American Governance Script Falters with Israel Aid Crisis

The Houses' difficulty in providing $14 billion in emergency aid to Israel is revealing political divisions that make America appear as a divided superpower incapable of quickly assisting a friend that believes it is engaged in a war for its existence.

House GOP leaders have announced their intention to vote on the aid package on Thursday, but due to the unpredictable state of the majority, the timing is uncertain. Additionally, the nation's political divides and a lack of consensus in foreign policy are starting to hinder effective governance and impede US objectives overseas.

But House GOP Whip Tom Emmer and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise both said they expect to pass the package later in the day.

It shouldnt be this hard.

In the past, voting on aid to Israel used to be one of the least controversial actions taken in the House throughout the year. However, recent delays in advancing the measure, the delicate power dynamics in Washington, and disputes within and between political parties regarding the new conflict in the Middle East, indicate that an easy vote is no longer guaranteed.

The controversy surrounding this issue primarily revolves around the decision made by newly elected House Speaker Mike Johnson to finance the $14.3 billion aid package for Israel by making equivalent cuts to the budget of the Internal Revenue Service. While this approach resonates with conservatives, it has led many Democrats to oppose the measure, viewing it as nothing more than a political maneuver.

Johnson defended his decision on Thursday to tie Israel aid to cuts in IRS funding for the sake of fiscal responsibility rather than political motives. He explained to reporters that it was the most readily available source of funds to fulfill the immediate obligation. Adding to the political controversy, President Joe Biden included the Israel package in a broader request that encompasses arms and ammunition for Ukraine. This request, which exceeds $100 billion, faces opposition from Johnson's conference. While the speaker is moving forward with the Israel bill independently, there is a possibility that the Senate may insert Ukraine aid, causing further delays in providing US assistance to Israel during its conflict with Hamas.

Johnson faces the same unpalatable choices as McCarthy

The discussion is uncovering various underlying storylines within the realm of national politics, taking place a year prior to the upcoming election. Moreover, it is presenting a vivid depiction of American dysfunction, which rival countries such as China and Russia exploit in their efforts to diminish the influence of the United States.

Johnsons strategy illustrates how an extremely conservative faction of the GOP is ready to pursue a rigid political agenda, even on issues of global significance. Furthermore, his inclusion of IRS offsets indicates that, like his predecessor Kevin McCarthy, the Louisiana Republican must make concessions to appease the party's most uncompromising members in order to maintain a functioning GOP majority. However, these tactics are likely to be futile since they will not be accepted by the Democratic-led White House or Senate. President Biden has already vowed to veto the current House bill if it ever reaches him, which is highly unlikely. This raises the question of whether Johnson is being influenced by the extreme elements of his party, rather than leading them.

If Johnson is successful in navigating the bill into law without further delays, his position as speaker could be strengthened. However, there is a risk of undermining his authority before establishing a solid political foundation. While his IRS strategy might secure enough GOP votes for the bill's passage, it does not change the fact that power is shared in Washington. Sooner or later, he will need to propose a measure that can garner support from a Democratic-controlled White House and Senate. This may require him to rely on some Democratic votes for final approval, a scenario that infuriated extreme right GOP members and contributed to McCarthy's downfall, leading to three weeks of chaos in the House. Additionally, if the vote timetable on Israel is delayed, Johnson will waste even more time, just two weeks before a potential government shutdown. Avoiding this shutdown will necessitate passing a funding bill that will be even more difficult to pass than an Israel measure.

The aid debate is exposing a major divide within the Republican Party regarding foreign policy. On one side, there are the Make America Great Again isolationists who prioritize focusing on domestic affairs. On the other side, there is the old school establishment that believes in maintaining robust global leadership through alliances, which have been instrumental in maintaining global peace since World War II. Johnson's actions, such as burdening the Israel bill with political priorities and separating it from Ukraine funding, have created a rift between him and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. McConnell, a staunch conservative, is actually closer to President Biden on this issue than to his own party in the House. McConnell emphasized that history has repeatedly shown that the costs of disengagement from the world are much higher than the costs of engagement. Denying the evident connection between America's adversaries and the threats it faces is just as dangerous as rejecting the idea that, as a global superpower, the nation should confront these challenges head-on.

As McConnell pointed out, the debate over aid to Ukraine also exposes the deep divisions within the GOP. This debate raises a broader question about whether the United States and its citizens are willing to continue being a stronghold for global democracy. This question lies at the heart of a potential clash between Biden and former President Donald Trump in a general election. Biden, with his internationalist perspective shaped by the Cold War, strongly supports the US commitment to global alliances and democracy. On the other hand, Trump, being more transactional in his leadership style, views alliances more as protection agreements rather than instruments of American global power. Ultimately, the key question regarding Ukraine is whether the US will continue to advocate for the independence of a country that is facing a ruthless invasion orchestrated by the Kremlin. Unfortunately, a significant number of Republicans in the House, and an increasing number in the Senate, do not consider Ukraine as a vital US foreign policy interest. This stance seems to indicate a preference for Russian President Vladimir Putin over democracy in Kyiv.

Ukraine's supporters in Congress found a glimmer of hope when Johnson, the Louisiana lawmaker, attended the Senate policy lunch on Wednesday. Despite his previous doubts about Ukraine aid, Johnson seemed to acknowledge that as the speaker, he had a responsibility beyond his personal political preferences. In a recent interview with Fox News, Johnson stated that the US should not abandon Ukraine to Putin. Sen. Markwayne Mullin from Oklahoma revealed that the newly appointed speaker showed a willingness to pass Ukraine funding if it received support from House Republicans. Sen. Lindsey Graham from South Carolina, a proponent of assisting the war-torn country, expressed admiration for the speaker's foreign policy expertise. However, recent events have highlighted the stark contrast between what a GOP speaker wants to achieve and what is actually feasible. It is unlikely that there will be enough support from the Republican majority alone to pass Ukraine funding. Consequently, the speaker will once again rely on Democratic assistance, which could potentially damage his position.

While the Republican disunity on foreign policy grabs the headlines, the domestic political repercussions stemming from Israel's conflict with Hamas are becoming increasingly problematic for Biden. Certain progressive voices are growing more critical of Israel's tactics in Gaza, where hundreds of civilians have been killed in what Israel claims are targeted strikes against Islamist militant group leaders. The ongoing debate in the House regarding the aid package for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government will bring Democratic tensions to the forefront.

During a visit to Minnesota on Wednesday, the president faced intense anger from a protester identified as Rabbi Jessica Rosenberg. She repeatedly chanted "ceasefire now". While President Biden acknowledged the emotional aspect and supported a humanitarian pause in Israeli operations for hostage release, he refrained from publicly calling on Israel to agree to a ceasefire with Hamas. The president argued that Israel has the right to self-defense following the October 7 terrorist attacks, which claimed the lives of 1,400 individuals, predominantly civilians.

Ahead of the upcoming election, the president finds himself in a precarious political position. To avoid a decline in turnout among progressive and Muslim voters who sympathize with the Palestinians, particularly in swing states like Michigan, he unveiled plans for a new strategy to combat Islamophobia in the United States. This move carries potential political risks, considering the rise of antisemitism and the criticism he may face from Republicans. Consequently, the president now grapples with navigating the complex political challenges arising from the ongoing Middle East conflict on domestic soil.

This story has been updated with additional reporting.