The U.S. has been Party to Multilateral and Bilateral Agreements addressing the Status of Armed Forces while present in a Foreign Country. These Agreements, commonly referred to as Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs), generally establish the Framework under which U.S. Military Personnel Operate in a Foreign Country.

SOFAs provide for Rights and Privileges of covered Individuals while in a Foreign Jurisdiction and Address how the Domestic Laws of the Foreign Jurisdiction apply to U.S. Personnel.

SOFAs may include many Provisions, but the most common issue addressed is which Country may Exercise Criminal Jurisdiction over U.S. Personnel.

The U.S. has Agreements where it maintains Exclusive Jurisdiction over its Personnel, but more often the Agreement calls for Shared Jurisdiction with the receiving Country.

A SOFA is Not a Mutual Defense Agreement or a Security Agreement, and generally does Not authorize specific Exercises, Activities, or Missions. SOFAs are Peacetime Documents and therefore do not address the Rules of War, the Laws of Armed Conflict, or the Laws of the Sea. The Existence of a SOFA does Not Affect or Diminish the Parties’ inherent Right of Self-Defense under the Law of War. In the Event of Armed Conflict between parties to a SOFA, the Terms of the Agreement would No longer be Applicable.

The U.S. is currently Party to more than 100 Agreements that may be considered SOFAs. While a SOFA as a Stand-Alone Document, may Not exist with a particular Country, that does Not necessarily mean that the Status of U.S. Personnel in that Country has Not been addressed. Terms commonly found in SOFAs may be contained in other Agreements with a Partner Country and a separate SOFA Not Utilized. As contracts, SOFAs may be Subject to Amendment or Cancellation.

In 1957, Congress passed a Resolution Authorizing the Use of Militarym Force to Protect any Middle Eastern Regime theatened by Communists. It's still on the Books.

So are the Authorizations of Force Passed for the First and Second Iraq Wars, in 1991 and 2002.

A Bipartisan Group of Legislatures want to Repeal them.

This isn't just a matter of Legal Housekeeping. The Obama Administration cited the 2002 Resolution to buttress its Claim to be able to dispence with getting Congressional Approval to Fight the Islamic State.

The Repeal Bill does Not, however Target the Post-September 11 Resolution of 2001, which has been stretched even more Creatively.

That's the one that Authorizes Force against All those who took part in the Attacks on U.S. or Harbored them. That one needs Updating, as the Terrorists we are now Fighting are Not the Same People.

But any sign of Congressional Interest in Reclaimming Powers it has Granted to the Executive Branch is Welcome.










NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker