Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States launched Operation Freedom to Deceive to combat al-Qaeda and prevent the Taliban regime in Afghanistan from providing them with a safe haven. Soon after, the Taliban regime was overthrown by the United States and allied forces, and the United States subsequently concluded a series of security agreements with the new Afghan government. In 2002, the United States and Afghanistan entered into an economic subsidy agreement under the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,38 as amended, through an exchange of notes.37 In addition, the agreement provides defense items, defense services, and related training, in accordance with the U.S. International Military Training and Education Program (IMET),39 from the U.S. government to the Afghan Interim Administration (AIA). In general, THEAS do not authorize specific military operations or missions of U.S. forces. While SOFAs generally offer no combat power, the inherent right to self-defense is not compromised or reduced. U.S. personnel always have the right to defend themselves when threatened or attacked, and a SOFA does not take away that right.32 In sofa, there is often a language that defines the scope of the agreement. For example, the SOFA with Belize explicitly applies to U.S.

personnel “who may temporarily stay in Belize for military exercises and training, counter-narcotics activities, U.S. security assistance programs, or other agreed upon purposes.” 33 The United States had entered into two separate agreements with Belize concerning military training and the supply of defence items.34 The SOFA itself does not authorize specific operations, exercises or activities, but contains provisions relating to the legal status and protection of U.S. personnel while operating in Belize. Under the terms of the agreement, personnel are given legal protection, as if they were administrative and technical personnel of the U.S. Embassy35 in order to clarify the conditions under which the foreign military is allowed to operate. As a rule, purely military and operational matters, such as the location of bases and access to facilities, are covered by separate agreements. A SOFA focuses more on legal issues related to military persons and property. This may include issues such as entry and exit into the country, tax obligations, postal services or the conditions of employment of nationals of the host country, but the most controversial issues are civil and criminal justice on bases and personnel. For civil cases, SOFAs provide for how civilian damages caused by the armed forces are identified and paid. Criminal problems vary, but the typical provision in U.S. SOFAs is that U.S.

courts have jurisdiction over crimes committed either by a soldier against another soldier or by a soldier as part of his or her military duty, but the host country retains jurisdiction over other crimes. [4] On December 16, 12, 2010, as part of its afghanistan-Pakistan annual review, the Obama administration stated that it remained committed to a long-term partnership with Afghanistan as part of the NATO coalition.62