

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Today, 24 organizations consisting of American communities impacted by U.S. sanctions, as well as peace and diplomacy advocates, have added their names to a letter calling on the Biden administration to reassess U.S. sanctions and economic policies that carry a heavy human cost, worsened by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic.
The letter states, "Whether country-wide sanctions or blockade, U.S. policies have hurt civilian populations in targeted countries in what amounts to unjust collective punishment..."
"The United States must lead by example, overhaul U.S. sanctions, and ensure that sanctions are targeted, proportional, connected to discrete policy goals and reversible. This would necessarily result in an end to unjust collective punishment of civilian populations around the globe who have little control over governmental decision making. Only by grappling with the full impact of sanctions can the U.S. ensure that sanctions don't exacerbate the plight of ordinary citizens and serve, rather than undermine, U.S. interests."
Including examples from a broad range of countries such as Iran, Afghanistan, Venezuela and Cuba, the letter shows the magnitude of impact on civilians in targeted countries who often have little control over the policy making of their respective governments.
Jamal Abdi, President of the National Iranian American Council, stated, "Those of us from communities who have seen firsthand how broad sanctions hurt ordinary people were grateful for Biden's commitment to review and reform U.S. sanctions policy to avoid humanitarian harm, particularly amidst a global pandemic. But two years in and there's been little action from Biden and, if anything, the fervor for sanctions has increased while concerns about humanitarian consequences have receded into the background."
Arash Azizzada, Co-founder of Afghans for a Better Tomorrow, said, "It's beyond time that America is held accountable for its policy of economic strangulation around the world, one that is slowly erasing thousands of promising Afghan lives by the day. While our community ensures delivery of critical aid to countless Afghans who are starving, America's sanctions and theft of Afghan reserves is ensuring misery and pain that will be felt for generations to come unless it changes drastic course today."
Colleen Moore, Advocacy Director of Women Cross DMZ, stated, "President Biden came into office promising to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic on a global scale, and he must honor this promise by overhauling U.S. sanctions that have taken a significant humanitarian toll on struggling civilian populations. Particularly on North Korea, we call on the Biden administration to lift the travel restrictions and sanctions that have hindered urgently needed humanitarian aid and undermined efforts to achieve peace and security."
Despite the Biden administration's stated goals to combat the COVID-19 pandemic on a global scale and review U.S. sanctions policy, little concrete action has taken place to address these issues and most of the sanctions devastating civilian populations across the world remain in place. The tragedy of the humanitarian impact is compounded when we reflect on the ineffectiveness of these policies. In order to mitigate the harm being done to millions of innocent people and implement policies that serve U.S. interests, we must address the reality of sanctions, including their efficacy and impact.
The full letter is below:
April 28, 2022
President Joseph R. Biden
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Dear President Biden,
We write as organizations and individuals who are deeply concerned by the human cost and impacts of broad-based national sanctions and economic coercion on civilians across the world. While overly-broad U.S. sanctions have long caused undue harm to innocent civilians in targeted countries, contradicting stated policy objectives, this damage has been compounded by the COVID-19 pandemic. We urge you to take swift and immediate action to minimize these harmful impacts on innocent civilians.
Particularly in light of the swift and severe sanctions response that met Russia's invasion of Ukraine, sanctions have increasingly become a tool of first resort for U.S. foreign policy. As a result, it is important not to lose sight of the considerable human cost and impacts of broad-based national sanctions and economic coercion on civilians across the world. Many of us know firsthand the damage caused by these policies, as we have watched helplessly while our families and loved ones struggle under the weight of economic pressure in our countries of heritage.
In Afghanistan, tens of millions of people face food insecurity due to the U.S. initially withholding billions of dollars of the nation's central bank reserves and imposing restrictions on World Bank and IMF funds. The decision to block $3.5 billion of Afghanistan's central bank reserves for potential allocation to 9/11 families will only worsen an already disastrous situation where millions of Afghans face starvation. Central bank reserves are critical to a functioning economy and needed to support urgent relief that can forestall widespread famine across the country. Given the 20-year long U.S. war in Afghanistan and the foreign aid dependency it helped build, the United States has a critical responsibility to address the oncoming humanitarian disaster that has been worsened by U.S. policies.
In Cuba, U.S. sanctions have impoverished the population, leading Cubans to suffer from scarcity of food, essential medicines, and needed medical equipment. These policies continue despite a six-decade long embargo that the international community has urged the U.S. government to lift for almost 30 years.
In Gaza, an Israeli blockade backed by the U.S. government hinders imports of any medical supplies, with key essential drugs and medical disposables at "zero stock" levels. The only COVID-19 testing center in Gaza was badly damaged during bombing in 2021, while medical imaging devices used in the treatment of COVID-19 patients have been blocked from entering Gaza. The blockade exacts a grim toll on the besieged population.
In Iran, U.S. sanctions have devastated the economy and the livelihoods of millions of people, while slowing the response to COVID-19 in one of the world's early epicenters for the virus. These sanctions have not abated, impoverishing the population and limiting access to goods, resources and medicine that could fight the disease. Moreover, a surge of refugees from Afghanistan has added to the economic and medical pressures facing civilians on the ground.
In North Korea, U.S. sanctions and travel restrictions have hindered urgently needed humanitarian aid and restricted the work of humanitarian assistance groups and private charities that provide a lifeline for some 13 million North Koreans. With North Korea potentially facing a major humanitarian crisis, U.S. sanctions will impede a timely response to urgent needs for the most vulnerable populations of the country when North Korea re-opens their borders.
In Venezuela, oil and financial sanctions initiated by the Trump administration contributed to a 72% collapse in per capita income, heightening food insecurity and worsening the health and economic crisis facing the civilian population. Sanctions against Venezuela have targeted the oil industry, which provided more than 95% of the country's foreign currency revenue, and impeded the country from accessing international financial markets. U.S. foreign policy decisions have also barred Venezuela from accessing its funds in banks and multilateral financial institutions, obstructing its ability from deploying an effective response to the pandemic and helping fuel the greatest migration exodus in the modern history of the Western Hemisphere. The U.S. is the only country in the world to impose economic, instead of just individual, sanctions on Venezuela.
In Yemen, the U.S. government has continued to support the Saudi-led war, enabling them to impose a devastating blockade that blocks essential goods including fuel and medical supplies from entering the country. This has resulted in the world's worst ongoing humanitarian crisis, which includes a years-long famine and the largest cholera outbreak anywhere in history. The United States recently agreed to sell missiles to Saudi Arabia which are likely to be used to enforce the blockade, rewarding a government that is starving to death a Yemeni child every 75 seconds.
Whether country-wide sanctions or blockade, U.S. policies have hurt civilian populations in targeted countries in what amounts to unjust collective punishment. Despite the crucial goal of the Biden administration to tackle the COVID-19 pandemic on a global scale, these policies ultimately worsen global public health and put at risk countless millions across the world, depriving them from their right to health, life-saving medical care and equitable access to COVID-19 treatments and vaccines.
We recognize that the Biden administration initiated a comprehensive review of U.S. sanctions policies last year, setting out a general goal of minimizing humanitarian impacts and supporting humanitarian trade to heavily-sanctioned jurisdictions. However, this guidance has not been followed by concrete and comprehensive steps to deliver relief and open up humanitarian trade. As a result, the U.S. government has failed to significantly alter course and continues to enforce policies that fuel humanitarian and public health disasters.
The United States must lead by example, overhaul U.S. sanctions, and ensure that sanctions are targeted, proportional, connected to discrete policy goals and reversible. This would necessarily result in an end to unjust collective punishment of civilian populations around the globe who have little control over governmental decision making. Only by grappling with the full impact of sanctions can the U.S. ensure that sanctions don't exacerbate the plight of ordinary citizens and serve, rather than undermine, U.S. interests.
Sincerely,
Afghans for a Better Tomorrow
American Friends Service Committee
National Iranian American Council
Oil for Venezuela
Women Cross DMZ
Yemen Relief and Reconstruction Foundation
***
Action Corps
American Muslim Bar Association
Charity & Security Network
CODEPINK
Demand Progress Education Fund
Global Ministries of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) and the United Church of Christ
Just Foreign Policy
Latin America Working Group
Maryknoll Office for Global Concerns
Mennonite Central Committee U.S.
Miaan Group
Partnership for the Advancement of New Americans
Presbyterian Church (USA)
Project South
Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft
United Church of Christ, Justice and Local Church Ministries
The United Methodist Church -- General Board of Church and Society
Win Without War
The National Iranian American Council (NIAC) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization founded in 2002 to give voice to the Iranian-American community. From being the trusted voice on U.S.- Iran relations, to pushing forth legislation that protects individuals of Iranian heritage from systematic discrimination, to celebrating our cultural heritage, NIAC creates a lasting impact in the lives of the members of our community.
(202) 386-6325"While working families struggle to feed their families, Republicans are cutting funding for fruit and vegetable vouchers for women, infants, and children," said Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro.
House Republicans, with the help of four Democrats, voted Thursday to approve legislation that would slash nutrition assistance for millions of young children and pregnant and postpartum women, even as food prices continue to rise nationwide and earlier GOP cuts to federal aid take hold.
In a 213-210 vote, largely along party lines, House lawmakers passed an appropriations bill that would fund the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) and other agencies for the coming fiscal year. The four Democrats who voted with most Republicans to approve the measure were Reps. Vicente Gonzalez (Texas), Adam Gray (Calif.), Marie Gluesenkamp Perez (Wash.), and Don Davis (NC).
The bill, if also passed by the Senate and signed by President Donald Trump, would cut fruit and vegetable benefits that young kids and pregnant and postpartum women receive under the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC).
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) has estimated that the cut would strip modest fruit and vegetable benefits from "nearly 5.4 million toddlers, preschoolers, and pregnant and postpartum WIC participants." Under current law, CBPP observed, "children receive $26 monthly for fruits and vegetables, pregnant and postpartum participants receive $48, and breastfeeding participants receive $52."
Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said following Thursday's vote that "while working families struggle to feed their families, Republicans are cutting funding for fruit and vegetable vouchers for women, infants, and children."
"Working moms are already stretched thin, and Republicans are making it even harder to put dinner on the table," said DeLauro. "The president’s tariffs have hurt American farmers, and now the Republican plan is to cut off crucial assistance that they have come to rely on even more."
The House-passed appropriations bill would cut WIC by a total of $200 million compared to current levels, slashing $141 million in funding for fruit and vegetable benefits. The USDA's website says that WIC "saves lives and improves the health of nutritionally at-risk women, infants, and children," describing the program as "one of the most successful federally funded nutrition programs in the United States."

Trump's USDA chief, Brooke Rollins, has openly celebrated the large-scale loss of federal nutrition aid stemming from the Republican budget package that Trump signed into law last summer. That legislation included unprecedented cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), another highly effective food aid program.
The House vote to cut WIC broadly aligns with the Trump White House's proposed budget for Fiscal Year 2027—but doesn't go as far as the president envisioned. The National WIC Association noted that the House bill "cuts WIC’s fruit and vegetable benefits by about 10%, a first step toward an up to 75% cut sought by the White House."
“The House proposal fails WIC families when they need help most," said Georgia Machell, president and CEO of the National WIC Association. "It would force WIC to turn away eligible families for the first time in 30 years, breaking Congress’ 30-year bipartisan commitment to full WIC funding. For the families who receive WIC, it chips away at their ability to buy the very fruits and vegetables that federal dietary guidelines say all Americans should eat more of."
"At a time when Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza... Congress should be cutting off military support—not integrating the US military and Israeli defense sector," said one critic.
A US congressional committee on Thursday rejected an amendment to strip a provision from next year's Pentagon funding bill aimed at deepening integration of the US and Israeli militaries under the guise of reducing aid.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) introduced an amendment to strike Section 224—which would establish a formal "United States–Israel Defense Technology Cooperation Initiative"—from the 2027 National Defense Authorization Act. The proposed NDAA authorizes $1.15 trillion in baseline military spending, while the Trump administration’s full defense request seeks an unprecedented, debt-exploding $1.5 trillion in armed forces and related funding for the coming fiscal year.
Section 224 would require the US defense secretary to designate a Pentagon executive agent responsible for coordinating and expanding US-Israel defense technology cooperation.
In Thursday's voice vote, members of the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) from both parties rejected the amendment to remove Section 2024 from the NDAA, with only Khanna and Rep. Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) backing the measure.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza—has called Section 224 "my plan."
While proponents of Section 224 contend that the measure would reduce US taxpayer funding for Israel, Khanna argued that the provision amounts to a blank check for a country that most Americans oppose sending more aid to.
“The American people are tired of the arrogance and insolence of Prime Minister Netanyahu telling America what we should do," the congressman said Thursday while promoting his amendment. "The entire country of Israel has a GDP that is less than a single town in my district, yet somehow Netanyahu thinks he could tell the American people what we should do."
“I am for Team America," Khanna added. "I am for the interests of this country, and I believe that's what [President] Donald Trump ran on. That includes American interests against any foreign country. We should have American sovereignty and make it clear that we strike 224. If we want to give aid to Israel, if we want to sell them weapons, that should be a vote for the entire Congress.”
In a letter to Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.)—who is not on the HASC—Netanyahu said he is "heartened" by Section 224's plan to “develop a new Memorandum of Understanding with the United States government” that will reduce “US financial military assistance over the next decade” and replace it with “a new framework of joint defense cooperation, codevelopment, coproduction, and mutual investment."
The US has provided more than $20 billion in armed aid to Israel during the Biden and Trump administrations since Netanyahu launched the genocidal war on Gaza in retaliation for the Hamas-led attack of October 7, 2023. The current 10-year Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Israel, signed in 2016 during former President Barack Obama's tenure, provided Israel with $38 billion in US military aid and expires in 2028.
Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.)—who has partnered with Khanna on introducing or supporting war powers resolutions aimed at curbing Trump's ability to wage unconstitutional wars in countries including Yemen, Venezuela, and Iran—said last month that if Section 224 made it out of committee, he would work with Khanna to "offer an amendment to strip it from the bill on the floor."
The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee (ADC) is urging Americans to contact their members of Congress to tell them to reject Section 224.
"This is not 'America First.' It is Israel First," ADC argues on its website. "The resolution language attached to this proposal gives it away: it expresses support for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s initiative to transition the US–Israel relationship toward mutual defense cooperation and joint economic investment. This language turns Congress into a vehicle for advancing Netanyahu’s agenda and asks the American people to treat it as their own national security policy."
"Section 224 would move US support for Israel away from the more transparent foreign aid framework and into a maze of Pentagon procurement, licensing, data-sharing, and backdoor deals that are harder for Congress, taxpayers, and future administrations to monitor, cap, condition, or unwind," the group continued. "Concerns of undefined 'network integration' and 'data fusion' should alarm every American who cares about sovereignty, privacy, civil liberties, and democratic oversight."
"At a time when Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza, exporting surveillance technologies used against activists and journalists around the world, marketing military technology tested on Palestinians, and carrying out terrorist attacks as seen in the cell phone [bombings] in Lebanon, Congress should be cutting off military support—not integrating the US military and Israeli defense sector and making accountability harder than ever," ADC added.
In an opinion piece published this week by Common Dreams, Ben Freeman, director of the Democratizing Foreign Policy Program at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, wrote that "lawmakers should reject Section 224 from the NDAA to avoid deep integration with Israel’s military at a time when a growing number of Americans oppose Israel’s actions in the region."
"This unprecedented level of US-Israeli military integration stands in stark contrast to the traditional aid model of defense cooperation, in which Israel already stood out as the top recipient of US military assistance," Freeman said.
"Every day that we do nothing, 11 more Lebanese children are killed or injured by the Israeli military in this US-supported invasion."
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries helped Republicans tank Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s war powers resolution to limit US military involvement in Lebanon on Thursday, holding up the effort to curb the conflict for at least another several weeks.
Despite Israel’s invasion of Lebanon pushing deeper, with more than 3,500 people killed and 1.2 million displaced since early March, the Michigan Democrat's resolution was defeated in a 324-92 vote, with a large number in her own party joining Jeffries (D-NY) and the Republican majority against it.
In a joint statement shortly ahead of the vote on Tlaib's resolution, House Minority Leader Jeffries of New York, along with Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), said: “We stand with the Lebanese people, the government of Lebanon, and the Lebanese Armed Forces in their efforts to live peacefully and defeat Hezbollah." The statement included no mention of Israel.
The lawmakers said they’d support a different resolution introduced by Tlaib on Wednesday, which was crafted in tandem with Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
That resolution likewise required President Donald Trump to remove US forces “from any hostilities in Lebanon” within seven days of passage. But it also added the caveat that it could not be construed to "prevent or limit security cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces."
Jeffries, Clark, and Aguilar said, "There are no US servicemembers involved in combat operations or hostilities in Lebanon."
However, supporters of Tlaib's original measure have noted that the US military is heavily involved in Israel's actions in the country without having boots on the ground.
"The US is actively cooperating with Israel on coordinating strikes, intelligence sharing, and planning, including Trump green-lighting major attacks on Lebanon multiple times," Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams.
While the resolution's passage wouldn't "end US involvement overnight," she said, "it fundamentally changes the landscape of accountability" by giving opponents of US collaboration a legal mechanism to conduct oversight.
And while the resolution would not cut off US military aid to Israel, Abou-Elias said Israel could continue its occupation "only for a limited period of time" without US assistance.
"Israel would be absorbing losses while also draining its broader manpower and firepower reserves," she said. "At some point, the cost-benefit of continuing their occupation without US support would shift."
Because war powers resolutions are privileged, they can be forced to a vote even without approval from the Republican majority.
However, committees are given 15 days to act before a resolution is forced onto the floor, followed by three days for a House vote. This means it could take until June 21 for the new version to pass. The Senate would also have to pass it, and it would then take another week to go into effect.
"The people of Lebanon can't wait another month for Congress to act," Tlaib said on social media following news that the proposal would be voted down. "Every day that we do nothing, 11 more Lebanese children are killed or injured by the Israeli military in this US-supported invasion. Congress must pass today's Lebanon war powers resolution."
Abou-Elias said that despite the setback, Tlaib's introduction of the measure was not a wasted effort.
"Even if the resolution doesn't pass today, the vote forces every representative on record on the US participation in the attacks on Lebanon," she said. "That alone has value."
Though resolution failed, proponents of the measure championed the 92 lawmakers who did vote in favor.
“Congress’s failure to act has thus far enabled multiple Israeli invasions of Lebanon and war crimes against Lebanese civilians,” said Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, in a statement. “Tonight’s vote demonstrated that a growing block of members of Congress are beginning to listen to their constituents. Americans don’t want the US involved in atrocities against Lebanese, Palestinians, Iranians, or anyone. This vote is just the beginning, and we will continue to organize until all of Congress acts to end these atrocities.”