The Biden administration is under scrutiny for its military support of Israel during the ongoing conflict in Gaza. In response to concerns over airstrikes on Gaza and restrictions on aid delivery, the administration is set to provide a formal verdict on whether these actions violate international and U.S. laws designed to protect civilians in conflict areas. This decision could put pressure on President Biden to limit weapons and financial assistance to Israel’s military. The administration recently paused a shipment of bombs to Israel due to concerns over a threatened offensive in a densely populated area of Gaza.
Under an agreement with Congress, the administration must evaluate whether Israeli forces in Gaza have used U.S.-provided weapons and military assistance lawfully. They must also determine if Israel has impeded the delivery of U.S.-supported humanitarian aid to Gaza. The upcoming verdict is crucial as cease-fire negotiations and a potential Israeli offensive in Rafah could change the course of the conflict and impact American support for Israel’s actions. The decision will also reflect broader debates within the Biden administration and Congress on the balance between human rights considerations and strategic national interests.
The administration’s response to the conflict has evolved over time, with President Biden criticizing Israel for its conduct in the war and raising concerns about civilian casualties. The U.S. has a longstanding security partnership with Israel, which is the largest recipient of U.S. security assistance. Calls from lawmakers to reassess this support in light of reported human rights abuses by Israeli security forces have led to the current review process. The outcome of this assessment will have significant implications for future military aid to Israel and could impact U.S.-Israel relations.
Critics of U.S. support for Israel argue that the country has committed grave abuses against Palestinians, and the U.S. has turned a blind eye to these violations in the past. The application of the Leahy Laws, which mandate suspension of aid to foreign security forces accused of human rights abuses, has become a point of contention in the current review process. The administration has found credible evidence of abuses by an Israeli military unit, but has opted to work with Israel on remediation rather than suspending aid. This decision has sparked debate over the enforcement of human rights standards in U.S. foreign policy.
Calls to condition military support to Israel have intensified as reports of civilian casualties in Gaza mount. Critics argue that Israel’s actions, including strikes on aid convoys and civilian buildings, far exceed legal standards of proportionality in warfare. The Biden administration is facing pressure to take a firm stance on these violations and consider cutting military aid to Israel if necessary. With international organizations like Amnesty International also documenting violations of international law by Israel, the administration’s verdict on the conflict could have significant ramifications for U.S. foreign policy and global perceptions of American support for human rights.
