Thread by @Seharrison7

It might be helpful to walk through some issues related to reports that the USG is finally applying the Leahy laws to Israel--even though reports say it is just one unit.

BLUF: It is symbolically *significant*, but its impact will do *very little* to stem harm to Palestinians🧵

For starters, there are two Leahy laws, one for State and one for DoD. They prohibit US assistance (under the FAA & AECA & w/use of DoD $) to a unit of a foreign security force if SecState or SecDef have credible information the unit committed a gross violation of human rights.

The laws only apply to state security forces and only apply to "gross violations of human rights": extrajudicial killings, rape, torture (the specific definition can be found in 502B(d)(1) of the Foreign Assistance Act).

To my knowledge and based on publicly available information, neither of these laws have ever been objectively applied to units of Israeli security forces.

Last week, @BrettMmurphy reported that Blinken has been sitting for months on recommendations from officials in his department to cut assistance under the Leahy laws to "multiple units":

propublica.org/article/israel…

But new reporting suggests Blinken only agrees that one unit should be prohibited from receiving US assistance: the Netzach Yehuda battalion. @MairavZ and I briefly discussed this unit when we published this article on Shireen Abu Akleh's killing:

justsecurity.org/84471/shireen-…

So Q #1: Why did SecState only approve this one unit--a notoriously violent unit--and not the others, if, as reported, multiple units were recommended by his staff to be prohibited from receiving assistance under the State Leahy law?

Was this a way to appease critics--who say State isn't applying the law to Israel--by applying the law to a unit that is low-hanging fruit (the battalion's actions led to the death of a US citizen) while quietly finding reasons to not prohibit assistance to the other units?

I don't know the answer, but we should be asking why Secretary Blinken didn't agree with cutting assistance to the other units *if* that was what State Department officials recommended.

Q #2: How do we know US assistance will be restricted? We know that Gantz and Netanyahu have both come out strongly against the reports that there is a Leahy law designation (incorrectly reported as a "sanction"). So how will cutting assistance work?

Due to the nature of "untraceable assistance" (assistance provided up-front to countries that then later disperse it to non-vetted units) Congress required State to enter into agreements with certain countries in which they commit to comply with potential Leahy law prohibitions.

The US has one of these agreements in place with Israel, signed on December 30, 2021, in which Israel agrees it "shall not provide any assistance...to any security force unit...identified...consistent with Section 620M" of the FAA (the State Leahy law).

Israeli leadership's public resistance to upholding an agreement with the US calls into question Israel's commitment to restricting assistance wrt the Leahy law. Some might argue such pushback calls into question the credibility of other Israeli assurances to the US.

Q#3: Even if SecState sticks to the designation and US assistance is properly withheld in accordance with the agreement, does this determination really have any impact?

It's complicated, though there is def symbolic significance. It contributes to what @MairavZ describes as "de-exceptionalizing Israel." Bc Israel has received special treatment under US laws and policies for decades, this is a small but necessary step towards correcting that.

But the impact on the ground is minimal in that (1) it does not apply to the sale of US arms--Israel can still use its $ to purchase US weapons for the unit & (2) it doesn't do much to address the broader Biden admin policy to not condition assistance to Israel.

As @John_Hudson has been reporting, US arms continue to flow to Israel and US arms have been contributing to significant civilian harm:

washingtonpost.com/national-secur…

A Leahy designation of one unit will not slow the violence in Gaza or the WB. Despite cries from Israeli leaders that this is an outrage, it really isn't. And while the slow shift away from special treatment *is* newsworthy, we shouldn't lose the forest for the trees.