Foreign Policy: What if America reduced its military aid to Israel?

A prominent researcher has called for an end to US military aid to Israel, arguing that Washington is no longer required to bear the consequences of Israel’s policies and mistakes, and that it’s time to reassess the strategic relationship between the two countries in light of recent political shifts and wars in the region.

In an article in Foreign Policy, Steven Cook, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations (a New York-based think tank), points out that calls to halt or reduce military aid to Israel are no longer limited to left-wing voices or pro-Palestinian activists, but have become more present within the Democratic Party itself.

Cook cites the vote by a majority of Democratic senators last April against an arm deal for Israel that included armored bulldozers and heavy bombs, despite its approval with broad support from Republican members of the Senate.

He believes that the shift in the American position is due to growing unease within American political circles about Israel’s behavior in the war on the Gaza Strip, in addition to what he described as the creeping annexation of the West Bank.

Cook points out that the idea of ​​using US aid to pressure Israel isn’t new, but has been raised for years, including during the 2020 US presidential election.

Cook believes that Israel is now capable of financing its own military needs, suggesting that the current memorandum of understanding regarding US military aid, which expires in 2028, should be the last of its kind.

However, the Cook cautions that ending aid wouldn’t be without consequences for the United States itself.

The current agreement obligates Israel to spend most of the funds within the American market, which supports thousands of jobs at major American arms companies like Boeing and Raytheon.

Therefore, halting aid could negatively impact American employment and the defense industry, making the issue politically sensitive for Congress.

Halting US military aid to Israel could have a negative impact on US employment and defense industries, making the issue politically sensitive for Congress.

Cook also questions the belief that halting US aid would actually limit Israel’s military power or force Israel to change its policies.

According to the article, Israel has already begun bolstering its domestic military industries and increasing its self-reliance, particularly after October 7, 2023.

He points out that the Israeli government has signed contracts with a company to produce heavy bombs locally instead of importing them.

He adds that Israel already possesses advanced capabilities in drones, air defense systems, and military artificial intelligence technologies—areas that have become crucial in the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran.

Therefore, “ending aid won’t make the Israeli military less lethal, nor will it prevent Israel from pursuing annexation policies or military operations”.

Cook concludes that ending military aid to Israel might bring Washington some political and moral gains, most notably disengagement from controversial Israeli policies and a reduction in internal American divisions regarding Israel.

However, he emphasizes that this step won’t lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state, won’t prevent Israel from using force, and won’t fundamentally alter the balance of power in the conflict.