Lindsey Graham, the Republican senator from South Carolina, met recently with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in his office. I was not at that meeting – not even as a fly on the wall – but it seems to me that one can reasonably infer what was said there.
On the table stood Israel’s “blue box,” into which the Americans deposit nearly $40 billion every 10 years. In two years, the current agreement will expire. Netanyahu or Graham likely raised the question of when the aid agreement would be renewed – or whether it would be renewed at all.
No one knows exactly what they agreed upon, but following the meeting, the prime minister told The Economist that it is possible that within 10 years, Israel will no longer need US military assistance.
Graham, for his part, posted on social media platform X that “it would be advisable to accelerate the end of the assistance over the next two years so that the current plan will be the last one, in light of what the prime minister said.”
Graham added, “There is no need to wait 10 years.”
New trends
Amid the flood of news from both home and abroad that we see day after day, this issue may have been lost. Israelis did not follow this exchange, even though it concerns one of the most important agreements Israel has with the United States – an agreement that has funneled $33 billion into Israel’s defense establishment for the purchase of American weapons, and another $5 billion for missile-defense systems over the past decade.
Readers may ask themselves: “What happened to the prime minister? Why is he so readily giving up such an enormous sum, whose importance to Israel is greater than ever before?”
So, for our readers’ benefit: It is not the prime minister who is seeking to “give up” the aid. Rather, this is apparently – and regrettably – the emerging trend in Washington, and it poses a grave danger to the State of Israel.
No more 10-year aid agreement.
In the past, Netanyahu made similar statements – perhaps in a moment of weakness or out of national pride – and, of course, never followed through. Israel continued knocking on America’s door, and financial assistance resumed and continued year after year.
By the way, and with due modesty, let us note that Israel is the country that has received the largest cumulative amount of US military aid since World War II.
Menachem Begin also declared at the beginning of his term as prime minister that Israel could forgo American aid. Israeli officials who understood Israel’s security and civilian needs responded at the time that Begin was behaving like a “Polish nobleman” – full of pride and unwilling to take money from anyone (really!).
The Americans took Begin seriously and told their Israeli counterparts: “Let’s do away with the aid.” But the Israelis felt that the prime minister had erred “slightly,” and they worked to soften the blow. The negotiations then shifted; no more civilian assistance – their aid was only for military and security needs.
Later, the Americans determined that the entire assistance package would be spent in the United States rather than in Israel. Although Israel’s defense industries took a heavy hit, they learned to live with the new decree. The American arms industry was, of course, pleased with the change, which also had a certain logic to it.
New IDF plan
In a strange but fascinating convergence of timing, the IDF has just launched Hoshen, its new five-year plan which concludes that by around 2030, the IDF will require procurement totaling NIS 350 billion in addition to its ongoing operational budget.
It is obvious that there is no chance in the world that Israel will be able to finance this plan on its own. As an aside, one might also ask whether the IDF’s appetite has grown too large for the size and needs of the State of Israel.
But it is clear that Israel will emerge from this war with a large deficit and with the understanding that the military must be renewed and new needs must be met. Artificial intelligence, robots, and new technologies are entering service and are becoming central factors in future wars. Netanyahu knows all of this, yet he still said what he said.
The real reasons for his words are US President Donald Trump, the Republican Party, and the Democratic Party. Trump consistently demands that US allies – including NATO members, Ukraine, Taiwan, and South Korea – reach into their own pockets and share more fully in financing their defense expenditures.
Trump is protective of the American Treasury and understands that the less he spends on foreign aid – including to international organizations – the more money will remain for domestic needs. By that simple logic, US military aid to Israel is included – and, incidentally, so is its aid to Egypt.
It is reasonable to assume that Trump has shared his views with his party colleagues, including his close political ally Graham – and that is what Netanyahu heard either during his visit to Miami or at the meeting in Jerusalem.
Bipartisan support?
The Republican Party itself was once a fortified stronghold when it came to aid for Israel, and its members supported assistance almost unquestioningly. But now Israel has become controversial, and there are voices within the party – voices the president hears and listens to – calling for cuts to foreign aid.
As for the Democratic Party, it is steadily distancing itself from Israel. Netanyahu has, in practice, relinquished its support. He excludes it from his day-to-day engagement, including during his visits to the United States, and in doing so, he is losing half of the American public and its elected representatives.
At the same time, it must be said that the Democratic Party is gradually changing its positions toward Israel, and criticism of us grew stronger during the Israel-Hamas War.
At the moment, it appears that Republicans will lose their current majority in the House of Representatives in the midterm elections in November 2026. If that happens, it will be very difficult for Trump and his administration to advance legislation – including foreign aid. Israel will then be in dire need of bipartisan support.
If we have understood correctly, Netanyahu said that Israel is prepared to gradually reduce the aid over the coming decade and, at its end, to forgo it altogether. He assumes – though there is no evidence for this – that in 12 years he will no longer be in office, so he is less concerned with what happens after 2038.
But that matters greatly to the Israelis who will be here at that time. As things stand today, Israel cannot meet its security needs without American help.
However much our economy grows, we will not be able to generate defense budgets of such magnitude on our own. I have not said a word – let alone a half word – about the financial implications of manpower gaps and the ongoing refusal of the haredi community to share the military burden.
Netanyahu’s position is entirely lacking in long-term strategic vision. It is aimed solely at the needs of today and right now. This week, thank God, a great deal of rain fell in Israel, but Netanyahu cannot declare: “After me, the flood...”■
Nachman Shai is the dean of Hebrew Union College – Institute of Jewish Studies in Jerusalem, former minister of Diaspora affairs and IDF spokesperson, and a board member of Commanders for Israel’s Security.