discussion of federal policies: Treaties and International Agreements

discussion of federal policies: Treaties and International Agreements

discussion of federal policies: Treaties and International Agreements

from U.S. Department of State Policy Issues: Treaties and International Agreements

2021-2025 ARCHIVED CONTENT
You are viewing ARCHIVED CONTENT released online from January 20, 2021 to January 20, 2025.

Content in this archive site is NOT UPDATED, and links may not function.
For current information, go to www.state.gov.

Policy Issues – Treaties and International Agreements (archived)

Treaties and other international agreements are written agreements between sovereign states (or between states and international organizations) governed by international law.  The United States enters into more than 200 treaties and other international agreements each year.

The subjects of treaties span the whole spectrum of international relations: peace, trade, defense, territorial boundaries, human rights, law enforcement, environmental matters, and many others. As times change, so do treaties. In 1796, the United States entered into the Treaty with Tripoli to protect American citizens from kidnapping and ransom by pirates in the Mediterranean Sea. In 2001, the United States agreed to a treaty on cybercrime.

Read more about what specific bureaus are doing to support this policy issue:

Office of Treaty Affairs (L/T): Provides advice to the Department of State and other U.S. Government agencies on U.S. and international law and practice related to the negotiation, conclusion, interpretation, application, and implementation of treaties and other international agreements. The office also performs the United States’ duties as depositary for more than 200 multilateral treaties, including the Charter of the United Nations, the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the North Atlantic Treaty. The Office publishes the texts of treaties and international agreements entered into by the United States through the Treaties and International Acts Series, as well as Treaties in Force, which lists treaties and other international agreements currently in force for the United States. Read more about the Office of Treaty Affairs

from — Treaties and international agreements – United States Department of State. (2024, September 4). United States Department of State.

Office of Treaty Affairs (archived)

Our Mission

Provides advice to the Department of State and other U.S. Government agencies on U.S. and international law and practice related to the negotiation, conclusion, interpretation, application, and implementation of treaties and other international agreements. The office also performs the United States’ duties as depositary for more than 200 multilateral treaties, including the Charter of the United Nations, the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the North Atlantic Treaty. The Office publishes the texts of treaties and international agreements entered into by the United States through the Treaties and International Acts Series, as well as Treaties in Force, which lists treaties and other international agreements currently in force for the United States.

Resources on U.S. Treaty Law and Practice

from — Office of Treaty Affairs – United States Department of State. (2024, September 4). United States Department of State.

Treaties In Force (archived)

Treaties in Force 2020 lists treaties and other international agreements of the United States on record in the Department of State, which, as of January 1, 2020, had not expired by their own terms or which had not been denounced by the parties, replaced or superseded by other agreements, or otherwise definitely terminated. Certain types of agreements are not listed, such as classified agreements and certain agency-level agreements.

2020 Treaties in Force [5 MB]

The 2021 – 2023 Supplement to Treaties in Force 2020 lists treaties and agreements that have entered into force for the United States between January 1, 2020 and January 1, 2023, along with a small number of agreements that entered into force prior to January 1, 2020 but which did not appear in the 2020 edition.

2021 – 2023 Supplement to Treaties in Force 2020 — UPDATED [456 KB]

from — Technical difficulties. (n.d.-i). https://2021-2025.state.gov/treaties-in-force/

Treaties and International Acts Series (TIAS) (archived)

The Office of Treaty Affairs compiles and publishes online the texts of treaties and international agreements to which the United States is a party through the Treaties and International Acts Series (TIAS).  TIAS has been published exclusively in electronic form on the Office of Treaty Affairs website since 2006. Publication of treaties and agreements in TIAS is governed by 1 U.S.C. § 112a and 22 CFR 181.8, in accordance with these provisions:

  • The Department publishes the texts of treaties and other international agreements within 180 days after the date on which the treaty or agreement enters into force.  For information on subscribing to receive notifications of newly published agreements, click here.
  • TIAS serves as “legal evidence of the treaties, international agreements other than treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and agreements, therein contained, in all the courts of the United States, the several States, and the Territories and insular possessions of the United States.”
  • Certain categories of agreements are not published in TIAS, in accordance with 1 U.S.C. § 112a (b) and 22 CFR 181.8.

Finding Older Agreement Texts

No single source contains a comprehensive collection of all treaties and international agreements, so it may be necessary to consult more than one source to find the text of a particular treaty or agreement.  Aside from responding to requests made under the Freedom of Information Act, the Department of State does not provide the texts of treaties or international agreements in response to individual inquiries. For guidance on locating agreement texts, please visit the Finding Agreements page.

from — How to find treaty and agreement texts – United States Department of State. (2020, December 1). United States Department of State.

The United States is depositary for over 200 multilateral treaties – including, for example, the Charter of the United Nations, The Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the North Atlantic Treaty. In its depositary capacity, the United States keeps the original treaty texts and facilitates their signature, as appropriate. The depositary also receives instruments relating to the treaties, such as instruments of ratification, and maintains status lists of such actions.

Notice: The Office of Treaty Affairs is moving to digital updates for all depositary communications.  The United States’ circular notes communicating this change are at the following links:Circular note, July 1, 2019 [125 KB] and December 23, 2019 [138 KB]For instructions and information on subscribing to receive digital notifications of new depositary actions, click (RSS feed and email subscription instructions).

Status lists for treaties for which the United States serves as depositary may be found (status lists).

Information on recent actions for treaties for which the United States serves as depositary may be found (recent actions).

from — Technical difficulties. (n.d.-j). https://2021-2025.state.gov/depositary-information/

The Case-Zablocki Act (1 U.S.C. 112b) – as implemented by 22 CFR Part 181 – requires coordination with the Secretary of State prior to concluding international agreements, and timely reporting to Congress of concluded international agreements upon entry into force.  These requirements apply to all agencies of the U.S. Government regardless of whether such international agreements are entered into in the name of the U.S. Government or in the name of a U.S. Government agency.

The Office of Treaty Affairs supports U.S. Government agencies in fulfilling these requirements:

Coordination with the Secretary of State and the Circular 175 Procedure

Determination by the Office of the Legal Adviser of the Department of State

The Office of the Legal Adviser is responsible for determining whether a particular agreement constitutes an international agreement for the purposes of the Case-Zablocki Act.  To this end, all agencies of the U.S. Government responsible for negotiating and concluding international agreements must provide the text of any instrument that might constitute an international agreement to the Office of the Legal Adviser.  Within the Office of the Legal Adviser, the Office of Treaty Affairs exercises primary responsibility for making such determinations. More information may be found at 11 FAM 710.

Consultations with the Secretary of State

Prior to negotiating or concluding an international agreement, whether in the name of the U.S. Government or an agency, all agencies of the U.S. Government must consult with the Secretary of State or his designee, pursuant to the Department of State procedures set out in the Circular 175 procedure.

Detailed requirements for submitting requests for Circular 175 authority to negotiate or conclude an agreement may be found at 11 FAM 720.  Among other things, an agency wishing to negotiate or conclude an international agreement must transmit to the appropriate point of contact in the Office of the Legal Adviser relevant information about the proposed agreement including:  a draft text or summary of the proposed agreement; a precise citation of the constitutional, statutory, or treaty authority for such agreement; and other background information as requested by the Department of State.

If an international agreement is to be concluded in another language, the agency or office responsible must obtain –prior to conclusion—a signed memorandum from the Department of State’s Office of Language Services certifying that the English and foreign language texts are in conformity with each other and have the same meaning in all substantive respects.

Transmittal of Concluded Agreements

Twenty-day rule

Any agency of the U.S. Government that concludes an international agreement is responsible for transmitting the text of the agreement to the Office of Treaty Affairs no later than 20 days after conclusion.

Signed agreements

When transmitting signed agreements to the Office of Treaty Affairs, agencies must include:

  • Signed or initialed texts in all languages;
  • Unless clearly legible in the text of the agreement, the name and title of the individuals signing or initialing the agreement; and
  • Certified copies in the event original texts of signed agreement cannot be transmitted.

Agreement effected by exchange of diplomatic notes

When transmitting agreements effected by exchange of diplomatic notes to the Office of Treaty Affairs, agencies must include:

  • A certified copy of the note from the United States; and
  • The signed or initialed copy of the note from the foreign government.

Reporting to Congress

The Department of State must report international agreements other than treaties to Congress no later than 60 days after the entry into force of such agreements.  Each agreement is reported with a background statement including a brief explanation of the agreement and a precise citation of legal authority.

Preparation of Documents, Instructions, and Signing Ceremonies

Preparation of instruments for signature

The Office of Treaty Affairs supervises the preparation of approved texts of treaties and other agreements to be signed in Washington D.C, and provides instructions to posts for those instruments signed abroad.  There is no universal standard as to the kind or size of paper which must be used, each foreign ministry has its own “treaty paper.”  However, for every bilateral agreement there must be two originals, one for each government.  Each original must embody the full text of the agreement in all the languages in which the agreement is to be signed, and must be exactly the same as the other original subject only to the principle of the “alternat.” Customarily, the principle of the “alternat” doesn’t apply to multilateral agreements which are typically prepared for signature in a single original comprising all the official languages.

Supervising and assisting with signing ceremonies

The Office of Treaty Affairs makes arrangements for and/or supervises signing ceremonies for the signature of treaties or other international agreements taking place in Washington, D.C., and provides guidance and instructions to posts for those ceremonies taking place abroad.

Preparation of other documents necessary for the ratification of treaties

The Office of Treaty Affairs supervises the preparation of the Secretary of State’s report to the President and the President’s message to the Senate to transmit treaties for advice and consent to ratification.  The Office of Treaty Affairs also prepares full powers, instruments of ratification, and proclamations; and makes arrangements for the exchange or deposit of instruments of ratification.

Additional guidelines may be found at 11 FAM 730 and 11 FAM 740.

Drafting of Instruments not Intended to Create Legal Obligations

Although these instruments do not create legal obligations for the U.S. Government or its agencies they must be carefully drafted to avoid the use of language reserved for legally binding international agreements.  The Office of Treaty Affairs reviews instruments not intended to be legally binding proposed to be entered into in the name of the U.S. Government or its agencies to ensure drafting is in accordance with U.S. practice.

from — Treaty Procedures – United States Department of State. (2020, December 1). United States Department of State.

The following treaties have been submitted to the Senate; these treaties have not received Senate advice and consent to ratification.

  1. International Labor Organization Convention No. 87 Concerning Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organize, adopted by the International Labor Conference at its 31st Session held at San Francisco, June 17 – July 10, 1948 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. S, 81st Cong., 1st Sess.); submitted to Senate August 27, 1949.
  2. International Labor Organization Convention No. 116 Concerning the Partial Revision of the conventions adopted by the General Conference of the International Labor Organization at its first 32 sessions for the purpose of standardizing the provisions regarding the preparation of reports by the governing body of the International Labor Office on the Working of Conventions, adopted by the International Labor Conference at its 45th Session held at Geneva, June 26, 1961 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. C, 87th Cong., 2nd Sess.); submitted to Senate June 1, 1962.
  3. International Labor Organization Convention No. 122 Concerning Employment Policy, adopted by the International Labor Conference at its 48th Session held at Geneva July 9, 1964 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. G, 89th Cong., 2nd Sess.); submitted to Senate June 2, 1966.
  4. Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, done at Vienna May 23, 1969, and signed on behalf of the United States on April 24, 1970 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. L, 92nd Cong., 1st Sess.); submitted to Senate November 22, 1971.
  5. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, done at New York December 16, 1966, and signed on behalf of the United States on October 5, 1977 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. D, 95th Cong., 2nd Sess.); submitted to Senate February 23, 1978.
  6. American Convention on Human Rights, done at San Jose November 22, 1969, and signed on behalf of the United States on June 1, 1977 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. F, 95th Cong., 2nd Sess.); submitted to Senate February 23, 1978.
  7. Maritime Boundary Agreement between the United States of America and the Republic of Cuba, signed at Washington December 16, 1977 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. H, 96th Cong., 1st Sess.); submitted to Senate January 19, 1979.
  8. Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women, done at New York December 18, 1979, and signed on behalf of the United States on July 17, 1980 (Treaty Doc.: Ex. R, 96th Cong., 2nd Sess.); submitted to Senate November 12, 1980.
  9. Amendment to the 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), done at Gaborone April 30, 1983 (Treaty Doc.: 98-10); submitted to Senate October 4, 1983.
  10. Protocol II Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts, done at Geneva June 10, 1977, and signed on behalf of the United States on December 12, 1977 (Treaty Doc.: 100-2); submitted to Senate January 29, 1987.
  11. Convention on Biological Diversity, done at Rio de Janeiro June 5, 1992, and signed on behalf of the United States on June 4, 1993 (Treaty Doc.: 103-20); submitted to Senate November 20, 1993.
  12. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, done at Montego Bay December 10, 1982 (the “Convention”) and Agreement relating to Implementation of Part XI of the Convention, done at New York July 28, 1994 (the “Agreement”); Agreement signed on behalf of the United States on July 29, 1994 (Treaty Doc.: 103-39); submitted to Senate October 7, 1994.
  13. Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, done at New York September 10, 1996, and signed on behalf of the United States on September 24, 1996 (Treaty Doc.: 105-28); submitted to Senate September 23, 1997.
  14. International Labor Organization Convention No. 111 Concerning Discrimination in Respect of Employment and Occupation, adopted by the International Labor Conference at its 42nd Session held at Geneva June 25, 1958 (Treaty Doc.: 105-45); submitted to Senate May 18, 1998.
  15. Inter-American Convention against the Illicit Manufacturing of and Trafficking in Firearms, Ammunition, Explosives, and other Related Materials, done at Washington November 13, 1997, and signed on behalf of the United States on November 14, 1997 (Treaty Doc.: 105-49); submitted to Senate June 9, 1998.
  16. Protocol for the Protection of Cultural Property in the event of Armed Conflict, done at The Hague May 14, 1954 (Treaty Doc.: 106-1); submitted to Senate January 6, 1999.
  17. Rotterdam Convention on the Prior Informed Consent Procedure for Certain Hazardous Chemicals and Pesticides in International Trade, done at Rotterdam September 10, 1998, and signed on behalf of the United States on September 11, 1998 (Treaty Doc.: 106-21); submitted to Senate February 9, 2000.
  18. Treaty between the United States of America and the Republic of Nicaragua Concerning the Encouragement and Reciprocal Protection of Investment, signed at Denver July 1, 1995 (Treaty Doc.: 106-33); submitted to Senate June 26, 2000.
  19. Convention on the Safety of United Nations and Associated Personnel, done at New York December 9, 1994, and signed on behalf of the United States on December 19, 1994 (Treaty Doc.: 107-1); submitted to Senate January 3, 2001.
  20. Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, done at Stockholm May 22, 2001, and signed on behalf of the United States on May 23, 2001 (Treaty Doc.: 107-5); submitted to Senate May 7, 2002.
  21. 1996 Protocol to the Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972, done at London November 7, 1996, and signed on behalf of the United States March 31, 1998 (Treaty Doc. 110-5); submitted to Senate September 4, 2007.
  22. Agreement on the Conservation of Albatrosses and Petrels, with annexes, done at Canberra June 19, 2001 (Treaty Doc. 110-22); submitted to Senate September 26, 2008.
  23. Annex VI on Liability Arising From Environmental Emergencies to the Protocol on Environmental Protection to the Antarctic Treaty (Annex VI), adopted on June 14, 2005 (Treaty Doc. 111-2); submitted to Senate April 2, 2009.
  24. Convention between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Hungary for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income, signed at Budapest February 4, 2010, with related exchange of notes (Treaty Doc.: 111-7); submitted to Senate November 15, 2010.
  25. Protocols 1, 2, and 3 to the South Pacific Nuclear Free Zone Treaty, done at Suva August 8, 1986, and signed on behalf of the United States on March 25, 1996 (Treaty Doc.: 112-2); submitted to Senate May 2, 2011.
  26. Protocols I and II to the African Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone Treaty, done at Cairo April 11, 1996, and signed that day on behalf of the United States (Treaty Doc.: 112-3); submitted to Senate May 2, 2011.
  27. Protocol Amending the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, done at Paris May 27, 2010 and signed that day on behalf of the United States (Treaty Doc.: 112-5); submitted to Senate May 17, 2012.
  28. Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on December 13, 2006 and signed on behalf of the United States on June 30, 2009 (Treaty Doc.: 112-7); submitted to Senate May 17, 2012.
  29. Convention between the United States of America and the Republic of Poland for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income, signed at Warsaw February 13, 2013 (Treaty Doc.:  113-5); submitted to Senate May 20, 2014.
  30. Protocol to the Treaty on a Nuclear-Weapon-Free Zone in Central Asia, done at New York May 6, 2014, and signed that day on behalf of the United States (Treaty Doc.:  114-2); submitted to Senate April 27, 2015.
  31. The United Nations Convention on the Use of Electronic Communications in International Contracts, done at New York on November 23, 2005 (Treaty Doc.:  114-5); submitted to Senate February 10, 2016.
  32. The Beijing Treaty on Audiovisual Performances, done at Beijing on June 24, 2012, and signed on behalf of the United States on June 26, 2012 (Treaty Doc.: 114-8); submitted to Senate February 10, 2016.
  33. United Nations Convention on Independent Guarantees and Stand-By Letters of Credit, done at New York on December 11, 1995, and signed on behalf of the United States on December 11, 1997 (Treaty Doc.: 114-9); submitted to Senate February 10, 2016.
  34. The Arms Trade Treaty, done at New York April 2, 2013, and signed on behalf of the United States on September 25, 2013 (Treaty Doc.: 114-14); submitted to Senate December 9, 2016.
  35. United Nations Convention on Transparency in Treaty-Based Investor-State Arbitration, done at New York December 10, 2014, and signed on behalf of the United States on March 17, 2015 (Treaty Doc.: 114-15); submitted to Senate December 9, 2016.
  36. Amendments to the 1987 Treaty on Fisheries between the Governments of Certain Pacific Island States and the Government of the United States of America, as amended, done at Nadi on December 3, 2016 (Treaty Doc.: 115-3); submitted to Senate August 28, 2018.
  37. Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Relating to International Civil Aviation, done at Beijing September 10, 2010, and signed that day on behalf of the United States (Treaty Doc.: 116-3); submitted to Senate June 18, 2020.
  38. Protocol Supplementary to the Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, done at Beijing September 10, 2010 and signed that day on behalf of the United States (treaty Doc.: 116-4); submitted to Senate June 18, 2020.
  39. Extradition Treaty between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Albania, signed at Tirana December 22, 2020 (Treaty Doc.:117-2); submitted to Senate April 7, 2022.

from — Treaties pending in the Senate – United States Department of State. (2024, February 28). United States Department of State.

~ ~ ~

Withdrawing the United States from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States

MEMORANDUM FOR THE HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct:

Section 1.  Purpose.  (a)  On February 4, 2025, I issued Executive Order 14199 (Withdrawing the United States from and Ending Funding to Certain United Nations Organizations and Reviewing United States Support to All International Organizations).  That Executive Order directed the Secretary of State, in consultation with the United States Representative to the United Nations, to conduct a review of all international intergovernmental organizations of which the United States is a member and provides any type of funding or other support, and all conventions and treaties to which the United States is a party, to determine which organizations, conventions, and treaties are contrary to the interests of the United States.  The Secretary of State has reported his findings as required by Executive Order 14199.

(b)  I have considered the Secretary of State’s report and, after deliberating with my Cabinet, have determined that it is contrary to the interests of the United States to remain a member of, participate in, or otherwise provide support to the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum.

(c)  Consistent with Executive Order 14199 and pursuant to the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby direct all executive departments and agencies (agencies) to take immediate steps to effectuate the withdrawal of the United States from the organizations listed in section 2 of this memorandum as soon as possible.  For United Nations entities, withdrawal means ceasing participation in or funding to those entities to the extent permitted by law.

(d)  My review of further findings of the Secretary of State remains ongoing.

Sec. 2.  Organizations from Which the United States Shall Withdraw.  (a)  Non-United Nations Organizations:

(i)       24/7 Carbon-Free Energy Compact;

(ii)      Colombo Plan Council;

(iii)     Commission for Environmental Cooperation;

(iv)      Education Cannot Wait;

(v)       European Centre of Excellence for Countering

Hybrid Threats;

(vi)      Forum of European National Highway Research Laboratories;

(vii)     Freedom Online Coalition;

(viii)    Global Community Engagement and Resilience Fund;

(ix)      Global Counterterrorism Forum;

(x)       Global Forum on Cyber Expertise;

(xi)      Global Forum on Migration and Development;

(xii)     Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research;

(xiii)    Intergovernmental Forum on Mining, Minerals, Metals, and Sustainable Development;

(xiv)     Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change;

(xv)      Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services;

(xvi)     International Centre for the Study of the Preservation and Restoration of Cultural Property;

(xvii)    International Cotton Advisory Committee;

(xviii)   International Development Law Organization;

(xix)     International Energy Forum;

(xx)      International Federation of Arts Councils and Culture Agencies;

(xxi)     International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance;

(xxii)    International Institute for Justice and the Rule of Law;

(xxiii)   International Lead and Zinc Study Group;

(xxiv)    International Renewable Energy Agency;

(xxv)     International Solar Alliance;

(xxvi)    International Tropical Timber Organization;

(xxvii)   International Union for Conservation of Nature;

(xxviii)  Pan American Institute of Geography and History;

(xxix)    Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation;

(xxx)     Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combatting Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia;

(xxxi)    Regional Cooperation Council;

(xxxii)   Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century;

(xxxiii)  Science and Technology Center in Ukraine;

(xxxiv)   Secretariat of the Pacific Regional Environment Programme; and

(xxxv)    Venice Commission of the Council of Europe.

(b)  United Nations (UN) Organizations:

(i)       Department of Economic and Social Affairs;

(ii)      UN Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) — Economic Commission for Africa;

(iii)     ECOSOC — Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean;

(iv)      ECOSOC — Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific;

(v)       ECOSOC — Economic and Social Commission for Western Asia;

(vi)      International Law Commission;

(vii)     International Residual Mechanism for Criminal Tribunals;

(viii)    International Trade Centre;

(ix)      Office of the Special Adviser on Africa;

(x)       Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children in Armed Conflict;

(xi)      Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict;

(xii)     Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Violence Against Children;

(xiii)    Peacebuilding Commission;

(xiv)     Peacebuilding Fund;

(xv)      Permanent Forum on People of African Descent;

(xvi)     UN Alliance of Civilizations;

(xvii)    UN Collaborative Programme on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation in Developing Countries;

(xviii)   UN Conference on Trade and Development;

(xix)     UN Democracy Fund;

(xx)      UN Energy;

(xxi)     UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women;

(xxii)    UN Framework Convention on Climate Change;

(xxiii)   UN Human Settlements Programme;

(xxiv)    UN Institute for Training and Research;

(xxv)     UN Oceans;

(xxvi)    UN Population Fund;

(xxvii)   UN Register of Conventional Arms;

(xxviii)  UN System Chief Executives Board for Coordination;

(xxix)    UN System Staff College;

(xxx)     UN Water; and

(xxxi)    UN University.

Sec. 3.  Implementation Guidance.  The Secretary of State shall provide additional guidance as needed to agencies when implementing this memorandum.

Sec. 4.  General Provisions.  (a)  Nothing in this memorandum shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i)   the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii)  the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b)  This memorandum shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c)  This memorandum is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

(d)  The Secretary of State is authorized and directed to publish this memorandum in the Federal Register.

                              DONALD J. TRUMP

from — Stopperich, M. (2026, January 7). Withdrawing the United States from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States. The White House. 

~ ~ ~

Pulling out of 66 international organizations, Trump turns his back on science, facts, reason

By Benjamin Santer | Analysis | January 12, 2026

Whether the president and his supporters like it or not, the United States is part of a complex, interconnected world. Global supply chains, commerce, and economies are intricately intertwined. Countries are connected electronically via the internet, email, and social media. Humans are also linked through a shared global climate system, which influences—and can be influenced by—life on Earth.

On January 7, President Donald Trump, citing “the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,” withdrew the United States “from International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States.”

The list of “Organizations from which the United States Shall Withdraw” has 66 entries. It is divided into two categories: non-United Nations (UN) organizations and UN organizations.

The list contains such diverse entities as the International Renewable Energy Agency, the International Solar Alliance, the Partnership for Atlantic Cooperation, the UN International Law Commission, the Office of the Special Representative of the Secretary General for Children in Armed Conflict, the UN Peacebuilding Commission, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Under the Trump Administration, international law, conserving nature, protecting children from war, developing renewable energy, and building peace are issues antithetical to US interests.

As one might expect given the administration’s systematic efforts to dismantle US climate science, international climate organizations and treaties are also on “the list of 66.” Examples include the Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). The UNFCCC seeks to avoid dangerous anthropogenic interference with Earth’s climate—a goal that should be of interest to the United States, but apparently is not.

The US Senate ratified the decision to join the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992. As others have already pointed out, it might not even be legal for Trump to unilaterally withdraw the country from the UNFCCC without Senate approval.

At number 14 on “the list of 66” is the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change—the IPCC. The United States is a part of the IPCC through its membership in the UN and the World Meteorological Organization. There is no formal process for disengaging from the IPCC, because it’s a scientific body, not a treaty. A country can just stop contributing or participating in the IPCC’s activities, which the Trump administration has effectively done since assuming office. This new announcement is mostly for show.

The global climate system is indifferent to human territorial boundaries. It is not indifferent to human actions. By burning fossil fuels and altering the land surface, humans raised global atmospheric carbon dioxide levels. Other types of activity produced additional heat-trapping greenhouse gases, like methane, nitrous oxides, and fluorocarbons. In consequence, Earth’s global surface temperature has increased by roughly 1.5 degrees Celsius since the late 1800s. This may not sound like much, but it is. The size and rapidity of recent human-caused warming is deeply concerning. This deep scientific understanding of the reality and seriousness of human effects on climate arises in part from the seminal work of the IPCC.

RELATED:
How nuclear submarines could pave the way for nuclear weapons in South Korea

Since its inception in 1988, the IPCC has advised governments on three broad aspects of climate change: the physical science; impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability; and ways of mitigating projected 21st century changes in climate. The IPCC publishes definitive scientific assessments on all three topics. Each topic is assessed by a separate Working Group.

The IPCC first assessment report appeared in 1990. The sixth assessment was published in 2021. The seventh assessment is currently underway, with a target completion date in 2029.

I’ve served as a lead author or contributing author to the Working Group I reports of all six previous IPCC assessments—the reports dealing with the physical science of climate change. My expertise is in the evaluation of climate models, the analysis of atmospheric temperature data sets, and the identification of human “fingerprints” in observed climate records. My three decades of IPCC service inform this essay on what the United States will lose by leaving the IPCC.

The IPCC has been a particularly valuable instrument and forum for synthesizing, assessing, and sharing climate change science. Working together with organizations like the World Climate Research Programme, the IPCC facilitates the global “coming together” of many thousands of climate scientists. This coming together consists of far more than simply writing assessment reports.

After the 1990 IPCC report, it was recognized that the scientific value of such assessments would be enhanced by improved coordination of international climate modeling efforts. Rather than simply relying on a patchwork quilt of available off-the-shelf simulations, scientists figured out what types of simulation might be most useful for the entire community to perform. They agreed on simulation protocols, the simulation output to save, data storage, and naming conventions. They developed hardware and software for sharing petabytes of modeling results and climate data.

IPCC assessments provided impetus for the rise of the MIPs—model intercomparison projects. MIPs help scientists to do a better job with model diagnosis and quantification of uncertainties. If every climate modeling group performs the same numerical experiment, it’s a little easier to answer key questions. How well do models capture key features of today’s climate? By how much do climate change projections differ when models are run with the same high levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide? What aspects of these projections are we most confident about? What aspects are most uncertain? Where are the research gaps that need to be filled?

I like to think that the goal of the IPCC—to produce the best-possible assessments of climate science—spurred the rise of the MIPs. In turn, the information from MIPs enabled the IPCC to produce more comprehensive assessments. The IPCC process helped to provide grains of sand around which pearly layers of scientific knowledge accreted. Would this knowledge have been gained without the need for periodic IPCC assessments of climate science? Certainly—but I think it would have been gained more slowly.

For me and for hundreds of other US climate scientists, participation in IPCC assessments was life-changing. In my case, I had the opportunity to work on a key chapter of the IPCC’s 1995 Second Assessment Report—the chapter dealing with climate change detection and attribution. Our 1995 finding of a “discernible human influence on global climate” was historic. It mattered. After 1995, governments could no longer plead that they were ignorant of the climate consequences of fossil fuel burning. They knew the scientific facts. The IPCC told them the facts and the truth. Again and again and again.

RELATED:
Why the US should stop protecting Israel’s nuclear weapons

If you don’t like scientific facts, you bury them. You come up with counternarratives to the facts. With alternative facts. You pull the plug on US involvement in effective international knowledge-gathering and assessment organizations like the IPCC. You deny federally funded US climate scientists the opportunity to work on IPCC reports, and to collaborate with international colleagues. You deny the United States a seat at the global table of countries developing IPCC reports. You diminish your country’s standing and influence.

I’m grateful that I live in a world in which there is an Intergovermental Panel on Climate Change, dedicated to improving our understanding of human influence on Earth’s climate system and to sharpening our picture of the likely “shape of things to come” for 21st century climate. I’m grateful I don’t live in a counterfactual world in which we are solely reliant on the Trump administration for information on how and why Earth’s climate is changing. That would be a dark and ignorant world.

I hope that the decision to withdraw from the IPCC will not be lost in the noise of dysfunction and chaos that now characterizes daily life in the United States. The decision clearly demonstrates that the US government is turning its back on science, facts, and reason, and embracing antiquated, polluting energy-production systems that have no future.

The US president has made it known that he covets the Nobel Peace Prize. Nobel Peace Prizes are not awarded for the willful destruction of Earth’s climate system. Or for invading other countries. Or for unleashing militarized forces on the streets of US cities.

Perhaps Trump’s animus towards the IPCC stems from the fact that it was awarded the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize (jointly with Al Gore) for its efforts to “build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change.”

I’m proud that since its inception in 1988, the United States has played an important role in the IPCC. I hope that even after the IPCC made it onto Donald J. Trump’s list of “International Organizations, Conventions, and Treaties that Are Contrary to the Interests of the United States,” US scientists will still find ways to make important contributions to the IPCC.

The president is not the sole arbiter of what is in the best interests of the United States. Every US citizen has a say in defining those interests. What is truly contrary to the interests of the United States is the willful ignorance of the Trump administration on issues like climate change and vaccine safety. Such ignorance is also contrary to the interests of all global citizens who seek to live and thrive on this pale blue dot in the cosmos.

from — McKenzie, J., & McKenzie, J. (2026, January 12). Pulling out of 66 international organizations, Trump turns his back on science, facts, reason. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

~ ~ ~

treaties

treaties, noun

agreement, contract

  • accord
  • alliance
  • arrangement
  • bargain
  • bond
  • cartel
  • charter
  • compact
  • concord
  • concordat
  • convention
  • covenant
  • deal
  • entente
  • league
  • negotiation
  • pact
  • reconciliation
  • sanction
  • settlement
  • understanding
from — TREATIES Synonyms & Antonyms – 26 words | Thesaurus.com. (n.d.).

international

international, adj

  1. between or among nations; involving two or more nations.

    international trade.

  2. of or relating to two or more nations or their citizens.

    a matter of international concern.

  3. pertaining to the relations between nations.

    international law.

  4. having members or activities in several nations.

    an international organization.

  5. transcending national boundaries or viewpoints.

    an international benefit;

    an international reputation.

    Synonyms:
    cosmopolitanworldwide

international, noun

  1. (initial capital letter) any of several international socialist or communist organizations formed in the 19th and 20th centuries.

  2. (sometimes initial capital letter) a labor union having locals in two or more countries.

  3. an organization, enterprise, or group, especially a major business concern, having branches, dealings, or members in several countries.

  4. an employee, especially an executive, assigned to work in a foreign country or countries by a business or organization that has branches or dealings in several countries.

international, cultural

An international organization of workers founded by Karl Marx (see also Marx) in the 1860s. Weakened by disputes, it was dissolved in 1876, but it was succeeded by three later Internationals, which sought to spread communism throughout the world. The most effective of these was the Third International, formed by the Soviet Union in 1919 and dissolved in 1943 by Joseph Stalin.

Other Word Forms

  • internationality noun
  • internationally adverb
  • noninternational adjective
  • pseudointernational adjective
  • quasi-international adjective
  • uninternational adjective

Etymology

Origin of international

First recorded in 1770–80; inter- + national

from — Definition of international. (n.d.).


March 9th, 2026
Hudson Valley, New York

This is one of the words/ phrases you can’t say in the new Trump Regime. See a comprehensive list at the Forbidden Words Project.

image: T.A.C.O.  © Holly Troy 3.2026

The list has now expanded to 350+ words, encompassing even desirable goals like “safe drinking water,” the mention of which can now result in research grants or other agreements with the federal government getting nixed.  Some agencies ordered the removal of specific words from public-facing websites or the elimination of other materials (including school curricula) in which they might be included. In other cases, federal agencies used key words to flag materials for further review or asked staff to limit or avoid their usage. In a December court filing, Head Start provided a list of nearly 200 words and phrases it told administrators to avoid.

from — Connelly, E. A. (2025, December 22). Federal Government’s Growing Banned Words List Is Chilling Act of Censorship. PEN America.

Climate Science Legal Defense Fund

see Silencing Science Tracker — silencingscience.org

 


Discover more from holly troy ~ sacred folly

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Unknown's avatar

Posted by

Holly hails from an illustrious lineage of fortune tellers, yogis, folk healers, troubadours and poets of the fine and mystical arts. Shape-shifting Tantric Siren of the Lunar Mysteries, she surfs the ebbs and flows of the multiverse on the Pure Sound of Creation. Her alchemy is Sacred Folly — revolutionary transformation through Love, deep play, Beauty, and music.

One thought on “discussion of federal policies: Treaties and International Agreements

Leave a reply to Timothy McCown Reynolds Cancel reply