As the United States commemorates the anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, the nation is set to abdicate its independence 250 years later.
The U.S. Congress is slated to pass the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) – “must-pass” legislation that determines military spending and outlines defense policies for the fiscal year.
Consistently over 3,000 pages, the massive funding bill is rarely scrutinized and passes with little or no opposition. This year, the Trump administration has asked for an historic $1.5 trillion in total defense spending.
Buried in the pending NDAA, is a gravely consequential proposal to create permanent structures that would merge the militaries of the United States and Israel. The measure, Section 219 (in the House) and Section 1217 (in the Senate), titled the “United States-Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative,” blurs the lines between conventional cooperation between allies.
Section 219 would require the U.S. defense secretary to appoint a single “executive agent” to synchronize cooperative military and defense efforts between the two countries. The provision includes bilateral integration of military planning, intelligence sharing, technological development, procurement systems and strategic operations.
If signed into law, Congress would have essentially ceded the nation’s autonomy to a foreign power. Israel has, over decades, successfully secured its influence within U.S. governmental, economic and media institutions. Legislative efforts to integrate the military sectors, as proposed, would complete and legalize their influence.
The effort to fuse the two militaries was spearheaded by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a coalition of U.S. legislators and Israeli advocacy groups, like the powerful lobby, America Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Facing waning public support, pro-Israel groups are attempting to institutionalize an irreversible U.S.-Israeli military-industrial merger. By burying this alliance deep within the Pentagon bureaucracy, they aim to bypass congressional oversight and American voters.
Israel and its enablers – whose ideas formulated the legislation – have been discreetly moving the relationship away from patronage and/or partnership toward a more asymmetrical structure designed to make Israel “the indispensable state”and to harness American power to achieve Zionist expansionist aims.
For example, Congressman Marlin Stutzman (R-IN) and Prime Minister Netanyahu met on 27 May 2026 in Jerusalem to discuss transitioning the U.S.-Israeli defense alliance. One week after the meeting, Stutzman introduced a House resolution to reshape the relationship.
Most revealing is the specific language Netanyahu used in his letter of gratitude (1June 2026) to the Congressman. Upon receiving the pending initiative from Stutzman, Netanyahu thanked him for forwarding it and called the strategy “my plan.” Later in the letter, he framed it “our plan.” In addition, Netanyahu specified that he wanted integration as well as continued U.S. military aid ($3.8 billion annually), by proposing a “draw down” rather than an immediate halt to funding. Netanyahu wrote:
“I was glad to receive your proposed Congressional resolution endorsing my plan to shift the framework for U.S.-Israel defense cooperation from aid to partnership… I am heartened by your enthusiastic support for our plan to develop a new Memorandum of Understanding with the United States government that will draw downS. financial assistance over the next decade and replace it with what you refer to as a ‘new framework of joint defense cooperation, co-development, co-production and mutual investment in areas including advanced missile defense, artificial intelligence unmanned systems, cybersecurity and next generation military platforms’.”
After introducing the restructuring legislation, H. Res. 1339, on 3 June 2026, Stutzman released the following statement: “Above all, the United States and Israel stand together against totalitarianism and for freedom. We are bound by the shared Western values that built both our nations. As long as those values are under threat, we will defend them side by side.”
The Congressman’s lofty rhetoric about “shared Western values” glosses over a grim reality: both nations share violent histories of colonialism and genocide that persist into the present.
It should be noted that Stutzman’s resolution also commended Israel for its “joint military operations against Iran,” ignoring the fact that the 28 February 2026 “operation” killed at least 3,468 civilians, including 120 schoolchildren in Minab, murdered on the first day of the illegal unprovoked U.S.-Israel war on Iran.
Israel’s resolute defender, AIPAC, was also instrumental in advancing the legislation. In a 5 June 2026 press release, the lobby applauded the House Armed Services Committee for including pro-Israel provisions in the NDAA.
The current push towards cooperative militarization and defense integration raises fundamental questions: what geopolitical and economic factors are driving it?
For close to a century, the energy resources of the Middle East have been central to American hegemony and economic supremacy. Since the 1990s, Washington has sought to cement its control over the region by uniting its two core geopolitical pillars: Israel and the Gulf monarchies. U.S. administrations have attempted to do so through the implementation of various accords and normalization schemes, like the 1990 Oslo and 2020 Abraham Accords.
Washington’s normalization agenda and the broader global balance of power were upended by the October 2023 Hamas-led uprising and Israel’s protracted genocidal war on Gaza. In addition, the June 2025 and February 2026 joint U.S.-Israel wars against Iran have further weakened American hegemony in the Middle East and globally.
These all-important pivotal events have catalyzed the Global South and accelerated China’s influence as an alternative major power, while hastening America’s decline. The remaining good relations that existed between China, Russia and the United States have been exhausted by current realities.
Washington, steeped in outdated great-power politics, has categorized China as a primary adversary to be weakened rather than engaged. And unable to break Iran through military force, Washington and Tel Aviv are struggling to resurrect their collapsing regional hegemony. In a desperate bid to preserve dominance, they are working to deepen their strategic military pact.
The U.S. and Israel share complementary strategic objectives. Washington leverages the relationship to maintain its regional and global standing, while Israel – the anchor for projecting American power in the Middle East – uses it to achieve its Zionist expansionist designs. By synchronizing their military and intelligence networks, the U.S. and Israel seek to eliminate regional challengers and reverse the decline of U.S. power.
That the proposed resolution grants a foreign government unprecedented access and involvement, is tucked away in a massive spending bill, and has not been openly debated, is alarming and speaks to Israel’s extraordinary influence within the American political system.
There are numerous reasons, in addition to the loss of American independence, to reject this unwise mandatory merger. It skirts constitutional accountability, bypasses legislative debate on foreign policy and aid, places independent decision-making at risk, creates dependence on Israeli technology, transfers advanced U.S. technologies to a foreign regime. Most critically, it will legally bind the United States as an accessory to Israeli war crimes and to its official endorsement of illegal land appropriation and “settlement” expansion in occupied Palestine.
Essentially, if the 2027 NDAA passes as is, the United States will officially give its imprimatur to apartheid and genocide. It will, after 250 years, lift the veil on what the nation has become and on the future it envisions.
© 2026, M. Reza Behnam, Ph.D.
Dr. Behnam is a political scientist who specializes in comparative politics with a focus on West Asia. His “Cultural Foundations of Iranian Politics,” published by University of Utah Press, and still in print, was recognized by Choice as Outstanding Academic Book for 1987-1988.
