With the Gaza ceasefire teetering on the edge of collapse, Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., introduced new legislation aimed at halting the sale of bombs, missiles, and artillery shells to Israel.
Sanders’s move comes three months after he forced earlier votes that put senators on the record about arming Israel amid the assault on Gaza that left tens of thousands of civilians dead.
“It would be unconscionable to provide more of the bombs and weapons Israel has used to kill so many civilians.”
That effort fell far short and the latest resolutions have even less of a chance with Republican control of the Senate. Still, Sanders said he believed it was important to keep trying to block arms sales to Israel considering President Donald Trump’s remarks about “taking” Gaza for the U.S.
“With Trump and Netanyahu openly talking about forcibly displacing millions of Palestinians from Gaza — in other words, ethnic cleansing — it would be unconscionable to provide more of the bombs and weapons Israel has used to kill so many civilians and make life unlivable in Gaza,” he said in a release.
Sanders introduced four resolutions on February 20 identifying the weapon sales he wants to block. They cover $6.8 billion in sales for 2,166 small-diameter bombs and 2,800 500-pound bombs, along with guidance kits; $688 million for 615 more small-diameter bombs and more than 15,000 guidance kits; $660 million for Hellfire air-to-ground missiles; and $313 million for 10,000 155mm high explosive artillery shells.
The Institute for Middle East Understanding Policy Project said the weapons at issue have been used in strikes in Gaza and Lebanon that amounted to war crimes, including attacks on schools, refugee camps, and in supposed safe zones.
Sanders said Israel had a right to defend itself against the October 7, 2023, attacks led by Hamas, but that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government had violated international law by responding with “an all-out war against the entire Palestinian people.”
Under the law covering arms sales to foreign powers, Sanders can force a Senate floor vote on his resolutions. If they were to pass the Senate, they would still need to pass the House and either gain the president’s approval or overcome a veto to become law — all highly unlikely scenarios.
The votes will once again force Senate Democrats on the record about whether they support transferring more weapons to Israel — including a slate of new senators who will be weighing in for the first time. The upper chamber of Congress has gained six new Republicans and six new Democrats since Sanders’s previous resolutions in November.
Support for those earlier resolutions topped out at 19 votes, all Democrats or independents who caucus with the Democrats.
“A lot of Democrats were uncomfortable going against a president of their own party.”
Sanders’s office did not immediately respond to a question about whether he plans to force a floor vote on the latest resolutions. A vote in favor of the last round generated a backlash for a vulnerable Democratic incumbent, Sen. Jon Ossoff, D-Ga., who could face a tough re-election battle next year.
Matt Duss, the executive vice president of the Center for International Policy and a former foreign policy adviser to Sanders, said it was possible that more Democrats could vote in support this time.
“I know a lot of Democrats were uncomfortable going against a president of their own party. They shouldn’t have been,” he said. “I hope they will be more inclined to support a measure like this, now that it’s a Republican president.”
The Trump administration earlier this month moved to sidestep congressional review of $7 billion in arms sales to Israel, angering even Democrats who have generally been supportive of such weapons transfers.
Trump on Monday rescinded a Biden-era policy memo requiring the recipients of U.S. weapons to certify that they were not using them to violate human rights law and would not block humanitarian aid, according to the Washington Post.
The policy had proven to be toothless when it came to Israel, critics said, but some observers worried that repealing it would only encourage further violations of international law.
Duss, who’s criticized the memo as a gimmick, said that regardless of whether it is in place, U.S. law conditions military aid on respect for human rights.
