Two former US ambassadors to Israel called on US President Joe Biden's administration to cut off military aid to Israel, arguing that the relationship between the United States and Israel would be more appropriate without feeling financial dependency.

Famed columnist Nick Kristof of The New York Times, one of the most influential columnists in liberal circles, said on Saturday that former US ambassadors Dan Kurtzer and Martin Indyk told him it was time for a new approach to the US-Israel relationship that did not focus on foreign aid.

According to Christophe, Kurtzer told him, "The Israeli economy is strong enough that it does not need assistance. Security assistance distorts the Israeli economy and creates a false sense of dependence."

"The aid provides the United States with no leverage or influence over Israeli decisions to use force, because we sit quietly while Israel pursues policies we oppose, we are seen as 'enabling' the Israeli occupation," Kurtzer told Kristoff.

"The United States provides billions of dollars in aid to Israel that allows it to avoid difficult choices about where to spend its own money, and thus allows Israel to spend more money on policies we oppose, such as settlements," Kurtzer continued.

As for Martin Indyk, who also served as the US special envoy for peace in the Middle East between August 2013 and April 2014, he said, "Israel can bear it, and it would be better for the relationship if Israel stood on its own two feet."

The statements, made by two of the most important supporters of Israel historically, come at a time when this issue has been confined to a handful of progressive House representatives, and at a time when the relationship between the United States and Israel may be facing unprecedented tension, given the Biden administration's deep dissatisfaction with the policies pursued by the far-right government of Benjamin Netanyahu related to judicial reform, settlement expansion and other issues related to Israel's approach to the Palestinians, which makes the two-state solution, in which the administration verbally clings, almost impossible.

Perhaps one of the indications of this tension is Biden's refusal to officially invite Netanyahu to the White House for an official visit, which led to conflicting readings between the two parties, which unleashed many interpretations.

Kristof's call also comes as Democrats have become increasingly divided over the state of US-Israel affairs, with progressive voices critical of Israel being officially portrayed as anti-Semitic by Republican rivals and the rest of the Democratic Party unsuccessfully seeking to avoid politicizing the issue.

While judicial reform has forced many Democrats to contemplate whether they can continue to unabashedly support Israel if it loses its status as a democracy, senior US officials used President Isaac Herzog's recent visit to insist that the relationship is solid and unbreakable.

“I don't think any change should happen suddenly or in a way that jeopardizes Israeli security,” Kristoff suggests. The reason for rethinking US assistance is not to seek leverage over Israel — although I do think we should get tougher on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who destroys any hope for a two-state solution and is, in the words of former Prime Minister Ehud Barak, “determined to shatter Israel into a corrupt, racist dictatorship that will lead to the collapse of society.”

Instead, Kristof says, "The reason for having this dialogue is that US aid to another rich country squanders scarce resources and creates an unhealthy relationship that harms both sides.

"Today, Israel has legitimate security concerns but is not in danger of being invaded by the armies of its neighbours," he says, "and is richer per capita than Japan and some European countries. One sign of the changing times: Almost a quarter of Israel's arms exports last year went to Arab countries."

According to Christophe, the annual aid value of $3.8 billion to Israel is more than 10 times what the United States sends to the most populous country of Niger, which is one of the poorest countries in the world and is under attack by jihadists. In countries like Niger, that amount could save hundreds of thousands of lives annually, or here in the United States, it could help pay for much-needed early childhood programs.