A Jewish Peace Activist’s Call to Reform America’s Armament Agreements

The summer of 2022 started as the summer of peace. I devoted my entire summer to working for Roots, the only group in the West Bank dedicated to bringing together Jews and Palestinians in a joint and civil space for mutual understanding, reconciliation and promoting nonviolence. Roots undertakes most of their initiatives on a Palestinian farm called Merkaz Karama, Arabic for ‘dignity center.’ At Merkaz Karama, I worked as a volunteer and intern where I partook in various acts of joint Jewish-Palestinian solidarity in farming, youth groups, dialogue, and so much more. Sadly, by early August, my summer of peace was devolving into a summer of violence. 

Due to tension created from IDF raids in the West Bank, both Israel and Palestinian Islamic Jihad began exchanging rocket fire. IDF assaults on Palestinian villages thus multiplied following such escalation. While walking through a Palestinian village the morning after a raid, I came across a long, silver object on the ground. I quickly realized it was ammunition, specifically a used-bullet. It did not take me long to discover the bullet was either manufactured in Britain or the United States. Seeing that bullet gave me a needed perspective on the direct role American actors had in profiting off the death and destruction of Jews and Arabs, two peoples I consider to be family. 

Alongside my peace work with Roots, I am also the founder and President of Atidna International, the first and only organization on college campuses dedicated to bringing together Jews, Arabs, Israelis, and Palestinians for peace events (which solidify the familial bond between our peoples) and for dialogue sessions (on any topic pertinent to Israel/Palestine). Due to the morality instilled in me both through my Jewish upbringing and through my years in peace activism, I have come to see that my position as a peace activist would be incomplete without assessing and calling out the sources profiting from violence in Israel and Palestine. By assessing such sources, a process of needed introspection can commence to address whether America’s foreign policies, which overwhelmingly dictate the region’s security apparatus, are inducing global safety or for-profit instability. 

A key set of policies which have continually come under scrutiny for their role in profit-generation through conflict exacerbation is direct armament agreements, the same form of agreement which sent the bullet I found in the West Bank to the IDF. Due to the near monopolization of armament agreement powers by the President, many academics and policy analysts have begun to question what institutional reformations and safeguards can be enacted to counteract the whims of hawkish Commander-In-Chiefs. The answer lies with using a constitutional basis to regrant such a power to the legislative branch where a multi-perspective oversight system, rather than a singular voice, can provide a check against executive abuse.

Passed in 1976, the Arms Export Controls Act (AECA) is the driving force behind America’s arms trade. The power to conduct armament agreements, as enacted by the AECA, resides with the President and the only way to halt a weapons deal is for both houses of Congress to accrue a majority-disapproval of the sale. Even after such a rigorous prerequisite has been reached, the president can still annul the legislative branch’s disapproval through a mere presidential veto.

At the time of writing this, Senator Bernie Sanders is attempting to block President Biden’s $8 billion arms sale to Israel. Even if Senator Sanders miraculously attained a slim majority in both the Senate and House to support his resolution, President Biden would undoubtedly utilize his veto power. Short of attaining the congressional supermajority of a two-thirds threshold to override a presidential veto, which is nearly impossible for any piece of legislation in our current political climate, the power of arming foreign nations will continue to reside with a single elected representative, a power that has undoubtedly been abused by generations of presidents from Ronald Reagan to Donald Trump.

The most effective way to create a needed check on excessive executive powers concerning such weapons sales is for Congress to amend the AECA to reclassify foreign weapons sales as an ‘international treaty.’ Through the reclassification, the US constitution would require armament agreements, like all forms of international treaties entered in by America, to gain prior consent of at least two-thirds of the Senate. This would require armament agreements, deals which potentially place various innocent lives at stake, to be passed through meticulous bipartisan consensus rather than the aims of a singular political figure.

Since the inception of the AECA, arms agreements have been designated as “executive agreements” rather than treaties. The rationale behind executive agreements is two-fold: 1) they should be utilized when the Constitution grants the executive branch exclusive authority in the domain relevant to the agreement and 2) they be done in a streamline manner on issues where congressional oversight would be a hindrance, especially for time-sensitive matters. Not only do financial military matters fall under the domain of Congress, not the executive branch, according to the Constitution, but armament deals are meant to be an agreement constructed through extensive and rigorous debates rather than the immediate whims of a single individual. Billions of dollars of armaments to foreign nations, when allocated carelessly or insidiously, can place the lives of thousands in jeopardy and thus generate global instability. Only when they are truly needed should armament deals be enacted and thus an ideologically diverse and multi-participant body, namely Congress, should reserve primary obligations on such matters.

There is no denying that modifying the status quo will be an uphill battle. Opponents will likely be heavily concentrated in the executive as the President and others will be abrasive to relinquishing such control. However, with the momentum generated over the past seven months from the Gaza anti-war and divestment protests, of which I am a proud participant, the masses arguably have the collective power, organization and momentum to pressure government officials to upend the unjust executive armament monopoly. 

Now is thus the time to make your voices heard. When calling your representatives demanding a ceasefire in Gaza, couple such a plea with long-lasting legislative demands, including generating an amendment to the AECA redefining armament agreements as an international treaty. In a political climate where many are proclaiming themselves as pro-peace/anti-war figures, make them put their money where their mouth is by demanding their support for reforming the armament process.