AP Photo/Alex Brandon, file For more than a decade, American taxpayers have subsidized some combination of Israel’s expansion on the West Bank and financial support for its ultra-Orthodox community.
Maybe you didn’t realize we are funding those things, but money is fungible. Israel could fund its own defense needs by reducing its support for those other programs, but Washington’s financial support lets Jerusalem avoid making the hard political budgetary choices between domestic and national security programs that every major Western country, including the U.S., must make each year.
Bowing to the reality of the American public’s growing disenchantment with Israel and particularly with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s policies, Netanyahu announced that his country no longer would seek American financial assistance for its military programs.
When the current ten-year memorandum of understanding for U.S. financial assistance ends in fiscal 2028, Israeli policymakers will have to make those difficult budgetary choices.
At the same time, however, both countries are seeking to enter a new phase of their relationship — one that essentially treats the Israelis as a contributing partner to mutual defense and intelligence needs. Talks commenced earlier this month between Washington and Jerusalem regarding a new defense framework that would transform the relationship into what is being termed a “reciprocal partnership.”
The House and Senate Armed Services committees have taken initial steps to codify that new partnership in the Fiscal 2027 National Defense Authorization Act. They envision a “U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative” that incorporates key elements of the U.S.-Israel Futures Act .
As the Senate Armed Services Committee describes it, the Initiative’s purpose is “to expand and accelerate bilateral defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, coordination and industrial cooperation between the U.S. and Israel.” The legislation calls on the secretary of War to designate an executive agent — meaning a lead official, often from one of the military services — who would synchronize joint efforts including defense technology research, development, trade and evaluation.
Cooperation, including joint ventures, would focus on counter-drone systems, missile defense, artificial intelligence, biotechnology and cyber and electronic warfare. In a separate provision, the committee “authorizes increased funding for U.S.-Israel cooperation in countering unmanned aerial systems and subterranean warfare.”
Not surprisingly, these provisions have come under heavy criticism on Capitol Hill from those who oppose expanding American defense cooperation with Israel.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) argues that the new provision on defense technology cooperation “quietly expands U.S. military cooperation and weapons development with almost zero oversight.” He asserts that this is tantamount to “burying a provision in the defense bill that would give Israel more military integration than any NATO ally.”
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), like Sanders a frequent critic of the Jewish state, claims that the provision undermines American independence. Writing on X, he cautioned, “Don’t merge our military technology and supply chains with Israel’s … or any other country’s.”
But in fact, the U.S. has long worked jointly with other states to develop new technologies. For example, in what is termed “Pillar Two” of the AUKUS agreement, the U.S. is working together with Australia and the U.K. to develop new undersea warfare capabilities, hypersonic weapons, and robotic autonomous systems. Similarly, the U.S. and South Korea are working together to develop and exploit cutting edge tools such quantum and artificial intelligence that would drive autonomous systems.
Indeed, the U.S. and Israel have long cooperated on joint research, development and acquisition projects. And that cooperation has not been one-sided in Israel’s favor. Among the most notable joint efforts are the Iron Dome missile defense system, which the U.S. Army has procured, and the Arrow and David Sling systems that have provided technical knowledge that for our own missile defense development.
The new legislation does not force the Department of War into any particular arrangement. Moreover, there are areas — most notably close-hold development programs — where cooperation can almost certainly be ruled out. On some matters, either the U.S. or Israel refuses to release sensitive information.
Finally, any U.S.-Israeli arrangements will be subject to legislative oversight. And congressional funding for joint efforts cannot necessarily be guaranteed.
It is noteworthy that among the co-sponsors of the Senate U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative are Sens. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) and Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), both of whom voted for Bernie Sanders’ resolutions against supplying Israel with offensive military equipment.
As Kaine put it to me, this new arrangement “is a way to continue the relationship but make it more akin to the agreements we have with other partners.” That, in a nutshell, is why Congress should adopt the Defense Authorization Act’s provision on setting defense cooperation with Israel on a new course.
Dov S. Zakheim is a senior adviser at the Center for Strategic and International Studies and vice chairman of the board for the Foreign Policy Research Institute. He was undersecretary of Defense (comptroller) and chief financial officer for the Department of Defense from 2001 to 2004 and a deputy undersecretary of Defense from 1985 to 1987.
Add as preferred source on Google Tags Adam Schiff Benjamin Netanyahu Bernie Sanders Thomas Massie Tim KaineCopyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Comments: Link copiedMore Opinions - National Security News
See All
Opinions - National Security Sour grapes: Obama has no room to talk about Trump’s Iran deal by Liz Peek, opinion contributor 3 hours ago Opinions - National Security / 3 hours ago 
