I understand the strategic advantages. However, we allegedly strive for higher ideals. Our history really isn't consistent in that regard. Lots of examples (like supporting dictators just because they said they weren't communist). But we often are the first on the scene after a disaster. Supporting genocide, which is effectively what we're doing, is grossly inconsistent with that ideal. No matter the strategic advantages.

Also supporting land theft (by "settlers"), but that's a different tangent.

I don't expect obedience. Nations have their own goals that may be contrary to (or unrelated to) ours. However, when they are committing atrocities and we provide material support (i.e. actions matter more than words), I believe we are obligated to say "you aren't getting any more aid or assistance until you stop, and maybe not even then if the damage is bad enough".