. The votes sent shockwaves throughout the pro-Israel community: Of the 47 Democrats in the Senate, 40 voted in support of blocking the $295-million bulldozer deal, and 36 Dems were in favor of halting the $151-million bomb sale. Of the 10 Jewish Democrats in the Senate, 7 voted in favor of blocking arms shipments to Israel; all 10 voted to block bulldozers.

The legislation was defeated by a majority of Republican votes and the few Democrats who joined them, but the Sanders doctrine emerged victorious. Israel and its supporters can no longer count on Congress to automatically approve military aid.

And this is a real shift, not a fluke.

First, look at the trend. When the first proposal to stop certain bomb sales to Israel came up in 2014, Sanders managed to get only 19 Democratic senators to vote yes. In 2015 the number rose to 24. This year, 36 voted in favor of the resolution (four of the Democrats who supported the bulldozer measure opposed the one blocking the sale of heavy bombs.)

Moreover, this trend is based on realities that are not about to change: Democrats strongly believe that Israel’s military actions do not adhere to the standards set by the United States for nations receiving military support—not in Gaza, not in Lebanon and not in Iran. It’s more than a dislike of Benjamin Netanyahu, which could disappear if he loses the elections, but a disagreement with the way Israel now conducts its wars,  regardless of who’s in power.

And while for now Israel dodged the bullet, the next time around could look different: Democrats are expected to win more seats in the midterms, not to mention the possibility that some Dems who opposed Sanders’s measures in April might be less enthused to do so next time. Chuck Schumer, Jacky Rosen and John Fetterman are not likely to flip, but others, perhaps Kirsten Gillibrand or Richard Blumenthal, could eventually switch sides on this issue. 

The question of military aid to Israel has become a defining issue in Democratic politics. Even if it loses some of its edge once the Middle East wars are over, it will still remain a litmus test for Democratic politicians. 

There is also a reasonable chance—or threat, depending on one’s viewpoint—that Republican anti-Israel, anti-foreign aid, isolationist sentiments, which still reside in the MAGA margins, will make its way to the mainstream of the GOP, adding Republican votes to those of Democrats who are already seeking limits on military support to Israel.

2. Drawing a paradigm for military aid to Israel

This new reality could reshape the way Israel and its supporters deal with the U.S. Congress.

For starters, they will have to find out whom they can work with in the House and Senate. Democrats opposing aid to Israel are not one bloc. Some on the progressive end are indeed a lost cause for pro-Israel advocates. There’s no real way to get Sanders or members of The Squad in the House to agree to selling more arms to Israel. But there is a larger cohort of Democrats—think Elissa Slotkin, or Mark Kelly—who will gladly work with Israel to find a middle ground, one that addresses security needs while curbing the use of unjustified military force.

Then comes the tougher part. Israel and its supporters will need to adjust to a world in which Congress is no longer a rubber stamp to whatever list of military items is handed down to lawmakers. This adjustment will require making policy choices: Can Israel continue using American-made and taxpayer-funded heavy machinery to raze homes in Gaza, the West Bank and Lebanon? Probably not. Nor will it be able to use U.S.-supplied heavy bombs in strikes that cause heavy civilian collateral damage. But it should be able to continue relying on America for weaponry and munitions that are necessary for defense and for legitimate offensive use. 

In other words, Israel will have to embark on a route never taken before: understanding what it is that bothers Americans about military aid, identifying partners in Congress who share the belief in Israel’s survival, and working to find compromises with these partners so that core military sales remain intact.

Until now, Israel and the centrist lobbying groups that support it took an all-or-nothing approach. You either sign off on everything or get blacklisted. This approach has clearly failed. Now the must look at Democrats in a more nuanced way.

3. Trump wants you to know: It’s not because of Bibi

It’s not only Democrats who are struggling with their relationship with Israel—so are Republicans, or at least President Trump. But for POTUS, it’s a different challenge: He needs to prove that he’s not too close with Israel.

With pundits and critics raising time and again the claim that Trump was duped by Netanyahu into launching the war against Iran, the president sought to lay these claims to rest with a social media post last week: “Israel never talked me into the war with Iran, the results of Oct. 7th, added to my lifelong opinion that IRAN CAN NEVER HAVE A NUCLEAR WEAPON, did.”

Trump’s social media posts often reflect his mood at a certain moment or come as a response to a column he has just read or a comment he has seen on TV. But this one can also serve as an indication of the future direction of Trump’s relationship with Israel and Netanyahu: The strong bond remains, but politically, it might be wise to keep some distance.

4. Mamdani tries to split the difference

Two bills landed last month on New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s desk, both relating to “buffer zones.” One required the NYPD to provide rules for protests outside houses of worship, and the other did the same for schools and educational institutions. Both measures were primarily meant to deal with anti-Israel protests outside synagogues and schools that at times limit access and intimidate worshipers or students.

Mamdani waited until the last minute before deciding to go for a Solomon’s judgment solution: He cut the problem in half, allowing the bill relating to places of worship to become law and vetoing the one relating to schools. He explained that while the first maintained the needed balance between protecting freedom of protest and the right to freedom of religious worship, the schools bill was too broad and could infringe on rights of protest in colleges, museums and even hospitals.

It was a compromise that satisfied no one. 

Jewish organizations slammed Mamdani, calling the veto “a profound failure” to demonstrate that the city is committed to the safety of its citizens. Even liberal-leaning Jewish groups criticized the mayor’s move.

The city council could still try to push through the measure by trying to achieve a veto-proof majority in a new vote, but chances of that happening are slim.

5. Florida man vs. Florida man

Of all the midterm races you shouldn’t be watching, Florida’s 6th probably tops the list.

The incumbent is Republican Randy Fine, who is Jewish and who has made numerous Islamophobic comments. He is now being challenged in the Republican primaries by Instagram influencer Dan Bilzerian, who is deeply antisemitic and refers to his political opponent as a “fat Jew.”

It’s going to be as ugly as it sounds.