Key points overview:
• The U.S. Senate rejected three resolutions introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders to block the sale of offensive weapons to Israel, despite escalating civilian casualties in Gaza.
• The resolutions targeted tank rounds, high-explosive mortar rounds, and Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs).
• Nearly 44,000 Palestinians have been killed in Gaza since October 2023.
• Over 100 organizations, including J Street and Amnesty International, backed Sanders’ proposals.
• The Senate votes were 18-79, 19-78, and 17-80 against the resolutions.
• Key senators voting in favor included Dick Durbin, Elizabeth Warren, Raphael Warnock, and Jeff Merkley.
• Sanders criticized U.S. complicity, noting $18 billion in military aid to Israel in the past year.
• He highlighted Israel’s alleged war crimes, citing widespread civilian displacement and destruction in Gaza.
• Sanders argued that Israel violated U.S. laws prohibiting arms sales to nations committing human rights abuses.
• Members of both parties opposed the resolutions, with the Biden administration backing continued military aid to Israel.
• Advocates hailed the vote as historic, marking growing opposition to unrestricted arms sales to Israel.
• Demand Progress and other groups vowed to continue pushing for accountability in U.S. foreign policy.
The U.S. Senate voted this week to reject three resolutions introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders aimed at halting offensive arms sales to Israel, a decision that underscores America’s role in fueling one of the most devastating humanitarian crises of our time. The resolutions sought to block the sale of tank rounds, high-explosive mortar rounds, and Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs)—weapons directly tied to the civilian toll in Gaza, where nearly 44,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 2023.
Despite these numbers, the Senate overwhelmingly voted against the measures, leaving advocates of peace and human rights questioning U.S. complicity in the alleged war crimes unfolding in Gaza.
The resolutions, S.J. Res. 111, 113, and 115, were narrow in scope, targeting only offensive weapons, and left systems like Israel’s Iron Dome untouched. Senator Sanders emphasized that the measures complied with existing U.S. laws, including the Foreign Assistance Act and the Arms Export Control Act, which prohibit arms sales to countries committing human rights violations.
“These resolutions are simple, straightforward, and not complicated,” Sanders said on the Senate floor. “The United States government must obey the law—not a very radical idea. But unfortunately, that is not the case now.”
He cited reports from organizations such as the United Nations and Human Rights Watch, which have documented Israel’s alleged violations, including starvation tactics, targeting civilian populations, and blocking humanitarian aid in Gaza.
The Senate’s rejection of these measures was resounding. The vote on S.J. Res. 111 ended 18-79, with notable supporters including Senators Elizabeth Warren, Chris Murphy, Raphael Warnock, and Angus King. Other resolutions saw similar outcomes, with vote counts of 19-78 and 17-80.
Although these numbers reflect bipartisan opposition to Sanders’ proposals, they also highlight a growing dissent within the Democratic Party, where nearly half of its caucus voted in favor of restricting arms sales to Israel. This shift marks the most significant Congressional challenge to U.S.-Israeli military relations in decades.
However, high-profile opposition dominated the discussion. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer labeled the resolutions as “misguided,” echoing talking points from the Biden administration that suggested blocking arms sales would embolden enemies like Hamas and Hezbollah. Similarly, Senators Lindsey Graham and Ted Budd argued that the measures would undermine Israel’s security during a time of heightened regional tensions.
The votes came as international outrage grows over Israel’s ongoing military campaign in Gaza. According to medical volunteers and human rights organizations, the situation in Gaza is dire. Reports describe deliberate attacks on medical facilities, destruction of homes, forced displacement, and starvation tactics targeting over two million Palestinians.
Quoting a New York Times opinion piece, Sanders described the conditions: “Malnutrition was widespread. It was common to see patients reminiscent of Nazi concentration camps with skeletal features.” The article was penned by American doctors who volunteered in Gaza and witnessed the consequences of the blockade firsthand.
Sanders highlighted that much of this destruction has been carried out using U.S.-supplied weapons. “What this extremist government has done in Gaza is unspeakable,” he said. “But what makes it even more painful is that much of this has been done with U.S. weapons and American taxpayer dollars.”
Sanders’ resolutions garnered significant support from over 100 civil society organizations, including Amnesty International, the Service Employees International Union, and faith-based groups. J Street, a pro-Israel organization, endorsed the measures, noting that 62 percent of Jewish Americans support withholding weapons shipments to Israel until an immediate ceasefire is achieved.
Public sentiment also appears to favor the proposals. Polls show a majority of Americans oppose further arms sales to Israel, yet Congress remains out of step with its constituents. Advocates argue this disconnect reflects the disproportionate influence of military contractors and pro-Israel lobbying groups in shaping U.S. foreign policy.
The Senate’s decision underscores a persistent issue in U.S. foreign policy: the prioritization of military alliances over human rights. Critics point out that the Biden administration’s Conventional Arms Transfer policy, which prohibits sales likely to result in human rights violations, has been ignored in the case of Israel.
The United States has provided Israel with $18 billion in military aid over the past year alone, along with over 50,000 tons of equipment. This unwavering support has enabled the Netanyahu government to continue its controversial campaign in Gaza, despite widespread condemnation from the international community.
While Sanders’ resolutions failed, they represent a historic shift in Congressional discourse. For the first time, senators were forced to take a public stance on whether the U.S. should restrict arms sales to Israel. “Never before have so many senators voted to restrict arms transfers to Israel,” said Cavan Kharrazian, a policy adviser at Demand Progress.
This symbolic importance was echoed by Matt Duss, a former foreign policy adviser to Sanders: “The lawmakers who stood on the right side of history today will be remembered for their leadership and humanity.”
The Senate’s refusal to halt arms sales to Israel reveals the entrenched barriers to aligning U.S. policy with international law and moral accountability. Yet the growing Congressional dissent, coupled with shifting public opinion, signals the beginning of a broader reckoning with America’s role in perpetuating global conflicts.
“As Americans, we are complicit in these horrific and illegal atrocities. Our complicity must end,” Sanders concluded.
COMMENTS