Dr. Omar Al-Raddad, a military and strategic expert for France 24, considered that the US President’s decision to put an end to financial and military aid to Israel by the end of 2026 will not lead to the weakening of the Hebrew state as tension continues in the Middle East, and will not affect the balance of power in the region to its disadvantage. He also said that this announcement does not constitute a radical shift in US policy in light of the agreement of the Democratic and Republican parties to support Tel Aviv.

Published on: 04/11/2026 - 18:26

US President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday that he would end the aid his country provides annually to Israel at the end of this year, justifying his decision by saying that Tel Aviv no longer needs this support and “can buy its own weapons.”

Trump said in a statement coinciding with the US midterm elections, on the “Fox & Friends” program broadcast by Fox News Channel: “We were giving them $4 billion, and we are still doing so, but this will stop at the end of the year.” He also acknowledged the political nature of his statements, and pointed to the heated electoral race in the state of Michigan for the Senate seat, which was contested by Democrat Abdul Sayed and Republican Mike Rogers.

Al-Sayed announced on Wednesday morning that he had won the seat, making him the first Muslim to be elected to the upper chamber of Congress. Trump said: “Why should we suffer attacks from lunatics like Mr. Abdul Sayed, when they (the Israelis) don’t need it (aid)?”

Read also: The American midterm elections: Abdul Sayed... a Muslim doctor of Egyptian origin won a seat in the Senate

According to Trump, American support for the Hebrew state includes financial and military aid. He said he and the Israeli prime minister had discussed ending aid for years, adding that it was Netanyahu who raised the idea.

The current agreement between the two sides, which dates back to 2019, stipulates aid worth approximately $3.8 billion annually until 2028. Netanyahu had previously said that he seeks to gradually reduce dependence on American military aid.

Trump indicated that this aid has become a political goal and said that Netanyahu realizes that "this is one of the points of disagreement between them."

Since 1948, Tel Aviv has received American economic and military aid worth more than $300 billion, according to figures from the American Council on Foreign Relations.

To learn more about Trump’s decision and its repercussions on Israel, especially in light of the ongoing war in the Middle East and the strikes that Tel Aviv is directing at its opponents in the region on more than one level, we interviewed the Jordanian military and strategic expert and political analyst, Dr. Omar Al Raddad.

France 24: What are the reasons behind the US President’s decision to stop aid to Israel?

D. Omar Al-Raddad: I believe that the background of Trump’s decision is in fact linked to the contexts of the elections that took place on Tuesday, especially as the timing indicates this as it coincided with the start of the midterm congressional elections. Trump's decision, meaning to stop financial aid starting next year, 2027, comes in light of the accusations leveled by Democrats and other groups against the American administration of generosity and generous treatment with Israel, and that Trump stands by it and that he has increased the amount of aid directed to it while massacres are being committed against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which is contrary to American and Western values. Hence, Trump wanted to send a message saying that he does not fully stand with Israel and its current government. But he may have previously agreed on this announcement with Netanyahu during a phone call that took place between them a few days ago.

Does the decision constitute a fundamental shift in American policy towards its ally in the Middle East?

I do not think that it constitutes a fundamental shift in American policy, because the latter remains constant, indicating that the differences between the Democratic and Republican parties regarding the position with Israel are related only to viewpoints and are not radical differences that break or affect the strategic relationship between the two sides. We remember the Democrats' position even on the issue of Gaza after October 7, 2023, and their support for Israel against the Hamas movement, despite the American party's political differences with the Israeli right and differences with Israeli parties and governments. But this does not negate the reality of the strategic alliance between the two sides, taking into account the regional transformations in the Middle East, through which it may be planning to transform Israel into an effective regional state in the region like other regional powers while maintaining, as many Israelis suggest, predominance, military control, air superiority, etc., even while seeking to reduce the amount of American sponsorship in light of major trends at the level of the Democratic and Republican parties, and the view that the real confrontation and major upcoming conflicts for the United States are not in the Middle East region but with China, On the other hand, investment opportunities and future opportunities, as Democrats propose, are in Southeast Asia.

What are the repercussions of the decision on the war taking place on more than one level in the Middle East?

I do not think that the decision will be reflected in the direction of weakening Israel in the Middle East region, nor even on the war that is being prepared or that is presented as a scenario today. I mean the Israeli-American war on Iran or the possibilities of strikes and the possibilities of their expansion later. This is because this decision does not include the current American directions, because the directions and military support have been accomplished, meaning that Israel, if the United States launches a current strike on Iran, it will not need at the present time, perhaps for many weapons. If there is a strike or future changes to armament, I believe that the issue of armament has already been accomplished, as indicated by what is being announced about the landing of many American military cargo planes loaded with weapons, equipment, and ammunition in Israel. Therefore: the mission has been accomplished, and it is not required to be supplied with weapons in larger quantities, because what it has in addition to its military manufacturing will not be greatly affected by the balance of power in the Middle East, meaning that it will maintain military and technological superiority in the region, at many levels and perhaps for years to come. It is not known exactly how long this superiority will continue.

Read also: Israel: Netanyahu thanks Trump for providing weapons to “finish the mission” against Iran and its allies

But the importance, I think, is focused on the Israeli orientations themselves: Will this force be a military force for deterrence or for use within the framework of what is known as surplus power, expansion and influence on regional security? Perhaps this is linked to the results of the elections and the presence of Gadi Eisenkot [leading the opposition seeking to overthrow Netanyahu - editor’s note] at the head of the government later.

Returning to Trump's decision, regardless of what is happening in Israel, there will not be any profound changes in the balance of power in the Middle East at the strategic level.

Keywords related to the article

The content you want to browse is no longer in service or is currently unavailable.