Netanyahu U.S. – In a 60 Minutes interview, Netanyahu said Israel should move to zero U.S. financial support for military cooperation, starting now.
Benjamin Netanyahu used a high-profile Sunday interview to press for a major reset in how Washington finances Israel’s defense—going so far as to argue Israel should aim for “zero” U.S. financial support.
In the interview with 60 Minutes. Netanyahu was asked whether Israel should “reexamine and possibly reset” its financial relationship with the United States.. He responded affirmatively. framing the move as a deliberate effort to reduce what he called the “financial component” of U.S.-Israel military cooperation.
Netanyahu said the goal is to draw American support down to zero. arguing that Israel should “wean” itself from remaining military financial assistance.. He tied the proposal to a figure he described as the scale of U.S.. annual assistance—$3.8 billion per year—and cast the reduction as a step toward greater Israeli self-reliance.
When 60 Minutes correspondent Major Garrett asked about timing, Netanyahu said the process should begin “now” and be carried out “over the next decade.” His timeline, he indicated, would move the relationship away from ongoing annual support that the U.S. is scheduled to provide through 2028.
Netanyahu also said he has already shared the idea with Israeli lawmakers and with President Donald Trump. According to Netanyahu, Trump’s reaction was immediate when he heard the proposal, with Netanyahu describing the response as surprising.
The announcement lands amid an American-Israeli partnership that has been closely tied to the region’s security crisis. including U.S.. cooperation with Israel on the Iran-related campaign.. Netanyahu referenced efforts that included strikes that killed Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei at the end of February. underscoring that the relationship has operated on multiple fronts beyond funding alone.
In the United States, Netanyahu’s comments come as debate over U.S.. aid to Israel continues to run through Congress and the political media ecosystem.. The report noted that in recent years lawmakers and commentators have criticized the U.S.-Israel relationship, including Rep.. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, who last month pledged to oppose all military aid to Israel.
The interview also highlighted how conservative media criticism and political pushback can collide with international policy.. Tucker Carlson. the report stated. has argued on his show that Israel’s war is being conducted on behalf of the smaller country. and Trump has responded to similar critiques by suggesting he may have pressed Israel to act.
Netanyahu’s broader message in the interview was not limited to money and timelines.. He also pointed to domestic U.S.. politics and public opinion trends. describing social media as a major driver behind eroding support for Israel in the United States.. Garrett raised a Pew survey finding that 60% of Americans reported an unfavorable view of Israel—up 20 points over four years—an indicator Netanyahu said is being amplified online.
In Netanyahu’s telling. the Hamas terror attack in October 2023 was a particularly influential moment because it made it easier for anti-Israel commentators to reshape how the public understands the conflict.. He suggested that social platforms have accelerated distortions and narrowed the range of perspectives Americans encounter.
The political implications of a “zero” aid goal are likely to extend well beyond the Israeli government.. A move from years of scheduled funding through 2028 to a decade-long path toward zero would require sustained decisions in Washington. including congressional oversight and policy alignment across agencies—especially given that U.S.. aid debates have already become sharply partisan in recent years.
Even if Netanyahu frames the shift as an effort to reduce dependency. his timeline raises questions about how the U.S.. would view changes to military cooperation while continuing to work with Israel on shared regional threats.. The interview suggests Netanyahu sees the drawdown as compatible with ongoing strategic coordination. but it also highlights how difficult it can be to decouple funding levels from broader political and security relationships.
For U.S.. voters and lawmakers. Netanyahu’s comments arrive at a moment when public opinion. legislative threats. and media narratives are all influencing how aid is discussed.. If the issue continues to be tied to partisan messaging. it could further harden positions—making negotiations over any future assistance package more contentious even as both sides insist they share long-term security interests.
Netanyahu’s central demand—beginning the move “now” and aiming for “zero” U.S.. financial support within ten years—puts the future of a large, recurring federal commitment directly onto the political agenda.. Whether Washington embraces that kind of schedule or seeks a different pathway. the interview sets a clear marker for what Netanyahu believes is the next stage of the U.S.-Israel relationship.
Netanyahu U.S. aid 60 Minutes interview Israel military funding Congress military assistance Trump foreign policy Pew unfavorable Israel
Sure, “wean” ourselves off U.S. aid… right after Israel asks the U.S. to do the heavy lifting. Netanyahu can call it self-reliance all he wants, but it sounds like a negotiation tactic dressed up as a long-term plan.
John Miller makes it sound purely cynical, but the timeline matters. If the U.S. is scheduled to provide support through 2028, shifting to “zero” over the next decade implies either a phased drawdown after that point or a renegotiation of existing agreements. Either way, you’d expect pushback because the funding structure is tied to planning, procurement, and interoperability.
I’m not convinced this is realistic. Sarah Johnson is right that the logistics are the real issue, and John Miller is right that it can’t just be one side asking for less help while expecting the same level of cooperation. Also, claiming “Trump’s reaction was immediate” doesn’t mean it’s politically sustainable for Congress or for the Pentagon’s budgeting cycle.
John Miller, I get why you’re side-eyeing it, but I think this is more about leverage than pure funding math. If Washington wants different terms, Netanyahu will absolutely frame it like Israel is “taking the lead.”