WASHINGTON, D.C. — Senate Democrats this week supported record numbers of failed attempts to prevent U.S. arms sales to Israel, underscoring a growing division within their party over its Middle East policy amid mounting humanitarian concerns in Gaza.
Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) introduced two resolutions intended to block separate arms transfers: one targeted the delivery of 20,000 automatic assault rifles; and the other would block $675 million worth of bombs and guidance kits. To his great surprise, 27 Democrats voted in support of blocking delivery of automatic rifles while 24 supported shelving shipment of bombs–marking the first time majority Senate Democrats opposed such measures (Axios +11, Al Jazeera +11 and AP News each reported 25 votes against these measures).
Although both resolutions gained momentum, both were defeated overwhelmingly with final votes for assault rifle measures being 70-27 and for bomb shipment being 73-24 – well short of meeting threshold requirements to become law (AP News/Reuters/Axios).
Republicans were swift in rejecting Republican’s proposals, citing how stopping arms sales would undermine support for key U.S. allies during wartime.
Charting the Shift: Democratic Dissent Increases
Previous similar efforts gained only 15 Democratic votes in April, so this new total marks an obvious rise in dissidence within the party (Reuters +12 Al Jazeera +12, Reuters +4 Washington Post and ynetnews).
Senators backing these measures included high-profile figures such as Tim Kaine (D-Va.), Mark Kelly (D-Arizona) and Lisa Blunt Rochester (D-Del.) who switched their vote from opposing earlier litigations to voting in support.
According to The Washington Post,
Sen. Sanders described this development as historic, asserting that most Americans want an end to funding of a conflict which contributes to starvation and suffering in Gaza (Reuters +8 AP News +8) ( The Guardian).
At the same time, Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer of New York strongly opposed these resolutions by asserting that military aid supports Israeli civilians rather than any particular government and remains essential to U.S. strategic interests (Reuters +15 The Washington Post +15 AP News = 15).
Supporters of Resolutions Reported Dreadful Conditions in Gaza
Voters supporting resolutions pointed to dire conditions on the ground in Gaza, including reports of famine, mass casualties and displacement, which prompted progressive Democrats to reconsider supporting offensive weapons transfers (The Times of Israel +8 [AP News +8 (The Washington Post),
+8
A group of over 40 Democratic Senators issued a joint letter calling on immediate steps to alleviate starvation in Gaza and increase humanitarian aid through trusted NGO channels, according to AP News.
Sen. Kaine stressed the necessity of providing defensive assistance as long as its political viability remains viable; offensive transfers risk leading to civilian harm and regional destabilization, according to The Washington Post (via Wikipedia) (with 3 references).
Lisa Blunt Rochester announced she could no longer support additional weapons unless Israel significantly changes its approach to civilian protection in Gaza and the West Bank (Axios +9; The Washington Post +9; Wikipedia = +9)
Political Implications This election highlights a widening chasm between moderates–who continue to support Israel’s self-defense–and progressives, who increasingly question its moral and strategic justification amid civilian casualties and international condemnation, and progressives questioning it on moral and strategic grounds. Wikipedia. The Wall Street Journal
This potential internal shift could transform Democratic electoral politics ahead of 2026 elections in states with growing pro-Palestinian sentiment among younger voters, particularly swing states with potential swing states with growing pro-Palestinian sentiment.
What Comes Next
Even though these resolutions failed, their passage indicates increasing pressure on Democratic leadership to alter U.S. foreign policy. As Gaza’s humanitarian crisis deepens, Democratic senators may demand conditionality or limitations on future weapons deals instead of rubberstamping foreign military assistance without stringency or restrictions.
With public opinion shifting away from Israel’s actions and majority dissatisfaction with ongoing aid–even among Democrats–Washington faces an intensified debate over strategic loyalty versus moral accountability in U.S. foreign policy.