GAO Finds State Department Must Improve Civilian Harm Response for U.S. Arms Transfers
The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently released its report “HUMAN RIGHTS: State Can Improve Response to Allegations of Civilians Harmed by U.S. Arms Transfers” (GAO-25-107077), highlighting critical gaps in the Department of State’s ability to address allegations of civilian harm resulting from U.S. arms exports. As the world’s largest provider of defense articles, the United States has long imposed legal and policy frameworks aimed at ensuring that arms transfers do not contribute to human rights abuses. However, GAO found that despite updated Biden Administration policies strengthening human rights considerations, agency processes do not fully mitigate the risk that U.S. weapons are used to harm civilians abroad.
The report details that although U.S. laws like the Arms Export Control Act and Foreign Assistance Act prohibit providing security assistance to countries or security forces that consistently violate human rights, the Department of State has not developed sufficient mechanisms for monitoring how transferred defense articles are actually used. Existing end-use monitoring programs primarily verify the storage and security of U.S.-origin weapons rather than their use in active operations. This leaves a significant blind spot in efforts to ensure that U.S. arms are not implicated in civilian casualties. While the Biden Administration revised the U.S. Conventional Arms Transfer Policy in 2023 to strengthen human rights protections and required new assurances under National Security Memorandum-20, no arms transfers were paused or stopped as a result of these updates.
One of the most significant findings of the GAO report is that the State Department’s Civilian Harm Incident Response Guidance (CHIRG) process, developed in 2023, only accepts reports from U.S. government personnel. This severely limits the information the State Department receives, particularly since nongovernmental organizations and international bodies like the United Nations have documented thousands of civilian harm incidents during conflicts such as the ongoing Israel-Hamas war. GAO recommends that the State Department develop a mechanism to incorporate external reports from NGOs and international organizations into its incident tracking system to create a more complete picture of potential misuse of U.S. arms.
Further compounding the issue, GAO found that the State Department has not completed investigations into any of the civilian harm incidents it deemed credible. Staffing shortages were cited as a primary reason. With only a handful of full-time staff and contractors assigned to review over 600 reported incidents, the backlog is staggering, and cases are taking significantly longer to process than the two-month standard envisioned in CHIRG’s design. GAO emphasized the need for the Department to implement a strategy to ensure appropriate staffing and resource allocation to investigate incidents more efficiently and effectively.
Ultimately, the GAO’s findings underscore the disconnect between human rights policy and practical enforcement in U.S. arms sales. Without stronger systems for incorporating external civilian harm reports and without greater resource investments, the U.S. risks allowing its defense articles to be implicated in human rights abuses abroad without sufficient accountability. The GAO’s recommendations aim to bring greater transparency, responsiveness, and responsibility to how the United States monitors the use of its exported arms in conflict zones.
Disclaimer: This blog post is a summary of GAO-25-107077 and is intended for informational purposes only. It is not guaranteed to be accurate and does not constitute legal advice.