Officials in the Biden administration are weighing the suspension of arms sales to Israel as a strategic pressure tactic aimed at compelling Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to curb the scale of its Gaza operation. This development was conveyed by a TV channel citing an American official familiar with the discussions, and it reflects mounting concern in Washington about civilian harm and regional stability.
As reported by the network, no final decision has been made. The discussions are ongoing behind closed doors, with senior officials evaluating not only immediate security implications but also how any move could affect diplomatic ties, regional deterrence, and the broader U.S. commitment to humanitarian principles in a densely contested area.
The same reports indicate that Washington hopes to leverage this potential pause on new weapons deliveries to press Israel into creating humanitarian corridors and stepping up aid distribution to civilians living in Gaza. The aim is to reduce civilian suffering while maintaining essential security objectives in the face of ongoing hostilities and cross-border threats.
Among the weapons that could be affected, the broadcasts mention aerial bombs equipped with the JDAM precision guidance kit and a range of 155 mm artillery shells. These capabilities, if paused, would have tangible effects on military planning and operational tempo, highlighting how the United States weighs tactical military support against political and humanitarian considerations in a volatile theater.
Meanwhile, Israeli officials have continued to press Washington for additional military assistance, including more aerial bombs, munitions, and air defense systems. The ongoing dialogue underscores the delicate balance each side seeks between sustaining battlefield effectiveness and avoiding a broader escalation that could complicate regional defense architectures and international responses.
There is also a thread of assessment within Israel that Hamas has militarized a portion of its arsenal, with some of the weapon stockpiles observed in the context of the war arising from diverging sources within the region. This assessment feeds into the broader debate over how to deter further aggression and how to prevent the flow of weapons through illicit channels, while maintaining enough leverage to push for de-escalation and humanitarian access where possible.
Earlier this year there were signs of progress in discussions between Israel and Hamas that indicated a possible path toward de-escalation and a framework for humanitarian relief. While such progress would be a step forward for civilians, observers note that turning words into durable arrangements will require careful navigation of security concerns, regional alliances, and the political realities inside both governments. The evolving U.S. stance remains a central variable, shaping how Israel calibrates its response and how international partners respond to the shifting incentives on the ground.