The Ongoing Approval of Weapons Transfers
The ongoing approval of weapons transfers from the United States to Israel has sparked a heated debate among politicians and activists alike. While the Biden administration has expressed concerns about potential civilian casualties in Gaza, it continues to view supporting Israel’s right to defend itself as a top priority. This has led to criticism from some Democrats who argue that weapons should be withheld unless Israel commits to limiting civilian casualties and easing restrictions on humanitarian aid in Gaza.
Senator Chris Van Hollen’s Perspective
Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland has been vocal in his belief that the Biden administration should leverage its influence effectively and secure commitments from Israel before approving further weapons transfers. He argues that conditioning aid is necessary to ensure that civilian lives are protected and that the humanitarian situation in Gaza improves.
Israel’s Silence and Speculations
The Israeli government, however, has chosen not to comment on these authorizations, leaving many to speculate on their intentions. U.S. and Israeli officials have reported that four Hamas battalions remain in Rafah, where over 1.2 million Palestinians have sought shelter after being displaced by Israel’s extensive bombing campaign. President Biden has made it clear that a scorched-earth invasion of Rafah would be a “red line” for him, prompting him to request a meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu to discuss proposals for limiting the bloodshed. Unfortunately, the visit was canceled after the United States refused to veto a United Nations Security Council resolution that called for a temporary cease-fire and the release of hostages, without condemning Hamas.
Continued Weapons Transfers
Despite the public disagreement, President Biden has not hesitated to rush weapons and military equipment into the conflict. Just last week, the State Department authorized the transfer of 25 F-35A fighter jets and engines worth approximately $2.5 billion. While this particular case was approved by Congress in 2008 and did not require a new notification, the authorization for MK84 and MK82 bombs this week had been approved by Congress years ago but had not yet been fulfilled.
Critics’ Concerns
Critics argue that the U.S.’s unwavering support for Israel undermines moral responsibility and the rule of law, both domestically and internationally. They question the transparency of arms transfers and whether authorizing older unfilled cases is an attempt to avoid new notifications to Congress, which could face scrutiny. In response, a State Department official explained that fulfilling an authorization from one notification to Congress can result in multiple individual foreign military sales cases over the course of several decades. Major procurements, such as Israel’s F-35 program, are often broken down into several cases spanning many years.
Risk of Civilian Casualties
The use of 2,000-pound bombs in densely populated areas is a cause for concern due to the high risk of civilian casualties. Western militaries generally avoid using such bombs in these areas. However, Israel has utilized them extensively in Gaza, including in the bombing of the Jabalya refugee camp on October 31. This particular strike resulted in the deaths of over 100 people and was condemned by U.N. officials as a “disproportionate attack that could amount to war crimes.” Israeli officials argue that their military campaign has not been indiscriminate and place the blame for civilian casualties on Hamas for embedding its fighters among the population in Gaza.
Support from Pro-Israel Interest Groups
President Biden’s decision to continue the flow of weapons to Israel has garnered strong support from influential pro-Israel interest groups in Washington, such as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC). AIPAC is actively spending tens of millions of dollars in this election cycle to unseat Democrats it perceives as insufficiently pro-Israel. However, critics argue that these recurring approvals of weapons transfers raise questions about moral responsibility and the adherence to international law. The ongoing conflict between Israel and Palestine continues to be a contentious issue, with no clear resolution in sight.
