Follow us on social

GOP trying to drive wedge between Dems with Israel votes

GOP trying to drive wedge between Dems with Israel votes

Sen. Risch is the latest Republican to take unusual steps in support of pro-Israel legislation

Reporting | Washington Politics

Republicans in Congress are threatening to obstruct committee legislative activity if the Senate does not vote on a bill sanctioning the International Criminal Court that passed the House last week.

Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho), the ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on Tuesday that he would not sign off on any legislation or nominations in the committee until Democrats agreed to take up the legislation, either in the SFRC or through a floor vote.

It is the latest in a series of efforts from the GOP to force Israel-related votes in an attempt to drive a wedge between Democrats.

While the Republican majority in the House has passed a number of bills linked to the war, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has been reluctant to introduce them in the Senate.

Notably, the House has measures aimed at funding Israel’s war by making cuts to domestic spending, punishing the Biden administration for pausing one weapons shipment to Israel, and, most recently, sanctioning the ICC for issuing arrest warrants against leaders of Hamas and Israel.

Each of these bills received relatively small but meaningful support from House Democrats, with 42 of them voting for the ICC bill, despite White House opposition. Senate Democrats, who hold a slim majority, do not want to risk passing such legislation that the Biden administration has either publicly opposed or outright said it would veto.

Previously, in response to Schumer’s refusal to bring the bill that would have forced Biden to proceed on the weapons shipment that was withheld, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) said he would introduce a War Powers Resolution with the aim of shutting down the Pentagon-built humanitarian pier in Gaza, which Cruz charged was aiding Hamas.

According to reporting from late May, Cruz claimed the effort was intended to divide Democrats. He said he would have preferred the Senate vote on the House measure, but he was using the WPR as a vehicle because Schumer could not prevent a speedy vote on the floor.”This War Powers Resolution is a mechanism for forcing a vote and getting every Democrat on record — where do you stand? Do you support undermining Israel and supporting Hamas?” Cruz said.

So far, that effort has gone nowhere.

The latest attempt could have more legs, since Democrats have been largely receptive to efforts to punish the ICC. Bipartisan talks over possible ways to express opposition to the ICC chief prosecutor’s decision reportedly broke down on Monday, perhaps prompting Risch’s ultimatum.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) the committee chairman, who was reportedly interested in negotiating a compromise bill with Republicans, communicated his displeasure with Risch’s decision.

“Defending Israel from this flawed and biased prosecution deserves the same united support we share for the entire U.S.-Israel relationship,” he told Punchbowl News. “Political maneuvering by Republicans have made a bipartisan bill more difficult, but I have continued talks with those Republicans who are genuinely interested in a bipartisan path forward.”

Even Republican Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas, the chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, lamented that the House legislation had become a “partisan messaging bill.”

Before the text of the bill was released, many Democrats were sharply critical of the ICC ruling, and even Secretary of State Antony Blinken said he was open to working with Congress to find the “appropriate response.”

But as Connor Echols and Maya Krainc reported in RS last week, the House ICC sanction bill would not only punish the court, but also anyone who assisted its investigation of Israel’s conduct in Gaza.

The legislation “would also sanction immediate family members of those targeted,” Echols and Krainc wrote. “The sanctions include bans on entering the U.S. and doing business with American companies or citizens.”

Some of the 42 Democrats who voted in favor — more than either of the other ICC-related bills — may have calculated that the bill would be unlikely to pass the Democratic-led Senate in any event and that they would incur less of a political cost by voting for it in the House than if they voted against. The powerful American Israel Public Affairs Committee, or AIPAC, supports the bill and has already spent nearly $20 million through its super PAC, United Democracy Project, on defeating progressive House Democrats who have been critical of the way that Israel has carried out its Gaza military campaign.

While it remains unclear whether Risch's latest move to force a Senate, or at least an SFRC vote on ICC sanctions will succeed, it is likely to complicate matters for the leadership of a committee that prides itself on operating in a bipartisan manner.


Phil Pasquini / Shutterstock.com

Reporting | Washington Politics
Trump ASEAN
Top photo credit: U.S. President Donald Trump looks at Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr., next to Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim when posing for a family photo with leaders at the ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, October 26, 2025. Vincent Thian/Pool via REUTERS

‘America First’ meets ‘ASEAN Way’ in Kuala Lumpur

Asia-Pacific

The 2025 ASEAN and East Asia Summits in Kuala Lumpur beginning today are set to be consequential multilateral gatherings — defining not only ASEAN’s internal cohesion but also the shape of U.S.–China relations in the Indo-Pacific.

President Donald Trump’s participation will be the first by a U.S. president in an ASEAN-led summit since 2022. President Biden skipped the last two such summits in 2023 and 2024, sending then-Vice President Harris instead.

keep readingShow less
iran, china, russia
Top photo credit: Top image credit: Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and and Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi shake hands as Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Ma Zhaoxu looks on during their meet with reporters after their meeting at Diaoyutai State Guest House on March 14, 2025 in Beijing, China. Lintao Zhang/Pool via REUTERS

'Annulled'! Russia won't abide snapback sanctions on Iran

Middle East

“A raider attack on the U.N. Security Council.” This was the explosive accusation leveled by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov this week. His target was the U.N. Secretariat and Western powers, whom he blamed for what Russia sees as an illegitimate attempt to restore the nuclear-related international sanctions on Iran.

Beyond the fiery rhetoric, Ryabkov’s statement contained a message: Russia, he said, now considers all pre-2015 U.N. sanctions on Iran, snapped back by the European signatories of the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — the United Kingdom, France, Germany — “annulled.” Moscow will deepen its military-technical cooperation with Tehran accordingly, according to Ryabkov.

This is more than a diplomatic spat; it is the formal announcement of a split in international legal reality. The world’s major powers are now operating under two irreconcilable interpretations of international law. On one side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany assert that the sanctions snapback mechanism of the JCPOA was legitimately triggered for Iran’s alleged violations. On the other, Iran, Russia, and China reject this as an illegitimate procedural act.

This schism was not inevitable, and its origin reveals a profound incongruence. The Western powers that most frequently appeal to the sanctity of the "rules-based international order" and international law have, in this instance, taken an action whose effects fundamentally undermine it. By pushing through a legal maneuver that a significant part of the Security Council considers illegitimate, they have ushered the world into a new and more dangerous state. The predictable, if imperfect, framework of universally recognized Security Council decisions is being replaced by a system where legal facts are determined by political interests espoused by competing power blocs.

This rupture followed a deliberate Western choice to reject compromises in a stand-off with Iran. While Iran was in a technical violation of the provisions of the JCPOA — by, notably, amassing a stockpile of highly enriched uranium (up to 60% as opposed to the 3.67% for a civilian use permissible under the JCPOA), there was a chance to avert the crisis. In the critical weeks leading to the snapback, Iran had signaled concessions in talks with the International Atomic Energy Agency in Cairo, in terms of renewing cooperation with the U.N. nuclear watchdog’s inspectors.

keep readingShow less
On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants
Top Photo Credit: (Official White House Photo by Molly Riley)

On Ukraine and Venezuela, Trump needs to dump the sycophants

Europe

While diplomats labored to produce the Dayton Accords in 1995, then-Secretary of Defense Bill Perry advised, “No agreement is better than a bad agreement.” Given that Washington’s allies in London, Paris, Berlin and Warsaw are opposed to any outcome that might end the war in Ukraine, no agreement may be preferable. But for President Trump, there is no point in equating the illusion of peace in Ukraine with a meaningless ceasefire that settles nothing.

Today, Ukraine is mired in corruption, starting at the very highest levels of the administration in Kyiv. Sending $175 billion of borrowed money there "for however long it takes" has turned out to be worse than reckless. The U.S. national sovereign debt is surging to nearly $38 trillion and rising by $425 billion with each passing month. President Trump needs to turn his attention away from funding Joe Biden’s wars and instead focus on the faltering American economy.

keep readingShow less

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.