In February of last year, President Biden implemented a new arms transfer policy that altered the U.S. standard for halting weapons deliveries to foreign militaries accused of harming civilians during conflicts. Previously, U.S. officials needed “actual knowledge” of such violations, but under the new policy, weapons should not be provided to countries that are “more likely than not” to engage in human rights abuses or violate international law. This change aimed to position the United States as a protector of civilians during wartime. In August, Secretary of State Antony Blinken further instructed State Department officials to investigate incidents of civilian harm by foreign militaries using American weapons and recommend responses, such as halting arms deliveries.
The war in Gaza that ensued when Hamas attacked Israel a few months later placed President Biden and Secretary Blinken in the spotlight, sparking intense debate about Israel’s use of U.S. arms. Despite the new policies emphasizing human rights in American foreign policy, critics argue that Mr. Biden’s decision to continue arms deliveries to Israel contradicts his initiatives and undermines his goal. Now, as Israel threatens to invade Rafah in southern Gaza, Mr. Biden faces a new challenge. A report to Congress assessing Israel’s compliance with U.S. and international laws regarding the use of American weapons is expected this week. If violations are found, restrictions on arms deliveries could be imposed.
The roots of the U.S. law forbidding military assistance to countries engaging in gross violations of human rights date back to the 1970s, when concerns about America’s Cold War allies led to legislation sponsored by Senator Hubert H. Humphrey. This law prohibits U.S. arms sales to governments committing serious violations such as torture, arbitrary detention, or attacks causing disproportionate civilian casualties. There are limited procedures in place to evaluate potential infractions by armies receiving American weapons, and the U.S. government lacks monitoring mechanisms to oversee the usage of these arms.
Pressure from Democrats in Congress, including Senator Chris Van Hollen, led the Biden administration to take a closer look at Israel’s compliance with U.S. and international laws. A national security memo akin to Van Hollen’s Senate measure requires that recipients of U.S. military aid confirm that they have followed relevant laws when using American weapons. Israel, without being named specifically, submitted assurances to the State Department in March. The report due to Congress will evaluate any credible claims of violations and assess how the country involved has pursued accountability.
Experts remain doubtful that the report will implicate Israel without finding ways to continue arms deliveries. The Biden administration, however, asserts that the same standard applies to all conflicts worldwide, including Gaza. If Israel’s assurances are found lacking credibility, the report will outline steps to address the situation, which could include cutting off arms transfers. While the State Department is conducting investigations under the guidelines established by Blinken, these systems are more oriented towards facilitating policy discussion to prevent similar incidents in the future, without clear penalties set in place.
