A lot has been stated about the possible imminent signing of the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the US. I am in favour of the signing of such an agreement because I feel that the benefits would well outweigh the disadvantages in terms of both security and the economy.
But let me be clear – I do not feel that a US SOFA agreement should be signed at any cost, especially not if it concerns Moneyval or letting crooks off the hook, as is being alluded to in many blogs.
Conversely, it is up to the government of the day to balance whether signing the agreement will benefit the country or not and we are all free to express our views.
But, back to the SOFA. I feel that signing the agreement will not impinge on Malta’s neutrality because SOFA is an agreement which regulates the status of military (and civilian) personnel engaged on overseas military training and operations in a host country, whereby the latter would agree to extend certain rights and privileges to such personnel.
These include arrangements in relation to legal jurisdiction over visiting personnel, enforcement of discipline by the superiors of the relevant personnel and the determination of liability for damage to property of third parties. A SOFA does not mean establishing military alliances, nor inviting the US or any other nation to establish bases in Malta or give the green light for such forces to exercise freely in the country.
Moreover, a SOFA would not implicity grant immunity to visiting US military personnel but could provide a waiver of jurisdiction in certain pre-agreed cases and it is questionable whether sailors on shore leave would be covered – this needs to be negotiated. A SOFA would also provide a framework for compensation for any damages which occurred as a result of an incident. This is why it would be important for the government to negotiate in the best interest of our nation.
That being said, I feel that the benefits of signing the SOFA well outweigh the disadvantages in terms of economy and security for a number of reasons.
It will enable US warships to start re-visiting Malta more frequently, allowing ships to purchase fuel and provisions, facilitate crew changes through incoming flights and allow sailors to enjoy shore-leave, probably spending dollars in Valletta and Paceville, all good for our economy. To note: in 2004, a record 54 US warships stopped in Malta to replenish but this number has dropped to one to two a year over the last 10 years or so.
The benefits of signing the SOFA well outweigh the disadvantages in terms of economy and security- Martin Cauchi Inglott
It will enable US auxiliary vessels to use our docks again. Again, such works were the norm pre-2004, even with the support of the Malta Drydocks, but they have stopped altogether. Is this also not lost revenue? And …
It will improve US-Maltese military cooperation through the facilitation of training of AFM personnel by US forces in Malta, to the benefit of our security. To note: a healthy Malta-US military relationship led to the US funding the purchase of two brand new 87-foot patrol boats in 2002/4, which still provide top services until this very day!
So what is really at stake if we sign the US SOFA agreement now? If we sign it, in the very worst case scenario, a US serviceman committing a hideous crime in Malta may face a US military court martial instead of Maltese courts, if there is agreement from the Maltese side to surrender jurisdiction.
And let us not forget that the last official hideous incident against a Maltese citizen by a US serviceman officially took place in the 1960s, as far as I am aware. So, for example, had Malta signed a SOFA with Chile, the Chilean government would have been obliged to hand over Cadet Sepúlveda in 1999, during the Esmeralda incident, for arrest and prosecution, possibly in Malta.
After having graduated from the US Naval War College and cooperated very closely with US forces in Malta and Europe over some 20 years, I must state that I do trust the US military as an institution. Therefore, if one were to balance the pros and cons of signing the SOFA, I would certainly vote for signing a SOFA to enhance US-Malta security cooperation and pull some much needed financial resources to our tourism and maritime sectors.
Though the subject has nothing to do with neutrality, it is a hot potato for local politicians, who very much depend on the popular vote, but perhaps it may be wiser for the government to sign the NATO PfP SOFA to cover both US personnel as well as those of other partner countries. Incidentally, let us not forget that Malta signed and ratified the EU SOFA already…
Martin Cauchi Inglott is a former EU colonel responsible for EU military relations with partners and former secretary-general of the Democratic Party.