Israel Aid Deal: Watchdog Seeks Criminal Probe Into Netanyahu's $4 Billion Waiver

The Movement for the Quality of Government (MQG) asked Israeli law enforcement officials on Tuesday to open a criminal investigation into the reported decision to end US defense aid to Israel. The group claims the move may be connected to US President Donald Trump's recent endorsement of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for the 2026 election.

In a filing submitted to Attorney General Gali Baharav-Miara and the Israel Police on November 3, the MQG requested that investigators look for reasonable suspicion of offenses. These potential charges include breach of trust and the bribery of a foreign public official.

The appeal responds to Trump's public statement that he agreed with Netanyahu to end approximately $4 billion in annual US defense assistance. Trump said the initiative came from Netanyahu. The MQG noted that the existing aid agreement is scheduled to run through 2028. The organization argued that ending the assistance during the remaining two years could remove roughly $7.6 billion from Israel's defense budget.

The watchdog questioned why the Defense Ministry and the Israel Defense Forces were not involved in the decision. It also pointed out a contradiction between this abrupt end and Netanyahu's previously stated plan to reduce reliance on American aid over a period of ten years. Investigators are asked to determine who participated in the decision and which ministries were consulted.

The MQG specifically asked authorities to examine the timing of the announcement. The agreement was publicized on the day of the US midterm elections. The group wants to know if there was an improper link between the financial waiver and Trump's political support for Netanyahu.

"Israel's security funds must not serve as compensation for personal political support," said Yaniv Goldberg, head of the MQG's Economic Department. Goldberg added that the reports raise questions about the mix between national interest and the prime minister's political interest. He stated that the public is entitled to know what was agreed upon and who will pay the price.