Abdelhalim Abdelrahman Archives

Enforce the War Crimes Act Against Americans Who Committed Them In Gaza

Abdelhalim Abdelrahman is a Palestinian-American political analyst, host of the Uncharted Territory Podcast and a Marcellus Policy Fellow alum at the John Quincy Adams Society advocating for a restrained U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East centered around American laws and respect for Palestinian human rights.

Following the October 7th, 2023 attacks, Israel embarked on a series of military operations that human rights organizations, legal experts, and U.N. special rapporteurs recognize as constituting a number of war crimes and other violations of international law, including the crime of genocide. The involvement of US citizens as Israel Defense Forces (IDF) personnel in Gaza–and possibly in other roles in the territory–has raised questions of whether Americans may have committed war crimes in Gaza.

The Guardian published a report in September 2025 on Daniel Rabb, a U.S.–Israeli citizen from Chicago operating as a sniper in Gaza. Raab is part of the Paratrooper Unit 202, a sniper division of the IDF, for which Raab’s parents helped fundraise over $300,000. Raab, reports the Guardian, says he shot Salem Doghmosh “simply because he tried to retrieve the body of his beloved older brother Mohammed.” This goes against International Humanitarian Law regarding the recovery of the dead. The Guardian story also quotes Asa Kasher, co-author of the Israeli Defense Forces’ ethics code, stating that “if you see someone recovering a body or helping a wounded person, that’s a rescue operation, it should be respected. Someone like that should not be shot.”

Accusations that Americans committed war crimes in Gaza have not been limited to those US citizens who served in the IDF. While allowing a trickle of aid into Gaza, Israel’s government prevented the United Nations from delivering aid for much of 2025, instead disbursing lifesaving supplies through the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation (GHF), created with the involvement of the U.S. Department of State and Israel. However, the United Nations estimated that, by August 1, 2025, over 850 Palestinians in Gaza had been killed near GHF distribution sites, largely from fire by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

On May 27, 2025, the New York Times reported that the opening of aid distribution sites by the GHF was marred by chaos and gunfire near some of the sites. On June 2, CNN reported that hundreds of Palestinians had received gunshot wounds outside an aid site run by GHF. On July 2nd, the Associated Press reported that two US contractors speaking on condition of anonymity claimed that fellow GHF contractors had “regularly lobbed stun grenades and pepper spray in the direction of the Palestinians.” AP reported that one of the contractors “said bullets were fired in all directions — in the air, into the ground and at times toward the Palestinians, recalling at least one instance where he thought someone had been hit.” Videos provided by one of the contractors “include conversation between English-speaking men discussing how to disperse crowds and encouraging each other after bursts of gunfire,” according to the AP report.

In July 2025, Democracy Now interviewed U.S. Army Veteran Anthony Aguilar about his experience in Gaza with UG Solutions, the security subcontractor working with the GHF. He told Democracy Now that the aid distribution sites had “become death traps.” He also said “[w]e are using indiscriminate force, targeting civilians, escalation of force that goes far beyond the measures of appropriate, against an unarmed, starving population.”

In August, CBS News interviewed another individual claiming to be a GHF whistleblower under the alias “Mike,” who also asserted that American subcontractors and the IDF deliberately targeted Palestinian civilians near aid sites. The GHF vigorously denies the claims that its contractors fired on any Palestinian civilians.

Under the 1996 War Crimes Act, Congress and the Department of State have the authority to investigate and charge citizens and dual nationals who facilitate war crimes. While federal level action is unlikely under the Trump administration, members of Congress, civil society, and groups leading strategic litigation should press to use U.S. law to hold both the Israeli government and individual perpetrators accountable.

The War Crimes Act

Although the United States’ engagement with international war crimes prosecution is complex, under statutory law, U.S. nationals can be held domestically accountable for war crimes. The War Crimes Act, passed in 1996 by unanimous consent in the Senate and voice vote in the House, criminalizes a range of conduct constituting “grave breaches” of the Geneva Conventions, when committed by U.S. nationals or members of the U.S. armed forces. The scope of the WCA is significant: conduct committed overseas is not exempt from prosecution under U.S. law if the perpetrator is an American national.

Conduct by U.S. citizens and dual nationals in Gaza, like firing on civilians, could constitute a “grave breach” under the Geneva Conventions. This offers a legal basis for the Department of Justice to open WCA investigations against Americans credibly alleged to have committed war crimes.

The DOJ should immediately create a War Crimes Task Force, which would actively investigate credible allegations of war crimes committed by U.S citizens in Gaza. This task force should have expertise in international humanitarian law, open-source forensics, and conflict-zone investigations. This step would make clear that American citizenship is not a means to evade responsibility, and would allow the U.S. government to enforce the War Crimes Act to help prevent future impunity. Such an effort would also likely clear the path for a long-overdue accounting of war crimes committed by people serving in the US military, such as the 151 cases uncovered by The New Yorker and the Pulitzer Center in 2024.

Disarming Dangerous ‘Allies’

While the War Crimes Act allows for charges to be brought against perpetrators, the State Department and Department of Defense are obliged under the Leahy Laws to prevent continued military aid to foreign military units “where there is credible information implicating that unit in the commission of gross violations of human rights”. There is potential for overlap: if an American is serving in a foreign military unit committing abuses, they could be charged under the War Crimes Act, and their unit should be flagged for rigorous vetting under the Leahy Laws, though the crimes need not overlap for either measure to be useful.

The Leahy Laws offer another tool to prevent the use of American weapons in human rights abuses. Initially passed in 1997, and expanded/reaffirmed since, the Leahy Laws prohibit U.S. security assistance to any foreign security force unit “about which” credible information exists of gross violations of human rights, including but not limited to torture, extrajudicial killing, and enforced disappearance. The Leahy laws prevent specific military aid from continuing to be provided to units found in violation, but the laws do not at present ensure such units are barred from receiving assistance given to the foreign country’s military as a whole, after which the distribution of that aid makes it non-traceable, and can leave it in the hands of specific units that violate human rights. Patrick Leahy, the former Senator whose name the Leahy laws bear, argued in spring 2024 that the laws should be applied to Israel. “Unlike for most countries,” he wrote, “U.S. weapons, ammunition and other aid are provided to Israeli security forces in bulk rather than to specific units. The secretary of state is therefore required to regularly inform Israel of any security force unit ineligible for U.S. aid because of having committed a gross violation of human rights, and the Israeli government is obligated to comply with that prohibition.”

To date, the Leahy Laws have been used to impede funding to suspect units in Colombia, Pakistan, Egypt, Ukraine, and elsewhere, but as Leahy himself noted, since “the Leahy law was passed, not a single Israeli security force unit has been deemed ineligible for U.S. aid, despite repeated, credible reports of gross violations of human rights and a pattern of failing to appropriately punish Israeli soldiers and police who violate the rights of Palestinians.”

Congress and State should end that double standard. Accountability and integrity under US law demands that the Leahy conditions should be upheld in every instance, even and especially when friends and allies commit war crimes.

Daniel Raab’s Israeli Sniper Unit 202 should be subject to rigorous Leahy Law vetting, reasserting that U.S. military assistance—training, intelligence, equipment, etc.— can and will be withdrawn on credible allegations of unlawful attacks. Other units responsible for war crimes, like the targeting of civilians, should be identified in the open source or news reporting and similarly be made ineligible for U.S support under the Leahy Laws.

Policy Recommendations

Congress must do its job to ensure oversight and transparency. It should require the State Department to make regular public reports on investigations of U.S. nationals under the War Crimes Act, as well as the results of Leahy vetting. Congress can and should hold oversight hearings to demand the executive branch take action (or explain its inaction) when such violations come to light. The U.S. government should coordinate with U.N. fact-finding missions, NGOs, and international prosecutors and share evidence it has that can be used to corroborate allegations. It should be absolutely clear, through public messaging by the State Department, that U.S. nationals are not exempt from accountability mechanisms for violations committed anywhere.

Enforce U.S. Law on U.S. Nationals who commit war crimes
Increase Leahy Vetting on units seen in open source to be violating human rights
Ensure Oversight, Transparency, and International Cooperation when it comes to withholding arms and prosecuting war crimes

As the second anniversary of October 7 passes, and the tenuous terms of a ceasefire are once again agreed to, the genocide in Gaza remains a humanitarian and legal crisis. American citizens and nationals have been directly implicated in the violence, raising profound questions of accountability. Washington possesses legal tools, like the War Crimes Act, and legally mandated procedural obligations, like arms withholding under Leahy Laws—but has lacked the political and moral courage to utilize them. Enforcing these statutes, such as conditioning aid, arms embargoes and enhancing transparency, are essential steps toward upholding international law, deterring future violations, and ensuring that American citizenship is never misused as a shield for war crimes.

The United States cannot credibly demand accountability for atrocities in other conflicts (e.g Russian war crimes in Ukraine) while it simultaneously shields Americans who may be complicit in war crimes in Gaza

If serving in a foreign military is a free pass to immunity, then citizenship, and by extension the law, loses meaning. The U.S. must not create that precedent. The threat, however small, of prosecution or conditioned assistance will have a deterrent effect: knowing that one’s military actions may later have legal and reputational consequences will push compliance with IHL.

While the present administration may disregard the harm done to national reputation as undermining U.S. strategic interest, unaddressed accusations of grave human rights violations by U.S. citizens abroad carries real diplomatic risk for Washington. Ignoring it erodes trust with allies and partners that expect and demand the U.S. to uphold its own laws.

Editor’s note: This piece has been updated for clarity and to include the GHF’s denial of claims by cited sources.

Enforcing The Leahy Laws Can Help Find Justice for Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi

Abdelhalim Abdelrahman is a Palestinian-American political analyst and Marcellus Policy Fellow at the John Quincy Adams Society advocating for a restrained U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East centered around American laws and respect for Palestinian human rights.

Nine months have passed without any justice and accountability for the killing of 26-year-old Turkish-American activist Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). Before the Trump administration took office, U.S. Senator Peter Welch (D) along with seven other Democratic lawmakers pressed the Biden-led State Department and then-Secretary of State Anthony Blinken for answers regarding which IDF unit was responsible for Eygi’s murder and why the IDF deemed her to be a threat. While an investigation into Egyi’s murder may prove even more elusive under a Trump presidency, the quest for answers is a small step in what thus far has been an elusive process for justice, even without the current administration.

As a member of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), Eygi was shot and killed by the IDF in the occupied Palestinian village of Beita, located just south of the city of Nablus. Eygi was protesting with ISM against recent settler violence and ongoing expansion of illegal settlements in the occupied Palestinian village of Beita. Since 2021, Israeli forces have killed at least 17 people in Beita by using disproportionate and lethal force against civilians who dare speak out against Israel’s occupation of Palestinians. Since her killing, the United States government has failed both to hold Eygi’s killer accountable and to impose consequences onto the military force responsible for the cold-blooded murder of an American citizen. The IDF claimed that Eygi was “hit indirectly and unintentionally by IDF fire which was not aimed at her, but aimed at the key instigator of the riot,” which is false given that Eygi was standing 200 meters away from the original protest site that had already subsided by the time IDF forced open fired.

Eygi preceded in death the recently slain Amir Rabee, who like Eygi joined Rachel Corrie, Shireen Abu Akleh, Omar Assad, Mohammad Khdour, and Tawfic Abdel Jabbar on a long list of Americans whose murder Israel labels “an accident.” Eyewitness reports have contradicted the IDF claim that Eygi’s killing was inadvertent, saying it appears that she was targeted by the IDF.

Launch an independent investigation to obtain pertinent information into Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi’s murder
Publicly affirm that Eygi’s death was an extrajudicial killing, offering credible evidence of gross violations of human rights. Demand charges be brought against the officers responsible and withhold all U.S. security assistance to all implicated units.
Investigate other units recently credibly accused of gross violations of human rights, including the Givati Brigade, Metzada Unit, and Force 100.

Based on eyewitness testimonies, along with the history and genesis of IDF forces killing of American citizens, the U.S. State Department should investigate the murder of Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi as an extrajudicial killing, which constitutes a gross violation of human rights (GVHR)under the Leahy Law. Under this legal process, the United States government would withhold foreign assistance to the IDF unit responsible and conduct an investigation into the unit’s history to ensure they have a clean human rights record. If not, then the United States would be legally able to withhold all military assistance to that said unit until they are back into compliance with U.S law.

On September 6, 2024, Ayşenur Ezgi Eygi was shot in the head by an Israeli soldier in Beita while protesting the illegal Evaytar outpost in Nablus that had been taken over by hilltop settlers in 2021. Since the creation of the outpost in Beita, 17 Palestinians have been killed by IDF forces while protesting settlement expansion in this village. According to independent analyses by the Washington Post and CNN, Eygi’s killing occurred within the vicinity that these Palestinian civilians were killed. Furthermore, the IDF soldier who shot and killed Ms. Eygi was located behind a concrete wall roughly 230 meters from her location. The eyewitness testimonies reported by the Washington Post verified that during the time of Eygi’s killing, the protest was over and that Eygi posed no threat to Israeli forces, and corroborated the accounts as told to The Intercept. With all of this put together, it is reasonable to suspect that the IDF soldiers committed an unlawful, deliberate killing of an American civilian.

Policy Prescriptions: An Independent Investigation and Enforcement of The Leahy Laws

Firstly, the U.S. Department of State should heed the September 2024 call of Democratic lawmaker Adam Smith and 102 of his colleagues to launch an independent investigation to obtain pertinent information into Aysenur Eygi’s murder. That investigation should include which IDF unit was responsible for her killing, if that unit received U.S. security assistance in the form of training or equipping, the identity of the Israeli soldier and what accountability measures they may have faced. Secondly, the U.S. State Department should investigate whether or not Ms. Eygi’s death was an extrajudicial killing which would constitute gross violation of human rights (GVHR) under the 1997 Leahy Law.

While the State Department and Department of Defense’s respective Leahy Laws do not explicitly spell out what constitutes a “gross violation of human rights” the State Department utilizes the 1961 Foreign Assistance Act for guidance on the meaning and application of GVHR’s when applying the Leahy vetting process, defining an extrajudicial killing as a “deliberate killing of an individual, carried out under color of law,… and not authorized by a previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court after a trial affording all requisite fair trial and appeal guarantees.” The color of law clause is important because it explicitly states in order to operate under the color of law, a soldier or member of an armed force must be “acting or appear to be acting, in their capacity as a security unit.”

The IDF soldier responsible for Eygi’s death was acting as a member of a security unit of the IDF when he or she deemed Ms. Eygi as a threat.. Given that Ms. Eygi sustained a gunshot wound to her head, the precision with which she was killed means her death is plausibly a targeted killing.

Should an independent inquiry identify the unit involved in Ms. Eygi’s murder, the U.S. State Department should enforce the Leahy Law and ban all foreign assistance to that unit, as well as naming that unit explicitly as ineligible for assistance under the Duty to Inform provision. Similar rulings could also be issued in the cases of Omar Assad and journalist Shireen Abu Akleh, both of whom were American citizens killed by the IDF.

The notorious Netzah Yehuda unit handcuffed, blindfolded, and beat to death OmarAssad in an empty parking lot in January 2022.. Despite widespread evidence that the group had committed grave human violations against Palestinians in the past, without adequate remediation, former Secretary of State Anthony Blinken refused to enforce the Leahy Laws against the Netzah Yehuda.

On May 11, 2022, an unidentified Israeli soldier with the IDF’s Duvdevan Unit shot and killed Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. They later claimed her death as result of Palestinian gunfire, but an independent U.N. inquiry found this to be untrue. To this very day, the soldier that is responsible for Shireen’s death remains unburdened by consequences and Congress has resisted pleas from both lawmakers and Shireen’s family for an independent investigation into her killing.

The failure in accountability around Israel’s devastating harm to civilians, whether within the borders of 1947 Israel, or in Palestine, Lebanon, or Syria, must end. The consistent funding and political support for Israel by the world’s largest military power, notwithstanding international and domestic legal requirements to the contrary, is among the most key enablers of impunity for Israel.

Demanding the Trump administration to act in accordance with the Leahy Law should be the baseline policy position for any Member of Congress or political figure attempting to position themselves as a defender of U.S. and international law. Applying existing U.S. law to Israel, rather than continuing a long upheld unjust double standard, would be a valuable first step in the search for Eygi and the many other American citizens murdered by the Israeli armed forces. On May 8, 2025, Zeteo’s documentary “Who Killed Shireen?” named the alleged killer of Abu Akleh.

Secondly, once the investigation is completed, the U.S. government must publicly affirm that Eygi’s death was an act of extrajudicial killing, making public the evidence. This would provide Congress and other key actors with valuable information required to hold the suspects in Eygi’s murder accountable.

Lastly, if the Leahy Law was indeed violated in the case of Ms. Eygi, then the U.S. Department of State should use investigate other units recently credibly accused gross violations of human rights, including the Givati Brigade, Metzada Unit, and Force 100; all of whom, have been alleged to have participated in grave human rights violations against the Palestinian-Americans and other members of the diaspora visiting their homeland and Palestinians living under Israel’s military occupation.

Biden-Harris’s Gaza policy abandoned American workers

Abdelhalim Abdelrahman is a Palestinian-American political analyst and writer advocating for a restrained U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East centered around American laws and respect for Palestinian human rights.

When Vice President Kamala Harris lost to President-elect Donald Trump on November 5th, she did so without carrying any of the seven battleground states. Armchair post-mortems of her defeat by pundits across the nation have identified many issues as possible culprits for Harris’ defeat, from the disillusionment of working-class Americans after a period of inflation to lack of enthusiasm for both candidates, and of course ongoing support from the Biden-Harris administration for Israel’s actions in Gaza. Pundits have been quick to label Gaza, and especially the U.S. role in allowing Israel to facilitate likely war crimes with U.S.-made weapons, as a phenomenon that only impacted Michigan’s Arab American community. While Gaza was a significant factor in why Kamala Harris lost the state, labeling Gaza as a problem unique only to Michigan’s Arab American is disingenuous.

U.S. labor unions in swing states, working class Americans and younger voters all played a significant role in protesting the onslaught in Gaza, and they represent an overlooked demographic within the anti-war bloc over the last year. Gaza hit home with America’s labor unions and youth, marking foreign policy not as a separate issue from domestic issues but one intimately bound up in them. The inability of Democrats to enforce U.S. law, adopt a restrained foreign policy, and focus on working class issues at home contributed in overlapping ways to Kamala Harris’ defeat.

U.S. Labor Unions Spearheaded Anti-Genocide Protest Efforts

Early signs of this split could be seen in the organs of workplace democracy. Major labor unions across the United States threatened to withhold endorsing Kamala Harris unless she broke with President Biden and his unwavering commitment to Israeli security. Such a sentiment was widespread amongst local labor unions in key swing states such as Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin–the proverbial “blue wall” that Democrats have heavily relied upon in past elections. However, this time around, the “blue wall,” containing nearly 1.5 million labor union workers (530,000 in Michigan, 730,000 in Pennsylvania, and 205,000 in Wisconsin), crumbled.

The National Labor Network for a Ceasefire spearheaded a campaign for a ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo on Israel. The seven unions in the network represent 9 million workers, and on July 23 they made public a letter to the Biden administration in which the labor network called for a ceasefire and a halt on military aid to Israel. While most major labor unions went on to endorse Kamala Harris, not all of them were quick to do so. Shawn Fein, president of the United Auto Workers Union (UAW), held out on endorsing Ms. Harris initially. While Fein and the UAW did endorse Harris, he and the UAW remained relentless in calling for a ceasefire.

Throughout the last year, labor union workers across the United States told reporters how they saw themselves in Gaza, indicating that the issue impacted more Americans than pundits may have realized.“Workers are always being attacked by companies or being exploited,” said labor union worker Marcie Pedraza in an interview with The Nation back in December. Pedraza continued, “Why wouldn’t this same concept apply to people being targeted in a lethal military campaign in another part of the world, who are suffering unimaginable levels of persecution and loss?”

UAW Region 9A Director Brandon Mancilla similarly told In These Times, “The amount of political backing, arms resources we supply to the State of Israel is astronomical… we spend so much on defense, military spending in lieu of actually trying to solve deep social crisis in this country, of inequality of healthcare, of food access, education, the things you need to survive in this country.” UAW’s Region 9A encompasses 34 local unions across eastern all six New England states plus eastern New York and Puerto Rico. While Trump did not win any of these states, he improved on his 2020 performance in New York State, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island.

Pedraza and Mancilla’s comments highlight how as workers they’ve connected the struggle of working class Americans to the harms of spending money on the military of other nations, especially when that spending is accepted as an unquestioned part of bipartisan consensus politics.

It is clear to American workers that a foreign policy that runs counter to American interests has a detrimental impact on their living conditions. And while Gaza was not the sole reason for Kamala Harris’ failure earlier this month, it at least serves as a contributing factor as to Democrats’ loss of credibility amongst America’s working class.

Embargoing Arms To Israel Is A Popular Position Democrats Refused to Embrace

An arms embargo on Israel is not just a specific focus of the working class and labor unions, it was and remains a popular position for most Americans, again demonstrating that Gaza was not an issue relegated solely to Arab-Americans. According to the Institute for Middle Eastern Understanding (IMEU) Policy Project, pledging to impose an arms embargo would have given Kamala Harris an edge in Arizona, Georgia, and Pennsylvania, states Harris lost. The IMEU study found that 35% of Democrats and Independents polled in Arizona said they would be more likely to vote for Harris had she embraced an arms embargo, versus 5% who said they would be less likely. The figures were similar in Georgia (39% versus 5%) and Pennsylvania (34% versus 7%).

Polling in other groups paints a similar picture. A poll conducted by CBS in June 2024 showed that 61% of Americans (including 77% of Democrats) were against sending aid to Israel. Additionally, studies conducted by CIRCLE at Tufts University in January 2024 showed that 38% of youth ages 18-34, including 56% of those who identify as Democratic or lean Democratic, thought Israel’s military operation was going “too far.” CIRCLE also noted that that 49% of youth voters believed there was a genocide happening in Gaza.

Had Harris embraced this popular position with American voters, she would have been in a much better position to win the election. However, by ignoring calls for an arms embargo on Israel and a ceasefire in Gaza, Harris and the Democrats at large undermined the notion that American foreign policy is for the middle class. Instead, it signaled that the U.S. is perfectly willing to bend its own rules against arming human rights violaters, and will do it over the objections and needs of young voters and working class Americans.

Internationale Laws

Going forward, progressives must communicate effectively how recalibrating America’s foreign policy is beneficial to Americans, especially young people and union workers. For example, despite credible evidence from human rights observers indicating that Israel has U.S. weapons to facilitate war crimes in Gaza and block aid from coming into the enclave –both blatant violations of the United States’s Leahy Law and Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act–, Biden and Harris continued to provide Israel with unconditional arm shipments.

To re-engage the youth, working class and labor union workers, the United States must demonstrate a commitment to enforcing U.S. laws against human rights violators. That starts with enforcing the Leahy Law and Section 620I of the Foreign Assistance Act. Another crucial step is showing hard-working Americans that the United States is committed to a foreign policy rooted in restraint and rule of law.

In 2024, unions and workers showed politicians how they understand solidarity with workers across the world. Bringing them back into the “big tent” means treating their analysis as honest, their qualms as real, and their goals as legitimate aims. If the U.S. can carve out special rules for favored allies, what’s to stop presidents from playing favorites with bosses over workers? Either we have a system of international laws that applies to everybody, or we don’t. Workers saw that. Maybe by 2028, presidential candidates will too.

Resource Author: Abdelhalim Abdelrahman