Sen. Chris Van Hollen Takes a Stand: Criticizes Netanyahu, Urges Limits on U.S. Arms Over Gaza Civilian Toll

Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), once broadly seen as a steady supporter of Israel, has emerged as one of the Senate’s most outspoken critics of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conduct of the Gaza war. His public opposition to continued U.S. offensive military support and weapons transfers reflects growing concern about the conflict’s civilian toll and a push for a values-based U.S. foreign policy.

From Supporter To Critic

A member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Van Hollen responded to Hamas’s Oct. 7, 2023, attack with anger and solemn condemnation. He described the assault as leaving a lasting wound on both Israeli and American communities. But as Israel’s military response intensified and the civilian death toll mounted in Gaza, Van Hollen took a markedly different stance — pressing for constraints on lethal assistance and for consistent application of human-rights principles.

“This is a matter of humanity,” Van Hollen told the author, arguing that American taxpayers and weaponry have contributed to “much of the humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza and ongoing violent settlement expansion on the West Bank.”

Public Pushback and Community Support

Van Hollen’s views have provoked sharp disputes within Maryland’s Jewish community. Tensions came to a head at a Lox and Legislators breakfast hosted by the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, where JCRC CEO Ron Halber publicly criticized the senator, saying Van Hollen had “dramatically lost his way.” Halber accused him of showing insufficient empathy for Jewish suffering and Israel’s strategic concerns.

A spokesperson for Van Hollen countered that Halber had become “an apologist for the Netanyahu government,” while Van Hollen remained committed to holding both allies and adversaries to the same human-rights standards.

The clash sparked an outpouring of grassroots support: within 48 hours, more than 500 Maryland constituents — including students and younger Jewish community members — signed a letter calling Van Hollen’s stance “courageous” and urging continued independent judgment.

Wider Political Context

National organizations such as AIPAC and the Anti-Defamation League have frequently resisted public criticism of Israeli policy or the Israel Defense Forces, prompting accusations from critics that such groups sometimes equate policy critique with support for terrorist violence. Polling shows a growing share of Jewish Americans, particularly younger and progressive voters, expressing skepticism of Netanyahu’s policies and greater sympathy for Palestinian rights — a trend mirrored among the broader U.S. public.

Some political leaders have chosen more measured language. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore issued a carefully calibrated statement emphasizing support for the Israeli people’s right to safety without explicitly criticizing Netanyahu’s policies — an example of a pragmatic political response Van Hollen contrasted with his own more direct approach.

Political Risk and Principles

Van Hollen acknowledged that well-funded pro-Israel groups could try to recruit a primary opponent ahead of the 2028 election cycle, but he said he is prepared for that challenge. “This job’s not worth it if you can’t look yourself in the mirror at the end of the day,” he said, framing his stance as a matter of conscience and consistent values.

Full disclosure: Van Hollen served with the author’s brother, Paul, in the Maryland state legislature before joining Congress in 2002.

Mark I. Pinsky is a Durham, N.C.-based journalist and author.