Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/573382
maltatoday, SUNDAY, 20 SEPTEMBER 2015 15 an additional obligation." Perhaps, but other legal frame- works also exist. US citizens (or indeed any foreigners) who are not members of the military face exist- ing legal procedures when accused of crimes committed overseas; there is international law, there are extradition agreements (where applicable), etc. Which raises the question of why an additional, spe- cial agreement would be considered necessary for the military… "There's been a long-standing tra- dition of these agreements since the beginning of NATO. They are not necessarily 'special' agreements; be- cause depending on what is agreed between the two countries, what happens to a civilian may be very similar to what happens to a mili- tary person who gets into trouble. But traditionally, there is military justice as well as civilian justice. A military person may in fact face both; and there are times when the military justice is more severe, because the armed forces have ad- ditional responsibilities as public servants, as members of a country's military. So it could be very differ- ent indeed. That's why there are ad- ditional details that could have an impact on the military, as opposed to ordinary civilians." All along, however, we haven't re- ally touched on the question of why this issue is so important for Amer- ica. That it would be a desirable ob- jective is understandable; but why is it such a priority? The ambassador however counters that SOFA agreements are priority US objectives in them- selves… not just with Malta. "Most nations have some sort of agreement to cover the movement of their armed forces around the world. Whether it's ship visits in- volving 100 sailors; whether it's a smaller visit of four military train- ers on a training programme, or do- ing a conference, etc… these agree- ments govern their visits to foreign countries. They are put in place to ensure that, regardless of where they go, US military personnel are going to meet what we consider to be a reasonable standard of jus- tice and protection. Usually these agreements are very easy to reach with European nations, because we have similar standards. But they also protect military forces when they go to countries which don't have such a robust, developed legal system. The original idea grew in fact out of concerns with the latter category of country. "Now we have a posi- tion that we do them wherever our military goes…" And does it have nothing at all to do with the worsening security situ- ation in the Mediterranean? It may be a coincidence, but calls for SOFA seem to have gained momentum since the deepening of the Libyan crisis, and the refugee emergency in Eastern Europe… "Not specifically, no. This has been a priority for a while. We have been trying to reach this agreement for many years…" She does however concede that the security issue has impacted the issue on at least one level. "There are discussions currently going on regarding Mediterranean security… on Libya, on other things that happen within the PfP/NATO realm… and the fact that Malta doesn't have a Status of Forces Agreement also means that there are certain discussions that Malta is not privy to, or involved in. We be- lieve that that is damaging to Medi- terranean security for everyone. We believe that Malta's long experi- ence, expertise and intimate knowl- edge of the region is important to have in these discussions. We be- lieve that Malta brings a great deal to the table, quite frankly. There should not be any discussions on Mediterranean security that Malta is not involved in…" Lastly, Abercrombie-Winstanley suggests that SOFA is desirable for no other reason than that it enables more US military personnel to visit Malta. "As for our military… we like to come to Malta. It is safe; it is Eng- lish speaking, there is nothing bet- ter than Maltese hospitality. Our sailors like to come here a great deal; the two or three times we've had naval visits since I've been here have been overwhelmingly success- ful. The captains were thrilled to have their crews here. One of the things our military likes to do in Malta is what we call 'community relations': they might go out and do a clean-up; one time I know of they painted a shelter. It's something they are thrilled to do because they are very happy to be here. They like to spend money here… the last time a ship came in, I was surrounded by sailors asking me about services, restaurants. They come and spend considerable amounts of money. And they try very hard to be good guests here: we haven't heard about problems with American military on the times they come; and hun- dreds come at a time when the ships come in… Speaking of considerable amounts of money: there is also the small matter of Malta's shipyards being unable to compete for US navy con- tracts for lack of a SOFA agreement. Palumbo has reportedly already lost out on over €30 million in ship re- pair contracts… She nods. "I can't comment on the Palumbo story except for what I read in the newspaper; but it is a fact that the US military spends be- tween 2 and 3 million dollars a day in the Mediterranean. A day. That's between visits, repairs… the last ship that came to Malta was the Mt Whitney, and the USA had just put out a contract – which Croatia bid for and won – worth between 20 and 30 million dollars, for a single ship…" This indirectly raises another con- cern: it would seem that the prom- ise of financial gain – or loss – is often a strategy used to gain lever- age in international negotiations. I am reminded, for instance, of when Malta ratified the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. Malta refused to sign a similar agreement with the USA, this time offering immunity from action by the ICC. The response of the Bush-led US government was to suspend its reg- ular military funding to the Armed Forces of Malta. This in turn implies a 'carrot and stick' approach: with the carrot, in this case, taking the form of lucra- tive ship repair contracts… would she agree with that perception? "No, I don't think so. That there are financial benefits involved is true, but I don't think that's the only reason we should be discuss- ing this. There are other issues we believe are very important: full par- ticipation by Malta in discussions on Mediterranean security is one of them. We believe it's important for our military to have access to Mal- ta; and also that the increased train- ing that could occur under a SOFA agreement would be beneficial to Malta. A lot of that is not happening because of the lack of an agreement. We believe that is important for the United States, but also for Malta and the region writ large. These are things that are going on throughout the region – in Italy, Greece, and all the countries around Malta. But not with Malta…" Interview A 'Status of Forces Agreement' would be beneficial for both Malta and the USA, according to US Ambassador GINA ABERCROMBIE-WINSTANLEY. But after years of quiet discussion, Malta is no closer to accepting SOFA