US aid to Israel faces scrutiny amid Gaza humanitarian crisis: Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez speak out

Amidst a deepening humanitarian crisis in Gaza, U.S. lawmakers challenge continued military aid to Israel, sparking a heated debate over ethical foreign policy.


The recent passage of a U.S. government appropriations bill has sparked a heated debate among lawmakers, with significant implications for international relations and humanitarian aid. Central to the controversy is the bill’s provision for $3.3 billion in military aid to Israel and the exclusion of funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), a critical lifeline for Palestinians in Gaza. Prominent figures like Senator Bernie Sanders and Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez have vocally opposed these provisions, highlighting the dire humanitarian situation in Gaza and questioning the ethical implications of continued U.S. support for Israel’s government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The bill, which passed the Senate with a 74-24 vote, was signed into law by President Biden, effectively averting a government shutdown with a $1.2 trillion funding package. However, the financial support for Israel, coupled with the ban on aid to UNRWA, has raised eyebrows and ire among progressive lawmakers. Sanders, known for his outspoken stance on human rights, condemned the decision, pointing to the exacerbation of the already severe conditions in Gaza.

Echoing Sanders’ concerns, Ocasio-Cortez delivered a poignant speech on the House floor, imploring the U.S. government to suspend military aid to Israel amidst what she described as an “unfolding genocide” in Gaza. The Congresswoman painted a harrowing picture of the situation, where 1.1 million people are on the brink of famine, exacerbated by Israel’s blockade that hampers food and humanitarian assistance.

Ocasio-Cortez’s plea is grounded in legal concerns, citing U.S. laws that prohibit the provision of weapons to forces that hinder American humanitarian efforts. The unfolding events in Gaza, where the U.S. is implicated through its military support, test these legal boundaries and challenge the moral compass of U.S. foreign policy.

The humanitarian crisis in Gaza is acute, with reports of widespread famine and devastating casualties, including a significant number of women and children. The congresswoman’s speech brought attention to the dire need for humanitarian intervention, contrasting sharply with the U.S.’s continued military support to Israel.

The controversy extends beyond the immediate legal and ethical implications, touching on the long-standing debate over U.S.-Israel relations and the broader Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Critics argue that U.S. military aid to Israel contributes to the perpetuation of the conflict and undermines efforts toward a peaceful resolution.

The U.S. has a long history of providing military aid to Israel, a policy that has frequently come under scrutiny. The current debate is set against a backdrop of previous controversies, including past conflicts in Gaza and the ongoing blockade that has devastated the region’s economy and healthcare infrastructure.

The issue of military aid to Israel is divisive, with strong opinions on both sides of the aisle. While some defend the aid as essential for Israel’s security and a cornerstone of U.S.-Israel relations, others, like Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez, challenge its moral and legal justification, especially in light of the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The appropriation bill’s passage marks a critical juncture in U.S. foreign policy, particularly regarding its stance on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The vocal opposition from progressive lawmakers underscores a growing demand for a reevaluation of U.S. military aid to Israel, advocating for a policy that aligns more closely with humanitarian principles and international law. As the situation in Gaza continues to deteriorate, the U.S. faces increasing pressure to reconcile its foreign aid strategies with its professed commitment to human rights and international humanitarian standards.

In concluding her remarks, Ocasio-Cortez emphasized the urgency of the situation, quoting President Biden’s own words: “‘Preventing genocide is an achievable goal… Too often, these efforts have come too late, after the best and least costly opportunities to prevent them have been missed.’ It’s time for the U.S. to match its actions with its principles and reevaluate its support to ensure it contributes to a just and humane resolution in the region.”


If you liked this article, please donate $5 to keep NationofChange online through November.