The political fallout from the Democrats' sweeping victory in the US midterm elections could have far-reaching implications for Israel, including a fundamental shift in Washington's approach to military assistance, a former senior Biden administration official has warned.
Phil Gordon, who served as national security adviser to then-US vice president Kamala Harris from 2022 to January 2025, told The Jerusalem Post that American public support for providing financial assistance to Israel has declined to such an extent that it may no longer be politically sustainable within the Democratic party.
"I honestly don't think any of the candidates [in the next Democratic presidential primary] will support the notion of financial assistance to Israel," Gordon said. "That's not an arms cutoff or an arms embargo, but just the idea of American taxpayers financing Israeli purchases of weapons. I think that's probably a thing of the past."
Gordon's assessment comes as Israel faces an increasingly complicated political environment in Washington following the Democrats' significant gains in the midterm elections. While he cautioned against interpreting the results as primarily a referendum on Israel, he said the country's policies have become an increasingly important factor in the changing American political landscape.
The election, he argued, was above all a rejection of US President Donald Trump's domestic and foreign policies, with inflation, affordability, the war in Iran, corruption allegations, and the administration's approach to artificial intelligence and data centers all contributing to the Democratic victory.
"It is impossible to see it as anything other than a massive repudiation of the Trump administration's policies," Gordon said. He described the Democratic gains as an unexpectedly large shift, reflecting a broader sense among Americans that the country was moving in the wrong direction.
Asked whether the election could be considered the first midterm in which foreign policy played a particularly significant role, Gordon said the war in Iran was certainly a factor, but stressed that domestic concerns remained central.
"Affordability was the core issue here," he said. Trump had won the presidency in part by promising to bring down prices, Gordon noted, but had failed to deliver on that promise.
American attitudes toward Israel deteriorating across the aisle
Nevertheless, the election also reflected a broader deterioration in American attitudes toward Israel, he said – a trend that extends beyond the Democratic party.
"Americans in general, this is not just a party thing, because Republicans too, are not as supportive of Israel as they have historically been, and certainly not of the current government," Gordon said.
That shift, he added, had been underway for years but was significantly accelerated by the war in Gaza. The subsequent war in Iran further contributed to dissatisfaction, particularly among Americans who viewed Israel as having pushed Washington toward military confrontation with Tehran.
"There is a different mood and things that used to be controversial or even extreme in American politics, like conditioning aid to Israel or putting sanctions on settlements, are now mainstream," he said.
Gordon pointed to the dramatic change in Democratic senators' willingness to support legislation conditioning military assistance to Israel. Measures associated with Sen. Bernie Sanders that once attracted only a small handful of Democratic supporters have increasingly gained backing.
"That went from a handful to 20 to like 47," he said, describing the shift as evidence of how dramatically the political debate has changed.
"There is a new US-Israel relationship evolving."
For Israel, Gordon said, the implications extend beyond the prospect of a Democratic-controlled Congress. Jerusalem can no longer assume that the bipartisan consensus that traditionally underpinned the US-Israel relationship will automatically survive.
He argued that Israeli officials must fundamentally rethink how they engage with both American political parties, particularly as criticism of the Netanyahu government's policies increasingly crosses party lines.
Within the Democratic Party, Gordon identified three major sources of opposition: the conduct of the war in Gaza, Israel's perceived role in pushing for the war in Iran, and the government's policies in the West Bank.
He pointed specifically to settlement expansion, settler violence, the establishment of outposts, and what he described as de facto annexation.
Israelis, he said, have become accustomed to decades of assuming that Washington would provide consistent diplomatic and military backing. That assumption is no longer justified.
"Things you could assume before or count on before, like consistent support in the United Nations or no arms conditionality or no sanctions, the politics have changed," Gordon said. "Israelis need to realize that and handle it."
One of the clearest illustrations of this changing environment is the debate over the future of the US-Israel memorandum of understanding (MOU), which establishes long-term American military assistance.
Gordon, who was part of the Obama administration team that negotiated the previous agreement that included $4 billion of assistance per year between 2019-2028, said the political consensus that once made such arrangements relatively straightforward has eroded.
He recalled that when the previous MOU was negotiated, there was broad bipartisan agreement that the United States should provide Israel with military assistance to ensure its security.
That consensus, he said, can no longer be taken for granted.
Asked whether a Democratic administration in the White House would make negotiations over a new MOU more difficult for Israel, Gordon answered: "Yes."
But he went further, questioning whether even a Republican administration could guarantee continued American financial assistance over the long term.
"Honestly, I'm not even sure about the Republican side," he said, pointing to Trump's recent comments suggesting that the existing framework of long-term assistance may be coming to an end.
Even if Trump were to commit to a new 10-year agreement with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Gordon warned, there would be no guarantee that a future president or Congress would honor its financial commitments.
An MOU, he noted, remains subject to congressional authorization and appropriations. Ultimately, only Congress can allocate the money.
"I don't know that you could count on a future president or Congress to appropriate that funding," he said.
Israel's economic development has also changed the debate, Gordon argued, with American taxpayers increasingly questioning why the United States should finance weapons purchases for what is now a wealthy country.
Mainstream Democrats say US arms sales to Israel should be conditional
Gordon distinguished between the declining political support for direct financial assistance and the separate, increasingly contentious debate over whether the United States should continue selling advanced weapons systems to Israel.
He acknowledged that an arms embargo or a complete halt to weapons sales remains a position associated primarily with the progressive wing of the Democratic party, particularly younger voters.
But the broader principle of conditioning military sales on Israeli government policy has moved much closer to the Democratic mainstream, he said.
Asked whether he personally supports making American arms sales conditional, Gordon replied: "Yeah, I think arms sales should be conditional."
He added that as a starting point Israel should be required to comply with existing US law, including provisions restricting weapons transfers to countries that obstruct humanitarian assistance.
Beyond that, he said, Washington could debate additional conditions related to the use of military force and Israeli policy.
Gordon pointed to the Biden administration's decision to withhold certain 2,000-pound bombs during the Gaza war, as well as then-president Joe Biden's public warning that the United States would not provide certain weapons if Israel conducted its military operation in Rafah in a particular manner.
"Even in the Biden administration, which got so much criticism for not withholding weapons, Biden himself went on TV and said if Israel conducted the Rafah operation in a certain way, he would not sell weapons," Gordon said.
"The principle of conditioning it on Israeli policy or behavior is now becoming more mainstream in the US."
The implications will be particularly significant during the next Democratic presidential primary. Gordon said that while candidates will not necessarily face formal litmus tests on Israel, their positions on military assistance, settlements, sanctions, and the MOU will become important considerations for Democratic voters. He suggested that it would be difficult for a candidate to emerge from the primary process without being willing to consider withholding weapons or voting against Israel at the United Nations.
"That doesn't mean that the more extreme views in the party will prevail," he said. "But the old ways of doing business just don't fly anymore. The old politics of Israel policy just don't fly anymore."
Asked whether there was a realistic path toward restoring normal relations while Netanyahu is still the prime minister, Gordon offered a blunt response.
"No," he said. "I think bridges have been significantly burned".
Politicians serving with Netanyahu seen as racist by US Democrats
Gordon stressed that the problem extends beyond Netanyahu's handling of the Gaza war. The composition of his governing coalition, particularly its inclusion of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, has further alienated leading Democrats.
Netanyahu, he said, has governed alongside politicians who are widely viewed in Democratic circles as "beyond the pale and racist."
"That is hard to imagine a normal relationship between leading Democrats and such a coalition," Gordon said. "I have to be honest, that would be pretty hard to imagine."
Gordon declined to speculate about whether Harris, whom he worked for, might seek the Democratic presidential nomination again in 2028, saying that the decision would have to come from the former vice president herself. Harris has publicly said she is considering her political future.
But regardless of who eventually leads the Democratic Party, Gordon's message to Jerusalem was clear: Israel is entering a new era in its relationship with Washington, one in which bipartisan support, long-term military financing, and diplomatic backing can no longer be treated as automatic.
Follow us on GoogleSource: The Jerusalem Post · AMICHAI STEIN
At a glance
- Topic
- Politics
- Country
- 🇮🇱 IL
- Publisher language
- EN
- Added to Allnira