President Donald Trump said Tuesday that the United States would stop providing about $4 billion in annual assistance to Israel at the end of the year, arguing that the country no longer needs the support. He made the announcement in an Election Day interview with Fox News, linking the issue in part to criticism of U.S. aid by Democratic candidates.
Trump said Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had raised the possibility of ending the assistance and that the two leaders had discussed it for several years. He described the support as a combination of military equipment and money, and said Israel would remain free to buy U.S. weapons after the aid ends.
The announcement appears to point to a rapid change in the U.S.-Israel security relationship. The current 10-year memorandum of understanding, signed in 2016, provides Israel with $38 billion in military assistance over the decade, or about $3.8 billion annually. It is scheduled to run through 2028. Trump’s remarks did not explain how the proposed year-end cutoff would interact with that agreement, or what formal steps would be taken to implement it.
Congress also has a role in appropriating federal funds, and the announcement did not specify whether lawmakers had agreed to end the aid. The White House and Netanyahu’s office were asked for further details, according to the supplied report.
Trump described the assistance as a political vulnerability, pointing to Michigan Democratic Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed, who has criticized U.S. support for Israel. He questioned why Republicans should face political attacks over the spending if Israel is prosperous and does not need the money. The comments came as voters went to the polls in the U.S. midterm elections.
The issue has become increasingly contentious within both major parties. Some Democrats have challenged continued military support for Israel, while a segment of conservative voters and commentators has also questioned the value of the relationship. Former Middle East negotiator Aaron David Miller said the debate had become a significant source of division among Republicans. He also expressed doubt that the announcement would substantially change voters’ decisions on Election Day.
The proposed cutoff comes amid uncertainty in Israeli politics. Israel held an election the previous week, and Netanyahu was trying to assemble a governing coalition. His main political rival, Gadi Eisenkot, criticized the announcement, saying Israel’s relationship with the United States was central to its national security. Eisenkot argued that Israeli citizens and defense officials should not have learned about a major change in the strategic relationship through a media announcement, and blamed Netanyahu’s conduct for weakening trust in the partnership.
Netanyahu has previously spoken about reducing Israel’s reliance on U.S. assistance, though he had not publicly advocated ending it on such a short timetable. Days before the Israeli election, he said that the country should prepare for a future in which it no longer received the large sums of American aid he had secured. Formal discussions between the United States and Israel on a successor to the current agreement began in May, but the supplied report said it was unclear whether the talks had produced a framework.
Trump’s account of the discussions also left important questions unanswered. When asked whether he meant military assistance or a direct cash payment, he said the figure could be understood in different ways, including as military aid or equipment. He said Israel could continue purchasing whatever weapons it wanted, but did not clarify whether the United States would maintain existing arms-sales arrangements, accelerate deliveries, or alter other forms of defense cooperation.
The distinction matters because much of the assistance is provided through foreign military financing that Israel uses to purchase U.S.-made weapons. The funding therefore supports American defense manufacturers as well as Israel’s military. A halt to aid would not necessarily end arms sales, but the terms and scale of future purchases remain unclear.
The United States has continued to authorize substantial military support during Trump’s second term. In September, his administration approved a $2.8 billion sale of heavy bombs to Israel. Former U.S. officials have questioned whether the administration would carry out a rapid cutoff, particularly if military operations against Iran resumed. Miller said Israel could defend itself without U.S. assistance, but expressed skepticism that Washington would immediately stop the flow of support in a period of heightened regional risk.
There has also been congressional activity aimed at deepening U.S.-Israeli defense cooperation. A provision in an annual defense bill passed by the House in July would strengthen collaboration on defense technology. That measure, alongside existing funding commitments and arms purchases already in production, could complicate any immediate shift. Weapons procurement can take years from approval to delivery, meaning that a change in annual assistance would not necessarily halt equipment already under contract.
Israeli political figures beyond Eisenkot also criticized Netanyahu. Yair Golan, head of the left-wing Democrats party and a retired deputy chief of staff in Israel’s military, described the announcement as a serious failure. He argued that a prime minister should have sought to strengthen American support rather than eliminate it, and warned that the dispute could worsen Israel’s security and economic challenges.
Journalist Anshel Pfeffer, a biographer of Netanyahu, likewise portrayed the announcement as a setback for the prime minister and Ron Dermer, a close Netanyahu ally involved in managing relations with the Trump administration. The coming weeks are likely to test whether Trump’s statement represents a settled policy, an opening position in negotiations over a future agreement, or a political announcement that will require further decisions by the administration and Congress.
