We call on Congress to reject the so-called "U.S.-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative" in every form it takes — whether as Section 219 of the House NDAA, Section 1217 of the Senate NDAA, the standalone U.S.-Israel FUTURES Act, or any future amendment, rider, or renamed vehicle its backers attempt to move.

This provision has already been renumbered once and buried inside a $1.15 trillion "must-pass" defense bill. Its sponsors and its organized backers — including AIPAC and FDD Action — have made clear they intend to keep pushing it. When the FY2027 NDAA stalled on the Senate floor in July 2026, this provision survived untouched inside it, waiting for the bill to return. We are not fighting one section number. We are fighting a policy that will keep changing its shape until Americans force a straight up-or-down vote on the merits.

Here is what that policy does, whatever it is called:

It surrenders American sovereignty. It hands a Pentagon "executive agent" the job of fusing a foreign government's technology directly into our most sensitive weapons programs — artificial intelligence, quantum computing, cyber warfare, autonomous systems, and missile defense. No other country on Earth has this arrangement with the U.S. military. Israel is not a NATO member, is not part of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, and has not signed the NATO Status of Forces Agreement — yet this initiative would grant a level of integration deeper than we extend to our formal treaty allies.

It is built to be permanent — and that's the point. This is the most alarming feature, and it is not an accident. Because it pushes integration rather than ordinary arms sales, no future vote is required to keep it running — it simply continues, automatically, forever. There is no sunset date. There is no expiration. There is no annual checkpoint where Congress or the public can say "enough."

And once two nations' defense industries are fused together, the entanglement becomes physically impossible to reverse. We have seen this before: it took years of painful, tangled effort just to unwind one country's role in a single fighter-jet program. This policy would weave a foreign government's technology into our missile defense, our AI, and our cyber and autonomous weapons systems all at once. Try to pull it out later and you risk breaking the very systems that defend this country. Lawmakers who want out won't be able to get out. A future Congress and a future president that Americans elect would be locked into an entanglement they never voted for and cannot escape.

We get little to nothing in return. It places no conditions on how the foreign government uses this access and does nothing to stop it from reselling U.S.-derived technology to other countries. We expose our crown-jewel military advantages and foot the bill as taxpayers, with no guarantees and no leverage.

It guts democratic oversight. By pushing integration rather than sales, it sidesteps the congressional approvals those sales normally require and channels commitments around the annual appropriations process — the one recurring point where the public's representatives vote on how our tax dollars are spent. This is exactly how you bury an unpopular policy: attach it to a bill that can't fail and shield it from a recorded vote.

It ignores our own government's warnings. The Defense Intelligence Agency recently elevated this ally's counterintelligence threat to "critical," its highest category. Deepening technical integration under these conditions exposes our most sensitive military advantages — while human rights organizations warn that fused intelligence and targeting data raise serious questions about U.S. complicity in civilian harm abroad.

This is not a partisan issue. A bipartisan amendment to strip the provision — led by Representatives Thomas Massie (R) and Ro Khanna (D) — was blocked from ever reaching the House floor for a vote. Americans across the political spectrum deserve an open debate and a recorded vote before our military is permanently tied to any foreign government.

We demand a straight vote — and we demand that Congress reject this policy wherever it reappears.