Donald Trump announced this November 3, on election day in the US, that his Government agreed with Benjamin Netanyahu to end US aid of $4 billion annually to Israel by the end of this year. What, according to Trump, does the rise of Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed have to do with this decision and what effect could it have in practice?

First modification: 11/03/2026 - 20:24 Last modification: 11/03/2026 - 21:19

To display this YouTube content, you must allow advertising and audience measurement cookies.

An extension on your browser appears to be blocking the video player from loading. In order to view this content, you must disable it on this site.

Donald Trump announced this Tuesday that he plans to interrupt the almost $4 billion annually that the United States allocates to Israel at the end of 2026, considering that the country "no longer needs" that assistance.

The last-minute announcement, on a day of crucial elections that will define control of the United States Congress, has been read by analysts as a "desperate" measure in the face of elections that do not show an encouraging outlook for Trump or the Republican Party as a whole.

"This is clearly an attempt to change the opinion of voters in the United States, which could well be false, because it is Congress that approves these shipments of support, not the president. And, on the other hand, it is a symptom of a structural distancing that is occurring due to how public opinion has changed in the United States with respect to Israel, and in Israel with respect to democracy," analyst José E. Múzquiz, doctor in Political Science and International Relations from the University of Southern California, warns France 24.

Kelley Beaucar Vlahos, senior advisor at the Quincy Institute, an American think tank focused on foreign policy, agrees with this, stating that "Trump's message today has a whiff of desperation."

The American president, who enters the midterms with the lowest approval rating - according to a Reuters poll - due, in large part, to the economic impact of the war in the Middle East, justified that Israel does not need that help.

"We were giving them (Israel) $4 billion. We continue to do so, but that aid stops at the end of the year (...) We give them $4 billion in goods and money, and they don't need it (...) Israel is the country we help the most, we give it more than any other and it no longer needs it. I have continued doing it, but Israel is a very prosperous country. It doesn't need it. If it needed it, I would say that we keep the help," Trump told Fox.

However, citizen perception goes against it: "People see that in the United States prices are high, public services are bad, people die from a health emergency and billions of dollars are sent to Israel," Múzquiz emphasizes.

Read alsoMidterms live: Americans vote in key elections marked by the high cost of living

Elections, El-Sayed and the reasons behind Trump's announcement

As American voters went to the polls on Tuesday for the midterm elections that will decide who will control Congress, Trump made the announcement about cutting aid to Israel, but did not offer details and it was not clear what funding he was referring to.

In particular, questions remained about how aid would be cut off at the end of the year, given that the Memorandum of Understanding that provides $3.8 billion in US military support to Israel each year expires in September 2028.

The additional question for analysts is what this announcement poses on an election day.

"There are two things that are happening simultaneously. The first is a very real: distancing between both countries. Not between Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, who are great allies. Trump supported him in the recent Israeli election and clearly they have a very close relationship," says José E. Múzquiz, clarifying that, however, after October 7 and the offensive in Gaza, "there has been something that has not been seen in many years, which is a change in American public opinion against Israel."

"An issue that previously united Americans on the right and left: the almost unconditional support for the State of Israel, is now greatly weakened among the people," adds the expert.

Beaucar Vlahos considers in a column published this Tuesday that, "on the one hand, he could be desperately trying to demonstrate to Republican voters on Election Day that his party is not subservient to Israel, as a growing group on its right wing now alleges. Disapproval of Israel — particularly over the war with Iran, which has undermined confidence in Trump's ability to direct the economy — is growing among Republicans."

But there is also the Democratic rebound in the polls. And this is what Trump himself suggested.

Support for Israel among Democratic voters has plummeted, candidates critical of its great ally in the Middle East have risen among progressives, and even moderate lawmakers are increasingly willing to question years of American support for Netanyahu.

One of those rising figures is Democratic candidate Abdul El-Sayed, who aspires to represent Michigan in the Upper House. El-Sayed, who if he wins this Tuesday would become the first Muslim to serve as a US senator, has opposed unconditional military aid to Israel, arguing that the nation's funding should prioritize US citizens.

In response, Trump, a total opponent of El-Sayed, claimed on Tuesday that the left has used US funding for Israel as a "sign of injustice" and that he could not allow it. Underscoring the political nature of his comment, Trump specifically mentioned El-Sayed when explaining why his administration was suspending funding.

"Why should we endure attacks by lunatics like El-Sayed when (Israel) doesn't need (the help)?" Trump said.

Despite this statement, analyst Alvaro Iriarte Baron sees something deeper and that comes from behind.

"The announcement was shortly before the election, if there had been a clear electoral political intention, this would have been made much earlier, in such a way as to project a response that would neutralize the criticism of the most left wing of the Democratic Party and of some on the right who view the intervention of the United States and the alliance with Israel with a certain skepticism," explains the also content director of the Res Publica Institute of Chile.

Read alsoAbdul El-Sayed seeks to win over the disenchanted Muslim vote in Michigan

An impact for Netanyahu?

The agreement that Trump mentions with Netanyahu takes place at a time when the Israeli prime minister is risking his political future. The legislative elections of last October 27 left the formation of a Government on hold.

The Central Electoral Commission (CEC) of Israel published the final results in the early hours of October 30, where the victory went to Likud, Netanyahu's party, with 27 seats, and his coalition obtained 53 seats. In second place was the opposition party Yashar, of former general Gadi Eisenkot, with 21 seats. None reached the majority to form a government.

For Netanyahu, however, the support he receives from Trump has generally been beneficial for his own elections.

Along these lines, opposition leader Gadi Eisenkot accused Netanyahu on Tuesday of endangering the country's strategic relationship with the United States and demanded that he give explanations to the public about the changes in the framework of cooperation between both countries. "Israel's special relationship with the United States is a key component of its national security," the politician wrote.

"A sudden loss of $3.8 billion in guaranteed annual military aid—at a time when the country is fighting wars on multiple fronts and is undoubtedly in a precarious economic situation—could be devastating. Security is an issue of concern to all sectors of the Israeli electorate, and a loss of confidence could affect negotiations for the formation of a Likud-led coalition government," reflects Beaucar Vlahos.

Read alsoTrump announces that the United States will stop providing $4 billion annually in aid to Israel

Another law up your sleeve?

Experts, however, recall that a defense bill is in the pipeline in the US, which includes a provision that would deepen military technological ties between the United States and Israel.

According to details released by the Quincy Institute and media such as Reuters, this provision would deepen cooperation between the defense sectors of the United States and Israel by accelerating the joint development of military technology and other collaborations. The bill passed the House of Representatives in July and remains pending a vote in the Senate.

"Through a law (Section 219), Congress is attempting to create a new structure that 'accelerates defense technology collaboration between the United States and Israel, including technology exchange, co-production of weapons systems, and bilateral research and development in multiple areas of warfare, such as biotechnology, autonomous systems, artificial intelligence, cyberwarfare, and others,' adds the Quincy Institute expert.

Under this version, a designated agent would handle the relationship, reducing Pentagon and Congressional oversight. "In other words, billions of dollars in aid will continue to flow to Israel, but covertly, making the relationship less politically sensitive," warns Beaucar Vlahos.

This point was recalled this Tuesday by critics of aid to Israel.

“If POTUS (the president of the United States) is genuinely committed to cutting aid to Israel, he should demand that Congress eliminate all proposed programs that will give the Israeli defense and intelligence apparatus unrestricted access to our own defense and intelligence R&D,” published in

To display this content from X (Twitter), you must allow audience measurement and advertising cookies.

"Let's protect American interests, let's put Americans first," he added.

With Reuters and EFE

Related keywords

The content you requested does not exist or is no longer available.