On November 21, 2024, the U.S. Senate rejected resolutions aimed at blocking proposed arms sales to Israel, even as growing dissent within the Democratic Party over the Israeli government's actions has been increasingly vocal.
Led by independent Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont, the resolutions sought to halt the sale of tank shells, mortars, and guided missile kits valued at around $1.1 billion. Despite the significant backing these measures garnered, they were overwhelmingly defeated with votes of 79-18, 78-19, and 80-17.
The Senate’s decision reflects bipartisan support for U.S. military assistance to Israel, even amid criticisms over its military campaign against Hamas. This campaign has unleashed considerable suffering on civilians, as illustrated by the Gazan health ministry's reports indicating over 43,000 fatalities since the conflict escalated following Hamas's attack on October 7, 2023.
During discussions prior to the vote, Sanders expressed anguish over the humanitarian crisis. “What is happening in Gaza today is unspeakable,” Sanders lamented, emphasizing the U.S.'s role. “We have been complicit by providing weapons and supporting policies at odds with international law.” He recognized Israel's right to defend itself but strongly criticized the scale of its military operations against Palestinian territories.
The arms sales proposed are meant to supply Israel with advanced military equipment and would not interfere with its defensive systems like the Iron Dome. Nonetheless, many lawmakers, particularly progressives in the Democratic Party, voice concerns about the ethical impact of enabling perceived war crimes.
The Democratic coalition is divided on this issue. While the majority showed support for the sales, notable Democrats aligned against them—indicating growing scrutiny of Israel's actions. Among those voting to support the resolutions were Senators Chris Van Hollen and Jeff Merkley, indicating how perspectives within the party are shifting.
Critics, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, warned against the resolutions, claiming they would undermine Israel's security and potentially embolden terrorist groups like Hamas and Hezbollah. Schumer stated, “Voting to block assistance could risk Israel’s ability to defend itself.”
Senator Ben Cardin, chairing the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, directly criticized Sanders, stating the focus should instead be on Hamas and its continued aggression, pointing to their hostage-taking and acts of violence.
Responses to the vote have been polarized, with organizations like AIPAC celebrating the Senate’s alignment with Israeli interests, asserting their unwavering support for U.S. military assistance. Conversely, advocates like the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee have condemned the Senate's decision, asserting the necessity of reforming U.S. policy to protect humanitarian principles.
New Jersey Senators Cory Booker and George Helmy cast their votes along party lines, with Helmy voting to block the sale of mortars but not tank rounds or guided kits. Helmy articulated his concerns based on observations made during humanitarian missions to Jordan, where he witnessed dire humanitarian needs arising from Israel's blockade.
The current humanitarian crisis is exacerbated by allegations of systematic violations of human rights, drawing comparisons to past interventions and military support provided under conditions of humanitarian scrutiny. A realization of this nature now grips sections of the U.S. population, demanding accountability from lawmakers.
To complicate matters, the Biden administration has been active behind the scenes, urging members of Congress to reject proposals to restrict arms sales, arguing such measures would empower adversarial forces threatening Israel. They reiterated commitments to improve conditions for Gazans but faced scrutiny over the perception of U.S. complicity.
The dichotomy between defense and humanitarian concerns faced by lawmakers prompts broader questions about the U.S.'s role as not only an ally but also as a potential contributor to humanitarian crises.
Looking forward, the internal rifts within the Democratic Party over U.S. support for Israel may continue to intensify as more citizens call for reevaluation of these long-standing alliances, particularly as reports from reputable humanitarian organizations challenge official narratives about the success of aid flows to Gaza.
There’s speculation about how these tensions might play out as the political makeup shifts with the incoming Republican majority, set to influence the direction of military support and broader foreign policy challenges facing the United States.
The Senate’s actions this week reinforce the historical complexity surrounding U.S.-Israel relations. While immediate arms sales are permitted, developments over the coming months could reshape the dialogue around military assistance as pressure mounts for greater accountability and humanitarian awareness.
Next steps remain to be seen as major humanitarian organizations urge for unprecedented shifts away from unconditional military support, pushing for criteria requiring fundamental respect for human rights before financial aid or military equipment is allocated to foreign governments.
