Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-dh8gc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T02:23:18.488Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Meeting Report
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 94 , Issue 1 , January 2000 , pp. 102 - 139
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 471 (1993). Throughout 1999, UN arms inspectors were unable to resume their work in Iraq, although they continued analyzing data in their possession and planning for future monitoring. See Note by the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/1999/1037 (1999).

2 See Roberto Suro, U.S. Air Raids on Iraq Become an Almost Daily Ritual, WASH. POST, Aug. 30, 1999, at A3.

3 See, e.g., Letter Dated 2 August 1999 from the Permanent Representative of Iraq to the United Nations Addressed to the Security Council, UN Doc. S/1999/842 (1999).

4 Letter Dated 6 July 1999 from the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates to the United Nations Addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. A/53/1014–S/1999/761 annex (1999); see Letter Dated 14 September 1999 from the Permanent Representative of the United Arab Emirates to the United Nations Addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. S/1999/974 annex (1999).

5 SC Res. 1284 (Dec. 17, 1999). The vote was 11-0 with four abstentions (China, France, Malaysia, and Russia). The resolution removes the ceiling on the amount of oil Iraq may sell abroad to buy food and other necessary goods, allows flights from Iraq for the annual Muslim pilgrimage to Mecca, and relaxes some controls on Iraq's import of medical, agricultural, and educational supplies.

6 See Barbara Crossette, Split UN Creates a New Inspection for Iraqi Weapons, N.Y. Times, Dec. 18,1999, at A1; Waiel Faleh, Iraq Rejects U.N. Weapons Inspection Plan, Wash. Post, Dec. 19, 1999, at A54.

7 Ambassador David J. Scheffer, The Continuing Criminality of Saddam Hussein's Regime (Oct. 27, 1999) (remarks at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace), available in < http://www.state.gov/www/policy_remarks/1999/99107_scheffer_iraq.html>.

8 [Editor's note: Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, UN Doc. A/CONF.183/9* (July 17, 1998), reprinted in 37 ILM 999 (1998).]

9 Scheffer, supranote 7; see also John Lancaster, U.S. Steps Up Efforts to Prosecute Top Iraqis, Wash. Post, Oct. 28, 1999, at A26.

10 S. Con. Res. 78, 105th Cong., 143 Cong. Rec. S1907 (1997). The vote was 93–0.

11 H. Con. Res. 137,105th Cong., 143 Cong. Rec. H10873 (1997). The vote was 396–2.

12 Pub. L. No. 105–358, 112 Stat. 3178 (1998).

13 Colum Lynch, U.S. Aids Hunters of Iraqi War Criminals, Wash. Post, Sept. 4, 1999, at A23; Christopher S. Wren, U.S. Gives Its Backing, and Cash, to Anti-Hussein Groups, N.Y. Times, Nov. 2, 1999, at A6. For fiscal year 2000, Congress earmarked $10 million for use in bringing about “political transition in Iraq,” of which not less that $8 million “shall be made available only to Iraqi opposition groups … for political, economic, humanitarian, and otiier activities of such groups,” and not more than $2 million “for groups and activities seeking the prosecution of Saddam Hussein and odier Iraqi government officials for war crimes.” Title V (§580) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2000, H.R. 3422 (1999), as enacted by Division B, §1000(a)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2000, Pub. L. No. 106–113 (1999).

14 Scheffer, supra note 7.

1 East Timor was regarded by the UN General Assembly as a nonself-governing territory and its status was regularly on the agenda of both the General Assembly and the Security Council. West Timor (previously under Dutch control) became a part of Indonesia in late 1949. For a contemporary history of Indonesia, see Robert Cribb & Colin Brown, Modern Indonesia: A History Since 1945 (1995).

2 The three agreements of May 5,1999, appear as annexes to Question of East Timor: Report of the Secretary-General, UN Doc. A/53/951-S/1999/513 (May 5, 1999).

3 Agreement between the Governments of Indonesia and Portugal and the Secretary-General of the United Nations, May 5, 1999, para. 1, reprinted in id., Annex III (1999).

4 See S.C. Res. 1246 (June 11, 1999); S.C. Res. 1257 (Aug. 3, 1999).

5 The vote was officially announced on Sept. 4, 1999. See Seth Mydans, In East Timor, Decisive Vote for a Break from Indonesia, N.Y. Times, Sept. 4, 1999, at A1.

6 Barbara Crossette, UN Says a Quarter of East Timorese Have Fled, N.Y. Times, Sept. 8, 1999, at A1; Keith B. Richburg, E. Timor Militias Return to Streets, Wash. Post, Sept. 1, 1999, at A1; Doug Struck, Nuns Describe Slaughter in E. Timor, Wash. Post, Sept. 11, 1999, at A1.

7 Seth Mydans, Jakarta Concedes a Loss of Control over Timor Forces, N.Y. Times, Sept. 12, 1999, at 1; Keith B. Richburg, East Timor's Capital City Devastated by Fires, Looting, Wash. Post, Sept. 9, 1999, at A1.

8 U.N. Mission in East Timor Is Abandoned to Looters, N.Y. Times, Sept. 15, 1999, at A6.

9 U.S. Dep't of State Press Release on Suspension of Military Sales to Indonesia (Sept. 10, 1999), available in < http://secretary.state.gov/www/briefings/statements/1999/ps990910a.html>; see Elizabeth Becker & Philip Shenon, With Other Goals in Indonesia, U.S. Moves Gently on East Timor, N.Y. Times, Sept. 9, 1999, at A1 (noting the United States’ long-term interests in Indonesia, a mineral-rich nation that, at 200 million people, is the fourth largest in the world, and one that is undergoing a political and economic transformation); see also Steven Mufson & Bradley Graham, U.S., IMF Move to Isolate Jakarta, Wash. Post, Sept. 10, 1999, at A1 (reporting the effective suspension by the International Monetary Fund of the disbursement of $2.2 billion remaining of a $12 billion lending program).

10 See Barbara Crossette, A Push to Intervene in East Timor Is Gathering Backers at the U.N., N.Y. Times, Sept 7, 1999, at A1.

11 Remarks to American and Asian Business Leaders in Auckland, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1727, 1727–28 (Sept. 20, 1999).

12 Seth Mydans, Indonesia Invites a UN Force to Timor, N.Y. Times, Sept. 13, 1999, at A1.

13 S.C. Res. 1264 (Sept. 15, 1999); see SCOR S/PV.4045, 54th Sess., 4045th mtg. (1999).

14 Letter Dated 29 October 1999 from the Secretary-General Addressed to the President of the Security Council, UN Doc. S/1999/1106 (1999) (third periodic report on the operations of Interfet); see Seth Mydans, Peacekeepers Slake Claim to Capital of East Timor, N.Y. Times, Sept. 21, 1999, at A1; The Timor Force, Wash. Post, Sept. 16, 1999, at A17.

15 Remarks on Departure for the Federal Emergency Management Agency and an Exchange with Reporters, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1755 (Sept. 20, 1999); see Roberto Suro & Colum Lynch, 200 GIs to Aid Force Going to Timor, Wash. Post, Sept. 17, 1999, at A18. For the president's October 8 letter to Congress on the deployment (which was provided “consistent with the War Powers Resolution”), see Letter to Congressional Leaders on Deployment of United States Force to Provide Support to the Multinational Force in East Timor, 35 WeeklyComp. Pres. Doc. 1998 (Oct. 18, 1999).

16 Seth Mydans, Stung by Debate, Indonesian Leader Ends Election Bid, N.Y. Times, Oct. 20,1999, at A1; Seth Mydans, Indonesia Chooses anlslamic Cleric As New President, N.Y. Times, Oct. 21, 1999, at A1.

17 S.C. Res. 1272 (Oct. 25, 1999).

18 Christopher Wren, U.N. Creates an Authority to Start Governing East Timor, N.Y. Times, Oct. 26, 1999, at A8.

19 Remarks to the 54th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1779, 1781 (Sept. 27, 1999); see also Christopher S. Wren, Raise Intervention Abilities, Clinton Urges U.N. Members, N.Y. Times, Sept. 22, 1999, at A16.

20 Remarks to the 54th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in New York City, supra note 19, at 1782.

1 22 U.S.C.A. §§6442(b), 6445-6447 (West Supp. 1999) (further amended by Pub. L. No. 106–55 (1999)).

2 22 U.S.CA. §6412(b) (West Supp. 1999). For background on passage of the law, see Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 480 (1998).

3 U.S. Dep't of State Annual Report on Religious Freedom (1999), available in < http://www.state.gov/global/human_rights/irf/irf_rpt/index.html>.

4 64 Fed. Reg. 59,821 (1999).

5 [Editor's Note: Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Dec. 10, 1948), Arts. 1, 18, GA Res. 217 (III 1948)].

6 U.S. Dep't of State Briefing on Release of the 1999 Annual Report on International Religious Freedom (Sept. 9, 1999), available in < http://www.state.gov/www/policy_remarks/1999/990909_seiple_koh_irf.html>.

1 See, e.g., Agreement Regarding Claims of Nationals of the United States july 16, 1960, US-Pol., 11 UST 1953, 384 UNTS 169. See generally Burns H. Weston et al., International Claims: Their Settlement by Lump Sum Agreements, 1975-95 (1999); Richard B. Lillich & Burns H. Weston, International Claims: Their Settlement by Lump Sum Agreements (1975).

2 See generally Michael L. Neff, Comment, Eastern Europe's Policy of Restitution of Property in the 1990s, 10 Dick. J. Int'l L. 357(1992).

3 Stuart Eizenstat, Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs, Testimony Before the Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (Mar. 25, 1999), available in < http://www.state.gov/www/policy_remarks/1999/990325_eizentat_restitu.html>.

1 INS Press Release on INS Announces Legal Immigration Figures for Fiscal Year 1999 (Aug. 11, 1998). INS press releases and other information may be found at <http://www.ins.usdoj.gov>.

2 See Michelle Mittelstadt, Legal Immigration at 10-Year Low: Congressional Action Blamed, Wash. Post, Aug. 12, 1999, at A6.

3 Campbell Gibson & A. Dianne Schmidley, U.S. Census Bureau, Profile of the Foreign-Born Population in the United States: 1997, Current Population Reports, Series P23-195, at 3 (1999), available in <http://www.census.gov/>; see Philip P. Pan, U.S. Naturalization RateDrops, Wash. Post, Oct. 15, 1999, at A1.

4 8 U.S.CA. §§1101 (a) (42) (A) (WestSupp. 1999).

5 INS Fact Sheet on U.S. Asylum and Refugee Policy (Oct. 29, 1998). On August 12, 1999, President Clinton increased the refugee allocation to Europe for FY 1999 by 13,000 to accommodate refugees fleeing from Kosovo. Presidential Determination No. 99–33, 64 Fed. Reg. 47, 341 (1999).

6 Presidential Determination No. 99–45, 64 Fed. Reg. 54,505 (1999).

7 Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.C. §§1101–1537 (1994 & Supp. IV 1998), 8 U.S.CA. §§1101–1537 (West Supp. 1999). The alien may apply affirmatively to the INS for asylum, in which case the application is heard by an INS asylum officer. If the application is denied, it may then be heard by an immigration judge. If the INS has brought proceedings against an alien, and the alien then requests asylum, the matter goes direcdy to an immigration judge.

8 8 U.S.C.A. §1158(b)(1) (West Supp. 1999). For the procedures followed upon an application for asylum, see 8C.F.R. §208 (1999).

9 8 U.S.C.A. §1158 (b) (2) (A) (ii), (iii) (West Supp. 1999). Denial of asylum on this basis was required initially by regulation and then by statute in the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, Pub. L. No. 104–208, 110 Stat. 3009–546 (1996). For a general discussion, see Evangeline G. Abriel, TheEffect of Criminal Conduct upon Refugee and Asylum Status, 3 Sw.J.L. & Trade Am. 359 (1996).

10 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, July 28, 1951, 19 UST 6259, 189 UNTS 150. The United States is not a party to this Convention but is derivatively bound to certain of its provisions tiirough adherence to the Protocol.

11 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees, Jan. 31, 1967, 19 UST 6223, 606 UNTS 267.

12 8 U.S.CA. §1231 (b)(3) (A) (West Supp. 1999).

13 Seems v. Stevic, 467 U.S. 407, 429–30 (1984).

14 8 U.S.CA. §1231 (b)(3)(B)(ii), (iii) (West Supp. 1999).

15 Illegal Immigration Reform and ImmigrantResponsibilityAct, §§306, 321–322, Pub. L. No. 104–208, 110 Stat. 3009–546, 3009–607, 3009–627–628 (1996).

16 8 U.S.CA. §1226(c) (West Supp. 1999).

17 See Philip P. Pan, INS Shifts Policy on Criminal Detainees, Wash. Post, Aug. 9, 1999, at A1.

18 INS Press Release on INS Implements New Procedures on Long-Term Detention (Aug. 6, 1999).

19 INS Press Release on INS Sets New Removals Record; Fiscal Year 1999 Removals Reach 176,990 (Nov. 12, 1999).

20 Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees, Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status Under the 1951 Convention and 1967 Protocol Relating to the Status of Refugees (1979).

21 Aguirre-Aguirre v. INS, 121 F.3d 521 (9th Cir. 1997).

22 INS v. Aguirre-Aguirre, 119 S.Ct. 1439 (1999), reprinted in 38 ILM 786 (1999). See Linda Greenhouse, Court Restricts Refugee Status for Criminals, N.Y. TIMES, May 4, 1999, at A22. In the Aguirre case, the Supreme Court was interpreting the “serious nonpolitical crime” provision associated with withholding of deportation as it appeared in its prior codification, at 8 U.S.C. §1253(h) (2) (C) (1994).

23 119 S.Ct. at 1447.

24 Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984).

25 119 S.Ct. at 1445 (citing Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Abudu, 485 U.S. 94 (1998)).

26 Fredric N. Tulsky, Abused Woman Is Denied Asylum, Wash. Post, June 20, 1999, at A1.

27 In re R-A-, Interim Decision 3403, 1999 BIA LEXIS 31 at *3 (BIAJune 11, 1999).

28 Memorandum from Phyllis Coven, Office of International Affairs, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Considerations for Asylum Officers Adjudicating Asylum Claims from Women, to all INS Asylum Officers and HQASM Coordinators (May 26, 1995), reprinted in Deborah E. Anker, Women Refugees: Forgotten No Longer?, 32 San Diego L. Rev. 771, 794–816 (1995).

29 1999 BIA LEXIS 31 at *16. For background, see Audrey Macklin, Cross-Border Shopping for Ideas: A Critical Review of United States, Canadian, and Australian Approaches to Gender-Related Asylum Claims, 13 Geo. Immigr. L.J. 25 (1998); Patricia A. Seith, Note, Escaping Domestic Violence: Asylum As a Means of Protection for Battered Women, 97 Colum. L. Rev. 1804 (1997).

30 1999 BIA LEXIS 31 at *27.

31 Id. at *30–31 (citations omitted).

32 See Fredric N. Tulsky, Asylum Denied for Abused Girl: Ruling of Appeals Panel Is Assailed, Wash. Post, July 4, 1999, at A3.

33 In reFauziya Kasinga, Interim Decision 3278, 1996 BIA LEXIS 15 at *3 (BIA June 13, 1996), reprinted in 35 ILM 1145 (1996); see Linda A. Malone & Gillian Wood, International Decisions, 91 AJIL 140 (1997).

34 Abankwah v. INS, No. 98–4304, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 15545 at *17 (2d Cir. July 9, 1999).

35 Id. at *14.

36 See Amy Waldraan, Asylum Won by Woman Who Feared Mutilation, N.Y. Times, Aug. 18, 1999, at A21.

37 Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998, § 2242(b), as contained in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act of 1999, Pub. L. No. 105–277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998).

38 GA Res. 39/46, annex, 39 UN GAORSupp. No. 51, at 197, UN Doc. A/39/51 (1984), reprinted in 23 ILM 1027 (1984), as modified, 24 ILM 535 (1985). The Convention entered into force for the United States on November 20, 1994.

39 64 Fed. Reg. 8478 (1999) (to be codified at 8 C.F.R. pts. 3, 103, 208, 235, 238, 240, 241, 253 & 507).

40 7d. at 8491, §208.18(c).

41 Joan Biskupic & William Branigin, Court Curbs Free Speech of Illegal Immigrants: Government Wins on Deportation flute, Wash. Post, Feb. 25, 1999 at A1; Linda Greenhouse, Justices Uphold Selective Deporting of Aliens, N.Y. Times, Feb. 25, 1999, at A22.

42 119 S.Ct. 936 (1999).

43 For a discussion on the “Los Angeles Eight”, see Kevin R. Johnson, The Antiterrorism Act, the Immigration Reform Act, and Ideological Regulation in the Immigration Laws: Important Lessons for Citizens and Noncitizens, 28 St. Mary's L.J. 833, 865–69 (1997).

44 119 S.Ct. at 945.

45 Id. at 947.

46 Id. at 945.

1 See Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 641 (1999).

2 Joint Statement by President Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak, 35 WeeklyComp. Pres. Doc. 1412 (July 26, 1999).

3 The Sharm el-Sheikh Memorandum on Implementation Timeline of Outstanding Commitments of Agreements Signed and the Resumption of Permanent Status Negotiations (Sept. 4, 1999), reprinted in 38 ILM 1465 (1999); see Jane Perlez, Israel and P.L.O., with Help of U.S., Reach an Accord, N.Y. Times, Sept. 4, 1999, at A1.

4 Statement on the Middle East Peace Process, 35 WeeklyComp. Pres. Doc. 1689 (Sept. 13, 1999).

5 Secretary of State Madeleine K. Albright, Remarks at Arab-Israeli Peace Process Signing Ceremony (Sept. 4, 1999), available in <http://secretary.state.gov/www/statements/1999/990904c.html>.

6 Joel Greenberg, Israel Prepares to Transfer Land and to Free 200 Palestinians, N.Y. Times, Sept. 9, 1999, at A7; Deborah Sontag, Acting on Pact, Israel Releases 199 Prisoners, N.Y. Times, Sept. 10, 1999, at A1.

7 Title VI of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2000, H.R. 3422 (1999), as enacted by Division B, sec. 1000 (a) (2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2000, Pub. L. No. 106–113 (1999).

1 The FSIA is codified at 28 U.S.C. §§1330, 1602–1611 (1994 & Supp. III 1997). For the current amended version, see 28 U.S.C.S. §§1330, 1602–1611 (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1999).

2 Pub. L. No. 104–132, § 221, 110 Stat. 1214, 1241–1243 (1996).

3 28 U.S.C.S. §1605(a) (7) (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1999). If the act occurs within the territory of the terrorist state, the claimant first must afford the state “a reasonable opportunity to arbitrate the claim in accordance with accepted international rules of arbitration.”

A state may be designated as a sponsor of terrorism under section 6(j) of the Export Administration Act of 1979, 50 U.S.CApp. §2405 (1994), or section 620A of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. §2371 (1994). As of January 2000, the State Department had designated Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Syria, and Sudan as terrorist states. In addition, the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia was designated as a state sponsor of terrorism for purposes of the FSIA in Tide V (§591) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2000, H.R. 3422 (1999), as enacted by Division B, sec. 1000(a)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2000, Pub. L. No. 106–113 (1999).

4 28 U.S.C.S. §§1610(a) (7), (b) (2) (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1999).

5 Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba, 996 F.Supp. 1239 (S.D.Fla. 1997); see Stephen J. Schnably, International Decisions, 92 AJIL 768 (1998).

6 Flatow v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 999 F.Supp. 1 (D.D.C. 1998).

7 Cicippio v. Islamic Republic of Iran, 18 F.Supp.2d 62 (D.D.C. 1998). The Cicippio case involves claims by three U.S. nationals, joined by two of their spouses, for tortious injuries in the course of their kidnapping, imprisonment, and torture during 1985 to 1991 in Lebanon by a group receiving material support from the Iranian government. The district court found in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $65 million. A similar case by a U.S. national, Terry Anderson, held hostage in Lebanon, was filed on Mar. 22,1999, seeking $100 million. See Dirk Johnson, Journalist Held Hostage in Lebanon Sues Iran, N.Y. TIMES, Mar. 23, 1999, at A14.

8 See Rein v. Socialist People's Libyan Arab Jamahiriya, 995 F.Supp. 325 (E.D.N.Y. 1998) (denying defendant's motion to dismiss), aff'd, 162 F.3d 748 (2d Cir. 1998), cert, denied, 119 S.Ct. 2337 (1999).

9 Bombing Victim's Family Can't Intervene in Confirmation Action, 14 Mealey's Int'l Arb. Rep., Aug. 1999, 15 at 16. On the possibilities for collection in the Flatow case, see Ethan J. Early, Note, Flatow v. Islamic Republic of Iran and the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act: Is Peace of Mind Enough?, 14 Conn. J. Int'l L. 203 (1999).

10 Ministry of Defense and Support for the Armed Forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran v. Cubic Defense Systems, Inc., 29 F.Supp.2d 1168, 1170–71 (S.D.Cal. 1998).

11 Islamic Republic of Iran v. United States, Award No. 586–A/27–FT (June 5, 1998), available in Westlaw, Int-Iran, Iran Award 586–A27–FT. Case A/27 arose from the refusal of the Second Circuit to enforce a 1988 Tribunal award in favor of Iran against Avco Corporation. The Second Circuit refused to enforce the award under the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, June 10, 1958, 21 UST 2517, 330 UNTS 38, on grounds that Avco was unable to present its case to the Tribunal. Iran then filed Case A/27 against the United States, asserting that it was obligated under the Algiers Declarations to provide a mechanism whereby Tribunal awards would be enforced in U.S. courts. The Tribunal agreed with Iran and ordered the United States itself to pay the award, plus interest, to Iran.

The United States is seeking to quash the writ of attachment filed by Mr. Flatow on grounds that the doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes the attachment of U.S. funds that are owed by the United States to ajudgment debtor. Bombing Victim Family's Search for Iranian Assets Targets Buildings, Awards, 13 Mealey's Int'l Arb. Rep., Dec. 1998, at 17, 18.

12 FMC Corp. v. Iran,Award No. 292–353–2 (Feb. 12, 1987), rented in 14 Iran-U.S. Cl. Trib. Rep. 111, 133(1988).

13 31 C.F.R. §535.311 (1999).

14 Flatow v. Iran, No. 97-366, 1999 WL 1049831 (D.D.C. Nov. 15, 1999).

15 Flatow v. Iran, No. 97-366, order (D.D.C. Nov. 29, 1999).

16 Flatow v. Iran, No. 97-366, order (D.C. Cir. Dec. 2, 1999).

17 Flatow v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 98-4152, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13759 (D.Md. Sept. 7,1999). In support of the proposition that the plaintiff must prove “day-to-day control” by the foreign state of the corporate entity in order to take advantage of an exception to state immunity, the court cited to the Alexandre case discussed infra at text accompanying notes 32 to 37.

18 SeeSean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 181 (1999).

19 The amendment—which adds 28 U.S.C. §1610(f) to the FSIA—is contained in section 117 of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act for 1999, as contained in the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Act for 1999, Pub. L. No. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681 (1998). The law also changed 28 U.S.C. §1606 (which addresses the extent of liability) to make clear that punitive damages could be imposed against the terrorist state; previously, section 1606 did not permit punitive damages against a foreign state, although it did permit them against an agency or instrumentality of the state.

For discussions regarding civil liability of terrorist states, see Joseph W. Glannon &Jeffery Atik, Politics and Personal Jurisdiction: Suing State Sponsors of Terrorism Under the 1996 Amendments to the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 87 Geo. L.J. 675 (1999); John F. Murphy, Civil Liability for the Commission of International Crimes as an Alternative to Criminal Prosecution, 12 Harv. Hum. R.T.S.J. 1 (1999); Naomi Roht-Arriaza, The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act and Human Rights Violations: One Step Forward, Two Steps Backf, 16 Berkeley J. Int'l L. 71 (1998).

20 In describing the blocking statutes, the amendment refers to “section 5 (b) of the Trading with the Enemy Act, 50 U.S.C. App. §5 (b) (1994), section 620(a) of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, 22 U.S.C. §2370(a) (1994), sections 202 and 203 of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, 50 U.S.C. §§1701–1702 (1994), or any other proclamation, order, regulation, or license issued pursuant thereto….” 28 U.S.C.S. 1610(f)(1)(A) (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1999).

21 28 U.S.C.S. 1610(f)(2) (Law. Co-op. Supp. 1999).

22 Presidential Determination No. 99-1, 63 Fed. Reg. 59,201 (1998), reprinted in 28 U.S.CA. §1610 note (West Supp. 1999). For the president's position on the constitutionality of the law were such a waiver not available, see Murphy, supranote 18, at 185–86.

23 Statement of the White House Press Secretary (Oct. 21,1998), available in <http://www.pub.whitehouse.gov/uri-res/I2R?urn:pdi//oma.eop.gov.us/1998/10/22/3.text.l>.

24 Flatow v. Islamic Republic of Iran, No. 97-396, mem. op. (D.D.C. Dec. 10, 1999).

25 Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba, 996 F.Supp. 1239, 1253 (S.D.Fla. 1997).

26 See Proclamation No.3447, 27 Fed.Reg. 1085 (1962), reprinted in 22 U.S.C. §2370 note (1994); see also Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 C.F.R. §515 (1997).

27 22U.S.C. §6004(e)(l), (3) (1994); 31 C.F.R. §515.542(b), (c) (1997).

28 Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba, 42 F.Supp.2d 1317, 1326–27 (S.D.Fla. 1999).

29 42 F.Supp.2d at 1331.

30 Id. at 1336.

31 Id. at 1339.

32 Alejandre v. Telefonica Larga Distancia de Puerto Rico, 183 F.3d 1277,1279 n. 1 (11th Cir. 1999). In its brief to the Eleventh Circuit, the U.S. government argued extensively that the statutory language and structure of section 117, as well as its executive and legislative history, supported the president's authority to waive its substantive provisions, and that any ambiguity should be resolved in favor of the president's foreign-relations authority. Brief and Reply Brief for the Intervenor-Appellant the United States of America, Alejandre v. Republic of Cuba, 183 F.3d 1277 (11th Cir. 1999) (No. 99–10225–E).

33 Id. at 1283.

34 First National City Bank v. Banco Para El Comercio Exterior de Cuba, 462 U.S. 611 (1983).

35 183 F.3d at 1284.

36 Id. at 1284–85.

37 Id. at 1286–87 (citations omitted).

38 S.1796, 106th Cong. (1999).

39 Terrorism: Victims' Access to Terrorist Assets: Hearing on S. 1796 Before the Senate Judiciary Comm., 106th Cong. (Oct. 27, 1999) (statement of Treasury Deputy Secretary Stuart E. Eizenstat). Others who testified in favor of the bill included Stephen Flatow and Maggie Alejandre Khuly. See also Stephen M. Flatow, In This Case, I Can't Be Diplomatic, Wash. Post, Nov. 7, 1999, at B2.

40 Convention on Diplomatic Relations, Apr. 18,1961, 23 UST 3227, 500 UNTS 95.

41 Convention on Consular Relations, Apr. 24, 1963, 21 UST 77, 596 UNTS 261.

42 Agreement Relating to the Headquarters of the United Nations, June 26, 1947, U.S.-UN, 61 Stat. 3416, 11 UNTS 11 (subsequently supplemented and amended).

43 Convention on the Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations, Feb. 13, 1946, 21 UST 1418, 1 UNTS 16.

44 Eizenstat, supra note 17.

1 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, opened for signature Dec. 10, 1982, Art. 33, S. Treaty Doc. No. 103-39 (1994), reprinted in 21 ILM 1261, 1276 (1982).

2 Proclamation No. 5928 (Dec. 27, 1988), 3 C.F.R. 547 (1989), reprinted in 43 U.S.C. §1331 note (1994).

3 Proclamation No. 7219, 64 Fed. Reg. 48, 701 (Sept. 8, 1999); see Philip Shenon, U.S. Doubles Offshore Zone Under Its Law, N.Y. Times, Sept. 3, 1999, at A13.

1 U.S. Const. Art. III, §2, cl. 1.

2 See, e.g., Moyer v. The Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel, Known as Andrea Doria, 836 F.Supp. 1099, 1104 (D.N.J. 1993). For a general discussion of salvage law, see Joseph C. Sweeney, An Overview of Commercial Salvage Principles in the Context of Marine Archaeology, 30 J. Mar. L. & Com. 185 (1999); see also, Sean R. Nicholson, Comment, Mutiny As to the Bounty: International Law's Failing Preservation Efforts Regarding Shipwrecks and Their Artifacts Located in International Waters, 66 UMKC L. Rev. 135 (1997).

3 R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. The Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel, 924 F.Supp. 714, 722–24 (E.D.Va. 1996).

4 R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. The Wrecked and Abandoned Vessel, 9 F.Supp.2d 624, 626, 632–35 (E.D.Va. 1998). For an analysis of this decision, see Rachel J. Lin, Salvage Rights and Intellectual Property: Are Copyright and Trademark Rights Included in the Salvage Rights to the R.M.S. Titanic?, 23 Tul. Mar. L.J. 483 (1999). For a general discussion on the Titanic, see James A. R. Nafziger, Second Newport Symposium: “Sunken Treasure: Law, Technology, and Ethics”: Fourth Session: Future Directions: The Titanic Revisited, 30 J. Mar. L. & Com. 311 (1999).

5 9 F.Supp.2d at 640.

6 R.M.S. Titanic, Inc. v. Haver, 171 F.3d 943, 967–70 (4th Cir. 1999), cert, denied, 68 U.S.L.W. 3223 (U.S. Oct. 5, 1999) (No. 98-2058) (citations omitted).

1 See Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 167, 627 & 885 (1999). A study by Human Rights Watch released in February 2000 found that the NATO air campaign led to the deaths of 500 civilians in 90 separate attacks. Human Rights Watch, Civilian Deaths in the NATO Air Campaign (2000), available in <http://www.hrw.org/reports/2000/nato/>.

2 Steven Lee Myers, NATO Raid Hits China Embassy: Beijing Cites “Barbarian Act”; Allies Admit Striking Hospital, N.Y. Times, May 8, 1999, at A1.

3 Michael R. Gordon, NATO Says It Thought Embassy Was Arms Agency, N.Y. Times, May 9,1999, at 1; Vernon Loeb, CIA Chief Takes “Responsibility” for Bombing of Chinese Embassy, Wash. Post, July 23, 1999, at A1 6; Open Hearing Before the House Permanent Select Comm. on Intelligence, 106th Cong. (July 22, 1999) (statement of the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency George J. Tenet on the Belgrade Chinese Embassy Bombing), available in <http://www.odci.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/dci_speech_072299.html>.

4 Remarks on Departure from Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma, and an Exchange with Reporters, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 854 (May 17, 1999).

5 UN Doc. S/PRST/1999/12 (May 14, 1999); see Judith Miller, Council Voices Distress over Embassy Attack, N.Y. Times, May 15, 1999, at A7.

6 John Pomfret & Michael Laris, Chinese Protests Continue to Rage, Wash. Post, May 10, 1999, at Al; Seth Faison, Talks Halt on Bombing of Embassy in Belgrade, N.Y. Times, July 17, 1999, at A6.

7 U.S. Dep't of State Press Release on Accidental Bombing (July 6, 1999) (on file at GWU).

8 Memorandum of Understanding between the Delegation of the United States of America and the Delegation of the People's Republic of China, July 30, 1999. The Memorandum was transmitted by the State Department to Congress pursuant to the Case Act, 1 U.S.C. §112b (1994).

9 Michael Laris, U.S. to Pay Embassy Bomb Victims, Wash. Post, July 31, 1999, at A15.

10 See U.S. Dep't of State Press Release on China-Property Damage Agreements (Dec. 16, 1999), available in <http://secretary.state.gov/www/briefings/statements/1999/ps991216b.html>; Michael Laris, U.S. China Reach Deal On Embassy Payments, Wash. Post, Dec. 16, 1999, at A32.

1 Indictment, Prosecutor v. Ntakirutimana, Case No. ICTR–96–19–I (June 20, 1996); amended by Indictment, Prosecutor v. Ntakirutimana, Case No. ICTR–96–19–I (Sept. 7, 1996).

2 Agreement on Surrender of Persons, Jan. 24, 1995, U.S.-Int'l Crim. Trib. Rwanda, available in 1996 WL 165484 (Treaty). The agreement provides in Article 1 that the United States will “surrender to the Tribunal… persons … found in its territory whom the Tribunal has charged with or found guilty of a violation or violations within the competence of the Tribunal….” See Kenneth J. Harris & Robert Kushen, Surrender of Fugitives to the War Crimes Tribunals for Yugoslavia and Rwanda: Squaring International Legal Obligations with the U.S. Constitution, 7 Crim. L.F. 561 (1996); Evan J. Wallach, Extradition to the Rwandan War Crimes Tribunal: Is Another Treaty Required?, 3 UCLA J. Int'l L.&Foreign Aff. 56, 66 (1998).

3 National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1996, §1342,18 U.S.C. §3181 note (Supp. II 1996). Section 1342(a)(1) of this law provides that federal extradition statutes (18 U.S.C. §§3181–3196) shall apply to the surrender of persons to the ICTR.

4 In re Surrender of Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, 988 F.Supp.1038 (S.D.Tex. 1997), reprinted in 37 ILM 398 (1998).

5 Id. at 1042–44.

6 In re Surrender of Elizaphan Ntakirutimana, No. L–98–43, 1998 U.S.Dist. LEXIS 22173, at * 100 (S.D.Tex. Aug. 6, 1998).

7 Id. at *27–*29.

8 Ntakirutimana v. Reno, 184 F.3d 419, 430 (5th Cir. 1999), cert, denied, 68 U.S.L.W. 3479 (U.S.Jan. 25, 2000) (No. 99479).

1 See The World Bank, Global Development Finance: Analysis and Summary Tables 219 (1999). For joint BIS-IMF-OECD-World Bank statistics on external debt, see <http://www.oecd.org/doc/debt/>. For a discussion of U.S. approaches to foreign debt through the mid-1990s, see Jonathan E. Sanford, Foreign Debts to the U.S. Government: Recent Rescheduling and Forgiveness, 28 Geo. Wash. J. Int'l L. & Econ. 345 (1995).

2 For information on Jubilee 2000, see <http://www.jubilee2000uk.org>.

3 Blueprint for a United States-Africa Partnership for the Twenty-first Century (Mar. 18,1999), reprinted in Letter dated 1 July 1999 from the Charge d'affaires A.I. of the United States Mission to the United Nations Addressed to the Secretary-General, UN Doc. E/1999/104-S/1999/754, annex (1999).

4 Remarks to the Conference on United States-Africa Partnership for the 21st Century, 35 WeeklyComp. Pres. Doc. 443, 445 (Mar. 22, 1999).

5 The four states were Bolivia, Guyana, Mozambique, and Uganda. Debt-relief packages have been agreed upon for some other states, and even more states have been reviewed for eligibility. Current information on the HIPC program can be found at <http://www.worldbank.org/hipc.htm> or <http://www.imf.org/external/np/hipc/hipc.htm>; see also Global Development Finance, supra note 1, at 76.

To obtain HIPC debt relief, a state must agree to enter into a two-phase World Bank/IMF program in which it must implement economic reforms and then demonstrate an ability to maintain them. Debt relief is the incentive for the state to complete the reform program, and continues to be granted until the debt burden is no longer unsustainable.

6 Remarks to the Conference on United States-Africa Partnership for the 21st Century, supra note 4.

7 Charles Babington, G–7 Summit Offers Poor Nations Plan for Substantial Debt Relief, Wash. Post, June 19, 1999, at A1.

8 Report of G–7 Finance Ministers on the Cologne Debt Initiative, para. 2 (June 18–20, 1999), available in <http://www.state.gov/www/issues/economic/summit/99finance_report.html>.

9 Communiqué of the Interim Committee of the Board of Governors of the International Monetary Fund (Sept. 26, 1999), available in <http://www.imf.org/external/np/cm/1999/092699A.htm>.

10 IMF Press Release on IMF Board of Governors Adopts Resolution on Off-Market Gold Sales, No. 99/48 (Sept. 30, 1999), available in <http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/pr/1999/PR9948.htm>.

11 Remarks to the Annual Meeting of the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1853 (Oct. 4, 1999); David E. Sanger, Clinton Widens Plan for Poor Debtor Nations, N.Y. TIMES, Sept. 30, 1999, at A12.

12 John Burgess, 26 Poorest Nations Get Debt Break, Wash. Post, Sept. 27, 1999, at A1.

13 Lawrence H. Summers, Debt Relief: A Fresh Start, Wash. Post, Nov. 3, 1999, at A35.

14 Tide II [debt restructuring] & Title V (§557) of the Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs Appropriations Act of 2000, H.R. 3422 (1999), as enacted by Division B, sec. 1000(a)(2) of the Consolidated Appropriations Act for 2000, Pub. L. No. 106-113 (1999).

1 Section 181 of the Trade Act of 1974, 19 U.S.C. §2241 note (1994).

2 Office of the United States Trade Representative, The 1999 National Trade Estimate Report on Foreign Trade Barriers (1999), available in <http://www.ustr.gov/reports/nte/1999/contents.html>.

3 For background, see Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 907 & 910 (1999).

4 Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures, Apr. 15,1994, Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, Annex 14, in Final Act Embodying the Results of the Uruguay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations, Marrakesh, 14 April 1994, at 69 (1994).

1 See Sean D. Murphy, Contemporary Practice of the United States, 93 AJIL 192 (1999). “Fast-track legislation” maybe found in the Trade Act of 1974,19 U.S.C. §§2101–2242 (1994& Supp IV1998), and in the Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988,19 U.S.C. §§2901–2906 (1994 & Supp. IV 1998).

2 U.S. Const. Art. II, §2, cl. 2.

3 19 U.S.C. §§3301–3473 (1994 & Supp. IV 1998).

4 For views of scholars, see Bruce Ackerman & David Golove, Is NAFTA Constitutional?, 108 Harv. L. Rev. 801 (1995), and Detlev F. Vagts, International Agreements, the Senate and the Constitution, 36 Colum. J. Transnat'l L. 143 (1997).

5 Made in the USA Foundation v. United States, 56 F.Supp.2d 1226 (N.D.Ala. 1999).

6 Id. at 1228.

7 Id. at 1236–54.

8 Mat 1254–78.

9 Id. at 1313–14.

10 Id. at 1319–22 (citations omitted).

11 Victoria Roberts, Judge Rejects Attempt to Nix NAFTA, Finds Enactment Process Constitutional, 16 Int'l Trade Rep. (BNA) 1293 (Aug. 4, 1999).

1 GA Res. 50/245 (Sept. 10, 1996). The vote was 158 in favor, 3 opposed, and 5 abstentions.

2 S. Treaty Doc. No. 105-28 (1997); see Marion Nash (Leich), Contemporary Practice of the United States, 92 AJIL 59 (1998).

3 Remarks on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and an Exchange with Reporters, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1424, 1425 (July 26, 1999).

4 Facing Nuclear Dangers: An Action Plan for the Twenty-First Century, Report of the Tokyo Forum for Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, UN Doc. A/54/205, S/1999/853 (Aug. 5, 1999); see Barbara Crossette, U.S. Undercuts Arms Control Efforts, Global Panel Finds, N.Y. Times, Aug. 4, 1999, at A6.

5 Helen Dewar, Lott Proposes Vote on Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, Wash. Post, Oct. 1, 1999, at A4.

6 See, e.g., Remarks on Departure for New York City and an Exchange with Reporters, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1953, 1954 (Oct. 11, 1999).

7 William Drozdiak, U.S. Allies Urge Senate to Ratify Test Ban, Wash. Post, Oct. 8, 1999, at A1 Jacques Chirac, Tony Blair & Gerhard Schröder, A Treaty We All Need, N.Y. Times, Oct. 8, 1999, at A31.

8 Madeleine K. Albright, Secretary of State, U.S. Dep't of State Press Release on Statement Before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (Oct. 7, 1999) (as prepared for delivery), available in <http://secretary.state.gov/www/statements/1999/991007a.html>.

9 145 Cong. Rec. S12311 (daily ed. Oct. 8, 1999) (statement of Senator Helms).

10 See Charles Babington & Michael Grunwald, President Requests Treaty Vote Deferral, Wash. Post, Oct. 12, 1999, at A1 (reporting on a letter from the president to the Senate majority leader and minority leader).

11 145 Cong. Rec. S12548 (daily ed. Oct. 13, 1999).

12 Remarks on Senate Action on the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty and an Exchange with Reporters, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 2026 (Oct. 18, 1999).

13 Eric Schmitt, Senate Kills Test Ban Treaty in Crushing Loss for Clinton: Evokes Versailles Pact Defeat, N.Y. Times, Oct. 14, 1999, at A1 (characterizing the defeat as the first time the Senate had rejected a major international security agreement since the defeat of the Covenant of the League of Nations).

14 See Barbara Crossette, Around the World, Dismay over Senate Vote on Treaty, N.Y. Times, Oct. 15, 1999, at A1; William Drozdiak, Nations Unite in Assailing Senate Vote on Test Ban Treaty, Wash. Post, Oct. 15, 1999, at A19.

15 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, May 23, 1969, 1155 UNTS 331, reprinted in 8 ILM 679 (1969). Whether that obligation requires that the United States refrain from nuclear testing is unclear.

16 Doomed Treaties, N.Y. Times, Oct. 17, 1999, at WK4.