This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history
This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.International relationsWikipedia:WikiProject International relationsTemplate:WikiProject International relationsInternational relations
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Trade, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Trade on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TradeWikipedia:WikiProject TradeTemplate:WikiProject TradeTrade
not sure whether the statement "the arrangement is not a treaty" is correct. Usually every international organization must be based on a treaty. However I could not find such a treaty. And it is strange that the organisation is named "arrangement" and not "agreement". There is no trace on the organisations website. Could somebody elaborate on this aspect ? Is the arrangement a "quasi-treaty"? How much binding force derives out of the cooperation of States under an arrengement in the absence of a treaty ? What is the reason for saying arrangement and not agreement ? Interesting questions of Public International Law ! 80.187.106.27 (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of it status as a treaty or not-a-treaty, it should still be categorized under the appropriately "Treaties of X country" and "Treatities by year". Senator2029“Talk”15:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]