MAGA acolyte Marjorie Taylor Greene votes alongside Tlaib and Omar to cut US funding for Israel
The House of Representatives, however, rejected in a 422-6 vote on Thursday, to cut funding for the Israeli Cooperative Program - an agreement through which the US provides Israel with $500m to boost its missile programmes.
It is a separate allocation from the $3.3bn the US sends Israel as "security assistance" every year.
"Israel bombed the Catholic Church in Gaza, and that entire population is being wiped out as they continue their aggressive war in Gaza," Greene told her colleagues in a rare statement from a Republican.
"My amendment would strike $500m in funding for nuclear-armed Israel's missile defence system. The US already provides Israel with $3.8bn annually in foreign aid. 3.8 billion. That's a lot of money," she said.
New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch
Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters
"Additionally, the April 2024 security supplemental included $8.7bn for Israel, even though Israel - nuclear-armed Israel - has universal healthcare for their citizens and subsidized college for their citizens," she added. "Here in America, we're $37tn in debt. My amendment will ensure an America First department of defence, and that is exactly what we need."
That security supplemental, pushed by the Biden administration, provided increased support to Israel for its Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Iron Beam defence structures - among other military backing - in response to the 7 October 2023 Hamas-led attacks on southern Israel.
Greene had altogether introduced six amendments to reduce foreign spending in the defence appropriations bill, a massive annual funding agreement that lawmakers must pass to fund the Pentagon's operations for the following year.
All of them failed. Only six members of Congress voted to withhold $500m to Israel, after 21 months of its war on Gaza, which has left more than 58,000 Palestinians dead, most of them women and children.
The House ultimately approved $832bn in 2026 US military spending.
'Loyalty to a foreign country'
Greene's comments on the House floor were not her first criticism of Israel's hold on Washington's policymaking.
In an appearance on Conservative podcaster Tucker Carlson's online show last month, she shared her frustration with what she described as a consistent attempt to appease Israel in Congress.
"Since I've become a member of Congress - since 2021 - we have voted on 22 resolutions for Israel," she said. "We never vote on resolutions proclaiming great things about America, or defending certain Americans."
Carlson asked Greene what had changed her mind now.
"It's coming to a point where it's so obvious all the time, in everyone's language, the social media posts they put out, the statements that they make. They have to proclaim Israel. They have to proclaim their faith and loyalty in Israel," she responded.
Trump's pick for UN ambassador says he'll use aid as 'leverage' for African votes Read More »
"It's becoming like, wait a minute, what about our own country? What about our own people?"
Citing her own children, who are in their 20s, Greene referred to the financial struggles of young Americans.
"They can't afford rent. They can't afford to buy a house. They can't afford insurance. They can't buy a new car. They can't find a good-paying job," she said.
"It seems hopeless for them, but then in Congress, everyone is chasing and pursuing and proclaiming their loyalty to a foreign country."
Greene had disagreed with President Donald Trump's decision to bomb Iran's nuclear sites in June, and took to the online programme of another leading MAGA (Make America Great Again) voice, Steve Bannon, where she insisted that "We are bombing Iran on behalf of Israel," and that "Fox News brainwashes all the baby boomers" as it cheerleads US wars.
It has become clearer that the MAGA branch of the Republican Party is mounting an anti-war campaign that goes so far as to align itself with the progressive left.
Both Carlson and Bannon, both of whom have long had the president's ear, have recently made their critical views known on Israel, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and war with Iran to their combined millions of listeners.
"I grew up in a world that espoused violence. That's what the US government does," Carlson told Bannon last month.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
an hour ago
- Middle East Eye
Trump's strategy for Middle East 'peace' is built on Israeli dominance. It will fail
The Trump administration is attempting to reshape the Middle East after launching strikes on Iran last month, adopting a strategy characterised by "peace through strength" and "commerce, not chaos". While this approach is presented as pragmatic, it risks destabilising the region in favour of maximising US and Israeli military and economic advantage. President Donald Trump considers himself an "expert dealmaker", believing that calculated military strikes create leverage for diplomatic gains - particularly by pressuring Iran back to the negotiating table. His strategy emphasises overwhelming but short-term military force to achieve defined goals, avoiding prolonged entanglements or "forever wars". It also marks a rejection of nation-building, shifting the burden of regional stability onto local partners. Though the strategic value of Middle Eastern energy resources has declined for the US, the region remains crucial - perhaps even more so under the current administration. As Med This Week reports, three primary factors shape recent US actions. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The first is the ideological alliance between far-right governments in the US and Israel, which transcends the traditional "special relationship" and reflects a deeper political and strategic alignment. The administration also views Israeli hegemony as a vehicle for regional stability, envisioning a dominant "Greater Israel", backed by overwhelming US support, capable of unilaterally enforcing peace and marginalising Iran. At its core, the Trump doctrine envisions a Greater Israel, backed by US power, enforcing peace and sidelining Iran Finally, personal financial interests - particularly those of Trump and his family - were prominently on display during his recent Gulf visit. The immediate objective of the 12-day war was to dismantle Iran's nuclear infrastructure and prevent it from acquiring nuclear weapons. Trump declared key sites "destroyed" or "shut down", hailing the campaign as a critical blow against a perceived existential threat. (A recent US intelligence report found that only one of the three targeted nuclear facilities was completely destroyed, with the others expected to be operational again within months.) These military operations have significantly reshaped regional power dynamics, pushing forward the Trump administration's regional strategy: normalising relations between Israel and Arab states, particularly Saudi Arabia, and potentially extending to Oman, Indonesia, Qatar and even Syria. Yet this pursuit of realignment remains constrained by Israel's ongoing war on Gaza. A ceasefire and the release of Israeli hostages are seen as prerequisites for advancing and expanding normalisation. Israel: A hegemonic power? The US has demonstrated its willingness to act unilaterally with overwhelming force - particularly through the use of "bunker-buster" bombs on Iranian nuclear sites. This was portrayed as a show of unmatched American might, aimed not only at Iran but also as a deterrent to rivals like China and Russia. America's costly backing for Israel is enabling China's unstoppable rise Read More » Meanwhile, Israel has sought to project itself as a formidable military force with deep intelligence reach into Iran's nuclear and security infrastructure. Some Israeli officials have even claimed the country has joined the ranks of global powers, though the strikes, which killed large numbers of civilians, have drawn widespread criticism and raised questions about the legitimacy of such claims. Yet the question remains: can Israel truly become a hegemonic power in the region? Despite its recent operations and short-term tactical gains, Israel faces structural and political barriers to sustained dominance. It remains heavily reliant on US military, diplomatic and economic support. Deep-rooted regional conflicts persist, particularly the unresolved Palestinian issue, which continues to inflame public opinion and obstruct meaningful diplomatic engagement. Key regional powers such as Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt are unlikely to accept Israeli expansionism or hegemony. Meanwhile, Iran's political will to pursue its nuclear ambitions appears undiminished, with some analysts suggesting that the recent strikes may ultimately accelerate, rather than deter, its nuclear development. Iran's leadership, especially Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is unlikely to negotiate from a position of perceived weakness. The recent military escalation follows the US "maximum pressure" campaign and its hostile stance towards Iran after withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, in 2018. Together, these developments have reinforced Iranian mistrust and further narrowed the space for diplomacy. Furthermore, there is no credible assessment that the recent strikes have permanently crippled Iran's nuclear programme. Many analysts believe any setbacks will last only months, not years, and that Iran will simply shift operations deeper underground. Roadblocks to dominance The unresolved Palestinian question remains the greatest obstacle to expanding the Abraham Accords and achieving regional peace. Saudi Arabia has made its position clear: it demands an unambiguous commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. Yet the Netanyahu government - shaped by ultra-right forces - prioritises military dominance over meaningful negotiations, particularly in Gaza and the West Bank. Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders. Without a clear post-war vision for Gaza and a comprehensive ceasefire, Israeli dominance is unsustainable. Follow Middle East Eye's live coverage of the Israel-Palestine war Regional actors, especially in the Gulf, fear appearing complicit with a state widely viewed as violating Arab rights. Israel's prolonged war in Gaza and lack of a political roadmap have tarnished its global image, leading to growing international condemnation and even weakening support from traditional allies like the EU (though it declined to take any action). Israel's military assault on Gaza has inflamed Arab public opinion, making normalisation politically costly for Gulf leaders The erosion of diplomatic support for Israel - alongside the continued refusal to hold it accountable for its war crimes - has only furthered its isolation, undermining any bid for genuine regional leadership. Meanwhile, Israeli national security doctrine under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu relies on military superiority as the only guarantee of peace. But even claimed military "victories" come at staggering human and economic costs - both for Palestinians and for Israelis. Even if external military actions temporarily consolidate internal support - as seen in Iran - they often fail to trigger regime change or long-term stability. Decades of foreign interventions have shown that externally imposed political transitions are more likely to produce chaos than lasting peace. Regional and internal pressures have compounded the challenges facing Israel's hegemonic ambitions. Gulf states, wary of Iranian collapse, fear the resulting chaos, humanitarian crisis, refugee flows and nuclear proliferation. Domestically, Netanyahu faces mounting pressure amid public frustration over his failure to secure a full ceasefire in Gaza or release all hostages - exposing internal fractures that challenge any coherent long-term strategy. Crucially, Israel has not established a legitimate Palestinian governing authority to assume control of Gaza, nor has it succeeded in imposing external or co-opted leadership. The result is chaos and the emergence of new resistance movements - mirroring US failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Regional defiance Saudi Arabia has remained unwilling to embrace Israeli ambitions, insisting that any normalisation must be preceded by a concrete commitment to establishing a Palestinian state. However, Israel's aggression has made further agreements politically untenable. Gulf states must act to avoid Israel's war on Iran spiralling into chaos Hadi Kahalzadeh Read More » Some Gulf countries are reassessing their approach to Israel, questioning whether its actions foster stability or provoke further conflict. Many now prefer a long-term weakening of both Iran and Israel, rather than a decisive victory for either, to reduce threats to their own regimes. Saudi and Emirati strategies of hedging - including outreach to Iran - suggest a desire to avoid taking sides in regional conflicts, reducing their willingness to join an anti-Iran alliance led by Israel. Turkey, too, is unlikely to accept Israeli regional dominance. What was once a "golden age" of cooperation in the 1990s has devolved into mutual suspicion. Turkish leaders have grown increasingly vocal in their condemnation of Israel's actions, particularly in Gaza, and Ankara views Israel's deepening alliances with Greece and Cyprus as a threat. Turkey continues to build its own military and missile capabilities and asserts regional influence in Syria. It also positions itself as a potential mediator in Israeli-Iranian tensions - an indication of its desire to act independently. A fragile vision Trump's military campaign may have weakened Iran's nuclear ambitions and its regional allies, but long-term regional stability remains elusive. The current "peace" is more accurately described as a fragile truce than a durable shift. At its core, Israeli military superiority has failed to deliver political solutions. Without addressing the Palestinian question, stabilising Gaza, and navigating complex regional rivalries, lasting peace is impossible. Even if armed groups are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures Even if armed resistance groups such as Hezbollah or Hamas are temporarily subdued, the region's capacity to generate new forms of resistance endures. Israel may maintain its military edge, but it will continue to struggle for legitimacy and leadership in the Middle East. As violations of international law by the US and Israel mount, the message appears clear: "Only the weak follow the rules." Such a precedent erodes collective security and undermines any meaningful regional consensus. Real, enduring peace will not come through dominance alone - it demands diplomacy, justice, and the courage to confront the root causes of conflict. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
Dubai Eye
2 hours ago
- Dubai Eye
US and EU avert trade war with 15% tariff deal
The US struck a framework trade agreement with the European Union on Sunday, imposing a 15 per cent import tariff on most EU goods - half the threatened rate - and averting a bigger trade war between the two allies that account for almost a third of global trade. US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced the deal at Trump's luxury golf course in western Scotland after an hour-long meeting that pushed the hard-fought deal over the line, following months of negotiations. "I think this is the biggest deal ever made," Trump told reporters, lauding EU plans to invest some $600 billion in the US and dramatically increase its purchases of US energy and military equipment. Trump said the deal, which tops a $550 billion deal signed with Japan last week, would expand ties between the trans-Atlantic powers after years of what he called unfair treatment of US exporters. Von der Leyen, describing Trump as a tough negotiator, said the 15 per cent tariff applied "across the board", later telling reporters it was "the best we could get." "We have a trade deal between the two largest economies in the world, and it's a big deal. It's a huge deal. It will bring stability. It will bring predictability," she said. The baseline 15 per cent tariff will still be seen by many in Europe as too high, compared with Europe's initial hopes to secure a zero-for-zero tariff deal. Bernd Lange, the German Social Democrat who heads the European Parliament's trade committee, said the tariffs were imbalanced and the hefty EU investment earmarked for the US would likely come at the bloc's own expense. Trump retains the ability to increase the tariffs in the future if European countries do not live up to their investment commitments, a senior US administration official told reporters on Sunday evening. The Euro rose around 0.2 per cent against the dollar, sterling and yen within an hour of the deal's being announced. MIRROR OF JAPAN DEAL Carsten Nickel, deputy director of research at Teneo, said Sunday's accord was "merely a high-level, political agreement" that could not replace a carefully hammered out trade deal: "This, in turn, creates the risk of different interpretations along the way, as seen immediately after the conclusion of the US-Japan deal." While the tariff applies to most goods, including semiconductors and pharmaceuticals, there are exceptions. The US will keep in place a 50 per cent tariff on steel and aluminum. Von der Leyen suggested the tariff could be replaced with a quota system; a senior administration official said EU leaders had asked that the two sides continue to talk about the issue. Von der Leyen said there would be no tariffs from either side on aircraft and aircraft parts, certain chemicals, certain generic drugs, semiconductor equipment, some agricultural products, natural resources and critical raw materials. "We will keep working to add more products to this list," von der Leyen said, adding that spirits were still under discussion. A US official said the tariff rate on commercial aircraft would remain at zero for now, and the parties would decide together what to do after a US review is completed, adding there is a "reasonably good chance" they could agree to a lower tariff than 15 per cent. No timing was given for when that probe would be completed. The deal will be sold as a triumph for Trump, who is seeking to reorder the global economy and reduce decades-old US trade deficits, and has already reached similar framework accords with Britain, Japan, Indonesia and Vietnam, although his administration has not hit its goal of "90 deals in 90 days". US officials said the EU had agreed to lower non-tariff barriers for automobiles and some agricultural products, though EU officials suggested the details of those standards were still under discussion. "Remember, their economy is $20 trillion... they are five times bigger than Japan," a senior US official told reporters during a briefing. "So the opportunity of opening their market is enormous for our farmers, our fishermen, our ranchers, all our industrial products, all our businesses." Trump has periodically railed against the EU, saying it was "formed to screw the United States" on trade. He has fumed for years about the US merchandise trade deficit with the EU, which in 2024 reached $235 billion, according to US Census Bureau data. The EU points to the US surplus in services, which it says partially redresses the balance. Trump has argued that his tariffs are bringing in "hundreds of billions of dollars" in revenues for the US while dismissing warnings from economists about the risk of inflation. On July 12, Trump threatened to apply a 30 per cent tariff on imports from the EU starting on August 1, after weeks of negotiations failed to reach a comprehensive trade deal. The EU had prepared countertariffs on 93 billion euros ($109 billion) of US goods in the event a deal to avoid the tariffs could not be struck.
Arabian Post
2 hours ago
- Arabian Post
US-EU Trade Deal to Reshape Energy and Investment Landscape
A transformative trade agreement between the United States and the European Union is poised to redefine their economic relations. US President Donald Trump announced the deal, which is set to have far-reaching implications on both sides of the Atlantic. The agreement includes the unprecedented opening of trade at zero tariffs, along with a significant commitment from the EU to purchase $750 billion worth of energy over the next decade. Moreover, the EU has pledged to invest an additional $600 billion in various sectors, significantly surpassing previous investment targets. The deal was hailed by the Trump administration as a major victory for the US economy, promising to bolster energy exports and enhance investment flows. While the specifics of the energy sectors involved remain under discussion, the agreement signals a substantial shift in the global energy market. The US, a major producer of natural gas and oil, is expected to benefit from increased exports, particularly in liquefied natural gas and other energy resources. At the heart of the deal is the mutual understanding that both parties will benefit from zero tariffs on industrial goods, which has been a longstanding issue in US-EU trade talks. The tariff reduction is expected to boost economic growth on both sides, especially for sectors such as automotive, technology, and agriculture. For the EU, the opening of the US market is seen as a crucial opportunity to tap into the world's largest economy without facing the heavy tariffs that have traditionally limited market access. ADVERTISEMENT Investment plays a pivotal role in the agreement, with the EU's commitment to direct $600 billion more than previously agreed upon into US infrastructure, technology, and innovation. This will likely lead to a surge in American jobs, particularly in industries poised for growth. It also presents a major opportunity for EU businesses to secure a foothold in the burgeoning US tech sector, which has long been a hotspot for investment. The announcement of the deal was accompanied by optimistic rhetoric from both US and EU officials, who described the agreement as an example of transatlantic cooperation that will not only benefit both economies but also foster stronger geopolitical ties. Experts believe the trade deal could serve as a model for future trade relations, potentially influencing global trade dynamics and setting a precedent for other international agreements. However, the deal has faced criticism from some quarters. Critics argue that the focus on energy purchases and large-scale investments could overshadow critical issues like labour rights, environmental protections, and fair competition. Some environmental groups have voiced concerns about the potential long-term environmental impact of increased energy trade, particularly if it leads to more fossil fuel reliance. These concerns underscore the ongoing debates about the balance between economic growth and sustainability, a tension that continues to shape global trade discussions.
