The peacetime deployment of U.S. forces in foreign countries goes against traditional notions of sovereignty. How did such deployment become legitimate following World War II? This article examines the legal strategy that the U.S. military employed to make American troop presence more palatable to foreign publics and to critics at home: granting certain legal authority over offending troops to host countries, while seeking to shield troops from trials in host-country courts. The military also used local, informal ties with hosts to guarantee fair legal treatment for troops and worked to convince skeptics that U.S. troops faced no legal threat. The mitigating of legal tensions helped the military create conducive political conditions for its presence abroad and likely contributed to the durability of U.S. deployments. The Cold-War practice contrasts sharply with the contemporary desire of the United States to maintain complete jurisdiction over its troops.
AllenM. A.FlynnM. E.MachainC. M.StraversA. (2020). Outside the wire: U.S. Military deployments and public opinion in host states. American Political Science Review, 114(2), 326–341. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0003055419000868
2.
AngstL. I. (2001). The sacrifice of a schoolgirl: The 1995 rape case, discourses of power, and women’s lives in Okinawa. Critical Asian Studies, 33(2), 243–266. https://doi.org/10.1080/14672710122284
3.
BraithwaiteA.KucikJ. (2018). Does the presence of foreign troops affect stability in the host country?Foreign Policy Analysis, 14(4), 536–560. https://doi.org/10.1093/fpa/orw058
4.
CalderK. E. (2007). Embattled garrisons: Comparative base Politics and American globalism. Princeton University Press.
5.
CooleyA. (2008). Base Politics: Democratic change and the U.S. Military overseas. Cornell University Press.
6.
CooleyA.NexonD. H. (2013). “The Empire will compensate you”: The structural dynamics of the U.S. Overseas basing network. Perspectives on Politics, 11(4), 1034–1050. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592713002818.
7.
CooleyA.SpruytH. (2009). Contracting states: Sovereign transfers in international relations. Princeton University Press.
8.
CurtinN. (2012). “We might as well write Japan off”: The state department deals with the girard crisis of 1957. Journal of American-East Asian Relations, 19(2), 109–131. https://doi.org/10.1163/18765610-01902002.
9.
EfratA. (2021). Troop crime in peacetime: Criminality and accountability of U.S. Troops worldwide during the Cold war. Armed Forces & Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327X211011578
10.
EfratA. (2022). Facing U.S. Extraterritorial pressure: American troops in foreign courts during the Cold war. Journal of Politics, 84(1), 242–257. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1086/715254
11.
EganJ. W. (2006). The future of criminal jurisdiction over the deployed American soldier. Emory International Law Review, 20, 291–343.
12.
FilippucciG.2018. Alternative approaches to certain deployments: Agreements conferring status similar to the status of administrative and technical staff of embassies (A&T agreements). In FleckDieter (Ed.), The handbook of the law of visiting forces (2nd ed., 713–724). Oxford University Press.
13.
FleckD. (2013). The legal status of personnel involved in United Nations peace operations. International Review of the Red Cross, 95(891/892), 613–636. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1816383114000290
14.
GaoR. E. (2009). Between a rock and a hard place: Tensions between the U.S.-ROK status of forces agreement and the duty to ensure individual rights under the ICCPR. Fordham International Law Journal, 33(2), 585–647.
JohnsonC. (2000). Blowback: The costs and consequences of American empire. Metropolitan Books.
17.
KawanaS.TakahashiM. (Eds.). (2021) Exploring base Politics: How host countries shape the network of U.S. Overseas bases. Routledge.
18.
KawatoY. (2015). Protests against U.S. Military base policy in Asia: Persuasion and its limits. Stanford University Press.
19.
KirkDon (2002, August 4). Koreans protests U.S. Military’s handling of a fatal accident. New York Times.
20.
KooJ. H. (2011). The uncomfortable SOFA: Anti-American sentiments in South Korea and the U.S.-Korea status of forces agreement. American University National Security Law Brief, 1(1), 103–115.
21.
LepperS. J. (1994). A primer on foreign criminal jurisdiction. Air Force Law Review, 37, 169–189.
22.
Martinez MachainC.MorganT. C. (2013). The effect of US troop deployment on host states’ foreign policy. Armed Forces & Society, 39(1), 102–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0095327x12442306
23.
OdelloM.BurkeR. (2016). Between immunity and impunity: Peacekeeping and sexual abuses and violence. International Journal of Human Rights, 20(6), 839–853. https://doi.org/10.1080/13642987.2016.1176810
24.
SchmidtS. (2014). Foreign Military Presence and the Changing Practice of Sovereignty: A Pragmatist Explanation of Norm Change. American Political Science Review, 108(4), 817–829. https://doi.org/10.1017/S000305541400043
25.
SchmidtS. (2020). Armed guests: Territorial sovereignty and foreign military basing. Oxford University Press.
26.
U.S. House of Representatives. (1955). Status of forces agreements: Hearing before the committee on foreign Affairs on H. J. Res. 309 and similar measures, 84th Cong. July 1955.
27.
U.S. House of Representatives. (1957). Status of forces treaty and related agreements: Report of the committee on foreign Affairs on H. J. Res 16, 85th Cong. July 1.
28.
U.S. Senate. (1953a). Agreement regarding status of forces of parties of the North atlantic treaty: Supplementary hearing before the committee on foreign relations on, 83rd cong. June 24.
29.
U.S. Senate. (1953b). Agreements relating to the status of the North atlantic treaty organization, armed forces, and military headquarters: Hearings before the committee on foreign relations, 83rd Cong. April 7–8.
30.
U.S. Senate. (1955). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearings before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 84th Cong. March 29, 31, and June 21.
31.
U.S. Senate. (1956). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 84th Cong. February 9.
32.
U.S. Senate. (1957). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 85th Cong. April 9.
33.
U.S. Senate. (1958). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 85th Cong. July 29.
34.
U.S. Senate. (1959). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 86th Cong. August 18.
35.
U.S. Senate. (1960). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 86th Cong. June 8.
36.
U.S. Senate. (1961). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 87th Cong. July 19.
37.
U.S. Senate. (1962). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 87th Cong. August 27.
38.
U.S. Senate. (1963). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 88th Cong. November 26.
39.
U.S. Senate. (1964). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 88th Cong. August 7.
40.
U.S. Senate. (1965). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 89th Cong. June 25.
41.
U.S. Senate. (1966). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 89th Cong. August 26.
42.
U.S. Senate. (1967). Operation of article VII, NATO status of forces treaty: Hearing before a subcommittee of the committee on armed services, 90th Cong. August 15.
43.
YeoA. I. (2011). Activists, alliances, and Anti-U.S. Base protests. Cambridge University Press.
