BY MIRABEL ODETA

The United States Senate on Wednesday rejected two resolutions aimed at stopping approximately $450 million worth of military equipment sales to Israel, highlighting a widening political divide in Washington over U.S. support for the country. The measures failed despite increasing concern among lawmakers about the humanitarian impact of ongoing military operations in the Middle East.

Both resolutions were introduced in response to proposed sales that included heavy-duty bulldozers and powerful aerial munitions. While the efforts were ultimately unsuccessful, the level of support they received—particularly among Democratic senators—signaled a notable shift in the conversation surrounding U.S. military aid to Israel.

The first resolution sought to block the $295 million sale of D9R and D9T Caterpillar bulldozers, along with spare parts and support services. These machines are often used in military operations for clearing land and demolishing structures. The measure failed to advance after a 59 to 40 vote, with all Republicans and seven Democrats voting against it. One Republican senator did not cast a vote.

The second resolution targeted a separate $151.8 million package involving 12,000 BLU-110A/B general-purpose 1,000-pound bombs, along with logistical and technical support. This measure was also defeated, with a vote of 63 to 36. Eleven Democrats joined Republicans in opposing the resolution, while another Republican senator was absent from the vote.

Supporters of the resolutions argued that the United States should reconsider its military assistance to Israel due to the impact of ongoing conflicts on civilian populations. Critics pointed to reports of destruction in Gaza, Lebanon, and the West Bank, where such equipment has reportedly been used in both airstrikes and ground operations. They emphasized that U.S. aid provides significant leverage that could be used to push for changes in military conduct and greater protection for civilians.

Opponents of the measures, however, maintained that continued support for Israel is essential, particularly in the context of regional security threats. They argued that Israel has the right to defend itself and that its military actions are aimed at targeting militant groups and infrastructure rather than civilians. Israeli officials have consistently stated that civilian harm is not intentional and that efforts are made to minimize casualties.

Although both resolutions failed, the voting margins revealed a shift compared to earlier attempts to block arms sales. In July, similar measures received far less support, with votes in the Senate overwhelmingly rejecting them by wide margins. The increased backing this time suggests growing unease among some lawmakers, especially within the Democratic Party, about the scale and consequences of U.S. involvement.

The debate also comes in the context of earlier decisions by the administration to expedite military assistance to Israel. At the start of the U.S.-Israeli conflict involving Iran, the administration invoked emergency authority to bypass the usual congressional review process, allowing weapons transfers to proceed more quickly. This move drew criticism from lawmakers who argued it limited oversight on significant military decisions.

While the resolutions did not pass, the discussions surrounding them indicate that U.S. policy toward Israel may face increasing scrutiny in the months ahead. Lawmakers appear to be grappling with the challenge of balancing long-standing strategic alliances with rising concerns about humanitarian consequences and accountability in conflict zones.