One of the key decisions taken by his administration in the field of foreign policy was the announcement by the administration of US President Joe Biden to freeze his country's exports of offensive weapons to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Security cooperation - especially foreign military sales - is an important and controversial central tool of US foreign policy, especially toward the Middle East.
US arms exports jumped to $ 175 billion in 2020, according to data from the Pentagon's Defense Security Cooperation Agency.
The new contracts for the F-35 sale pushed sales up close to 3% from their 2019 counterpart.
The years of former President Donald Trump's rule saw the priority of the economic basis for arms deals, and US arms sales increased with the administration easing some restrictions on arms deals, especially towards countries that do not have formal alliances with Washington, such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Hence, Biden's decision to freeze and review arms deals for the two countries represented a major break between the approach of the Trump and Biden administrations.
A greater role for Congress
Military expert David de Roch, a former warrior and assistant professor at the Near East and South Asia Center at the US National Defense University, told Al Jazeera Net;
"The Biden administration's move to review arms sales to both Saudi Arabia and the UAE can be understood within the framework of reforming the balance of relations between the White House and Congress regarding the issue of arms sales."
During his confirmation hearing, Anthony Blinken said that "the voice and role of Congress in foreign policy have been weakened and diminished," and that this "makes our country weaker."
A former ambassador who spoke to Al Jazeera indicated that "Congress' playing a greater role in foreign policy making will mean playing a greater role in the fate of the arms deals."
Then Minister Blinken indicated - in a press conference after that - that the State Department’s review of arms sales is “a regular thing at the start of every new administration, to ensure that these sales reinforce our strategic goals and advance our foreign policy.”
Arms sales to the countries of the Middle East have represented a great dilemma for successive US administrations, and data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute indicates that Middle Eastern countries received 51% of US arms sales between 2015 and 2019.
Saudi Arabia alone received half of these sales, and paid for the war in Yemen, and the biggest humanitarian crisis the world has seen in recent decades.
Until Congress intervenes in repeated attempts to block arms sales to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
Some members of Congress expressed their opposition to the war by imposing restrictions on arms transfers.
The Trump administration bypassed Congress on several occasions under the pretext that the sales were in the interest of the national security of the United States, and former President Donald Trump was forced to use the presidential veto power to overcome congressional objection to arms sales to Saudi Arabia.
Many members of Congress also expressed their objection to the sale of F-35 aircraft to the UAE under the pretext of threatening Israel's qualitative military superiority.
The acquisition of Russian weapons by allies of the United States, such as Turkey, India, and Egypt also raised a dilemma, and in light of which it enacted the "Katsa Law" (the Anti-America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act - "CAATSA"), which obliges Washington to impose sanctions on Russian arms buyers and stop US arms sales. The same happened with the F-35 deal for Turkey, due to its acquisition of Russian S-400 missiles.
Experts believe that Congress’s playing a greater role in making foreign policy means playing a greater role in the fate of (European) arms deals.
Controversy of US arms sales
Some commentators believe that the Biden administration is pressing to use arms sales to accelerate an end to the war in Yemen, and will continue the Trump administration’s approach to using the "Katsa" law against Turkey.
However, the rapid international changes with which many alternatives to American weapons are available undermine the effectiveness of US pressure.
In response to Congress’s criticism of arms sales, the Trump administration defended itself by stating that “your adversaries, including Russia and China, have adopted deliberate and long-term strategies to try to disrupt our partnerships by seeking to replace the United States as the preferred and reliable supplier of weapons.”
A ready-made and practical alternative is not available in the case of countries such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which already possess large stockpiles of American weapons, as moving to Russian or Chinese systems is not a viable alternative.
The issue becomes more complicated in the case of Turkey, as an ally and an active member of NATO, with its strategic position and a huge army that is the second within the alliance after the United States, and Turkey acquired the "S-400" missiles, which prompted Washington to Freeze the deal to acquire F-35 fighters.
A former US ambassador said to Al-Jazeera Net that the Biden administration is aware of the complete attachment and dependence of Saudi Arabia and the UAE on Western and American weapons, and that they cannot switch to Russian or Chinese weapons systems.
This gives the Biden administration leverage as it pursues its goal of stopping the fighting in Yemen, reopening humanitarian aid channels and starting peace talks.
The ambassador - who preferred to remain anonymous - indicated that "the Biden administration realizes that pressure can be exerted on the two countries with regard to Yemen, and it can also use its armed influence to work to improve the records of the two countries in human rights issues."
The Turkish case also represents a great test for Biden in achieving the balance of strategic relations with it, in light of the commitment to sanctions as a result of its acquisition of Russian weapons that impede its role within NATO.