U.S. Policy on Bomb Deliveries to Israel Highlights Shifts in Administration Approaches

Washington, D.C. – The United States has altered its stance on arms deliveries to Israel under successive administrations, reflecting differing approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and U.S.-Israeli relations.

Under President Joe Biden, the U.S. paused the delivery of approximately 3,500 bombs, including 2,000-pound explosives, to Israel in May. The decision aimed to mitigate civilian casualties in densely populated areas such as Rafah, amid Israel’s military operations against Hamas in Gaza. This marked one of the most significant indications of the Biden administration’s dissatisfaction with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of the conflict and created tension in U.S.-Israeli ties.

In contrast, President Donald Trump’s administration reversed this policy, instructing the Pentagon to lift the hold on supplying 2,000-pound bombs. The decision aligned with Trump’s campaign promises and his commitment to supporting Israel’s military efforts, a cornerstone of his Middle East policy.

Despite this support, Trump expressed impatience with the ongoing conflict as early as March, urging Israel in an interview with Israel Hayom to “finish up your war. You have to finish it up; you got to get it done.” Trump maintained consistent communication with Netanyahu, alongside his Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, to broker a ceasefire and negotiate a hostage exchange during the transition from the Biden administration.

Although a ceasefire and prisoner swap deal were announced shortly before Trump’s inauguration, the former president has claimed credit for its success. In a recent statement, he highlighted his administration’s role in facilitating the latest exchange of four Israeli soldiers for approximately 200 Palestinian detainees.

The contrasting policies of the Biden and Trump administrations underscore the evolving dynamics of U.S. involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, shaped by strategic interests and broader diplomatic objectives. As the situation in Gaza continues to unfold, these decisions highlight the complexities of balancing support for allies with humanitarian considerations.