Bernie Sanders to Force Vote on Israeli War Crimes. . . ISI Document Blows Up Pakistan’s Case Against Imran Khan

This article was originally published as a newsletter from Ryan Grim. Sign up to get the next one in your inbox.

At the end of November, my colleague Dan Boguslaw caught up with Bernie Sanders on his way into a meeting with Democrats in the Capitol, and had a chance for a brief interview. He asked Sanders if he had any plans to force a vote that would condition military aid to Israel on the country’s willingness to abide by international laws of war. Sanders responded in the affirmative. 

I covered the exchange the next day on Counter Points, and added that there actually is an obscure procedural tool Sanders could use to force a vote. It’s outlined in Section 502(b) of the Foreign Assistance Act, and it’s never been used in this way, but the law is extremely clear. Two weeks later, Sanders has now introduced a resolution to force a vote using 502(b). It has to sit in the Foreign Relations Committee for 10 days before it can be brought to the floor, which means it’ll be ripe in the New Year when the Senate returns. 

If a majority of senators approve the resolution, the State Department will have 30 days to report back on whether Israel is following the laws of war. (Politico reported the resolution would have to pass both chambers; that’s untrue, a simple Senate resolution would trigger the State action.) After the 30 days, all of Congress would then be able to vote on a joint resolution to disapprove military aid — which would be binding — if the report found Israel was out of compliance. With Republicans controlling the House, that’s perhaps an insurmountable bar, but Sanders is setting up the first serious effort to put people on record.

If the vote were held on the merits, it wouldn’t be a difficult one. Human Rights Watch, for instance, has just released a report that finds Israel is using starvation as a weapon of war — which, needless to say, is a war crime. Much of the report is based on public comments made by Israeli officials. 

We’ve also continued following the prosecution of Pakistan’s former Prime Minister Imran Khan, who is (falsely) accused of mishandling a classified cable reported on by The Intercept in August. As we’ve said, he wasn’t our source, but the case against Khan hinges on a claim by prosecutors that revealing the contents of a cable allows an adversary to then crack the encryption system used by Pakistan. But the ISI studied the question of whether the revelation of the cable’s contents would compromise the system, and concluded that it most certainly would not. My colleague Murtaza Hussain and I obtained that ISI analysis. 

Book update: I was on MSNBC to talk about “The Squad: AOC and the Hope of a Political Revolution.” (If you haven’t gotten a copy yet, you can do that from an independent bookseller here. If you have, please give it a review.)