Time for US taxpayers to question money train flowing to Israel

US aid to Israel remains a complex and controversial issue that needs to be reassessed in light of changing geostrategic realities and humanitarian concerns

By Iftikhar Gilani

Continued U.S. aid to Israel has sparked debates about whether it is worthwhile for American taxpayers to continue spending their hard-earned money on maintaining the Jewish nation in the Middle East.

Israel has received a staggering $297 billion in U.S. aid from 1946 to 2023. According to reports from USAID and the Congressional Research Service (CRS), this aid, which includes both economic and military assistance, far exceeds aid to any other country.

By comparison, Egypt, the second largest recipient, has received $167 billion, while Palestine has received over $11 billion since 1950.

Recently, the U.S. agreed to continue supporting Israel with almost $4 billion annually until 2028, primarily to fund the Israeli military.

This includes $5.2 billion for missile and anti-missile defense systems and $3.5 billion for the purchase of modern weapons.

A further $1 billion is earmarked for improving weapons production, while $4.4 billion will be used for other defense equipment and services. In addition, around $2.4 billion will be provided to support U.S. operations in the region during the ongoing assault on Gaza.

A bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on April 20 provided $17 billion in defense aid for Israel and about $2 billion for the Gaza Strip.

Total U.S. aid to Israel in 2023 and early 2024 amounts to around $18 billion, including $ 3.8 billion in regular annual aid and $14.5 billion in additional aid.

Some U.S. and Israeli analysts have suggested that American aid to Israel should be re-evaluated, as Israel is now a wealthy country with one of the most modern militaries in the world.

Steven A. Cook, senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), argued in 2020 that it was time to phase out military aid: “This is not a punishment, but a recognition that the United States has succeeded in its goal, that aid is not an entitlement, and that the United States does not believe that annexation [of the West Bank] is in Israel’s interest.”

Martin Indyk, former U.S. ambassador to Israel, echoed this sentiment, saying that relations between the U.S. and Israel would be healthier without the reliance on aid. He explained: “The relationship between the US and Israel would be much healthier without this dependency. It’s time for Israel to stand on its own two feet at 75.”

According to the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), an independent think tank, the U.S. provided substantial economic aid to Israel from 1971 to 2007.

Most of the aid, approximately $3.3 billion annually, is provided as a grant under the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program, which Israel must use to purchase U.S. military equipment and services.

In the past, Israel has also been allowed to use a portion of its FMF aid to purchase equipment from Israeli defense contractors — a benefit not granted to other recipients of U.S. military aid.

American aid reportedly accounts for about 15% of Israel’s defense budget. In addition, $500 million is earmarked annually for Israeli and joint U.S.-Israeli missile defense programs, including the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and Arrow II systems.

-Weak conditions with no supervision

The transfer of U.S. military equipment to Israel, like transfers to other foreign governments, is subject to U.S. law. The President must notify Congress before selling major weapons systems or services valued above a certain threshold and give lawmakers a review period.

For deals with Israel and other close U.S. allies, the threshold for review ranges from $25 million to $300 million, depending on the type of defense equipment or services.

Congress can block a sale through a joint resolution, but this has never happened.

As stated in the Leahy Law, the U.S. may not provide security assistance to foreign governments or groups that commit gross human rights abuses.

The Biden administration announced in February 2023 that it would not provide arms to recipients likely to commit gross human rights violations.

Critics argue that the U.S. has not applied the Leahy Law to Israel as strictly as it has to other countries in the Middle East.

Since October 7 of last year, the Biden administration has reportedly made over one hundred military aid deliveries to Israel, but only two of them, totaling $250 million, have met the threshold for congressional review and have been made public.

The Israeli military has received accelerated shipments of weapons from a strategic stockpile that the U.S. has kept in Israel since the 1980s.

Shortly after the attacks, the U.S. also agreed to lease Israel two Iron Dome missile defense batteries that Washington had previously purchased from the country.

The extraordinary influx of aid included tank and artillery ammunition, bombs, rockets, and small arms.

In April 2024, it was reported that the Biden administration was considering over $18 billion worth of new military sales to Israel, including fifty F-15 fighter jets.

A cornerstone of U.S. military aid is to provide Israel with a qualitative military edge (QME) in the Middle East.

This was enshrined in U.S. law in 2008 and commits the U.S. government to maintaining Israel’s ability to defeat any credible conventional military threat with minimal damage and casualties.

QME ensures that Israel is the first country in the region to have access to the most advanced US military weapons and platforms, such as the F-35 stealth fighter.

According to media reports, American adults have begun to question paying their hard-earned money to Israel in recent opinion polls. Pro-Israel sentiment in the country is waning as Israel’s attacks have led to thousands of killings of Palestinian civilians in Gaza and exacerbated the humanitarian crisis.

President Biden has always supported Israel’s right to self-defense but is increasingly critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conduct of the war.

In December 2023, as Congress debated the $14 billion appropriation for Israel, Biden warned that Israel’s “indiscriminate bombing” of Gaza threatened to cost Israel its international support.

Some Democratic lawmakers have sought to make US aid conditional on Israel’s commitment to limit civilian casualties.

Relations between the U.S. and Israel have been strained by Netanyahu’s rhetoric and policies. These include plans to curtail the powers of the Israeli Supreme Court and the approval of further Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

Critics argue that these settlements violate international law and undermine the prospects of a future Palestinian state.

Supporters of continued aid argue that it promotes important cooperation between the American and Israeli defense industries and ultimately helps both countries confront common threats in the Middle East, particularly Iran.

U.S. aid to Israel remains a complex and controversial issue which now needs re-evaluation in light of changing geostrategic realities and humanitarian concerns.

While debates continue within the U.S. and among allies, the future of this aid will likely be shaped by evolving political dynamics, regional stability, and the ever-changing landscape of international relations.