In the post-October 7 world, Israel needs to think ahead, even as the war continues on seven fronts. It has already come to the realization that pre-emptive actions must supersede deterrence, as Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran have never been dissuaded by fear of reprisals. Next on the agenda is long-term planning for Israel’s military needs for the next 25 years, and where the resources will come from.
In less than four years, America’s Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for military and missile defense aid to Israel will expire. Since the agreement was signed, the Middle East, the American political landscape, and Israel’s military needs have changed dramatically.
Israel, with American help, has significantly degraded Hamas and Hezbollah’s military capabilities and leadership, as well as Iran’s air defense systems. Since October 7, the US went far beyond the terms of the MOU to resupply Israel’s depleted munitions and Iron Dome and David Sling missile interceptors, with supplemental appropriations passed with bipartisan congressional support.
For the majority on both sides of the congressional aisle, military aid to Israel is a cornerstone of the strength of the US-Israel relations for our indispensable friend living in a troubled region. Even as the US decreases foreign funding, most legislators want to continue future financing for the MOUs.
However, there is a small but growing minority in America who want to reduce all foreign military funding (FMF), so now should be a time for those who want to continue US funding to remind colleagues of the merits and advantages of providing military aid to Israel, and how it benefits the United States.
Calls to phase out US military aid to Israel
The Heritage Foundation’s recent call to slowly phase out military aid to Israel as part of a strategy to “reorient” America’s relationship “with Israel to an equal strategic partnership over the next two decades” has caused much controversy. The Israeli ambassador to the US and the House Foreign Affairs Committee chairman withdrew from the conference scheduled to discuss the plan, causing Heritage to postpone the meeting.
Although the timing of the announcement was poor, raising such a contentious issue with our primary ally still fighting a seven-front war was particularly upsetting. However, decreasing military aid over time has some appeal for fiscal hawks and progressives for very different reasons. As long as the partnership between the nations remains strong, incrementally decreasing aid is not a death knell but could be an opportunity.
IN THE past, I have spoken about the benefits and risks of slowly decreasing military aid to strengthen the relationship from dependency to equal partnership, with the caveat that during times of war, exceptions can be made to expedite military aid with one-time grants. Keeping Israel strong is in America’s interest as a powerful Israel stabilizes the region and decreases the need for US boots on the ground. Being the only democracy in the region makes the Jewish state an indispensable ally.
I have discussed the ramifications of ending funding with Israeli political, defense, and intelligence leaders, who are aware of the challenges of being both too dependent or too independent of Israel’s closest and increasingly only ally in the world. Former president Joe Biden’s slow-walking of resupplying Israeli munitions was a defining moment.
There are voices in Israel that also believe that the Jewish state should end US military aid. Retired IDF Maj.-Gen. Gershon Hacohen said “Once we are not economically dependent on [America], the partnership can flourish on its own merits.” The Institute for National Security Studies think tank issued a report saying “Aid to Israel has never been an act of charity or a payment extorted by ‘the lobby,’ but a tool to advance American interests.”
The last MOU negotiated was a double-edged sword for Israel. Previous ones allowed Israel to use 26% of the aid for its defense industries. Ending this benefit caused small, innovative Israeli defense firms to adapt, merge, or go out of business, with job losses estimated in the tens of thousands. What Israel’s critics do not appreciate is that almost all of the military assistance Israel now receives is spent in the US, strengthening America’s defense industry while creating tens of thousands of American jobs.
Israel needs America, and America needs Israel for each of their national security interests. Phasing out military aid will not end the importance of the alliance, but could allow the relationship to evolve, mature, and strengthen.
Jerusalem purchasing military hardware from its best friend with its resources, while Washington reciprocates and pays for Israeli technological advancements of our military hardware tested in war conditions, is a win-win for both countries. Israeli advancements to our F-35 program, cybersecurity, the Iron Dome developed in Israel that is now part of our defense system, and unrivaled shared intelligence are just a few examples of the indispensable need to strengthen the partnership.
ISRAEL IS an unrivaled test lab for our weaponry in action that has saved American soldiers’ lives, improving our capabilities to win battles decisively and harming shared adversaries like Iran. One specific area that should be addressed if funding is phased out is an assurance that America will continue to sell weapons systems that allow Israel to maintain its Qualitative Military Edge.
According to the Council on Foreign Relations, QME requires America to maintain Israel’s ability “to defeat any credible conventional military threat… the United States must ensure any weapons it provides to other countries in the Middle East do not compromise Israel’s QME… QME has also ensured that Israel is the first in the region to receive access to the most sophisticated US military weapons and platforms, such as the F-35 stealth fighter.”
The Heritage report “From Special Relationship to Strategic Partnership,” called for a “new regional architecture” that would create a strategic alliance incorporating Arab allies and Israel. According to Jewish Insider, the report will “fundamentally alter Israel’s geostrategic position. No longer will it be isolated and left on its own to respond to threats on its borders or those farther afield.” A strategic alliance with Arab nations against shared adversaries like Iran should be a US priority regardless of the debate concerning foreign military funding.
However, the symbolism and how the Axis of Aggressors – Iran, China, and Russia – will interpret America’s decreasing military aid to Israel must be taken into consideration, because if it is perceived as a weakness, it is an invitation for war. Iran and much of the Arab world have strategic patience, waiting years or decades to find an opening to take advantage of an adversary. Therefore, it is essential that a phase-out of aid is rolled out so as not to leave any room for doubt that the US-Israel relationship is still unbreakable with written promises of security guarantees and emergency support during hostilities.
THE HERITAGE document should not be confused with the far-Left call to end military aid to Israel. Just six weeks before the October 7 massacre, the flagship progressive magazine The Nation told progressive lawmakers that “Cutting US aid to Israel doesn’t go nearly far enough…only by conditioning US aid alongside more assertive punitive measures such as divestment and sanctions can the US effectively pressure Israel.”
There is little doubt the Democratic Party of the future will increasingly question military aid to Israel, as young progressives indoctrinated in US universities see the Jewish state as an illegitimate colonizer, and their numbers will only increase as they mature into more leadership positions.
On November 8, 2023, less than a month after the Hamas attack, when Israelis were still reeling and processing the existential threat from Hamas, the majority of Democratic members of the Senate wrote a letter to president Biden demanding to know whether Israel was acting according to international humanity law and supporting assistance that would advance a two-state solution. Making these demands for Palestinians who had just committed the worst day of murder in Jewish history since the Holocaust is not a good omen for the day when the pendulum swings and they control the executive branch and Congress.
Ending military aid to Israel could move from the fringes of American politics to the mainstream. For the Democratic party, it will be as a punishment for Israel’s occupation of the disputed territories. For Republicans, it will be perceived as essential cost savings so monies can be used at home. Regardless of the reason, now is the time for Israel to address this issue head-on before a future Republican isolationist or Progressive Democratic president takes the initiative first with a compliant Congress.
The writer is the director of the Middle East Political Information Network (MEPIN) and is the senior security editor of The Jerusalem Report. He regularly briefs members of Congress and their foreign policy aides.
