r/moderatepolitics 6h ago

Discussion Congress quietly moves to integrate US and Israel militaries

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/israel-us-military/
34 Upvotes

59 comments sorted by

66

u/brusk48 6h ago edited 5h ago

If you read the bill, it just appoints an "executive agent" to help with procurement of Israeli military tech that DoD thinks could be useful. You can read the bill here, and the actual section starts on PDF page 43:

https://armedservices.house.gov/uploadedfiles/fy27_ndaa_chairmans_mark_-_final.pdf

The article OP linked takes one bullet point in the items to be looked into for potential procurement section (essentially a wishlist), "Network integration, data fusion, and contested logistics", and blows it up into the Israelis being fully integrated into US DoD data and decision making, which isn't at all what the bill says.

The journalism here was doing a Ctrl + F on the NDAA for "Israeli" and then making up a story after misinterpreting a wishlist.

u/Crownie Neoliberal Shill 5h ago

making up a story

It is the institute for responsible statecraft.

u/Baderkadonk 5h ago

The legislation directs the Secretary of Defense to appoint a dedicated executive agent to synchronize bilateral defense technology efforts. That official would be tasked with identifying Israeli-origin technologies that could be incorporated into U.S. programs of record, facilitating their transition from research projects into actual procurement pipelines, and promoting industrial partnerships and co-production arrangements between American and Israeli firms.

In other words, Congress is not merely encouraging cooperation. It is directing the Pentagon to actively search for Israeli technologies that could become part of the future U.S. military.

That is unusual.

The United States cooperates extensively with allies such as Britain, Australia, Japan, and South Korea.

Through AUKUS, Washington is sharing some of its most sensitive military technologies with Canberra and London.

The United Kingdom enjoys an exceptionally close defense relationship with the United States, including cooperation on nuclear weapons and advanced aircraft programs.

Yet Congress has rarely created a dedicated statutory framework to identify a specific ally’s technologies and integrate them into American acquisition programs.

Further, none of those extremely close relationships—not even the US-UK “Special Relationship”—comes close to the level of cooperation and integration being proposed for the US and Israel under the NDAA’s Section 224.

I'm quoting this article.

We need to be able to keep Israel at an arm's length, and this would make that much harder to do. If we need closer cooperation with allies than we should do that with countries that aren't huge liabilities. We don't even have a formal defense treaty with Israel.

u/brusk48 4h ago

I'm not sure who Brandon Weichert is, but that Substack was started 3 days ago and has under 500 subscribers, so he doesn't seem like someone a ton of people are listening to.

Regardless, though, comparing this with AUKUS or the Special Relationship feels misguided. Deals like AUKUS are primarily deep intelligence sharing, which is a much bigger thing than the US shopping for military technology. It's apples and oranges.

On the broader Israel point, I don't necessarily disagree that broadening dependence feels like going the wrong direction, but inflating appointment of an acquisitions guy into some kind of broad handover of US military command to Israel is patently ridiculous. Clickbait sub-headlines like "Is Washington Trying to Merge the US & Israeli Militaries?" aren't good faith contributions to the public dialog and we should hold journalists to higher standards than that.

u/WallStreetTechnocrat Neoconservative 4h ago

Literally nobody reads past headlines huh

u/TA-MajestyPalm 44m ago

I'm convinced most people aren't open to changing their opinions or getting objective news.

They just read the headline then fill in the details to affirm their beliefs.

22

u/BendicantMias 6h ago edited 6h ago

SS: So, to clarify what the article means by 'quietly', this change is being baked into the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), which has to be passed every year anyway, rather than as its own thing. If not for journalists checking it out, ordinary people would never see anything strange about that Act passing.

To summarise, it's firstly granting Israel unprecedented access to American military data to an extent not allowed for anyone else before. And secondly it's integrating Israel into the American military industrial complex so as to lock in support for Israel no matter the broader public mood by tying it to the US' own operations and thus many constituencies will be stuck at the hip to Israel. It's basically both burying support for Israel away from the public eye, unlike the controversial aid Israel gets every year, and an insurance policy to insulate support for Israel into the American political fabric.

It also proposes “network integration” and “data fusion.” In other words, the U.S. military’s data could soon be the Israeli military’s data.

If fully enacted, this proposal would provide a higher level of military-industrial integration than the U.S. has with any other country in the world.

The shift will strip away the political and diplomatic oversight mechanisms that make the relationship publicly accountable, moving it from a visible annual aid vote into the opaque machinery of defense acquisition, where oversight is limited and political accountability is minimal. The result would be a defense relationship that is simultaneously deeper and less transparent.

Just 30% of respondents to a New York Times/Sienna poll from mid-May believe Trump made “the right decision” to go to war with Iran, with 64% saying it was wrong. An Institute for Global Affairs poll released earlier this week dove even deeper into the American psyche when it comes to arming Israel, finding that “Just 16 percent say the United States should keep supplying Israel with weapons without new restrictions. Thirty-eight percent want to stop supplying weapons entirely, and another 24 percent want weapons conditioned on how they’re used.”

Yet, mainstream leadership in both parties remains largely pro-Israel and continues to shape the base legislative text before amendments and broader congressional debate open it to the full body, as is the case with this NDAA provision.

This feels like an attempt to future proof an increasingly isolated and unpopular Israel from democratic shifts in America, to effectively reduce Israels' accountability as an American partner to the whims of the American public. To bake it into the overall system, as it were, and make it difficult to identify and extricate afterwards.

Trump isn't exactly seen as a paragon of long term thinking, but his major backers certainly seem to be. Changes like this would only make him less popular, even with his base, yet the administration is still trying to do it. This suggests that they're not trying to help him, but to prepare for the time after him. Opponents of Trump, who mostly overlap with opponents of the massive largesse Israel gets, hope that the passing of his moment will also see the public turn against Israel finally start to change the relationship. But moves like this suggest that even if Trump falls, much of what he's done - not just abroad but at home too - will persist.

u/shaymus14 4h ago edited 4h ago

To summarise, it's firstly granting Israel unprecedented access to American military data to an extent not allowed for anyone else before. And secondly it's integrating Israel into the American military industrial complex so as to lock in support for Israel no matter the broader public mood by tying it to the US' own operations and thus many constituencies will be stuck at the hip to Israel.

No, it's not doing those things. Another poster linked to the text of the bill that everyone can read and see that the article you posted is a mischaracterization of what the bill actually does.

The bill mandates that the Secretary of Defense shall name an executive agent to identify to identify jointly-developed or Israeli-developed technologies that would be useful to the US military and identify potential joint ventures where US companies could manufacture Israeli technology in the US. The bill even says it has to protect US sensitive technology and information and the national security interest.

u/ghostofwalsh 1h ago

This feels like an attempt to future proof an increasingly isolated and unpopular Israel from democratic shifts in America

Seems to me we'll be passing another NDAA next year and if dems are writing it, then I don't see how anything in here can't be undone next year.

u/PornoPaul 5h ago

I see that there is disagreement on what the article says versus what the actual bill says. Reading it, I would argue its still vague enough to go either direction. What kind of access or power does this executive have, amd are they American or Israeli? I may have missed it.

u/JeffB1517 5h ago

Excellent analysis. I agree with your analysis. Stakeholders generally intend to shape societies in ways that make reversal difficult. To pick a similar example a lot of the debate in the Supreme Court was whether Obamacare would institutionalize a broad right to healthcare i.e. a tax when Congress had explicitly promised that it wasn't a tax. The court found it was structurally a tax, and thus despite the rhetoric was legal. I.e Congress intended structural change as they had claimed even if they were being g disingenuous about the mechanisms.

Another example would be gay marriage. The proponents of gay marriage in some states argued explicitly that given the choice between breaking the interstate marriage covenant (i.e. a couple is either married or unmarried in all 50 states even though marriage is state regulated) and allowing gay marriage people would opt for gay marriage. They were right. It worked once some states allowed it very quickly the pressure become unbearable in states where there wasn't a solid majority in favor and we have it in all 50 states.

A shift in Israel policy to be successful requires good faith negotiations with the people committed to a long standing deep tie, to be blunt Jews and Christian Zionists. Prior to Oct 7th the Non-Zionist Community was pushing the Anti-Zionist Community to seriously engage, i.e correct tone. As they saw it rightly the majority of American Jews are Liberal Zionists and thus would support some forms of pressure for some objectives. But they unite easily with Conservative Zionists when confronted with demands they see as unreasonable. Essentially urging Anti-Zionists to do politics: compromise and coalition building rather than activism.

Oct 7th changed the dynamics of the discussion as Israel shifted policy, and then acted quickly to achieve on the ground objectives even at considerable public backlash. But the fundamental issue doesn't change. To get an actually effective policy there is going to need to be a consensus. Otherwise every faction is going to be focused on blocking other faction's desires.

30

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 6h ago

But the US is totally the one in charge of the Israel-US relationship, right? That's why Israel gets to issue orders and the US has to obey, because that's how being the subordinate nation works - you get to issue the orders and the dominant one has no choice but to obey.

5

u/JeffB1517 6h ago

Neither is in charge. It is an alliance. Though Israel is somewhat subordinate.

Israel wants to escalate in Lebanon. Israel would want the war with Iran to go on for years, they are fine with Iran's threat to induce a a global recession in exchange for flipping the regime. They are listening to Trump on both. They just spent the last 48 hrs drawing down in Lebanon to facilitate to negotiation they prefer would fail. That's them doing what the USA wants.

OTOH they aren't slaves to the USA. They will play their cards to achieve their goals just as we do. Don't expect Israel to be obedient in ways you wouldn't expect from the UK or France.

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 5h ago

They are listening to Trump on both.

No they're not. As proved by them undermining every negotiation attempt by attacking during the ceasefire and causing negotiations to collapse.

Sorry but the facts fully disprove this tired "it's an alliance with the US in the lead" narrative. Isn't now, and I fully believe it never actually was. It's always been Israel leading the US around by the nose, hence all of the US' middle east boondoggles over the last 40 years.

u/Stumblin_McBumblin 4h ago

You think Israel got us into Afghanistan and Iraq?

u/Beetleracerzero37 2h ago

Yes.

u/Stumblin_McBumblin 2h ago

I'd like to hear some elaboration on this.

u/WulfTheSaxon 2h ago

The US was going to invade Afghanistan no matter what. Israel’s PM at the time, Ariel Sharon, warned the US not to invade Iraq (without tackling Iran first) because Iranian proxies would turn it into a quagmire.

u/[deleted] 4h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 4h ago

Yes. Yes I do. Because all evidence points that way.

u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 4h ago

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 1:

Law 1. Civil Discourse

~1. Do not engage in personal attacks or insults against any person or group. Comment on content, policies, and actions. Do not accuse fellow redditors of being intentionally misleading or disingenuous; assume good faith at all times.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 7 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

-2

u/[deleted] 6h ago

[deleted]

4

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 6h ago

Well speak it. If there's a word then use it. Tell me exactly what you think I'm doing.

u/T0m_F00l3ry 4h ago

I met someone who used to work in the Israeli intelligence community. When I asked why the US cares about Israel so much, he said it was because of the incredible amount of Intel Israel shares. At this point, I'm fine without said Intel.

u/BendicantMias 3h ago

I mean, it was Netanyahu's 'intel' that apparently convinced Trump to go to war with Iran. Which makes Israeli 'intel' on the Iranian state about as trustworthy as American 'intel' on Iraqi WMDs..

u/PornoPaul 3h ago

Wasn't some of the intel to go into Iraq also provided by Israel?

u/WallStreetTechnocrat Neoconservative 42m ago

Israel also advised the US to not invade Iraq, that it would become a quagmire that would distract from the primary threat of Iran.

u/Ok-Communication4190 12m ago

Nice to see who the Israel handlers in this thread. Get that shit out of here. Questioning people’s ability to read is asinine when it’s clear as day that this is an extreme reach in our military affairs.

I’ve never seen such visible acts of infiltration within our own government

u/justHereToChiill 5h ago

That sounds illegal.

But its not like Israel wasn't in charge anyway

-18

u/esotologist 6h ago

Isn't that a treason?

22

u/Hamlet7768 6h ago

It’s neither waging war against the US or giving aid and comfort to her enemies, so no.

-2

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 6h ago

Is it not? Israel's actions vis-a-vis actively undermining negotiations by attacking the other party are exactly what the actions of an enemy looks like. Or do we need a formal declaration of them being our enemy for it to count?

u/Hamlet7768 5h ago

I think the constitutional definition requires at least an implied state of hostility, which doesn’t exist here. Israel is ostensibly our friend, albeit a poisonous and false sort of friend. Note that I’m not intending to defend this integration—I agree with OP’s assessment that this is trying to remove the question of whether Israel should be our friend from the proper channels. I doubt this would be a good idea if they were a good and non-toxic ally.

u/esotologist 5h ago

They've committed terrorist and military strikes against us and they have admitted to manipulating our politicians 

u/Beetleracerzero37 2h ago

That AIPAC tweet the other day blew my mind

u/nycbetches 5h ago

Not taking a position on whether Israel is a friend or an enemy, but just saying that just because a nation is “ostensibly our friend” doesn’t mean they can’t be treasonous, ie actively working to harm America. Many such examples In history, including, off the top of my head, Saudi Arabia, Russia during WWII, etc.

u/Hamlet7768 2h ago

That’s fair, but I think you’d have to prove that in order to have a chance of prosecuting treason. None so blind as those who refuse to see…

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 5h ago

Oh if it's just an implied state of hostility then we're absolutely long past that. Repeatedly intentionally undermining negotiations by attacking the other party is clear hostility against the US as it is actively preventing the US from accomplishing our goals. So if all it takes is an implied state then yes it is absolutely treason as per the Constitution. Which means the actual Constitutional definition probably requires a formal declaration of war for it to count.

u/refuzeto 5h ago

How are Hezbollah and IIran related and why would attacking Hezbollah, who is attacking Israel, effect the peace talks between Iran?

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 5h ago

They're related because Iran says so and they hold all the cards right now. And since Israel knows this their attacks on Lebanon are intentional undermining of US actions. And that is the action of an enemy state.

u/JeffB1517 5h ago

The actions of an enemy are what Iran is doing. The actions of an ally that disagrees with USA policy is what Israel is doing. Same as Democrats not agreeing with Trump doesn't make them an enemy.

u/Wonderful_Cookie_572 5h ago

No, both Israel and Iran are engaging in the actions of an enemy. An enemy actively works to prevent a nation from accomplishing their goals. Our goal is to exit the war. Israel is actively preventing that by attacking every time we go to the negotiating table. That is the action of an enemy, not an ally.

u/[deleted] 2h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 1h ago

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 0:

Law 0. Low Effort

~0. Law of Low Effort - Content that is low-effort or does not contribute to civil discussion in any meaningful way will be removed.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.

-4

u/dinodong54321 6h ago

Did Jonathan Pollard commit treason?

u/Hamlet7768 5h ago

Not in the constitutional definition, no. That doesn’t mean he didn’t do anything wrong—espionage is a serious crime—but the Constitution defines treason narrowly for good reason.

u/JeffB1517 5h ago

Yes and went to prison for it. If Congress passes black letter law sharing a secret with entity X, X is legally entitled to the information.

u/dinodong54321 5h ago

The point is that Jonathan pollard doesn’t fit into this definition laid out above:

It’s neither waging war against the US or giving aid and comfort to her enemies, so no.

u/esotologist 5h ago

But it is giving aid and comfort to an enemy. 

Israel has killed more Americans than any nation incan think of in the last several decades. 

They've killed our president 

They've committed multiple terrorist attacks and have poorly blamed other nations 

They have admitted in their own words to controlling our politicians and removing ones that disagree with them.

What do you consider an enemy exactly???

u/Hamlet7768 2h ago

I’m sorry, what? Which Americans did Israel kill? Which President???

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 4h ago

Ignoring all the other absolutely wild claims, how have they killed more Americans than any other country in the last several decades?

u/brusk48 4h ago

I don't think we should ignore the other wild claims. I, for one, really want to know which president they killed?

u/ThatPeskyPangolin 4h ago

I was probably going to take them one at a time, and that was definitely going to be my follow up.

u/[deleted] 5h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

u/ModPolBot Imminently Sentient 5h ago

This message serves as a warning that your comment is in violation of Law 3:

Law 3: No Violent Content

~3. No Violent Content - Do not post content that encourages, glorifies, incites, or calls for violence or physical harm against an individual or a group of people. Certain types of content that are worthy of discussion (e.g. educational, newsworthy, artistic, satire, documentary, etc.) may be exempt. Ensure you provide context to the viewer so the reason for posting is clear.

Due to your recent infraction history and/or the severity of this infraction, we are also issuing a 14 day ban.

Please submit questions or comments via modmail.