Hot answers tagged

21

The second part of the question is simple and factual: Signing is when the executive (President, Prime Minister, or their appointed minister) indicate the country's willingness to agree to a treaty. Typically at the end of a period of inter-governmental negotiation, the governments will sign the treaty. But in many countries (particularly democratic ones) ...


19

There is no accord allowing free movement of people between the USA and Canada. Neither country has visa requirements for short term entry, but there is no agreement (like the Schengen accord in Europe) to allow people to cross the border [source] As such, both the USA and Canada are free to close the border for any or no reason, and there is no requirement ...


17

No (modern) international agreement condones wars of aggression. What article 5 of the NATO treaty and article 42 (7) of the TEU establish is an obligation to assist the country being attacked (with many nuances and caveats) and certainly not any obligation to help a country attack another one (even by remaining neutral). There is therefore no conflict of ...


16

International law generally discourages countries from preventing people to leave, for example article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country. Or article 12 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Everyone shall be free to leave any ...


8

Article 5 of the NATO treaty (the article covering mutual defense) covers when a member state is attacked. If a NATO member attacks another state without provocation, Article 5 does not apply.


6

I believe that the answer to your question will require some very careful estimates of public statements vs. actual policy. Countries do not always do as they say, and what they say changes with what they can do. Both the United States and Russia rely on spaceborne early warning to warn against missile attack. This is part of their military infrastructure, ...


2

It seems the answer to the title question is "nothing", and as a result, Russia did indeed attempt to negotiate with the treaty's remaining members to ensure they will not forward intelligence to the US. As a condition for staying in the pact after the U.S. pullout, Moscow unsuccessfully sought guarantees from NATO allies that they wouldn't ...


2

No such sign or tension is seen. There is almost nothing that motivates a state to consider violating the OST in the foreseeable future. Developing space-based weapons may be a realistic motivation for violating the OST, but there’s nothing a space-based weapon can do that conventional nuclear weapon systems can’t do better. The traditional nuclear triad ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible