Ramaswamy says US aid should be ‘contingent’ on Israel’s action plan for Gaza

International News | The Hill

GOP presidential primary candidate Vivek Ramaswamy said Saturday that U.S. assistance to Israel should be contingent on the nation’s action plan for Gaza amid its war on Hamas militants.

“Israel is barreling toward a potentially catastrophic ground invasion of Gaza without clear objectives,” Ramaswamy said in a statement shared with The Hill. “‘Destroy Hamas’ is not on its own a viable or coherent strategy.”

“Instead, Israel is likely to invite attacks from Hezbollah in the north, which would almost surely draw the U.S. into a prolonged all-out regional war in the Middle East that does not advance American interests,” he argued.

The conservative entrepreneur added that the U.S. needs to push Israel to define its objectives before agreeing to fund its ongoing strikes.

“The U.S. should be clear with Israel that further U.S. support is contingent on Israel identifying clear objectives for success in Gaza and a coherent plan for what comes after toppling Hamas, even if Israel is successful in doing so,” Ramaswamy said. “As of now, these critical questions remain unanswered.”

Top Stories from The Hill

The Memo: Democrats divided on Biden’s vulnerabilities for 2024

GOP ditches Jordan and scrambles for Speaker: Five takeaways

Who is Speaker candidate Mike Johnson?

Chesebro attorney argues client never believed Trump’s ‘big lie’ of election fraud

On Friday, Ramaswamy also criticized the comparison of the Israel-Hamas conflict with the Russia-Ukraine war.

The entrepreneur was responding to President Biden’s Oval Office speech on Thursday evening, where he tied the two conflicts together. Biden also said he would deliver a request to Congress for new aid to both Ukraine and Israel.

“I think it’s a mistake to bundle the Israel discussion with the Ukraine discussion,” Ramaswamy said in an interview on Fox News. “It is a gambit to avoid debate on the merits of either one.”

He said lawmakers on both sides of the aisle should vote “no” on the “disastrous proposal.”