Sanders opposed to sending $10B to 'extremist Netanyahu government' in Israel
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), one of the Senate’s most prominent progressives, on Monday stated his opposition to sending $10.1 billion to the “Netanyahu government to continue its current offensive military approach,” lambasting the siege and assault of Gaza as “immoral.”
“I do not think we should be appropriating $10.1 billion for the right-wing, extremist Netanyahu government to continue its current military approach. What the Netanyahu government is doing is immoral, it is in violation of international law, and the United States should not be complicit in those actions,” Sanders argued on the Senate floor.
Sanders is taking issue with the more than $10 billion the Biden administration has requested for the Defense Department to resupply Israel’s Iron Dome and David’s Sling missile defense systems, as well as to replenish military stocks being drawn down by the war.
“I believe it is appropriate to support defensive systems that will protect Israeli civilians against incoming missile and rockets attacks, but I believe that it would be absolutely irresponsible to provide an additional $10.1 billion in unconditional military aid that will allow the Netanyahu government to continue its current offensive military approach,” he said.
A group of Senate Democrats are working on a proposal to attach conditions to U.S. military aid to Israel, an idea that has divided the Senate Democratic caucus.
Sanders cited Palestinian Health Ministry statistics of the mounting civilian death toll in Gaza: 16,000 Palestinians killed in the span of two months, two-thirds of whom are women and children, and tens of thousand of people injured.
He said that 1.8 million people have been displaced from their homes and are struggling every day to get food, water, medical supplies and fuel. He also noted that 250 Palestinians have died in the West Bank and thousands have been driven off their land there.
Sanders walked right up to the line of saying he would vote against the emergency funding package as currently drafted, criticizing it for lacking domestic investments at a time when millions of Americans are struggling to afford health care, child care and other necessities.
“There are pieces of this bill I strongly support, but in its present form I do not think it serves the interests of the American people,” he said.
“I am deeply concerned that this legislation has no investments to address the needs of working families in the United States — 60 percent of whom are living paycheck to paycheck. Let’s be clear: It is not only foreign countries that face emergencies,” he said.
He argued that much of the military spending bill should come out of the regular appropriations process, noting that Congress is expected to soon pass a defense bill authorizing $900 billion in military spending.
He argued that if some of the defense spending is shifted to the regular appropriations process, “we can save tens of billions of dollars in this bill and dedicate that money to some of the enormous domestic crises we face.”