The United States has operational bases and defense agreements with the GCC countries that underpin a long and strong relationship with the Council. It maintains arms deliveries to the GCC army, provides training and logistical assistance, shares intelligence information, and conducts joint land and naval military exercises and operations, among other things. After a relationship between the Obama administration and the GCC that was far from optimal, the US can now strengthen a robust presence that ensures its strategic interests, ensures regional stability, eases the concerns of allies and partners, and controls Iran`s active and aggressive foreign policy. 1995: Agreement on the status of U.S. military personnel and civilian employees of the Department of Defense who may be present in Albania as part of a Joint Military Search and Rescue Exercise (SAREX). 2004: Supplementary Agreement to the Agreement between the Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty and Other States Participating in the Partnership for Peace on the Status of their Armed Forces” on the Status of The United States Armed Forces in the Republic of Albania The United States has concluded an Agreement with the Government of Mongolia on Military Exchanges and Military Visits.22 Under the Agreement, Article X deals with the criminal jurisdiction of U.S. personnel in Mongolia. The text of the agreement states: ”The military authorities of the United States have the right to exercise in Mongolia any criminal and disciplinary jurisdiction over the United States conferred upon them by the military laws of the United States. Any crime against the laws of Mongolia committed by a member of the United States Armed Forces will be referred to the competent authorities of the United States for investigation and decision. 23 The agreement allows the Government of Mongolia to ask the United States to relinquish jurisdiction in cases of alleged criminal conduct unrelated to official duty.24 There is no obligation for the United States to relinquish jurisdiction, but only to ”give favourable consideration to such a request”.25 1954: Agreement on the stationing of US forces in the Netherlands NATO`s SOFA is a multilateral agreement applicable to all member states. NATO.

As of June 2007, 26 countries, including the United States, had ratified or acceded to the agreement by joining NATO.9 In addition, 24 other countries are subject to NATO`s SOFA through their participation in NATO`s Partnership for Peace (PfP) programme.10 The programme consists of bilateral cooperation between individual countries and NATO to increase stability. Reduce threats to peace and strengthen security relations.11 PfP countries commit to the terms of NATO`s SOFA.12 Through NATO`s SOFA and NATO PfP, the United States has a common SOFA with approximately 58 countries. Then-Secretary of State Rice and Secretary Gates said the United States has agreements in more than 115 countries around the world.13 NATO`s SOFA and NATO`s PfP SOFA account for about half of the NAFAs to which the United States has adhered. On February 10, 2011, Rep. Lynn Woolsey H.R. 651, the U.S.-Afghanistan Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) Act of 2011.64 The bill requires, 90 days after its passage, that the president ”seek to negotiate and enter into bilateral troop status with Afghanistan.”65 In addition, when it comes into force, the law requires that the agreement explicitly state: that the presence of U.S. forces in Afghanistan is temporary. Permanent stationing is prohibited and all troops must withdraw from the country within one year of the agreement.66 September 23. In May 2005, President Hamid Karzai and President Bush issued a ”joint statement” outlining a likely future agreement between the two countries.60 Military forces in Afghanistan ”assist in the organization, training, equipping and maintenance of Afghan security forces” until Afghanistan has developed its own capabilities, and to ”consult on taking appropriate measures if Afghanistan perceives that its territorial integrity, independence or security is threatened or threatened.” The statement does not mention the status of U.S.

forces in Afghanistan, but if an agreement is reached under the statement, it can be expected that a status-of-forces agreement will be included. In August 2008, shortly after U.S. airstrikes appeared to have resulted in civilian casualties, President Karzai called for a review of the presence of all foreign forces in Afghanistan and the conclusion of formal peace agreements with the respective countries.61 So far, however, it seems unclear whether the parties have begun formal negotiations that could lead to an update of the the SOFA. In 1941, the United States entered into an agreement with the United Kingdom to lease naval and air bases in Newfoundland, Bermuda, Jamaica, Saint Lucia, Antigua, Trinidad, and British Guiana.146 The agreement not only described the leased physical location, but also provided for the status of U.S. personnel located on the leased site. Although the lease was not an independent SOFA, it served the purpose of a SOFA at the specified locations. The United States and the United Kingdom entered into additional leases in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s that included status protection provisions in leased sites. While NATO`s SOFA provides comprehensive language to justify jurisdiction, the United States has listed many SOFA that appear to have a very basic rule for determining responsibility. Some agreements contain a single sentence stipulating that U.S.

personnel must be granted equivalent status to administrative and technical staff at the U.S. Embassy in that country. The Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations of 18 April 1961 defines categories of personnel, each enjoying different levels of legal protection.30 Administrative and technical personnel enjoy, inter alia, ”immunity from criminal jurisdiction of the receiving State”. 31 Accordingly, a SOFA which treats United States staff as administrative and technical staff confers immunity from criminal jurisdiction during their stay in the host country. 2001: Agreement on the Overflight, Transit and Presence on the Territory of the Republic of Bulgaria of United States Armed Forces, Personnel and Contractors in Support of Operation Enduring Freedom (Agreement concluded prior to Bulgaria`s accession to NATO) T.I.A.S., Agreement on Military Exchanges and Military Visits between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of Mongolia, Agreement of 26 June 1996. This announcement became a source of interest to Congress,115 in part because of statements by Bush administration officials that such an agreement would not be subject to legislative approval, even though the United States might be required to provide Iraq with ”security guarantees.”116 In the 110th century, the United States would be required to provide Iraq with ”security guarantees.” Congress held several hearings on the draft security agreement. In late 2007, Congress passed the Emergency Defense Supplementary Appropriations Act of 2008, which included a provision limiting the funds it provided by U.S. authorities to strike a deal with Iraq that subjugated U.S. members. Armed Forces under The Criminal Jurisdiction of Iraq.117 In October 2008, Congress passed the Duncan Hunter National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2009, which requires a report from the President to the House Foreign Affairs and Armed Services Committees, as well as to the Senate Foreign Relations and Armed Services Committees, on any U.S.-Iraqi agreement reached on specific topics. including U.S. security guarantees or obligations, fundamental rights, and the status of the United States.

. . .