For decades, U.S. military aid to Israel has been a fixture of American foreign policy—so much so that it seemed untouchable. But as 2026 unfolds, both political winds and public sentiment are shifting, raising tough questions about the future of this once-sacrosanct alliance. With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu openly discussing a gradual end to U.S. military aid and key American politicians on both sides of the aisle rethinking old certainties, the relationship between the two countries is at a crossroads.
Israel has been the largest recipient of U.S. military aid over the past 80 years, according to Haaretz. The arrangement is unique: Israel is required to spend more than 90 percent of the aid on American weaponry, a figure soon set to rise to 100 percent. This has long been touted as a win-win, bolstering Israel’s security while enhancing the reputation and reach of American arms. Joint missile development projects—like the Arrow and David’s Sling systems—have benefited both nations.
Yet critics argue that the time for this arrangement has passed. Israel’s economy has grown dramatically since the 1970s, when U.S. aid accounted for as much as 14 percent of Israeli GDP. Today, annual aid represents less than 1 percent of Israel’s GDP. As Netanyahu told The Economist in a January 9, 2026 interview, “We’ve come of age, and we’ve developed incredible capacities.” He projected that Israeli GDP may reach $1 trillion within the next decade. Given this economic strength, some say Israel is now rich enough to pay for its own defense.
But the debate isn’t just about economics. Critics in the U.S. also contend that continued aid discourages Israel from pursuing peace agreements and resolving the Palestinian issue. They argue that the aid enables Israel’s military dominance and, by extension, its ongoing violations of Palestinian human rights—something they say American taxpayers should not be funding. For Israel, however, the case for continued aid has always been straightforward. The money covers a significant portion of its defense budget, and, crucially, it has come with very few political strings attached. Until now, Israeli leaders never seriously considered turning it down.
That’s changing. With negotiations underway for a new 10-year aid package set to begin in 2029, Netanyahu has signaled a willingness to “taper off” U.S. military aid to zero over the next decade. This isn’t necessarily a full embrace of the critics’ arguments, but rather a pragmatic response to shifting American attitudes. The once-solid bipartisan support for aid to Israel is eroding, replaced by growing skepticism on both the left and the right. President Donald Trump—long seen as an ally of Israel—has become a leading opponent of continued military aid. According to Haaretz, Netanyahu is now “grudgingly accepting the fact that the mood in Washington is changing.”
The timing for these changes is particularly awkward for Israel. After two years of war, the Israel Defense Forces must replenish its missile and ammunition stocks and expand manpower amid persistent regional threats. Netanyahu wants to boost military spending by $80 billion over the next decade, raising defense spending to 6 percent of GDP—up from 4.4 percent in 2022, the last prewar year. That’s a significant leap, especially as U.S. aid may be winding down.
Public opinion in the United States has shifted sharply. According to an October 2025 Pew Research Center poll, the percentage of Americans viewing Israelis favorably dropped by 11 points over three years, landing at 56 percent—just slightly above the 52 percent who viewed Palestinians favorably. An August 2025 Economist/YouGov poll found that 42 percent of Americans believe aid to Israel should be reduced or ended, outpacing those who want to increase or maintain it. Among Democrats and Democratic-leaning voters, less than half view Israelis favorably, and only 18 percent have a positive view of the Israeli government—just four points higher than Hamas.
These numbers have real political consequences. Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent aligned with Democrats, forced three Senate votes of disapproval on sending U.S. arms to Israel during the recent Gaza war. While those measures failed, a substantial minority of Democratic senators supported them, and in one case, Sanders even garnered a majority of Democratic votes. The progressive wing of the Democratic Party—represented by figures like New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani—has become increasingly hostile to Israel, making criticism of the Jewish state a defining feature of their politics. Older Democrats, such as former President Joe Biden, who reflexively supported Israel, are fading from the scene.
Netanyahu has responded by aligning Israel more closely with the Republican Party. For years, Israel could count on unwavering support from neoconservatives and evangelical Christians. But even among Republicans, support has begun to wane. The decline is partly a reaction to the Gaza conflict, but it’s also driven by the rise of “America First” thinking, which demands that allies justify their relationship with the U.S. by advancing American interests and paying their own way. According to a recent Manhattan Institute poll, a quarter of Republicans under 50 now hold antisemitic views. At December’s Turning Point USA conference, pro-Israel commentator Ben Shapiro clashed with MAGA figures like Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, Megyn Kelly, and Candace Owens, many of whom expressed indifference or outright hostility to Israel’s actions in Gaza.
There’s also a policy shift taking shape among conservative think tanks. The Heritage Foundation, which has moved closer to the MAGA wing of the Republican Party, proposed in March 2025 a plan to gradually reduce U.S. aid to Israel to zero over the next decade. Instead of outright grants, the plan calls for joint military research and development funding—contingent on Israel purchasing an equivalent value of U.S. arms. Senator Lindsey Graham, traditionally a strong supporter of Israel, has endorsed an even faster phase-out. He wrote on X: “I will always appreciate allies who are trying to be more self-sufficient and believe that, given what the Prime Minister said, we need not wait ten years. The billions in taxpayer dollars that would be saved by expediting the termination of military aid to Israel will and should be plowed back into the U.S. military.”
Donald Trump himself hasn’t directly addressed the aid issue, but he has made his feelings clear. In April 2025, when asked if Israel should get relief from his “Liberation Day” tariffs, Trump replied, “We help Israel a lot. You know, we give Israel $4 billion a year. That’s a lot. My congratulations, by the way. That’s pretty good.” According to Haaretz, Israel is reportedly hoping to win tariff relief by agreeing to less aid.
Some experts have floated creative solutions to keep the U.S.-Israel relationship strong while addressing domestic political concerns. Kobby Barda, an expert on U.S.-Israel relations at the Holon Institute of Technology, has suggested a “MAGA-friendly” deal: Israel could pass a buy-American law matching the level of annual aid and commit its sovereign wealth fund to investing in the Nasdaq. More likely, though, is a gradual reduction in grants, replaced by joint development projects like those that produced the David’s Sling, Arrow, and the laser-based Iron Beam air defense systems. Such arrangements would be easier to sell politically in Washington.
With the political climate in flux, Israel may push for a 20-year agreement to lock in terms and avoid an even less favorable deal in the future. But whatever the outcome, the era of unquestioned U.S. military aid to Israel is ending. As American priorities shift and Israel’s economy grows, both nations are being forced to rethink what their partnership should look like in the years ahead.
As the world watches, it’s clear that the U.S.-Israel relationship is entering uncharted territory—one that will test both countries’ flexibility and resolve.