U.S. Senate Rejects Measures to Halt $20 Billion in Arms Sales to Israel

The United States Senate voted down three separate proposals this week that sought to block the transfer of roughly $20 billion in military equipment to Israel. The measures were introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont, and aimed to prevent the export of specific weapons and munitions amid ongoing concerns about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

The votes, held Wednesday night, came nearly one year after the October 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas, which triggered a large-scale military response by Israel in Gaza. Since then, according to estimates from the Gaza Health Ministry, tens of thousands of people have lost their lives in the conflict. The destruction has sparked widespread alarm among international observers, with United Nations officials warning that Gaza is now on the brink of famine.

In response, Senator Sanders introduced three Joint Resolutions of Disapproval (JRDs) under the Arms Export Control Act. The resolutions aimed to stop the transfer of tank ammunition, precision-guided weapon kits, and other military supplies to Israel, citing violations of international humanitarian law and obstruction of aid.

“These resolutions are about one simple question,” Sanders said during a Senate floor speech. “Should the United States continue providing weapons to a government that the United Nations and human rights organizations have accused of blocking aid and causing a devastating humanitarian disaster?”

Despite Sanders’ passionate plea, his lead resolution—S.J. Res. 111—failed by a vote of 18-79. The other two bills were also defeated by wide margins. While the outcome was expected due to longstanding bipartisan support for Israel in the Senate, the debate revealed growing divisions within Congress over U.S. involvement in the conflict.

Joining Sanders in support of the resolutions were Senators Peter Welch of Vermont, Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, and Jeff Merkley of Oregon. The group emphasized that the legislation was not about ending support for Israel’s right to self-defense but rather about ensuring that humanitarian concerns are not overlooked in the process.

At a press conference earlier in the week, the senators highlighted concerns about the delivery of weapons to a conflict zone where aid access has been restricted. Sanders alleged that U.S. military assistance to Israel could potentially be in violation of the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act—laws that prohibit assistance to countries impeding humanitarian relief or engaging in patterns of human rights abuses.

Israel, for its part, has maintained that it is facilitating the delivery of food and essential supplies to civilians in Gaza. The Israeli government has also defended its military operations as necessary for national security following the deadly attack by Hamas.

Still, humanitarian agencies continue to raise red flags. The UN has classified the situation in Gaza as “catastrophic,” citing blocked aid convoys, critical food shortages, and an increasing number of children suffering from malnutrition.

In a recent opinion piece published in the Washington Post, Sanders expressed concern over the scale of U.S. support for Israel during the current conflict. “Much of this destruction has been carried out with U.S.-supplied weapons and funded by American taxpayers,” he wrote. “In the past year alone, the United States has sent $18 billion in military aid and over 50,000 tons of weapons to Israel.”

The senator acknowledged Israel’s right to defend itself but insisted that accountability must come with support. “This is not just about Israel or Gaza—it’s about the role the United States plays in the world,” he said. “If we want to uphold international law and basic human rights, we must ensure that our actions align with those values.”

The United States has provided more than $310 billion in economic and military aid to Israel since its founding, according to figures from the Council on Foreign Relations. While support for Israel remains a core element of U.S. foreign policy, recent developments have sparked renewed debate on Capitol Hill.

Although the Senate votes did not succeed in stopping the arms transfers, the resolutions mark a shift in tone for some lawmakers. A growing number of senators and representatives are now publicly questioning whether continued military assistance should come with stricter conditions tied to humanitarian access and civilian protections.

In closing remarks on the Senate floor, Sanders reminded his colleagues of the broader implications. “It is not anti-Israel to demand accountability,” he said. “It is pro-humanity.”

With ongoing discussions in Congress and shifting public opinion, the conversation about America’s role in international conflicts—particularly when tied to military aid—appears far from over.