An unexpected alliance of progressive Democrats and conservative figures is opposing a specific aspect of the upcoming defense bill for next year. They believe it could deepen military ties between the United States and Israel for an extended period. The component in question is the ‘United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,’ known as Section 224 of the fiscal year 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).
This provision mandates that the U.S. Secretary of Defense appoint an ‘executive agent.’ This agent would oversee collaborative efforts with Israel, including joint defense technology research, development, testing, evaluation, integration, and industrial cooperation. Other specified collaborations involve joint ventures, licensing agreements, co-production manufacturing with Israeli industries, joint training exercises, and information-sharing mechanisms. Areas of focus include counter-drone systems, missile defense, artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, cyber and electronic warfare, biotechnology, and defense industrial production.
Senator Bernie Sanders, an Independent from Vermont, called for his supporters to oppose Section 224. Former Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene, a Republican from Georgia, cautioned that once Section 224 passes, it could be irreversible.
The Path to the House Floor
The debate unfolds as Congress considers the broader $1.15 trillion defense bill. The House Armed Services Committee discussed this provision on June 4, with Democrat Representative Ro Khanna from California proposing an amendment to remove Section 224. This proposal did not pass in the committee. Only Khanna and fellow Californian Representative Sara Jacobs supported it, and the bill advanced to the full House.
Section 224 did not originate from committee discussions. Its text is drawn from the U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act, initially introduced by Texas Representative Ronny Jackson and North Carolina Representative Don Davis, along with North Carolina Senator Ted Budd and New York Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. The FUTURES Act stalled, prompting its essence to resurface in the NDAA.
Rising Concerns
The provision has drawn more attention following a heightened counterintelligence threat assessment of Israel by the Pentagon’s Defense Intelligence Agency. This assessment, reported by U.S. officials and media outlets like NBC News and The New York Times, highlights concerns about increased Israeli espionage.
Israel has been seeking a new cooperation framework as the Obama-era memorandum of understanding is set to expire in 2028. This memorandum currently provides approximately $3.8 billion annually, totaling $38 billion over a decade. Former Prime Minister Naftali Bennett stressed that Israel is at a critical juncture, emphasizing its capability to defend itself amid tensions with Iran.
Progressive Viewpoints
Senator Sanders criticized the measure as excessively favorable to a foreign government against U.S. voters’ preferences. He expressed his views on the social media platform X, pointing out that expanding U.S.-Israel military cooperation lacks substantial oversight. Representative Khanna questioned the deepening ties at a time of strained relations with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Jacobs argued against reinforcing military links with nations accused of repeatedly violating international laws.
Military analysts find the provision’s precedent-setting aspects concerning. Retired Air Force Lieutenant Colonel William Astore shared with The Intercept a lack of historical parallels for Congress formalizing the integration of critical technologies with another nation.
Conservative Opposition
Marjorie Taylor Greene framed the measure as an attack on U.S. sovereignty. She emphasized that if Israel is independent, it should not require integration with the U.S. military nor financial support for its conflicts. Greene also expressed concerns about espionage, linking Section 224 to increased surveillance risks.
Kentucky Representative Thomas Massie, another critic, plans to introduce a floor amendment to revoke Section 224, reaffirming the U.S. sovereignty narrative.
Section 224 Details
- The Pentagon must publish regular updates on a dedicated Defense Department website.
- The executive agent will identify Israeli-origin technologies suitable for integration into U.S. military systems and facilitate partnerships with Israeli industry.
- The Pentagon must coordinate with other federal agencies, ensuring compliance with existing U.S. law.
- Within 180 days of enactment, the Pentagon is to brief Congress on the implementation, with annual unclassified reports required through 2030.
The provision allows a classified annex, if necessary.
Supporters’ Defense
Proponents, like Representative Mike Rogers, argue the measure enhances efficiency by designating a single coordinator for existing initiatives. They claim it does not compromise U.S. operational control or funding.
The argument that Netanyahu influenced the provision directly has been dismissed by its sponsors, who note that no direct correspondence from the Israeli Prime Minister motivated the initiative.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) supports the measure, emphasizing strategic advantages by strengthening ties with Israel, crucial for future warfare arenas.
Future Steps
The NDAA must still clear the full House vote, reconcile with the Senate version, and acquire presidential approval to become law. Representative Massie’s efforts could provoke further debate on the floor.