US-ISREAL RELATIONS: Why Does the US Always Support Israel? History, Lobby, and $298B in Aid

The Founding Moment: 1948 and Politics of Recognition.

The special relationship between US and Israel was formed within eleven minutes. Then President Harry Truman of USA was the first country in the world to recognize the new Jewish state on 14 May 1948, when David Ben-Gurion declared the state of Israel. President Biden subsequently confirmed that Washington had provided rock solid and unblinking support to Israel since the same moment, 75 years ago that the U.S. became the first nation to acknowledge Israel, 11 minutes after its establishment.

Such an immediate recognition was by no means accidental. It was driven by internal pressure on the part of the Jewish-American communities, the personal moral belief of Truman on the holocaust and also the cold war political consideration of the need to establish a democratic foothold in an unstable area. It established a pattern that no other administration, be it Democratic or Republican has essentially overturned. Relations between the two countries sprang out of an early American policy of sympathy and support of the creation of a Jewish homeland in 1948, to a relationship that links the United States, an up-and-coming superpower with conflicting interests in the Middle East, with Israel, a small but militarily strong state.

Pre-statehood: Zionism and the United States.

Over one millennium, the present-day Palestine was an Arab-dominant region of the Ottoman Empire, between 1517 and 1914, when Britain took it over during World War 1.

In November 1917, Britain declared the Balfour declaration, which was the reason why a Jewish national home was to be located in Palestine. Another person to approve of the declaration and the endorsement of the League of Nations of the British rule of the area was President Woodrow Wilkins.

Palestine was under a Mandate to govern by Britain, which through its administrative power was advancing the Zionist cause. Following the accession of Adolf Hitler and the American involvement in the Second World War, the 1942 Biltmore Program was adopted by American Zionists, and it was a development that proposed free immigration of the Jews and the establishment of a Jewish state in the country. The revelation of Nazi crimes enhanced the American support of Zionism effectively shifting its political focus out of London to Washington.

The Democratic Party platform in 1944 supported opening of Palestine to free immigration and colonization by Jews, and establishing a Jewish state. But, in fear of injuring to the war efforts of the U.S, President Franklin wrote, just before his death in 1945 to various Arab governments that the United States would do nothing to Palestine which would harm the Arab people.

The Scale of US Support: A Shocking economic Investment.

Even in terms of cumulative foreign aid, Israel has received the most aid compared to any other state since its inception, with over 300 billion dollars in total economic and military support, adjusted to inflation (CFR, 2025). The U.S. has given Israel over $174 billion dollars in current (non-inflation-adjusted) in bilateral aid, as well as missile-defence funding (U.S. State Department, 2025).

The amounts had grown dramatically following 1973. In 1999, the U.S committed no less than 2.67billion a year to Israel, the commitment was 3billion in 2009 and no less than 3.8billion in 2019. In line with the Memorandum of Understanding, the U.S. annually gives out 3.3 billion in Foreign Military Financing and 500 million on joint missile-defence programs (CRS Report RL33222).

In addition to the financial and military assistance, the U.S is very supportive politically. It has exercised its veto in the United Nations Security Council 42 times against resolutions criticizing Israel-42 out of its 83 total vetoes has been used in the resolutions criticizing Israel.

Cold War Foundation: Strategy Logic.

The long history of the US-Israel relationship has a geostrategic base. The United States policymakers started to regard Israel as an invaluable asset, rather than a humanitarian responsibility, after the Six-Day war of 1967 when Israel overcame the united forces of Egypt, Syria and Jordan in six days. President Lyndon B. Johnson considered Israel as a strategic ally and provided it with sophisticated offensive arms. The rapid triumph of Israel shattered US-Israeli relationship by solidifying the Israeli position in American Jewishness and securing pro-Israel policy in Washington.

The 1973 Arab-Israeli War and president Nixon raised military and economic support to Israel in large measure both because he believed the Soviet hand to be the major cause of tension in the Middle East and because he believed the Arab-Israeli conflict.

In 1987 The United States declared that Israel was granted major non-NATO ally which gave it an opportunity to compete with NATO and other allies of the U.S. in contracts and also acquire the advanced U.S. weapons systems. This institutionalized a very close relationship-Israel was incorporated into the military-industrial supply chain, combined training, co-development of weapons, and intelligence sharing of America.

The Pressure: Organised Domestic Pressure.

To have a full picture of the U.S. Israel relations, one must examine the domestic political machine behind it – a phenomenon that created one of the most debatable scholarly discussions in recent history.

In 2006, a seminal paper by John J. Mearsheimer, a professor in the University of Chicago, and Stephen M. Walt, a professor at the Harvard Kennedy School, was published. They stated that the U.S. aid to Israel has always been alleged to be based on mutual strategic interest or moral obligation, but in fact, it is primarily caused by the so-called Israel Lobby.

Mearsheimer and Walt define the Lobby as a loose group which exerts a great influence on the Executive branch. They also add that the Lobby is able to project its perception of Israel in the mainstream media.

The strength of AIPAC has been reported. In 1997, Fortune magazine requested congressmen and staff to rank the top lobbies in Washington. AIPAC came in second after the AARP and before powerhouses such as the AFL -CIO and the National Rifle Association. In March of the same year 2005, a study conducted by National Journal ranked AIPAC second.

The coalition in favor of Israel is not limited to the Jewish-American organizations. It also comprises of major Christian evangelicals like Gary Bauer, Jerry Falwell, Ralph Reed, and Pat Robertson. Dick Armey and Tom DeLay, former majority leaders in the House, are not left behind. They see the revival of Israel as a biblical prophecy, support its expansionist policies, and feel that unconditional help is one of the religious and patriotic obligations.

Opponents of the Mearsheimer-Walter thesis argue that the image is more detailed. Noam Chomsky, a scholar at MIT, though he termed the paper as a bold position, claimed that there are much more compelling interests that are vested in what occurs in the Persian Gulf than is AIPAC, which are oil companies, the arms industry, and other special interest.

Common Values and Democratic Identity.

There is another level to lobbying and strategy, a more significant level, an ideological affinity. The U.S. administrations, in collaboration with the congress, have been assisting Israel with a strong domestic backing on their security, the mutuality of their strategic demands in the Middle East, and historic connections that started with the U.S. support to the formation of Israel in 1948. Congress.gov

The American political culture has traditionally viewed Israel as the sole democracy in the Middle East – a label that resonates in a nation in which the export of liberal democracy is viewed as a central foreign-policy objective. In Foreign Affairs Mearsheimer and Walt break down the common arguments in favor of aiding Israel, its position as a co-democracy or strategic position or a small state that is endangered by its neighbors and claim that these moral arguments are rationalizations rather than causation. However, the emotional appeal of the common democratic values cannot be underestimated in the American popular opinion.

The term of a special relationship was created by President John F. Kennedy to refer to the relationship between the two nations. this has been the refrain of seven more decades of presidential speech, party notwithstanding.

Military and Intelligence Interdependence.

The patronage has given way to actual interdependence between the two. Israel is not just a recipient of American arms, but a co-developer, an experimental field, and a source of intelligence.

The United States provides Israel with access to some of the most sophisticated military technology in the world with the help of Foreign Military Financing, such as the F 35 Lightning. By April 2025, there are 751 active case of Foreign Military Sales with Israel, with the value amounting to $39.2 billion in the U.S.

Since 1992, the U.S. has sold Israel equipment to the tune of 6.6 billion dollars in the Excess Defense Articles program warheads, and spares, simulation tools, etc. The connection is supported by law: the CRS reports that as part of the American aid strategy, Israel is kept at its so-called qualitative military advantage over its neighbors, with Israel getting the first access to, or higher-tech incarnations of, American military technology. This practice was legislated in the Naval Vessel Transfer Act of 2008 to bar export of defense equipment to the non-Israeli nations in the Middle East which would compromise the advantage of Israel.

Why All Presidents Remain Pro-Israeli.

President Eisenhower aimed at staying neutral in Arab-Israeli war. In 1957, he even threatened to cut all the official and non-official aid in order to make Israel leave the Egyptian land. That was the final attempt at implementing the actual pressure. All subsequent administrations have abandoned such a view.

President Reagan strengthened the relationship to a dramatic degree. The two sides signed a Joint Political -Military Group in November 1983. In June 1984, joint air and sea drills started and two war-reserve stock bases were constructed in Israel by the United States to keep military equipment.

This trend cuts across the party lines. According to Mearsheimer and Walt, both candidates, Obama, Clinton, McCain, and Romney, have proclaimed strongly pro-Israel stances before the AIPAC audiences, and they will strive to prove that they care. It is explained by the influence of lobbying, the voting blocks of evangelicals, congressional consensus of the two parties, and a certain logic of the strategy, and even the cultural affinity, which is aimed in the same direction at once.

Since the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the lobbyists of Israel have launched large-scale domestic campaigns to gain bipartisan congressional backing of the bilateral alliance, including the American aid to Israel. The outcome is a structurally insulated policy: any president who tries to radically change U.S. policy towards Israel will meet a congressional, lobbying, evangelical and anti-abandonment of a democratic friend wall.

The Post-October 7 Moment: Victimizing the Limit.

Their relationship was put to the test as never before in the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023, and the following campaign of Israel in Gaza. The U.S. military assistance to the Israel in 2024 was the highest in decades. The war commenced with an assault of Hamas on October 2023, which left approximately 1,200 Israeli dead, the deadliest day in the history of the country. The United Nations estimates the number of Palestinians to have died in excess of 65,000.

At home the war divided the left and brought the right together. The Republicans were mostly in support of the counter offensive of Israel and the government of Netanyahu whereas the Democrats were split on ceasefire demand.

Although there was this partition, the main alliance remained. The clashes of the U.S. military with the Hezbollah in Lebanon and the clashes with Iran have proved to be of great attention to Israel as U.S military support has helped Israel to weaken the military capacities of its long time competitors.

As the legislators continue to vote in support of U.S. aid to Israel, there are political and ideological entities that are urging the reconsideration of the long-standing U.S. Israel aid relationship. The open debate of this relationship is going on, as never before in decades, something that would have been considered impossible just a generation ago.

Critical Perspectives

The reasons that are used to justify supporting Israel are not unanimous. Mearsheimer and Walt employ realist national interest analysis to indicate that, insisting that Israel is a fellow democracy, a strategic ally or a small state at risk is a mere rationalization and not the actual cause.

Mearsheimer-Walt paper was acclaimed by MIT scholar Noam Chomsky as a bold position, and Mearsheimer has highlighted that strong interests in the Persian Gulf, in particular, oil firms, the arms market, and defence contractors, have a higher stake than just AIPAC. Even certain Israelis criticize the order: former Defense Minister Moshe Arens remarked that Israel does not depend on US aid anymore, and a columnist Caroline Glick asked the government to negotiate the redesign of the assistance package.

Conclusion: A Multi-layered Lock.

The US pro-Israel policy has existed throughout the 14 administrations, starting with Truman and continuing with Trump and it cannot be attributed to a single factor. The combination of several mutually-reinforcing forces resulted in it: Cold War strategic logic that has turned into institutional habit; a strong domestic lobby that can capture the attention of Congress and the media; tens of millions of evangelical Christians who see the existence of Israel as mandated by their bibles; an ideological affinity between two self-proclaimed democracies; and a military-industrial co-dependency that offers such strong economic incentives to the status quo.

Change cannot be evaded in the relationship. Since October 7, the Democratic Party is starting to split, more younger voters are turning to support the Palestinian cause, and the Congress is starting to ask more questions all point to the coalition being less monolithic. The forces that have continued to place all the presidents of America pro-Israel remain in place, however, and it requires a concerted examination of geopolitics, theology and lobbying, economics and the intricate psychology of American national identity.