The rejection of Sanders’ bills highlights the complexities of U.S. foreign policy, where strategic alliances often take precedence over other considerations. Israel remains a key ally in the Middle East, with bipartisan support in Congress ensuring that arms deals proceed without significant resistance.

Opponents of Sanders’ measures contended that halting these sales could undermine Israel’s ability to defend itself and weaken the U.S.’s influence in the region. They also pointed to the historical importance of ensuring Israel’s military edge to maintain stability in a volatile area.

Sanders’ push for greater scrutiny of U.S. military aid to Israel reflects a growing divide within the Democratic Party and among the American public. While some lawmakers align with Sanders’ concerns, arguing that U.S. weapons have been used in ways that violate human rights, others maintain that such deals are crucial for strategic and security reasons. This debate has intensified as awareness of civilian casualties and humanitarian issues in the region grows, with activists and progressive politicians calling for a reevaluation of unconditional support for Israel.