By Avi Abelow, JNS
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s new arms plan signals a decisive break from defense dependency toward true Israeli strategic independence.
Since the horrific Oct. 7, 2023, massacre, Israel has had two overriding and non-negotiable goals: to bring the hostages home and crush our enemies so they can never repeat such an atrocity.
But beneath the battlefield headlines, something quieter, deeper, and potentially far more transformative has been set in motion. It is something that may prove to be the most important strategic development for Israel since its founding in 1948.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently stated what every Israeli now understands viscerally: “Our enemies are rearming in order to strike us again. Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, and, of course, Iran itself. And there are new threats.”
Then came a sentence that should fundamentally change how Israel thinks about its future: “We will strive for our armaments to be produced as much as possible within the State of Israel, including some of the aerial platforms. We are talking about 350 billion shekels over the next decade to build a weapons industry in the State of Israel."
This is not just a budgetary decision. It is a declaration of independence.
Oct. 7 did not happen in a vacuum. It was the culmination of years of strategic delusions: that our jihadist enemies could be deterred indefinitely by giving them our ancestral homeland; that economic incentives would tame more than 1,400-year-old jihadi Muslim ideology; that there will never be more wars in enemy territory; that a small and tech-savvy army was enough to defend us from perceived threats; and, most dangerously, that Israel could always rely on its allies for defense weapons.
That final illusion was shattered in this war.
We’ve seen this movie before: When Israel fought Hamas in 2014, U.S. President Barack Obama pressured Jerusalem by withholding Hellfire missiles, tanks, and artillery ammunition, and other precision-guided munitions—all battlefield-critical supplies—during an active war. Despite its damaging impact on the war effort, it failed to change Israeli policy. But it did expose a dangerous vulnerability.
This war removed any remaining doubt. The Biden administration went further, using arms embargoes and delivery delays as overt political leverage against Israel in the middle of an existential fight for survival. It was meant to force us to stop the war—not because Israel lacked moral or legal justification to fight back, but because U.S. domestic politics and detached foreign-policy fantasies collided head-on with Israeli reality.
If it happened twice, it can certainly happen again.
With changes in both the Democratic and Republican parties, it is clear that no future Israeli government—left, right or center—can assume that future U.S. administrations will automatically stand behind Israel.
Israel, a sovereign nation fighting for its survival, cannot operate under foreign veto power.
Just last year, I met with members of the U.S. Congress and Senate in Washington, along with Likud Knesset member Amit Halevi, chair of the Knesset Subcommittee on Rearmament and Strategy.
Our message was straightforward: the current “foreign aid” framework to Israel is outdated, mismanaged, and strategically harmful to both Israel and the United States. The vast majority of that aid never reaches Israel at all but is spent in the United States, binding Israel into procurement structures that ultimately reduce Israeli independence. Worse, the American public believes that Israel is an aid recipient that is of no value to U.S. interests.
We argued for a new framework based on reality: trade, joint research, technology partnerships and bilateral agreements, not dependency. Every congressman and senator we spoke with agreed that it was indeed necessary for the interests of both our countries. One congressman responded with striking clarity, saying the following, verbatim:
“One day soon, Israel won’t be able to trust any U.S. administration, Republican or Democrat. I know that it is in the U.S. interest that Israel be as independent as possible because Israel helps protect America. Therefore, we must work to have Israel be totally independent in developing munitions and missiles and as much weaponry as possible.”
That was not anti-Israel sentiment. It was pro reality.
A strong, independent Israel helps protect America and strengthens the Western front against Iran, jihadist terror and global instability.
For decades, Israel’s defense relationship with the United States came wrapped in what I call “golden handcuffs.” The aid was generous, but came with strings. It allowed U.S. foreign policy to literally tie Israel’s hands and stop it from doing what was necessary for defense and protection. Procurement limits. Political blackmail. Strategic leverage that could be pulled at the worst possible moment.
Oct. 7 was so horrendous, and the Biden arms embargo so dangerous, that it finally proved that those handcuffs are no longer acceptable.
Israel must be able to manufacture its own munitions, missiles, aircraft components, and defense platforms at scale, on its own timeline, without waiting for approvals from foreign capitals that may prioritize appeasement over survival.
Netanyahu’s 350 billion shekel ($110 million) plan is the first serious step toward that future.
It does not mean abandoning the United States. It means redefining the relationship on healthier terms, between a global superpower and a partner regional superpower, not patron and client.
Our enemies are watching closely.
A self-reliant Israel, able to sustain long wars, replenish its arsenals, and innovate faster than its adversaries, is a far stronger deterrent than an Israel constantly looking over its shoulder, asking whether the next shipment of weapons and missiles will be delayed.
Strategic independence is not isolationism. It is sovereignty. And sovereignty, after Oct. 7, is no longer optional.
Free the hostages. Defeat our enemies. And ensure that never again can any foreign leader, even a friendly one, decide whether or how the Jewish state of Israel is allowed to defend itself.
That is a truly significant development—one that moves toward a healthier Israel-U.S. relationship and will better protect both nations moving forward.
