Jeffries Says He Will Oppose Proposal to Cut Off U.S. Aid to Israel

Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the minority leader, told fellow House Democrats on Tuesday that he plans to oppose a measure to eliminate United States aid to Israel but called for a “major reset” between the two nations, weighing in on a debate that has bitterly divided his party.

The proposal, which the House is expected to vote on as early as Wednesday night, will mark House Democrats’ first up-or-down vote in this Congress solely on the issue of cutting taxpayer subsidies to Israel. It comes as the United States and Iran have restarted their war, which Mr. Trump entered with Israel’s urging.

The measure has highlighted an intense rift among Democrats over support for the Jewish state, which has become a major liability with young and left-leaning voters who are an important constituency in the party. Dozens of Democrats are expected to vote for the amendment, which would eliminate all $3.3 billion the United States provides to Israel, and many are struggling on a personal level over how to vote on a sensitive and delicate issue.

Mr. Jeffries announced his position in a letter to Democrats that underscored the squeeze. He made clear that he opposed the measure, calling it “overly broad,” but said he would not seek to persuade other Democrats to vote against it. And he hinted that Democrats would insist that any future security aid to Israel be contingent on reining in human rights abuses against Palestinians.

“There are good faith reasons that will result in members voting in a variety of different ways with respect to the amendment,” Mr. Jeffries wrote, asserting that because of the actions of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, “a major reset is necessary.”

“A meaningful change in direction is needed,” he added, regarding the soon-to-expire 10-year memorandum of understanding that commits billions of dollars of security aid to Israel annually.

He noted that the amendment was also opposed by Representative Rosa DeLauro, Democrat of Connecticut, an outspoken progressive on Israel, as well as J Street, the center-left, pro-Israel lobbying group.

The timing of the upcoming vote is precarious for lawmakers, months before the midterm elections and only weeks after three incumbent Democrats lost primaries in which their support for Israel became a major issue.

Over the past few weeks, Democrats have twice huddled privately to discuss the measure, which is being offered by Representative Thomas Massie, a Kentucky Republican who opposes foreign intervention. He recently lost his primary to a Trump-backed challenger who made Mr. Massie’s opposition to aiding Israel a major line of attack.

Democrats had asked Mr. Jeffries to hold off on announcing his position on the amendment until after the July 4 break.

In a caucus meeting on Tuesday morning, Mr. Jeffries told Democrats that they must run toward the issue of rethinking U.S. support for Israel, not away from it, calling the status quo unacceptable, according to a person in the room who insisted on anonymity to describe private discussions.

He said he did not view Mr. Massie’s amendment as a genuine effort to change U.S. backing for Israel, but that things did have to change.

In an interview last week with The New York Times, Mr. Jeffries, who represents one of the largest Jewish communities in the country and is endorsed by both the right-wing, pro-Israel lobbying group AIPAC and J Street, defended his relationship with AIPAC, which has drawn derision from progressives.

“Nobody can point to a single instance of me taking a vote that had anything to do with being influenced by any outside group,” Mr. Jeffries said. “I challenge people to do that.” He blamed “people outside of Congress” for pushing a narrative that he was beholden to lobbying groups.

J Street issued a statement on Tuesday acknowledging the difficulty of the vote.

“For many Democrats, this is one of the few opportunities to cast a recorded vote expressing opposition to the way American military assistance and American-supplied weapons have been used by the Israeli government in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon and elsewhere,” Jeremy Ben-Ami, the group’s president, said in a statement.

Mr. Ben-Ami added that members could vote “no, present or yes” to “reflect those competing concerns.”

In his letter on Tuesday, Mr. Jeffries also noted that he supports a bill that would seek to prevent settler violence in the West Bank and punish people who committed those acts. That, and his call for a change in direction on security assistance, hinted at the kind of legislation he might bring to the floor next year if Democrats win back the House and he is elected speaker.

And he stated plainly a clear commitment to an independent Palestinian state.

The amendment vote will serve as something of a preview of the fissures in the Democratic caucus that Mr. Jeffries will have to navigate next year. A crop of new Democratic Socialists who have been winning primaries across the country want the party to unify around halting military aid to Israel, and they view Mr. Jeffries as the kind of establishment politician standing in the way of their progressive goals.