Why It Matters

The Trump administration has dramatically expanded arms sales to Israel, approving more than $12 billion in potential transfers in 2025 and an additional $7 billion in 2026 to date, while invoking emergency authorities to bypass standard congressional review. But a recent Congressional Research Service (CRS) report examining U.S.-Israel relations is forcing lawmakers to confront a fundamental question: whether and how the United States should continue, condition, or restructure its military, diplomatic, and financial support for Israel.

Some members of Congress have increased scrutiny of arms sales to Israel, citing humanitarian concerns and civilian casualties in Gaza, while others have invoked provisions of U.S. and international law in efforts to halt or delay certain transfers. The political calculus is complicated by fractured Israeli public opinion, with more than 80 percent of Israelis believing the conflict with Iran weakened Israel's long-term security, and more than 56 percent rating Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's management of that conflict as failed or poor.

The Big Picture

The report traces Israel's military posture since October 7, 2023, when Hamas-led attacks killed more than 1,200 people and took 251 hostages. Israel has since conducted sustained operations across Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran, establishing buffer zones that extend well beyond its formal borders.

In March, Netanyahu articulated Israel's new "security concept," featuring Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) control over zones deep within enemy territory in eastern Gaza, southern Lebanon, and southern Syria. This represents a significant departure from Israel's approach during the two decades before 2023, when it had generally sought to deter and contain external threats without sustained commitments of the IDF outside Israel's borders.

The territorial footprint reflects shifting strategic calculations. According to the CRS report, Israel controls an estimated 54 percent of Gaza's territory, while Hamas retains control of roughly 46 percent. The Trump administration has stated it does not support expanded Israeli territorial control in Gaza, yet has simultaneously lifted most sanctions on Syria and rescinded Biden-era executive orders conditioning arms transfers on human rights compliance and imposing sanctions on violent West Bank settlers.

The Trump administration's approach to regional diplomacy has yielded mixed results. In May, President Trump called on Muslim-majority countries to join the Abraham Accords, but no Muslim-majority country indicated immediate willingness to do so. Saudi officials have linked normalization with Israel to progress toward Palestinian statehood, a demand the current Israeli government has strongly opposed.

Hamas had rejected disarmament demands from President Trump's Board of Peace, but at the end of July, Hamas agreed in principle to a phased framework and road map involving the surrender and storage of its weapons, announced by U.S. officials and President Trump. However, this agreement is conditional, and substantial obstacles remain regarding implementation, sequencing, and formal Israeli sign-off, according to the Associated Press and other sources.

The CRS report also documents U.S. military involvement during the Iran conflict, showing that the U.S. military expended far more high-end munitions defending Israel amid hostilities with Iran than Israeli forces used themselves. Other Israeli aims, including regime change in Iran, have not been achieved.

The Bottom Line

Israeli elections are scheduled no later than October 2026. The Trump administration's November 2025 National Security Strategy explicitly lists expanding the Abraham Accords as a core U.S. interest, signaling that regional normalization will remain a central policy objective, even as the administration navigates competing demands from Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Palestinian stakeholders heading into those elections. 

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article