The actions outlined Executive Order “Reforming Defense Sales to Improve Speed and Accountability,” issued April 9, 2025, will further obscure a vast portion of the arms trade from public and congressional oversight, undermine Congress’ legally mandated authority over arms sales, and increase the flow of U.S. weapons to actors in armed conflicts and criminal groups without adequate end-use monitoring measures.
Obscuring the arms trade from Congress by raising thresholds for notification:
Section 3(a)(iii) of the Executive Order dictates that the Executive “submit a joint letter to the Congress proposing an update to statutory congressional certification (also known as congressional notification) thresholds of proposed sales under the FMS and Direct Commercial Sales (DCS) programs in the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.).”
-
At present, under the Arms Export Control Act, arms sales that reach a certain financial value require congressional notification and review. The transaction value triggering notification and the duration of the review period vary depending on the proposed recipient and weapons system in question.
-
These notifications provide lawmakers an opportunity to weigh in on arms transfers and act as de facto transparency mechanisms in an otherwise opaque enterprise, facilitating public engagement and inter-branch negotiation on security assistance decisions which have massive impact on U.S. grand strategy and public image, as well as human rights and civilian protection.
-
Already, an enormous number of arms sales pass below this notification threshold. Between 2017 and 2020, the Department of State’s Office of the Inspector General found that more than 4,211 below-threshold arms transfers, worth roughly $11 billion, were made to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates as they bombed Yemen. Raising notification thresholds would increase the number of arms transfers that proceed without congressional review, warping the political risk calculus for sales and incentivizing even more permissive and less restrained practices.
Undermining congressional authority regarding arms sales:
Section 3(a)(iii) of the Executive Order further dictates that “The Secretary of State shall also work with the Congress to review congressional notification processes to ensure the timely adjudication of notified FMS and DCS cases.”
-
This is likely a reference to eliminating the “tiered review process,” one of the few tools Congress has to exert authority over the transfer of defense articles and services.
-
As the State Department Office of the Inspector General explains “the Department has by longstanding practice submitted a preliminary or informal notification of prospective major arms transfers in advance of their formal notification to the congressional committees of jurisdiction.” This process allows for Congress to ask questions or raise concerns prior to formal notification confidentially with the administration.
-
Because Congress has never successfully passed Joint Resolution of Disapproval to entirely block an arms sale, this is de facto the only opportunity for Congress to exercise its Constitutional oversight role in matters of foreign relations. Since 95% of arms sales are approved by the State Department within 48 hours, this tiered review process only impacts transfers which pose a significant risk to U.S. national security or violations of international law.
Increasing the flow of arms to conflict zones, while risking U.S. proprietary information:
Section 3(c)(ii) orders “The Secretary of State and the Secretary of Defense shall review and update the list of defense items that can only be purchased through the FMS process (the FMS-Only List).”
-
The United States restricts the sale of some items, including those with advanced capabilities and proprietary defense information, to the FMS (Foreign Military Sales) government-to-government process. Among these defense articles are autonomous weapons systems, intelligence libraries, and select electronic warfare items. Allowing these sensitive weapons to be sold through the Direct Commercial Sales process cuts public oversight, while raising the risk of unauthorized transfer or diversion.
Section 3(a)(ii) similarly orders the Executive to “Reevaluate restrictions imposed by the Missile Technology Control Regime on Category I items and consider supplying certain partners with specific Category I items, in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce.”
-
The Missile Technology Control Regime is an international agreement which seeks to limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and limit the risk of related items reaching violent or destabilizing groups.
-
Undermining the MTCR not only risks the greater proliferation of the equipment that enables the use of weapons of mass destruction, but means other parties to the MCTR, including Russia, Turkey, and India, may follow suit and make the transfer of these risky technologies to U.S. adversaries more likely.
For inquiries contact [email protected]
In response to the Biden administration’s decision on Wednesday to release the full tranche of Foreign Military Financing (FMF) to Egypt despite ongoing human rights violations, Security Assistance Monitor (SAM) director Ari Tolany issued the following statement:
“The Biden administration’s decision to grant Egypt a staggering $1.3 billion in military aid with no human rights restrictions undermines the administration’s own human rights reporting, which found there has been ‘no significant change in the human rights situation in Egypt,’ and defies concerns rightly expressed by Senators Chris Van Hollen, Chris Murphy and their colleagues.
“Consistent gross violations of human rights remain widespread, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearance, and torture. The government’s broad refusal to investigate or prosecute reported human rights abuses makes remediation for victims impossible.
“Secretary Blinken reports that he is waiving the human rights conditions in the ‘national security interest,’ but using unrestricted taxpayer dollars to subsidize the brutal, autocratic el-Sisi regime doesn’t make Americans—or the world—safer. U.S. appeals to international order will continue ring hollow so long as the United States refuses to hold its allies, not just its rivals, accountable for violations of international law.”
###
WASHINGTON, D.C. – In response to reports that the Biden Administration sought to bypass congressional review and accompanying public scrutiny of massive arms transfers to Israel by dividing them into more than 100 smaller deliveries that individually fell under the threshold for mandatory notification to Congress under U.S. law, Ari Tolany, the Center for International Policy’s Security Assistance Monitor (SAM) director, issued the following statement:
“This doesn’t just seem like an attempt to avoid technical compliance with U.S. arms export law, it’s an extremely troubling way to avoid transparency and accountability on a high-profile issue.
“These arms laws and notification requirements exist precisely so that American lawmakers and taxpayers can evaluate the appropriateness of transferring U.S. weapons systems to a context like the devastating conflict in Gaza. Providing assistance to an active conflict should raise our standards of transparency and accountability, not diminish them. The fact that this glut of deadly arms has enabled massive civilian suffering in a bombardment that President Biden has himself called ‘indiscriminate,’ and that these transfers have continued despite the administration’s acknowledgement that Israel is blocking U.S. humanitarian aid, makes this move all the more disturbing.”
“Congress needs to step in immediately and demand a suspension in arms transfers to Israel until it can be sure such transfers can be conducted in full compliance with all relevant U.S. law – as well as our related obligations under international humanitarian law.”
Center for International Policy President and CEO Nancy Okail released the following statement:
Sixty days after Hamas’ horrific attack against Israel and the beginning of Israel’s now two month-long assault on the Gaza Strip, it is clear that only a renewed and sustained ceasefire can avert a further humanitarian catastrophe. We welcome the United Nations Secretary-General’s extraordinary use of Article 99 of the UN Charter to convene a Security Council meeting toward urgently achieving that and related objectives like the delivery of desperately needed aid to the people of Gaza and the release of all hostages.
We reiterate our condemnation of Hamas’ war crimes against civilians. With more than 1,200 Israelis murdered, hundreds subjected to unspeakable atrocities, and dozens more still held hostage, Israel has the right and duty to protect its people.
It is also clear that Israel’s largely indiscriminate bombing of the long-blockaded Gaza Strip in response has violated the laws of war and resulted in the deaths of well over 15,000 Palestinians, two-thirds of which Israel itself estimates are non-combatants, most of them women and children. Israel’s siege of the territory– variably loosened and tightened but never allowing anywhere near an adequate amount of water, fuel, food and medicine into Gaza– risks the spread of further deprivation and disease which could take even more Palestinian lives.
Deadly attacks in the West Bank that have claimed the lives of Palestinian and Israeli civilians, multiple acts of forcible displacement of Palestinian communities in Area C, exchanges of fire on the Israel-Lebanon border, and attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq and commercial shipping in the Red Sea all risk spreading the conflict even further.
The international community must make every effort to stop the bloodshed and prevent further escalation in the region. The United States should not only be at the fore of such diplomacy, but ensure that its Security Council veto, as well as its arms and aid to Israel, are not used to deepen and drag out this humanitarian disaster. If another ceasefire is reached, the United States must also not squander the opportunity to guarantee the lasting human security of Israelis and Palestinians alike through a serious effort to finally achieve a just, negotiated end to the underlying Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
###
