USA (Washington Insider Magazine)—President Joe Biden’s ultimatum to limit weapon supplies to Israel, following a potential major offensive in Rafah, has ignited criticism from both parties. Biden’s stance, voiced publicly in a CNN interview, drew condemnation from Republicans and raised concerns among Democrats, showing bipartisan divisions on US-Israel policy.
Senator JD Vance questioned the rationale, arguing that withholding weapons could inadvertently increase civilian casualties. Biden’s policy review may affect future weapons sales, including JDAM kits, though these transfers remain speculative. Earlier, Biden approved a hold on 3,500 bombs, citing risks to civilians in Rafah, where thousands of civilians are sheltering.
Republicans like Lindsey Graham and Rick Scott called the decision a “horrible message” to Israel, with Scott accusing Biden of aligning with a “pro-Hamas wing” within the Democratic Party. A faction of 26 House Democrats echoed concerns, suggesting the decision could embolden Iranian-backed groups and requesting a briefing from the White House for clarity.
Rep. Adam Smith and Senator Chris Murphy defended Biden’s approach, clarifying that the president withheld only specific munitions deemed excessively destructive. Murphy emphasized Biden’s intent to avoid the mistakes of past US conflicts, where civilian harm strengthened terrorist groups, and underscored the strategic need for minimizing casualties to counter Hamas.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken also called for Israel to mitigate civilian deaths, citing that current operations in Gaza have resulted in extensive casualties. Meanwhile, the State Department report noted potential misuse of US weapons, though it stopped short of outright violations of humanitarian law. Some, like Sen. Chris Van Hollen, felt this report lacked transparency, worrying it set a low standard for civilian protections.
As Biden balances supporting Israel with calls for caution, his administration faces challenges navigating bipartisan pressures and safeguarding both civilian lives and strategic alliances.
