In a striking move during its final days, the Biden administration has decided to redirect over $100 million in military aid originally earmarked for Israel and Egypt to Lebanon, with the stated goal of supporting a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah. This last-minute reallocation, revealed in notices sent to Congress, has raised eyebrows among critics who see it as yet another misguided attempt to prop up a fragile Lebanese government often accused of being heavily influenced by Hezbollah, a designated terrorist organization.
The notices detailed a $95 million transfer from Egypt and $7.5 million from Israel to Lebanon’s army and government. According to the State Department, this shift is intended to bolster Lebanon’s sovereignty, border security, and counterterrorism capabilities. However, many remain skeptical, pointing out the irony of funding a military force in a country largely under Hezbollah’s sway and questioning whether such investments can truly counter terrorism when the recipient is so deeply entwined with it.
The history here doesn’t exactly inspire confidence. The United States has poured over $3 billion into Lebanon’s Armed Forces (LAF) since 2006, touting them as a “pillar of stability” in the region. Yet, this same military has failed to prevent Hezbollah from amassing tens of thousands of rockets and maintaining its stronghold over Lebanon. Critics argue that this strategy effectively funds a proxy force for Hezbollah while undermining the very stability the U.S. claims to support. It’s a baffling contradiction that seems to escape much of the scrutiny aimed at U.S. aid to other nations, particularly Israel.
The most recent diversion of $7.5 million from Israel to Lebanon has sparked outrage among conservatives who view this as yet another example of misplaced priorities. While Israel faces an existential threat from Hezbollah’s rocket arsenal, U.S. funds are being funneled into a country accused of shielding the terrorist group under the guise of maintaining a ceasefire. This pattern of enabling what some call “terrorist-adjacent” governments raises serious questions about the efficacy and ethics of U.S. foreign aid.
In the end, critics argue, this move exemplifies a broader failure in U.S. foreign policy—a tendency to throw billions at unstable regions in the name of diplomacy, only to see those investments strengthen the very forces they aim to counter. For the Biden administration, this eleventh-hour decision to redirect funds to Lebanon is unlikely to age well, particularly as President-elect Donald Trump prepares to take office with a markedly different approach to Middle Eastern policy. Whether this reallocation achieves its intended goals or simply becomes another example of taxpayer dollars squandered on ill-conceived strategies remains to be seen.
