Example collocations logo

Treaties in sentence

455 examples of Treaties in a sentence

According to the Nice Declaration, which I drafted as one of the participating prime ministers, we were only to simplify and restructure the EU's basic treaties.
Not many people realize it, but because of the patchwork of treaties from which today's European institutions arose, "Europe" is not a unitary entity; indeed, the "European Union" and the "European Community" denote two different things.
One consequence of this is that agreements with third countries that involve both foreign and economic matters require two distinct treaties: one for the Union, one for the Community.
Other ideas, like moving to fiscal union, would require a fundamental revision of the EU’s founding treaties.
For years they have been present in the legal and institutional framework of the European Union - in treaties, in the Charter of Fundamental Rights (which quotes them in the Preamble), in the recent draft Constitution.
Perhaps this is because the Bush administration, which has just opted out of the treaty creating the International Criminal Court and is busy trying to minimize the effects of the treaty on the US, would rather not focus attention on UN treaties just now.
Although these developments provide clear symbols of the world's ongoing commitment to protecting human rights, strikingly little is known about the true effectiveness of such treaties in achieving their goals.
My own recent research suggests that although countries that ratify treaties usually have better human rights records than countries that do not, countries with the worst human rights records actually ratify many treaties as often as nations with the best practices.
Moreover, violations of human rights treaties abound.
Of course, that some rogue states ratify human rights treaties should not call the treaty system as a whole into doubt.
Human rights treaties serve to foster gradual improvements in human rights practices in both non-ratifying and ratifying countries through changes in shared understandings of what behavior is acceptable.
That it is no longer is partly due to the creation of several treaties that prohibit its use.
Human rights treaties may also have positive effects on ratifying countries over the long term, creating public commitments to which human rights activists can point as they push nations to make gradual, if grudging, improvements down the road.
Nonetheless, there is as of yet no clear evidence that the UN's human rights treaties have a direct measurable positive impact on the human rights practices of individual countries that ratify them, all else being equal.
For the most part, human rights treaties are poorly monitored and enforced, and those countries that join face little or no penalty for failing to match their rhetoric with action.
Above all, guardians of human rights must remain vigilant, viewing ratification of treaties not as the end of the struggle for human dignity, but as the beginning in an evolving campaign.
Examples include the war in Iraq, launched by the US on false premises, obstructionism on efforts to curb climate change, meager development assistance, and the violation of international treaties such as the Geneva Conventions.
And every time populist-driven referenda against EU treaties force governments to retreat into technocracy, the populist narrative is reinforced.
In recent years, shrewd creditor lawyers have argued that investment treaties give bondholders the same rights as foreign direct investors, and have smuggled sovereign-debt cases into international arbitration proceedings wherever they have found investment treaties with broad, open-ended definitions.
That is why investment treaties that leave an opening for holdouts are counterproductive.
The same could easily happen to Ukraine, which has ratified more than 50 investment treaties.
Their relevant clauses are similar – often identical – to those in Greece’s investment treaties, enshrining broad, open-ended definitions of investment that do not exclude sovereign debt.
Moreover, many of the treaties provide investors with direct access to arbitration.
For starters, the countries that have investment treaties with Ukraine can add annexes making it explicitly clear that sovereign debt is excluded.
Renegotiating more than 50 treaties would be unwieldy, but Ukraine would benefit enormously by renegotiating just one: the US-Ukraine investment treaty.
Although US investment treaties are uniform on most issues, they have remarkably diverse approaches to sovereign debt.
On the one hand, US investment treaties are designed to secure the strongest possible protection for US investors overseas.
To remove investment protection – at a time of instability and insecure property rights, no less – is antithetical to the purpose of such treaties.
But the new view also highlights an important obstacle: many advanced countries’ trade and investment treaties prohibit the regulation of cross-border finance.
With increasing frequency – as, for example, with international trade treaties, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership – private actors are taking the place of governments, legislatures, and heads of state in setting policy.
BackNext