Follow us on social

google cta
US rifles may go to Israeli settlers, police units accused of rights violations

US rifles may go to Israeli settlers, police units accused of rights violations

The Biden administration will reportedly go through with the sale despite concerns from Congress and the State Department.

Reporting | Middle East
google cta
google cta

The Biden administration will reportedly approve a $34 million sale of rifles to Israeli police after receiving assurances that the weapons would not end up in the hands of settlers in the West Bank, where violence has surged over the past month.

But experts and officials are raising questions about whether the Ministry of National Security will meaningfully hold to those commitments given Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir’s long standing support for expanding settlements in the West Bank as well as his recent efforts to stand up “security squads” of armed civilians.

Notably, Ben-Gvir promised last month that he would give weapons to settlers in the West Bank, and an apparently independent group distributed 300 rifles to settlers late last month in a move that it said was coordinated with the Israeli military and police — the latter of which is under Ben-Gvir’s control.

Firearms are a “particularly fungible weapon,” noted Josh Paul, a long-time State Department official who recently resigned in protest of the Biden administration’s approach to the Israel-Gaza war. Even if Ben-Gvir holds to his promise, a large sale of U.S. weapons could free up Israeli guns or American weapons from previous sales to give to settlers, Paul explained.

It is also unclear whether a sale of rifles to Israel’s national police complies with the Biden administration’s own policy around weapons exports, which stipulates that the United States will not sell arms to units involved in gross violations of human rights.

“Within the Israeli National Police, there are a number of units that the Bureau of Democracy, Rights, and Labor at the State Department has identified as being credibly involved in gross violations of human rights, including extrajudicial killings and torture,” Paul told RS.

In a statement to RS, a spokesperson for the State Department did not address Paul’s allegation directly but argued that, under the administration's weapons sale policy, "[a]rms transfers and sales are evaluated holistically on a case-by-case basis based on diplomatic, security, economic, and human rights considerations." The spokesperson added that State officials "continue to stress to our Israeli partners the importance of mitigating civilian harm during operations."

A State Department official has said U.S. rifles will “only go to Israeli national police-controlled units.” Ben-Gvir has framed the “security squads” as a crucial way to protect Israeli citizens in case of a surprise attack like the one that occurred on October 7.

While the Biden administration has yet to publicly approve the sale, Axios reported that the White House and the relevant congressional committees have already signed off on the deal.

The news of the arms sale came shortly before Human Rights Watch issued a blanket call on all weapons suppliers to “suspend the transfer of arms to the warring parties in Israel and Gaza given the real risk that they will be used to commit grave abuses.”

“Providing weapons that knowingly and significantly would contribute to unlawful attacks can make those providing them complicit in war crimes,” Human Rights Watch argued.

The debate over whether to send U.S. weapons to Israeli police reveals the extent to which American officials are worried about violence in the West Bank, where soldiers and settlers have killed at least 130 Palestinians, including 41 children, and displaced more than 1,100 civilians. Settlers, for their part, claim that they are responding to an uptick in Palestinian violence.

While relatively few in Congress have called for a ceasefire in Gaza, a growing number of lawmakers have condemned settler violence. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) is reportedly among those who raised questions behind closed doors about the potential firearms sale. (Van Hollen’s office did not respond to a request for comment from RS.)

President Joe Biden has also slammed settler violence as “pouring gasoline on the fire” of the ongoing war. National security adviser Jake Sullivan put a finer point on the issue last week when he told CNN that it is “totally unacceptable to have extremist settler violence against innocent people in the West Bank.”


Photo credit: Knesset members Itamar Ben-Gvir and Avi Maoz in Sheikh Jarrah, Jerusalem. (Shay Kendler via Wikimedia Commons/CC BY-SA 4.0)
google cta
Reporting | Middle East
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?
Top image credit: Sens. Andy Kim (D-N.J.), Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) and Elissa Slotkin (D-Mich.) sit look on during a congressional hearing in January, 2025. (Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call/Sipa USA)

Will Democrats pop Trump's $50 billion trial balloon for war?

Washington Politics

On Wednesday, Sen. Ruben Gallego (D-Ariz.) told CNN that he would support new funding for the U.S. war with Iran — but only if Israel and Arab Gulf states help pay for it.

“We’re using our taxpayer money to protect those countries,” Gallego said. “We’re using our men to protect these countries. They need to throw in and have skin in the game too.”

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

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.