laitimes

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Abstract: On April 23, the United States Congress passed a foreign assistance package bill that includes assistance to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan, as well as humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip. Through the bipartisan vote in Congress, this article analyzes the different attitudes and social divisions of the two parties towards the so-called "military aid" of Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.

Keywords: foreign aid, United States, Republican, Democratic

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

On April 23, 2024, after a months-long extension, the United States Congress finally passed the Foreign Assistance Package bill submitted by United States President Joe Biden, which covers a total of $95 billion in foreign aid, including aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, and humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip. In addition, the bill includes other national security implications for United States, including forcing ByteDance to sell its overseas version of Tik Tok to United States companies or disable the software within United States; expanding sanctions against Iran; Take more economic measures against Russia. Initially, the United States House of Representatives voted on every element of the bill and eventually passed it. In the United States Senate voting phase, the bill was passed by an overwhelming 79 votes in favor and 18 against. The bill comes at a time when the United States is increasingly worried that the battlefield in Ukraine may gradually deteriorate and the Ukrainian army may not be able to respond to the Russian offensive.

In this foreign assistance package, Israel-related aid totals $26 billion, of which $9 billion will be used to provide humanitarian assistance to the Gaza Strip. Thus, security assistance to Israel totals $17 billion, of which $5 billion will be used to replenish Israel's stockpile of air defense systems (the Iron Dome anti-missile system, the David Sling-based anti-missile system and the Arrow anti-missile system) and the additional $1.2 billion will be used for the research and development of the Iron Beam laser weapon system. In addition, the United States invested $1 billion to upgrade Israel's R&D and production capacity in artillery and ammunition, and provided $2.4 billion in funding for United States' Central Command operations in the Middle East. United States's assistance to Israel demonstrates the importance that United States attaches to U.S.-Israel relations and Israel national security, especially after Iran struck Israel on April 14.

The results of the United States House of Representatives and Senate votes on the aid package also reflect concerns about United States' commitments to its allies in the new domestic and international context. Aid to Israel (including humanitarian aid to Palestine) was passed in the House of Representatives by 366 votes in favor and 58 against (37 Democrats and 21 Republicans voted against). The table below shows the data on this poll compiled by the Israel Institute for National Security.

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Table 1: Vote in the United States House of Representatives on the Israel aid package

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Table 2: Results of the United States Senate vote on the comprehensive assistance package

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Table 3: Republican votes in United States on the aid package for Israel (by ideology)

Congressmakers who oppose aid to Israel come mainly from two extreme factions of both parties: ultra-conservative Republicans and progressive Democrats. 36.5 percent of Republican lawmakers voted against the Freedom Caucus, the most conservative and anti-orthodox group in the Republican Party. By contrast, 35.4 percent of members of the Democratic party's "Progressive Caucus" group, which is considered a far-left group, voted against it. It's worth noting that the Democratic "Progressive Caucus" is not as ideologically aligned as the Republican "Freedom Caucus" and includes more moderate members of Congress.

There is an essential difference between the reasons why Democratic and Republican lawmakers in the United States voted against it. Many Republican lawmakers who voted against it worried about the impact that the aid package could have on United States' budget deficit, while Democratic lawmakers who voted against it were because of the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip and their growing opposition to Israel.

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Table 4: Votes by United States Democrats on the Aid to Israel Package (by Ideology)

The United States Senate vote shows that ultra-conservative Republicans are increasingly conservative about funding security assistance for United States allies, especially for Ukraine. In fact, a majority of Republican members in the Senate voted against the aid package for Ukraine, which passed because a majority of Democratic lawmakers voted in favor. At the same time, majorities of lawmakers on both sides of the bipartisan are in favor of providing aid to the Taiwan region, suggesting that lawmakers from both parties agree that United States needs to address China's primary strategic challenge. The table below shows the results of the votes of lawmakers from both parties on different parts of the aid package.

United States foreign aid programs and their implications

Table 5: Number of bipartisan votes in favor of the Taiwan, Ukraine, and Israel aid packages in the United States

Congressman Peter Welch from Ver·mont, Jeff Merkley · Oregon, and Bernie Sanders from Ver·mont are considered among the most enlightened Democratic senators. However, the three senators voted against the aid package because they opposed security assistance to Israel. This situation shows that progressive and young congressmen in the United States have changed their attitudes towards the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Polls show that the younger generation of Democrats is more likely to be sympathetic to Palestinians in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and this is a major change from the previous generation of Democrats.

In addition, 18 Republican lawmakers voted against the aid package, largely because of their reservations about aid to Ukraine and their concerns about illegal immigration at the U.S.-Mexico border, where the number of illegal immigrants has reached record levels in recent years. Several young Republican senators, including Josh · Hawley and J.D. Vance, argued that United States needs to prioritize domestic issues and U.S.-China competition. These arguments suggest that Trump's worldview ("United States First") has a large preponderance among Republicans. Senate Republican ·leader Mitch McConnell, who supports Ukraine, even admitted at a press conference that his party was influenced by the demonization Ukraine that began with Tu·cker Carlson, a conservative media personality who gave an exclusive interview to Putin in Moscow and reported positively. In fact, the House vote accurately reflects the prevailing views among the current Republican House members.

conclusion

The results of the above vote show that the majority of United States lawmakers from both parties still support Israel. However, in recent years, certain extreme factions in both parties have come under increasing scrutiny, a trend that is evident and increasingly prominent among the public and the media. Within the Democratic Party, there are significantly fewer progressive voters and lawmakers who support Israel, especially among younger generations. The phenomenon has been widely covered in the Israel media, especially on campus protests in the United States in recent months.

United States right-wing populist camp has emerged a phenomenon that focuses on United States domestic issues, a phenomenon that does not deserve much attention, but is worrisome, and its reach has expanded significantly since Trump's election. Since the end of World War II, the United States has reached a bipartisan consensus that United States can play an active role in international affairs and is conducive to maintaining peace, stability, prosperity and free trade within the international system. In recent years, however, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, and the 2008 financial crisis have challenged that consensus and shifted the bipartisan focus of United States to United States domestic issues. This trend began with the Obama administration, which reduced United States intervention in Middle Eastern affairs and withdrew US troops from Iraq. Since then, the Trump administration has further promoted this trend and taken a negative view of United States' traditional allies, even publicly accusing the international order of harming United States' interests. This view was endorsed by a large number of Republicans and conservative members of Congress, as evidenced by the vote. Although a majority of United States lawmakers from both parties still supported Israel in this vote, whether Israel will be able to gain such support in the future has become an important question. In an era that is more focused on United States' domestic problems, will the Republican Party still see Israel as its core interest?

In the area of foreign relations, United States bipartisan consensus on the only issue is the strategic threat posed by China, which was evident in the United States House vote on the latest aid package. However, there are still differences between the two parties, and the heated debate over these differences continues.

Read on