Democratic members of the House Appropriations Committee criticized Republican-led efforts to dismantle the United Nations Relief and Works Agency in the House’s draft 2026 budget bill for the State Department and other foreign programs.

The exchanges underscore the continued support among some prominent Democrats for restoring the U.S. relationship with the scandal-plagued UNRWA, more than a year after U.S. aid to the group was first halted following allegations that UNRWA staff participated in the Oct. 7, 2023 attacks on Israel. The budget bill includes a continued ban on aid to the agency and calls on the State Department to put together a plan to replace it.

Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-CT), the top Democrat on the committee, pushed for the restoration of support to UNRWA.

“The bill scapegoats our international partners, U.N. agencies and NGOs that deliver life saving aid to the most vulnerable people around the globe,” DeLauro said. “Organizations like UNRWA will be destroyed, leaving children and families in Gaza and other places around the world to starve and to die.”

DeLauro also pushed back on provisions in the bill that would withhold funding from the U.N. Secretariat until the U.N. and U.S. government take certain steps to pursue accountability for UNRWA members involved in the Oct. 7 attacks.

“I do not believe the language matches the intent,” she argued. “The provision is overly broad. It penalizes important U.N. entities until specific actions are taken by the United States government. This makes no sense.”

She argued that a provision demanding that the U.N. waive immunity for U.N. employees involved in the attack is unnecessary.

“U.N. immunity is already waived in cases where it would impede the course of justice or where someone has committed human rights violations or engaged in or supported acts of terrorism,” DeLauro said. “We all want justice for the horrific attacks on both Americans and our friends in Israel and indeed, the Justice Department has a task force already investigating this issue. We should work together to address this in a manner that achieves true justice.”

Reps. Madeleine Dean (D-PA) and Bonnie Watson Coleman (D-NJ) introduced an amendment that would halt future U.S. aid to the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation until the State Department transmits to Congress all evidence provided by Israel and all U.S. assessments about the diversion of United Nations humanitarian aid by Hamas in Gaza.

It would also require the State Department to report to Congress on deaths at or near GHF distribution sites and plans to minimize such deaths, as well as on fraud and antiterrorism safeguards, before any further aid is provided to the GHF.

Dean accused the GHF of “violating core humanitarian principles” and described the system as a “death trap for starving Palestinians,” urging the U.S. to return to previous U.N. and NGO-run distribution systems.

She said she’s been shown no proof that Hamas had diverted aid provided under previous distribution systems, though she said that it “could be” doing so. 

Dean claimed that “not a single refugee was gunned down as they attempted desperately to retrieve aid for their family with UNRWA or [the] World Food [Program] or other U.N. programs” and alleged that “more than 1,000 Gazans have been killed — shot and killed — by the IDF by trying to simply get food” at GHF sites. Israel has denied claims that it is targeting aid recipients at GHF sites, and some reports of such activity have been disproven.

Dean withdrew her amendment without requesting a vote.

Dean and Watson Coleman introduced another amendment to encourage the State Department to continue to support the East Jerusalem Hospital Network, which the committee rejected by a party line 35-26 vote.

Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R-FL) argued against the amendment, saying that no provisions of law would otherwise prohibit aid to the hospital network and that the decision should be left to Secretary of State Marco Rubio to assess where and how humanitarian funding would be best spent.

As part of an amendment package, committee Republicans called for an additional $2 million to be provided in the coming year for the implementation, enforcement and renewal of sanctions on Iran.

The amendment package also included language expressing concern about the Muslim Brotherhood, and requesting a report to Congress on how the State Department is countering “the threats posed” by the group, including visa restrictions.

The amendment package was adopted by a 34-27 vote.

Democrats more broadly criticized Republicans for the significant cuts the bill would enact on the State Department and U.S. foreign aid programs formerly run through the U.S. Agency for International Development.

Republicans on the House Appropriations Committee’s National Security, Department of State and Related Programs subcommittee are backing a significant increase in funding for the office of the State Department’s special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism.

The explanatory report accompanying the subcommittee’s 2026 funding bill, which it advanced last week, proposes $2.5 million for the office, up from the $1.75 million provided in 2024 and 2025. The report also includes language calling for increased full-time staff in the office. The full Appropriations Committee will meet to discuss and vote on the bill on Wednesday.

The bill also expands vetting policies for U.S. funding abroad, requiring that no funding be provided to organizations that engage in the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement targeting Israel, glorify violence or target the U.S. or Israel at the International Criminal Court or International Court of Justice.

Citing unspecified allegations that the U.S. provided assistance to organizations involved in political activity — a potential reference to GOP allegations that the U.S. funded protests against the Israeli government — the report directs the Department of State to expand its vetting procedures “to include an assessment of political neutrality and a review of statements by individuals or organizations that constitute engagement in political advocacy, incitement, or support for terrorism that would cause operational and reputational risks for the United States Government.”

The legislation, as approved by the subcommittee last week, would cut off U.S. funding to various United Nations initiatives, including the U.N.’s general budget.

The report explains that the cuts were motivated in part by the U.N.’s failure to address internal antisemitism and anti-Israel bias. It requests that the State Department report to Congress on the issue, including specific instances of antisemitism and their origins, statements by U.N. agencies or officials that may violate their responsibility to maintain neutrality toward Israel and an assessment of the U.N.’s plan to improve its response to antisemitism.

It also “strongly condemns” the U.N. General Assembly for passing a resolution granting the Palestinian Authority status nearly equivalent to that of a member state, describing the decision as having “undermin[ed] peace and security between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples.”

The report states that lawmakers are concerned about the continued relationship between Hamas and Turkey, which has hosted some of the group’s leaders. It makes no mention of the similar — and deeper — relationship between Hamas and Qatar.

The report calls for accountability for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, including demanding that the U.N. address atrocities committed by UNRWA members on Oct. 7, 2023, and UNRWA’s alleged provision of support for and partnership with terrorist groups.

It demands that the U.N. provide unredacted files on these issues, which it has allegedly declined to do thus far, and asks the State Department to present a plan for aiding the Middle East without UNRWA and a report on whether U.S. aid to UNRWA was diverted to or paid the salaries of terrorist groups and their members.

The bill would block U.S. funding to South Africa unless it meets several conditions, including ceasing its cooperation with U.S. adversaries.

It would earmark $5 million for programs in Israel designed to support archeological and cultural heritage, like the City of David. It also urges the State Department to support programs and organizations that back the U.S.-Israel relationship and directs the department to make funding available for humanitarian needs in Israel, such as medical responses to Iranian missile attacks.

It would maintain funding, $50 million annually, for the Middle East Partnership for Peace Act and would provide $50 million for the Middle East Partnership Initiative, which aims to support leadership and public-private partnerships in the Middle East; $10 million for the Middle East Regional Cooperation program, which funds scientific collaboration between Israel and Arab States; and $4 million for cooperative development programs between Israel and the United States in third countries.

The report states that freeing the remaining hostages in Gaza “is a critical United States priority and urges regional partners and allies to intensify their efforts toward achieving this objective.”

The legislation creates new oversight requirements for U.S. aid to Syria, requiring the State Department to notify Congress about aid provided to Syria, to consult with Congress before initiating a new aid program or activity and to ensure that no U.S. aid will benefit members or affiliates of the former Assad regime.

The report expresses concern about antisemitic discrimination in Latin America, “particularly instances of elected leaders fueling prejudice against Jewish communities through social media and official government channels or otherwise neglecting their responsibility,” and encourages them to condemn and work to fight antisemitism.

The report also instructs the State Department to work with U.S. allies toward implementing snapback of United Nations sanctions on Iran.

It also asks the State Department to report to Congress on foreign governments and nonstate actors that are targeting the international Jewish community and using antisemitism and antisemitic symbols.

The report requests that the State Department update Congress on the status of negotiations with the PA to end its terror payments program and expresses support for continued efforts to dismantle Hamas in Gaza, stating that the group continues to pose a threat to the U.S., Israel and other partners.

It further mandates that the State Department update Congress on the situation in southern Lebanon, including the actions of Hezbollah, the Lebanese Armed Forces and the U.N. peacekeeping force and their actions to comply with and enforce U.N. Security Council Resolution 1701 and the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire agreement, which mandates the disarmament of Hezbollah.

And it directs the State Department to present a plan for the future of the U.S.-Egypt relationship, including to consider negotiating a memorandum of understanding between the two countries on security assistance, as the U.S. has in place with Israel.

The report additionally instructs the State Department to ensure sufficient resources are provided to support the Abraham Accords and their expansion, and to work to expand membership in the Comprehensive Security Integration and Prosperity Agreement with Bahrain.

The members of the British rap duo Bob Vylan had their visas revoked by the State Department on Monday ahead of a planned U.S. tour after leading chants calling for “death to the IDF” over the weekend at the Glastonbury music festival in the U.K. 

“The Department of Justice Task Force to Combat Antisemitism will work with the U.S. State Department to deny entry into the United States of performers who incite violent antisemitic behavior,” a spokesperson for the DOJ told Jewish Insider. 

“Foreigners who glorify violence and hatred are not welcome visitors to our country,” Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau wrote on X.

Bob Vylan was slated to perform in 19 U.S. cities this fall. Organizers of the annual Glastonbury festival — Britain’s biggest summer music festival — said on Sunday they were “appalled” by the chants.  

Irish rap group Kneecap, which had their visas revoked in April, also performed at the festival on Saturday despite one of its members having been charged with a terror offense for displaying a Hezbollah flag at a London concert. 

The visa revocation comes amid a broader effort by the Trump administration to crack down on the explosion of antisemitism in the U.S, with several recent high-profile cases of student visa cancellations. 

The U.S.’ moves to evacuate some State Department personnel and military families from the Middle East are seen by experts as a potential sign of a U.S. or Israeli strike against Iran’s nuclear program — or, at least, a signal to Iran that the U.S. is prepared for such action, ahead of a planned round of nuclear talks with Tehran. 

The moves come as President Donald Trump’s self-imposed deadline for the talks is approaching this week, and Trump has expressed public frustration with the lack of progress being made. There have been conflicting reports about whether the talks expected this weekend are still slated to occur.

The State Department is drawing down personnel in Iraq, the department said, and the Pentagon is allowing for voluntary departures of military families from locations in the Middle East. The United Kingdom, separately, issued a maritime trade warning about a potential “escalation of military activity” in the Middle East.

Dana Stroul, the research director at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy and former deputy assistant secretary of defense for the Middle East, noted that the Trump administration had conducted mandatory drawdowns of State Department personnel in Iraq at the end of the first Trump administration. The Pentagon evacuations, she noted, are thus far optional.

“This was part of the Iran policy approach [during Trump’s first administration] to increase pressure on the Iraqi government to get attack[s] against U.S. forces to stop,” Stroul told Jewish Insider. “So some of the people making these decisions inside the Trump administration have prior experience with reducing our presence in the region as part of a pressure play against Iran.”

But, she added, a “reduction in military families in the Gulf is the first step military planners would want to take if they were trying to reduce risk to U.S. personnel before large-scale, significant military operations.”

“If you’re trying to minimize risk before significant military operations, this is what you do. But right now they’re voluntary, not ordered,” Stroul continued.

Stroul argued that, in combination with the recent call between Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump’s public comments that he’s been frustrated by Iran’s posture in negotiations, “Tehran should take notice.”

Daniel Shapiro, Stroul’s successor in the deputy assistant secretary role, said that the administration “is clearly into some major preparations for possible military action vs Iran (by US and/or Israel).”

“A useful signal ahead of round 6 of nuke talks,” Shapiro continued. “Need to be prepared to back it up.”

Jason Brodsky, the policy director for United Against Nuclear Iran, framed the move as a likely sign of action, noting that congressional testimony by Gen. Erik Kurilla, who leads U.S. Central Command, set for Thursday morning, had been postponed.

“Something is cooking,” Brodsky said.

John Hannah, a senior fellow at the Jewish Institute for National Security of America and former national security advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney, told JI he believes that the moves are primarily an “unambiguous signal to the Iranians in advance of the next round of talks that U.S. patience is not unlimited and that time may be running out for them.”

He said the steps will take time to carry out but “they all have the indicia of the classic playbook that the United States would start rolling out in advance of anticipated hostilities. And of course it’s all being undertaken without much stealth and secrecy, but rather in a manner that ensures the Iranians and the rest of the world will know about it.”

He added that it “doesn’t necessarily have to be just one or the other,” and the moves should leave Iran guessing.

“The fact that the immediate purpose of these moves might primarily be a signaling mechanism to influence Iran’s posture in the negotiations doesn’t ipso facto mean it’s all just a bluff — although, if we’re honest, bluffing and then retreating is clearly often an integral part of President Trump’s negotiating MO and the ‘art of the deal,’” Hannah said. “That said, it could also be a deadly serious first step to put Iran on notice that it’s got one last chance to take the deal on offer or face the wrath of a U.S. military strike.” 

“Trump is perfectly capable of going either way and the Iranians shouldn’t sleep too comfortably trying to figure out which one of those possibilities  they’re facing,” he continued. “If they guess wrong, the outcome for them is potentially catastrophic.”

Mark Dubowitz, the CEO of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, framed the moves more as a negotiating tactic.

“Ahead of round 6, the U.S. is signaling: failure at the table means real consequences,” Dubowitz said on X. “Starting to move non-essential personnel and families —reversible but not trivial. Message to Khamenei: you can end this peacefully, or face serious preparedness if you don’t.”

Kurilla said in response to a question from lawmakers on Tuesday about retaliation from a potential Israeli strike on Iran that the U.S. is continually assessing threats to military personnel in the Middle East and taking steps to address potential vulnerabilities.

The image of Greta Thunberg eyeing a turkey sandwich as she is taken into Israeli custody has been picked up across pro-Israel social media. And on the other side of the ideological spectrum, supporters of Thunberg, who is vegan, decried the “hostage-taking” of the Swedish climate activist and other participants on the boat that had been headed to Gaza before its interception overnight by Israel’s navy.

But the stunt — after all, the small vessel carrying Thunberg and the other activists could carry only a minimal amount of aid — has briefly taken global attention away from the legitimate efforts to distribute aid in Gaza, amid mounting distribution challenges following the launch of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation last month.

Distribution through the GHF was briefly paused last week following a series of incidents in and around distribution sites, including the shooting of some Gazans as they neared sites as instructed, and the rush on other facilities by crowds of Gazans. Additionally, the GHF said it was forced to close its distribution sites on Saturday due to threats from Hamas.

Further complicating issues is Israel’s support for an armed militia in Gaza that opposes Hamas, which Jewish Insider reported on last week. The Israeli decision to arm members of Yasser Abu Shabab’s gang in southern Gaza — which was made without the input of the Israeli security cabinet — is causing backlash in Israel, where former Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman pushed back against the plan, alleging that in attempting to pit Palestinian factions against each other, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “still continuing with the same idea that led us to the greatest massacre in the history of the state.”

Frustration over the situation from some of Israel’s staunchest defenders has at times boiled into public view. Speaking in Turkey last month, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said he was “troubled” by the humanitarian situation in Gaza, while Vice President JD Vance briefly addressed the humanitarian issue over the weekend in an interview with podcaster Theo Von. 

The State Department is reportedly considering allocating $500 million to the GHF’s operations — money that would come from USAID’s budget as the agency is folded into the State Department. But Israel has yet to demonstrate that it is able, through the GHF, to distribute aid at a large scale. And major challenges remain: that some of the most vulnerable are not in areas where easy and safe distribution is possible, and also that the distribution is taking place in a war zone with a rapidly changing security situation, and a route or site that is deemed safe one day may be unusable the next.

Kinks are to be expected as the GHF expands its operations. The open question, as distribution enters its third week, is if the GHF, with the backing of Israel and international partners, can address the existing challenges and scale up to meet the soaring humanitarian needs in the enclave, and whether in the longer term it can serve as a viable alternative to the many aid agencies and organizations with whom Israel refuses to work, or vice versa. 

It is against that backdrop that the GHF, Israel, the U.S. and other involved parties are working to formulate an implementable plan that avoids the logistical challenges of recent weeks. Thunberg’s boat stunt made headlines. But a functioning aid distribution apparatus, when operating at scale, can make a difference. 

The Trump administration tapped Michael Anton, the State Department’s director of policy planning, to lead a team of technical experts in negotiations with the Iranian regime about its nuclear program. 

According to Politico, Anton will lead a team of around 12 mostly career officials in discussions set to begin this weekend.

Anton is a conservative essayist and speechwriter who served in the first Trump administration as a deputy assistant to the president for strategic communications on the National Security Council. He was subsequently a senior fellow at the Claremont Institute.

In a 2020 Fox News interview, Anton said that the original Iran deal was flawed in part because it provided significant up-front financial benefits to Iran before the provisions more favorable to the U.S. took effect, which Iran used to fuel terrorism. He said Trump was “right to object to that” and reimpose sanctions. He said that cutting off Iranian resources would de-escalate, rather than escalate conflict.

He also supported the U.S. strike that killed Gen. Qassem Soleimani. 

Anton said on Fox and in a 2019 interview with NPR that he views Iran as generally cautious, retreating if it faces strong resistance.

“When and where Iran sees either weakness and/or a lack of vigilance — America not paying attention — it tends to try to exploit what it sees as gaps,” Anton said. “When it sees that we are being strong, that we are being vigilant, that we’re not leaving them opportunities to harm our interests, it tends to back down and turn its attentions elsewhere.”

He said that the U.S. and its allies can deter Iranian aggression by presenting a strong and united front. He also emphasized that all administration officials should ultimately defer to the president’s judgement on any issues to do with Iran or be fired.

Anton is known as an ardent defender of Trump and his foreign policy approach, which he described in a past interview with Jewish Insider as aiming to roll back U.S. involvement throughout the world and focusing instead on defending U.S. national security, economic interests, competitiveness and alliance structure.

“It’s a more focused doctrine than what Trumpism replaced. It’s seeing American interest through a more narrow lens,” Anton said. “Once you define everything as a priority, nothing is a priority. Once you define everything as an interest, it means nothing is an interest.”

He also told JI that he sees the U.S.-Israel relationship as critical to the U.S.’ security strategy but also based on more than “dollars and cents,” including a “shared conviction and shared interests” and a “natural affinity to democracies that share common values and so on.”

Michael Makovsky, the CEO of the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, who has expressed some concerns about the direction of the nuclear talks, said that the actual technical details of the talks are the paramount question.

“It depends upon what the technical team intends to do. If it’s to work out the technical details of dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear program, including its enrichment facilities, as well as limits on its missile program, that would be most welcome,” Makovsky said. “However, if it’s to work out the technical minutiae of a new version of Obama’s JCPOA, then that would be dangerous. The administration should clear up the confusion and clarify to the American people what its policy is.”

Daneille Pletka, a distinguished fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, told JI that Anton is a “weird choice” because “this is not his bailiwick. And there are others inside the administration who know more about Iran.”

“Donald Trump has had some success historically thinking outside the box about long-term challenges,” Pletka said. “But the technical issues are actually pretty challenging. Anton is no dummy, and so I suspect he can get up to speed. But I really worry about [Middle East Envoy Steve] Witkoff, and about the fact that there is no Venn diagram in which our red lines and the Iranian red lines intersect. So what are we negotiating about?”

Witkoff, the lead U.S. negotiator, has raised concerns among Iran hawks with inconsistent public explanations of the U.S.’ negotiating position on the issue of whether Iran can maintain domestic nuclear enrichment.

Dan Shapiro, a senior official in the Pentagon under the Biden administration and an ambassador to Israel under the Obama administration who is now a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council, said that he does not know Anton personally but “as a policy lead, it makes sense if he has the confidence of” Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

“But even more important is to staff the delegation for technical talks with bona fide nuclear technology experts,” Shapiro continued. “The Iranians know their brief cold. The U.S. team has to be able to match their expertise and call BS on loopholes that would sustain a pathway to a nuclear weapon.”

The news of Anton’s selection comes amid reports in Israeli media that Israeli officials are concerned the U.S. is approaching an insufficient deal that will not prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, that the talks are already far along and that Israel is not being kept informed on critical issues.

A new organizational chart released by the State Department on Tuesday shows major changes to the department’s structure, including the elimination of the office where the special envoy to monitor and combat antisemitism’s team is located. Despite this, internal department communications affirmed that the office of the special envoy is still a department priority and will continue to exist.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced the major shake-up of the department’s organizational structure as seeking to counter what he described as left-wing orthodoxy in the department and “drain[ing] the bloated, bureaucratic swamp.”

The changes include the elimination of the office of the under secretary for civilian security, democracy and human rights, where the office of the antisemitism envoy was previously placed. 

A fact sheet sent to State Department employees that was obtained by Jewish Insider makes clear that the antisemitism envoy’s office will now fall under the State Department’s new foreign and humanitarian affairs office, along with the office of international religious freedom. Many other offices were not afforded the same clarity in Rubio’s fact sheet. Layoffs are expected across the department, but senior officials declined to share with employees who might lose their job. 

“President [Donald] Trump and Secretary Rubio are focused on realigning U.S. foreign policy to reflect America’s core national interests and deliver better results for Americans,” the fact sheet stated. 

Trump nominated businessman Rabbi Yehuda Kaploun to serve as antisemitism envoy, an ambassador-level position that requires Senate confirmation. The office is still staffed by several civil servants even in the absence of a confirmed envoy.

This week’s “Inside the Newsroom” conversation features former Trump State Department spokesperson Morgan Ortagus talking about her trip to Qatar and its role in the region, and her thoughts on how a second Trump term would approach foreign policy.

Here is a clip from today’s conversation: