Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
23901908
label
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
23901908
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
citationUrl
collections
Records of the National Security Council Central and Eastern European Affairs Office (Clinton Administration)
Stephen Flanagan's Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
23901908
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
otherTitles
42-t-7585437-20111037F-007-009-2015
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4bfe8cada0d417d1
ocrText
Case Number: 2011-1037-F
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the Clinton Presidential
Library Staff.
Folder Title:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
Staff Office-Individual:
Central and Eastern European Affairs-Flanagan, Stephen
Original OA/ID Number:
1785
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
Stack:
30
4
5
2
V
Withdrawal/Redaction Sheet
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
00 a. memo
Susan Braden to Samuel Berger, re: Presidential Meeting with Baltie
01/09/1998
P1/b(1) VZ 9/21/2023
President Meri, Brazauskas and Ulmanis on January 16, 1998 (1 page)
001b briefing
From Samuel Berger, re: Meeting with Baltie Presidents (6 pages)
01/16/1998
P1/b(1) VZ 9/21/2023
paper
001 talking
Points to be Made for Meeting with Estonian President Meri, Latvian
ea.
01/1998
P1/b(1) VZ 9/21/2023
points
President Ulmanis and Lithuanian President Brazauskas (3 pages)
001d. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
001e. report
U.S. Government Report (1 page)
01/12/1998
P1/b(1)
001f. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
001g. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
001h. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
12/30/1997
P1/b(1)
001i. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
8692
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
January 8, 1998
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR SAMUEL R. BERGER
FROM:
STEPHEN J. FLANAGAN SJF
SUBJECT:
U.S. -Latvia Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in
Criminal Matters
The Acting Secretary has forwarded the Legal Assistance Treaty
between the United States and the Republic of Latvia for the
President's transmission to the Senate.
Attached at Tab I is your memorandum to the President forwarding
the transmittal message to the Senate (Tab A). The memo also
forwards the State Department report on the treaty (Tab B) and
the text of the Treaty (Tab C).
Concurrence by:
James E. NLH,For Baker and Mara MR Rudman
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the memorandum to the President at Tab I.
Attachments
Tab I Memo to the President
Tab A
Transmittal Message to the Senate
Tab B
State's Memo to the President
Tab C
Treaty Text
8692
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
THE EXECUTIVE CLERK
FROM:
SAMUEL BERGER
JOHN HILLEY
SUBJECT:
U.S.-Latvia Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in
Criminal Matters
Purpose
To transmit to the Senate the U.S.-Latvia Treaty on Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters.
Background
The Acting Secretary has forwarded the Treaty between the United
States and the Republic of Latvia on Mutual Legal Assistance in
Criminal Matters for your transmission to the Senate requesting
its advice and consent to ratification.
Attached for signature is your transmittal message to the Senate
(Tab A), which also forwards the State Department report on the
Treaty (Tab B) and the text of the Treaty (Tab C).
The Treaty, signed at Washington on June 13, 1997, provides for
mutual legal assistance in criminal matters. It will enhance
our ability to investigate and prosecute a variety of offenses.
The Treaty is designed to be self-executing and will not require
implementing legislation.
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the transmittal message at Tab A.
Attachments
Tab A
Transmittal Message to the Senate
Tab B
State's Report with Respect to the Treaty
Tab C
Treaty Text
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Dear Mr. President:
With a view to receiving the advice and consent of the Senate to
ratification, I transmit herewith the Treaty Between the United
States of America and the Republic of Latvia on Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters, signed at Washington on June 13,
1997. I transmit also, for the information of the Senate, an
exchange of notes which was signed the same date as the Treaty
and which provides for its provisional application, as well as
the Report of the Department of State with respect to the
Treaty.
The Treaty is one of a series of modern mutual legal assistance
treaties being negotiated by the United States in order to
counter criminal activities more effectively. The Treaty should
be an effective tool to assist in the prosecution of a wide
variety of crimes, including drug trafficking offenses. The
Treaty is self-executing. The Treaty provides for a broad range
of cooperation in criminal matters. Mutual assistance available
under the Treaty includes: taking of testimony or statements of
persons; providing documents, records, and articles of evidence;
serving documents; locating or identifying persons; transferring
persons in custody for testimony or other purposes; executing
requests for searches and seizures; assisting in proceedings
related to restraint, confiscation, forfeiture of assets,
restitution, and collection of fines; and any other form of
assistance not prohibited by the laws of the Requested State.
I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable
consideration to the Treaty and give its advice and consent to
ratification.
Sincerely,
The Honorable Albert Gore, Jr.
President of the Senate
United States Senate
Washington, D.C. 20510
8692
9722959
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
WASHINGTON
December 30, 1997
The President:
I have the honor to submit to you the Treaty Between
United States of America and the Republic of Latvia on
Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters ("the Treaty"),
signed at Washington on June 13, 1997. I recommend that the
Treaty be transmitted to the Senate for its advice and
consent to ratification.
Also enclosed, for the information of the Senate, is an
exchange of notes done at the time of signature of the
Treaty. After consultation with Senate staff, the United
States proposed and Latvia agreed to provisionally apply the
terms of the Treaty, to the extent possible under our
respective domestic laws, in order to provide a basis for
immediate mutual assistance in criminal matters.
Provisional application would cease upon entry into force of
the Treaty.
The Treaty covers mutual legal assistance in criminal
matters. In recent years, similar bilateral treaties have
The President,
The White House.
- 2 -
entered into force with a number of other countries. The
Treaty with Latvia contains all essential provisions sought
by the United States. It will enhance our ability to
investigate and prosecute a range of offenses. The Treaty
is designed to be self-executing and will not require new
legislation.
Article 1 sets forth a non-exclusive list of the major
types of assistance to be provided under the Treaty,
including taking the testimony or statements of persons;
providing documents, records and other items of evidence;
serving documents; locating or identifying persons;
transferring persons in custody for testimony or other
purposes; executing requests for searches and seizures;
assisting in proceedings related to restraint, confiscation,
forfeiture of assets, restitution, and collection of fines;
and rendering any other form of assistance not prohibited by
the laws of the Requested State. The scope of the Treaty
includes not only criminal offenses, but also proceedings
related to criminal matters, which may be civil or
administrative in nature.
Article 1 (3) states that assistance shall be provided
without regard to whether the conduct involved would
constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State.
Article 1 (4) states explicitly that the Treaty is not
intended to create rights in private parties to obtain,
- 3 -
suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the
execution of a request.
Article 2 provides for the establishment of Central
Authorities and defines Central Authorities for purposes of
the Treaty. For the United States, the Central Authority is
the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney
General. For Latvia, the Central Authority is the
Prosecutor General or a person designated by the Prosecutor
General. The article provides that the Central Authorities
shall communicate directly with one another for the purposes
of the Treaty. Article 3 sets forth the circumstances under
which a Requested State's Central Authority may deny
assistance under the Treaty. A request may be denied if it
relates to a military offense that would not be an offense
under ordinary criminal law. A further ground for denial is
that the request relates to a political offense (a term
expected to be defined on the basis of that term's usage in
extradition treaties). In addition, a request may be denied
if its execution would prejudice the security or similar
essential interests of the Requested State, or if it is not
made in conformity with the Treaty.
Before denying assistance under Article 3, the Central
Authority of the Requested State is required to consult with
its counterpart in the Requesting State to consider whether
assistance can be given subject to such conditions as the
Central Authority of the Requested State deems necessary.
- 4 -
If the Requesting State accepts assistance subject to these
conditions, it is required to comply with the conditions.
If the Central Authority of the Requested State denies
assistance, it is required to inform the Central Authority
of the Requesting State of the reasons for the denial.
Article 4 prescribes the form and content of written
requests under the Treaty, specifying in detail the
information required in each request. The article permits
other forms of requests in emergency situations but requires
written confirmation within ten days thereafter unless the
Central Authority of the Requested State agrees otherwise.
Article 5 requires the Central Authority of the
Requested State to execute the request promptly or to
transmit it to the authority having jurisdiction to do so.
It provides that the competent authorities of the Requested
State shall do everything in their power to execute a
request, and that the courts or other competent authorities
of the Requested State shall have authority to issue
subpoenas, search warrants, or other orders necessary to
execute the request. The Central Authority of the Requested
State must make all arrangements for and meet the costs of
representation of the Requesting State in any proceedings
arising out of an assistance request.
Under Article 5 (3), requests are to be executed in
accordance with the laws of the Requested State except to
the extent that the Treaty provides otherwise. However, the
- 5 -
method of execution specified in the request is to be
followed except insofar as it is prohibited by the laws of
the Requested State. Article 5 (4) provides that if the
Central Authority of the Requested State determines that
execution of the request would interfere with an ongoing
criminal investigation, prosecution, or proceeding in that
State, it may postpone execution or, after consulting with
the Central Authority of the Requesting State, impose
conditions on execution. If the Requesting State accepts
assistance subject to conditions, it shall comply with them.
Article 5 (5) further requires the Requested State, if
so requested, to use its best efforts to keep confidential a
request and its contents, and to inform the Requesting
State's Central Authority if the request cannot be executed
without breaching confidentiality. This provides the
Requesting State an opportunity to decide whether to pursue
the request or to withdraw it in order to maintain
confidentiality.
This article additionally requires the Requested
State's Central Authority to respond to reasonable inquiries
by the Requesting State's Central Authority regarding the
status of the execution of a particular request; to report
promptly to the Requesting State's Central Authority the
outcome of its execution; and, if the request is denied, to
inform the Requesting State's Central Authority of the
reasons for the denial.
- 6 -
Article 6 apportions between the two States the costs
incurred in executing a request. It provides that the
Requested State shall pay all costs, except for the
following items to be paid by the Requesting State: fees of
expert witnesses, costs of translation, interpretation, and
transcription, and allowances and expenses related to travel
of persons pursuant to Articles 10 and 11.
Article 7 requires the Requesting State to comply with
any request by the Central Authority of the Requested State
that information or evidence obtained under the Treaty not
be used for proceedings other than those described in the
request without its prior consent. Further, if the Requested
State's Central Authority asks that information or evidence
furnished under this Treaty be kept confidential or be used
in accordance with specified conditions, the Requesting
State must use its best efforts to comply with the
conditions. Once information is made public in the
Requesting State in accordance with either of these
provisions, no further limitations on use apply. Nothing in
the article prevents the use or disclosure of information to
the extent that there is an obligation to do so under the
Constitution of the Requesting State in a criminal
prosecution. The Requesting State is obliged to notify the
Requested State in advance of any such proposed use or
disclosure.
- 7 -
Article 8 provides that a person in the Requested State
from whom testimony or evidence is requested pursuant to the
Treaty shall be compelled, if necessary, to appear and
testify or produce items and articles of evidence. The
article requires the Central Authority of the Requested
State, upon request, to furnish information in advance about
the date and place of the taking of testimony or evidence
pursuant to this Article.
Article 8 (3) further requires the Requested State to
permit the presence of persons specified in the request and
to permit them to question the person giving the testimony
or evidence. In the event that a person whose testimony or
evidence is being taken asserts a claim of immunity,
incapacity, or privilege under the laws of the Requesting
State, Article 8 (4) provides that the testimony or evidence
shall be taken and the claim made known to the Central
Authority of the Requesting State for resolution by its
authorities. Finally, in order to ensure admissibility in
evidence in the Requesting State, Article 8 (5) provides a
mechanism for authenticating evidence that is produced
pursuant to or that is the subject of testimony taken in the
Requested State.
Article 9 requires that the Requested State provide the
Requesting State with copies of publicly available records
in the possession of government departments and agencies in
the Requested State. The Requested State may further
- 8 -
provide copies of any documents, records or information in
the possession of a government department or agency, but not
publicly available, to the same extent and under the same
conditions as it would provide them to its own law
enforcement or judicial authorities. The Requested State
has the discretion to deny such requests pursuant to this
paragraph, entirely or in part. Article 9 (3) provides that
records produced pursuant to this Article shall, upon
request, and without cost to the Requesting State, be
authenticated under the provisions of the Convention
Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign
Public Documents, dated October 5, 1961. The absence or
non-existence of such records shall, upon request, be
certified by an official responsible for maintaining them
through the use of Form C. Article 9 (3) also provides that
no further authentication shall be necessary for
admissibility into evidence in the Requesting State of
official records pursuant to this Article where the official
in charge of maintaining them authenticates the records
through the use of Form C appended to this Treaty.
Article 10 provides a mechanism for the Requesting
State to invite the voluntary appearance in its territory of
a person located in the Requested State or in a third State.
The Requesting State shall indicate the extent to which the
expenses will be paid. It also states that the Central
Authority of the Requesting State has discretion to
- 9 -
determine that a person appearing in the Requesting State
pursuant to this Article shall not be subject to service of
process or be detained or subjected to any restriction of
personal liberty by reason of any acts or convictions that
preceded his departure from the Requested State. Any safe
conduct provided for by this article ceases seven days after
the Central Authority of the Requesting State has notified
the Central Authority of the Requested State that the
person's presence is no longer required, or if the person
has left the Requesting State and voluntarily returns to it.
Article 11 provides for temporary transfer of a person
in custody in the Requested State or in a third State to the
Requesting State for purposes of assistance under the Treaty
(for example, a witness incarcerated in the Requested State
may be transferred to have his deposition taken in the
presence of the defendant), provided that the person in
question and the Central Authorities of both States agree.
The article also provides for voluntary transfer of a person
in the custody of the Requesting State to the Requested
State for purposes of assistance under the Treaty (for
example, a defendant in the Requesting State may be
transferred for purposes of attending a witness deposition
in the Requested State), if the person consents and if the
Central Authorities of both States agree.
Article 11 (3) further establishes both the express
authority and the obligation of the receiving State to
- 10 -
maintain the person transferred in custody unless otherwise
agreed by both Central Authorities. The return of the
person transferred is subject to terms and conditions agreed
to by the Central Authorities, and the sending State is not
required to initiate extradition proceedings for return of
the person transferred. The person transferred receives
credit for time served in the custody of the receiving
State. Where the receiving State is a third State, the
Requesting State shall make all arrangements necessary to
meet the requirements of this paragraph.
Article 12 establishes the authority of the Requested
State to authorize transit through its territory of a person
held in custody by a third State whose appearance has been
requested by the Requesting State. The Requested State
further has the authority and the obligation to keep the
person in custody during transit. The Parties retain
discretion to refuse to grant transit of their own
nationals, however.
Article 13 requires the Requested State to use its best
efforts to ascertain the location or identity of persons or
items specified in a request.
Article 14 obligates the Requested State to use its
best efforts to effect service of any document relating, in
whole or in part, to any request for assistance under the
Treaty. A request for the service of a document requiring a
person to appear in the Requesting State must be transmitted
- 11 -
a reasonable time before the scheduled appearance. Proof of
service is to be provided in the manner specified in the
request.
Article 15 obligates the Requested State to execute
requests for search, seizure, and delivery of any item to
the Requesting State if the request includes the information
justifying such action under the laws of the Requested
State. It provides that, upon request, every official who
has custody of a seized item is required to certify, through
the use of Form D appended to the Treaty, the continuity of
custody, the identity of the item, and any changes in its
condition. No further certification is required. The
certificate is admissible in evidence in the Requesting
State. The article further provides that the Central
Authority of the Requested State may impose terms and
conditions deemed necessary to protect bona fide third party
interests in items to be transferred.
Article 16 requires the Requesting State's Central
Authority, upon request of its counterpart in the Requested
State, to return any items, including documents and records,
furnished to it in execution of a request as soon as
possible.
Article 17 provides that, if the Central Authority of
one Party becomes aware of proceeds or instrumentalities of
offenses that are located in the other Party and may be
forfeitable or otherwise subject to seizure under the laws
- 12 -
of that Party, it may so inform the Central Authority of the
other Party. If the Party receiving such information has
jurisdiction in this regard, it may present this information
to its authorities for a determination whether any action is
appropriate. The Central Authority of the Party receiving
such information is required to inform the Central Authority
that provided the information of any action taken.
Article 17 also obligates the Parties to assist each
other to the extent permitted by their respective laws in
proceedings relating to forfeiture of the proceeds and
instrumentalities of offenses, restitution to victims of
crime, and collection of fines imposed as sentences in
criminal prosecutions. This may include action to
temporarily immobilize the proceeds or instrumentalities
pending further proceedings. The Party having custody over
proceeds or instrumentalities of offenses is required to
dispose of them in accordance with its laws. Either party
may transfer all or part of such assets, or the proceeds of
their sale, to the extent permitted by the transferring
party's laws and upon such terms as it deems appropriate.
Article 18 states that assistance and procedures
provided in the Treaty shall not prevent either Contracting
Party from granting assistance to the other Party through
the provisions of other applicable international agreements
or through the provisions of its national laws. The Parties
- 13 -
may also provide assistance pursuant to any bilateral
arrangement, agreement, or practice which may be applicable.
Article 19 provides that the Central Authorities shall
consult, at times mutually agreed, to promote the most
effective use of the Treaty, and may agree upon such
practical measures as may be necessary to facilitate the
Treaty's implementation.
Article 20 provides that the Treaty is subject to
ratification and the instruments shall be exchanged as soon
as possible. The Treaty enters into force upon the exchange
of instruments of ratification. Article 20 further provides
that either party may terminate the Treaty by written notice
to the other party, termination to be effective six months
following the date of notification.
A Technical Analysis explaining in detail the
provisions of the Treaty is being prepared by the United
States negotiating delegation, consisting of representatives
from the Departments of Justice and State, and will be
transmitted separately to the Senate Committee on Foreign
Relations.
The Department of Justice joins the Department of State
in favoring approval of this Treaty by the Senate as soon as
possible.
Respectfully submitted,
TREATY BETWEEN
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND
THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF LATVIA
ON
MUTUAL LEGAL ASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Article 1
Scope of Assistance
Article 2
Central Authorities
Article 3
Limitations on Assistance
Article 4
Form and Contents of Requests
Article 5
Execution of Requests
Article 6
Costs
Article 7
Limitations on Use
Article 8
Testimony or Evidence
in the Requested State
Article 9
Records of Government Agencies
Article 10
Appearance outside the Requested State
Article 11
Transfer of Persons in Custody
Article 12
Transit of Persons in Custody
Article 13
Location or Identification
of Persons or Items
Article 14
Service of Documents
Article 15
Search and Seizure
Article 16
Return of Items
Article 17
Assistance in Forfeiture Proceedings
Article 18
Compatibility with Other Treaties
Article 19
Consultation
Article 20
Ratification, Entry Into Force,
and Termination
Forms:
A Certification of Business Records
B Certification of Absence of Business Records
C Certification of Absence of Official Records
D Certification with Respect to Seized Items
The United States of America and the Republic of Latvia,
Desiring to improve the effectiveness of the law enforcement authorities of both
countries in the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of crime through cooperation
and mutual legal assistance in criminal matters,
Have agreed as follows:
- 2 -
Article 1
Scope of Assistance
1.
The Contracting Parties shall provide mutual assistance, in accordance with
the provisions of this Treaty, in connection with the investigation, prosecution, and
prevention of offenses, and in proceedings related to criminal matters.
2.
Assistance shall include:
(a) taking the testimony or statements of persons;
(b) providing documents, records, and other items;
(c) locating or identifying persons or items;
(d) serving documents;
(e) transferring persons in custody for testimony or other purposes;
(f) executing searches and seizures;
(g) assisting in proceedings related to immobilization and forfeiture of
assets; restitution; collection of fines; and
(h) any other form of assistance not prohibited by the laws of the
Requested State.
3.
Assistance shall be provided without regard to whether the conduct that is
the subject of the investigation, prosecution, or proceeding in the Requesting State would
constitute an offense under the laws of the Requested State.
4.
This Treaty is intended solely for mutual legal assistance between the
Parties. The provisions of this Treaty shall not give rise to a right on the part of any
private person to obtain, suppress, or exclude any evidence, or to impede the execution of a
request.
- 3 -
Article 2
Central Authorities
1.
Each Party shall have a Central Authority to make and receive requests
pursuant to this Treaty.
2.
For the United States of America, the Central Authority shall be the
Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney General. For Latvia, the
Central Authority shall be the Prosecutor General or a person designated by the
Prosecutor General.
3.
The Central Authorities shall communicate directly with one another for the
purposes of this Treaty.
Article 3
Limitations on Assistance
1.
The Central Authority of the Requested State may deny assistance if:
(a)
the request relates to an offense under military law that would not be
an offense under ordinary criminal law;
(b)
the request relates to a political offense;
(c)
the execution of the request would prejudice the security or similar
essential interests of the Requested State; or
(d)
the request does not conform to the requirements of the Treaty.
2.
Before denying assistance pursuant to this Article, the Central Authority of
the Requested State shall consult with the Central Authority of the Requesting State to
consider whether assistance can be given subject to such conditions as it deems necessary.
- 4 -
If the Requesting State accepts assistance subject to these conditions, it shall comply with
the conditions.
3.
If the Central Authority of the Requested State denies assistance, it shall
inform the Central Authority of the Requesting State of the reasons for the denial.
Article 4
Form and Contents of Requests
1.
A request for assistance shall be in writing except that the Central Authority
of the Requested State may accept a request in another form in urgent situations. If the
request is not in writing, it shall be confirmed in writing within ten days unless the Central
Authority of the Requested State agrees otherwise. The request shall be in the language of
the Requested State unless otherwise agreed.
2.
The request shall include the following:
(a)
the name of the authority conducting the investigation, prosecution,
or proceeding to which the request relates;
(b)
a description of the nature and subject matter of the investigation,
prosecution, or proceeding, including a statement of the factual basis
and applicable provisions of law for each offense ;
(c)
a description of the evidence, information, or other assistance sought;
and
(d)
a statement of the purpose for which the evidence, information, or
other assistance is sought.
3.
To the extent necessary and possible, a request shall also include:
- 5 -
(a)
information on the identity and location of any person from whom
evidence is sought;
(b)
information on the identity and location of a person to be served, that
person's relationship to the proceeding, and the manner in which
service is to be made;
(c)
information on the identity and suspected location of a person or item
to be located;
(d)
a precise description of the place or person to be searched and of the
item to be seized;
(e)
a description of the manner in which any testimony or statement is to
be taken and recorded;
(f)
a description of the testimony or statement sought, which may
include a list of questions to be asked of a person;
(g)
a description of any particular procedure to be followed in executing
the request;
(h)
information as to the allowances and expenses to which a person
asked to appear in the Requesting State will be entitled; and
(i)
any other information that may be brought to the attention of the
Requested State to facilitate its execution of the request.
Article 5
Execution of Requests
1.
The Central Authority of the Requested State shall promptly execute the
request or, when appropriate, shall transmit it to the authority having jurisdiction to do
so. The competent authorities of the Requested State shall do everything in their power to
execute the request. The Courts or other competent authorities of the Requested State
shall have authority to issue subpoenas, search warrants, or other orders necessary to
execute the request.
- 6 -
2.
The Central Authority of the Requested State shall represent or make
arrangements for representation of the Requesting State in the execution in the Requested
State of a request for assistance.
3.
Requests shall be executed in accordance with the laws of the Requested
State except to the extent that this Treaty provides otherwise. However, the method of
execution specified in the request shall be followed except insofar as it is prohibited by the
laws of the Requested State.
4.
If the Central Authority of the Requested State determines that execution of
a request would interfere with an ongoing criminal investigation, prosecution, or
proceeding in that State, it may postpone execution, or make execution subject to
conditions determined to be necessary after consultations with the Central Authority of
the Requesting State. If the Requesting State accepts the assistance subject to the
conditions, it shall comply with the conditions.
5.
The Requested State shall use its best efforts to keep confidential a request
and its contents if such confidentiality is requested by the Central Authority of the
Requesting State. If the request cannot be executed without breaching such
confidentiality, the Central Authority of the Requested State shall so inform the Central
Authority of the Requesting State, which shall then determine whether the request should
nevertheless be executed.
6.
The Central Authority of the Requested State shall respond to reasonable
requests by the Central Authority of the Requesting State on progress toward execution of
the request.
7.
The Central Authority of the Requested State shall promptly inform the
Central Authority of the Requesting State of the outcome of the execution of the request.
If execution of the request is denied, delayed or postponed, the Central Authority of the
- 7 -
Requested State shall inform the Central Authority of the Requesting State of the reasons
for the denial, delay or postponement.
Article 6
Costs
The Requested State shall pay all costs relating to the execution of a request except
for the following:
(a)
the fees of experts, unless otherwise agreed by both Central
Authorities;
(b)
the costs of interpretation, translation and transcription; and
(c)
the allowances and expenses related to travel of persons travelling
either in the Requested State for the convenience of the Requesting
State or pursuant to Articles 10 and 11.
Article 7
Limitations on Use
1.
The Central Authority of the Requested State may require that the
Requesting State not use any evidence or information obtained under this Treaty in any
investigation, prosecution, or proceeding other than that described in the request without
the prior consent of the Central Authority of the Requested State. In such situations, the
Requesting State shall comply with the requirement.
2.
The Central Authority of the Requested State may request that evidence or
information furnished under this Treaty be kept confidential or be used only subject to
terms and conditions that it may specify. If the Requesting State accepts the evidence or
- 8 -
information subject to such conditions, the Requesting State shall use its best efforts to
comply with the conditions.
3.
Nothing in this Article shall preclude the use or disclosure of evidence or
information to the extent that there is an obligation to do so under the Constitution of the
Requesting State in a criminal prosecution. The Requesting State shall notify the
Requested State in advance of any such proposed use or disclosure.
4.
Evidence or information that has been made public in the Requesting State
in a manner consistent with paragraph 1 or 2 may thereafter be used for any purpose.
Article 8
Testimony or Evidence in the Requested State
1.
A person in the Requested State from whom testimony or evidence is
requested pursuant to this Treaty shall be compelled, if necessary, to appear and testify or
produce items, including documents and records. A person who knowingly gives false
testimony, either orally or in writing, in execution of a request shall be subject to
prosecution in the Requested State in accordance with the criminal laws of that State.
2.
Upon request, the Central Authority of the Requested State shall furnish
information in advance about the date and place of the taking of the testimony or evidence
pursuant to this Article.
3.
The Requested State shall permit the presence of such persons as specified
in the request during the execution of the request, and shall allow such persons to question
the person giving the testimony or evidence.
- 9 - -
4.
If the person referred to in paragraph 1 asserts a claim of immunity,
incapacity, or privilege under the laws of the Requesting State, the testimony or evidence
shall nonetheless be taken and the claim made known to the Central Authority of the
Requesting State for resolution by the authorities of that State.
5.
Evidence produced in the Requested State pursuant to this Article or that is
the subject of testimony taken under this Article shall, upon request, be authenticated by
an attestation including, in the case of business records, authentication in the manner
indicated in Form A appended to this Treaty. The absence or non-existence of such
records shall, upon request, be certified through the use of Form B appended to this
Treaty. Records authenticated by Form A, or Form B certifying the absence of such
records, shall be admissible in evidence in the Requesting State as proof of the truth of the
matters set forth therein.
Article 9
Records of Government Agencies
1.
The Requested State shall provide the Requesting State with copies of
publicly available records, including documents or information in any form, in the
possession of government agencies and judicial authorities in the Requested State.
2.
The Requested State may provide copies of any records, including
documents or information in any form, that are in the possession of a government
department or agency in that State, but that are not publicly available, to the same extent
and under the same conditions as such copies would be available to its own law
enforcement or judicial authorities. The Requested State may in its discretion deny a
request pursuant to this paragraph entirely or in part.
- 10 -
3.
Records produced pursuant to this Article shall, upon request and without
cost to the Requesting State, be authenticated under the provisions of the Convention
Abolishing the Requirement of Legalization for Foreign Public Documents, dated
5 October 1961. The absence or nonexistence of such records shall, upon request, be
certified by an official responsible for maintaining them through the use of Form C
appended to this Treaty. Records authenticated under this paragraph, or Form C
certifying the absence or nonexistence of such records, shall be admissible in evidence in
the Requesting State as proof of the truth of the matters set forth therein.
Article 10
Appearance Outside the Requested State
1.
When the Requesting State requests the appearance of a person in that State
or 2 third State, the Requested State shall invite the person to appear before the
appropriate authority in the Requesting State or in the third State. The Central Authority
of the Requested State shall promptly inform the Central Authority of the Requesting
State of the person's response.
2.
The Requesting State shall indicate the extent to which the person's expenses
will be paid. A person who agrees to appear may ask that the Requesting State advance
money to cover these expenses. This advance may be provided through the Embassy or a
consulate of the Requesting State.
3.
The Central Authority of the Requesting State may, in its discretion,
determine that a person appearing in the Requesting State pursuant to this Article shall
not be subject to service of process, or be detained or subjected to any restriction of
personal liberty, by reason of any acts or convictions that preceded the person's departure
from the Requested State.
- 11 -
4.
The safe conduct provided for by this Article shall cease after the Central
Authority of the Requesting State has notified the Central Authority of the Requested
State that the person's presence is no longer required, and that person, being free to leave,
has not left within seven days or, having left, has voluntarily returned.
Article 11
Transfer of Persons in Custody
1.
A person in the custody of the Requested State whose presence in the
Requesting State or in a third State is sought for purposes of assistance under this Treaty
shall be transferred from the Requested State to the Requesting State or to the third State
for that purpose if the person consents and if the Central Authorities of both States agree.
2.
A person in the custody of the Requesting State whose presence in the
Requested State is sought for purposes of assistance under this Treaty may be transferred
from the Requesting State to the Requested State if the person consents and if the Central
Authorities of both States agree.
3.
For purposes of this Article:
(a)
the receiving State shall have the authority and the obligation to keep
the person transferred in custody unless otherwise agreed by both
Central Authorities;
(b)
the receiving State shall return the person transferred to the custody
of the sending State as soon as circumstances permit or as otherwise
agreed by both Central Authorities;
(c)
the receiving State shall not require the sending State to initiate
extradition or any other proceedings for the return of the person
transferred; and
- 12 -
(d)
the person transferred shall receive credit for service of the sentence
imposed in the sending State for time served in the custody of the
receiving State.
(e)
where the receiving State is a third State, the Requesting State shall
make all arrangements necessary to meet the requirements of this
paragraph.
Article 12
Transit of Persons in Custody
1.
The Requested State may authorize the transit through its territory of a
person held in custody by a third State whose personal appearance has been requested by
the Requesting State to give testimony or evidence or otherwise provide assistance in an
investigation, prosecution, or proceeding.
2.
The Requested State shall have the authority and the obligation to keep the
person in custody during transit.
3.
Each Party may refuse to grant transit of its nationals.
Article 13
Location or Identification of Persons or Items
If the Requesting State seeks the location or identity of persons or items in the
Requested State, the Requested State shall use its best efforts to ascertain the location or
identity.
- 13 -
Article 14
Service of Documents
1.
The Requested State shall use its best efforts to effect service of any
document relating, in whole or in part, to any request for assistance made by the
Requesting State under the provisions of this Treaty.
2.
The Requesting State shall transmit any request for the service of a
document requiring the appearance of a person before an authority in the Requesting
State a reasonable time before the scheduled appearance.
3.
The Requested State shall return a proof of service to the Requesting State
in the manner specified in the request.
Article 15
Search and Seizure
1.
The Requested State shall execute a request for the search, seizure, and
transfer of any item to the Requesting State if the request includes the information
justifying such action under the laws of the Requested State.
2.
Upon request, every official in the Requested State who has had custody of a
seized item shall certify, through the use of Form D appended to this Treaty, the identity of
the item, the continuity of its custody, and any changes in its condition. The certificates
shall be admissible in evidence in the Requesting State as proof of the truth of the matters
set forth therein.
- 14 -
3.
The Central Authority of the Requested State may require that the
Requesting State agree to the terms and conditions deemed necessary to protect third
party interests in the item to be transferred.
Article 16
Return of Items
The Central Authority of the Requested State may require that the Central
Authority of the Requesting State return, as soon as possible, any items, including
documents and records, furnished to it in execution of a request under this Treaty.
Article 17
Assistance in Forfeiture Proceedings
1.
If the Central Authority of one Party becomes aware of proceeds or
instrumentalities of offenses that are located in the other Party and may be forfeitable or
otherwise subject to seizure under the laws of that Party, it may so inform the Central
Authority of the other Party. If the Party receiving such information has jurisdiction in
this regard, it may present this information to its authorities for a determination whether
any action is appropriate. These authorities shall issue their decision in accordance with
the laws of their country. The Central Authority of the Party that received the
information shall inform the Central Authority of the Party that provided the information
of the action taken.
2.
The Parties shall assist each other to the extent permitted by their respective
laws in proceedings relating to the forfeiture of the proceeds and instrumentalities of
offenses, restitution to the victims of crime, and the collection of fines imposed as sentences
- 15 -
in criminal prosecutions. This may include action to temporarily immobilize the proceeds
or instrumentalities pending further proceedings.
3.
The Party that has custody over proceeds or instrumentalities of offenses
shall dispose of them in accordance with its laws. Either Party may transfer all or part of
such assets, or the proceeds of their sale, to the other Party, to the extent permitted by the
transferring Party's laws and upon such terms as it deems appropriate.
Article 18
Compatibility with Other Treaties
Assistance and procedures set forth in this Treaty shall not prevent either Party
from granting assistance to the other through the provisions of other applicable
international agreements, or through the provisions of its national laws. The Parties may
also provide assistance pursuant to any bilateral arrangement, agreement, or practice that
may be applicable.
Article 19
Consultation
The Central Authorities shall consult, at times mutually agreed to by them, to
promote the most effective use of this Treaty. The Central Authorities may also agree on
such practical measures as may be necessary to facilitate the implementation of this
Treaty.
- 16 -
Article 20
Ratification, Entry Into Force, and Termination
1.
This Treaty shall be subject to ratification, and the instruments of
ratification shall be exchanged as soon as possible.
2.
This Treaty shall enter into force upon the exchange of instruments of
ratification.
3.
Either Party may terminate this Treaty by means of written notice to the
other Party. Termination shall take effect six months following the date of notification.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, being duly authorized by their
respective Governments, have signed this Treaty.
DONE at Washington this thirteenth day of June, 1997, in duplicate, in the English
and Latvian languages, both texts being equally authentic.
FOR THE UNITED STATES OF
FOR THE REPUBLIC OF
AMERICA:
LATVIA:
Illoauline eveny
Naldin Binns
Form A
CERTIFICATION OF BUSINESS RECORDS
I,
(name)
, having been advised as a witness that a false attestation subjects me to a
penalty of criminal punishment, attest as follows:
I am employed by/associated with
(name of business from which documents are sought)
in
the position of
(business position or title).
and by reason of my position am
authorized and qualified to make this attestation.
Each of the records attached hereto is a record in the custody of the above-named business
that:
(A) was made, at or near the time of the occurrence of the matters set forth
therein, by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge of
those matters;
(B) was kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity;
(C) was made by the business as a regular practice; and,
(D)
if not an original record, is a duplicate of the original.
(date of execution)
(place of execution)
(signature)
Form B
CERTIFICATION OF ABSENCE OF BUSINESS RECORDS
I,
(name)
, having been advised as a witness that a false attestation
subjects me to a penalty of criminal punishment, attest as follows:
I am employed by/associated with
(name of business from which documents are
sought)
in the position of
(business position or title)
and by
reason of my position am authorized and qualified to make this attestation.
As a result of my employment/association with the above-named business, I am familiar
with the business records it maintains. The business maintains business records that are:
(A) made, at or near the time of the occurrence of the matters set forth therein
by, or from information transmitted by, a person with knowledge of those
matters;
(B)
kept in the course of a regularly conducted business activity; and
(C)
made by the business as a regular practice.
Among the records so maintained are records of individuals and entities that have
accounts or otherwise transact business with the above-named business. I have made or
caused to be made a diligent search of those records. No records have been found
reflecting any business activity between the business and the following individuals and
entities:
.
If the business had maintained an account on behalf of or had participated in a
transaction with any of the foregoing individuals or entities, its business records would
reflect that fact.
(date of execution)
(place of execution)
(signature)
Form C
CERTIFICATION OF ABSENCE OF OFFICIAL RECORDS
I,
(name)
, having been advised as a witness that a false attestation
subjects me to a penalty of criminal punishment, attest as follows:
1.
(name of public authority)
is a government office or
agency of
(country)
and is authorized by law to
maintain official records setting forth matters that are authorized by law to
be reported and recorded or filed;
2.
records of the type described below set forth matters that are authorized by
law to be reported and recorded or filed, and such matters regularly are
recorded or filed by the above-named public authority;
3.
my position with the above-named public authority is
(official
title)
;
4.
in my official capacity I have made, or caused to be made, a diligent search
of the above-named public authority's records for the records described
below; and
5.
no such records have been found to exist therein.
Description of documents:
(signature)
(Official Seal or Stamp)
(date)
Form D
CERTIFICATION WITH RESPECT TO SEIZED ITEMS
I,
(name)
, having been advised as a witness that a false attestation
subjects me to a penalty of criminal punishment, attest as follows:
1.
My position with the Government of
(country)
is
(official title)
;
2.
I received custody of the items listed below from
(name of
person)
on
(date)
at
(place)
; and
3.
I relinquished custody of the items listed below to
(name of
person)
on
(date)
at
(place)
in the same condition as when I received
them (or, if different, as noted below).
Description of items:
Changes in condition while in my custody:
(date of execution)
(place of execution)
(Official Seal or Stamp)
(signature)
CONT IDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
0131 Redo
W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
January 9, 1998
:
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR SAMUEL R. BERGER
THROUGH:
STEPHEN J. FLANAGAN
FF
FROM:
SUSAN R. BRADEN
8
SUBJECT:
Presidential Meeting with Baltic Presidents Meri,
Brazauskas and Ulmanis on January 16, 1998
Attached at Tab I is your memorandum to the President forwarding
briefing material and talking points for his meeting with Baltic
Presidents Lennert Meri, Guntis Ulmanis and Algirdas Brazauskas
on January 16, 1998.
Concurrences by:
Ki Fort KF and Nancy McEldowney
MIKE
8F
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the memorandum to the President at Tab I.
Attachments
Tab I Memo to the President
Tab A
Points to be Made
Tab B
Scenario
Tab C
Biographies
Tab D
Secretary of State Memo to the President
Tab E
Partnership Charter
DECLASSIFIED
E.O. 13526
White House Guidelines, May 16, 2017
By n NARA, Date 6/6/2023
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
2016-0314-m-1
Reason: 1.5 (b, d)
Declassify On: 1/9/08
CONFIDENTIAL
TAB I
CONFIDENTIAL
0131
W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MEETING WITH BALTIC PRESIDENTS
DATE: January 16, 1998
LOCATION: Cabinet Room
TIME: 1:40 p.m.
FROM: SAMUEL BERGER
I. PURPOSE
Underscore our commitment to advancing the integration of
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania's into Western institutions
and to strengthening our bilateral relations.
As a symbol of this commitment, sign the Charter of
Partnership, which codifies the terms of the relationship
and maps out the road ahead.
Reaffirm our commitment to keep NATO's door open and
support their efforts to become members of NATO. Also note
our support for their accession, on appropriate terms, to
the EU and WTO.
Applaud Baltic efforts to develop friendly relations with
their neighbors, particularly Russia, and offer support for
expanded cooperation between Russia and northeastern Europe
in areas where there is common ground.
II. BACKGROUND
The Baltic Presidents see this visit as a truly historic
occasion both because of the Charter signing and because it
will be the last time they, as key figures in their
countries' post-communist transformations, will be together
with you in the White House. Valdas Adamkus, a Lithuanian-
American former EPA official in Chicago, will replace
Brazauksas, who chose not to seek reelection, next month.
Meri, nearly 70, is unlikely to stand for another term, and
Ulmanis, whose second term expires next year, probably
won't run again.
These very different men -- the urbane and intellectual
Meri, the earthy, former Communist Brazauskas, and the
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
DECLASSIFIED
Reason: 1.5(b,d)
PER E.O. 13526
Declassify on: 1/9/08
2016-0314-M-1 (1,47)
6/12/2023 vz
CONFIDENTIAL
2
W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
centrist, business-like Ulmanis -- have succeeded in
putting their states at the forefront of the reform
movement in Central Europe. Over the past four years, they
have successfully used their positions to forward
democratic reform, continue the transition to market-
oriented economies, move closer to Western institutions,
and enhance relations with their neighbors, including
Russia.
All three leaders believe that the United States is key to
their full reintegration into the West. For over fifty
years, successive U.S. Administrations maintained a strong
policy of non-recognition of their forcible incorporation
into the Soviet Union. We then played a critical role in
helping them implement democratic and free market reforms
and strengthen their security and sovereignty. The Charter
of Partnership you will sign during this visit symbolizes
how far they have come since 1991 and expresses our
commitment to help them complete this journey.
The Charter is a political statement of common principles
and a framework for the expansion of our relations. Most
importantly to the Baltics, it affirms that they are part
of our vision for a new Europe and will not be left out or
discriminated against due to history or geography.
On NATO, it builds on the Madrid Summit, stating that the
United States welcomes Baltic aspirations and supports
their efforts to join NATO. It also recalls Madrid's
caveat that aspirants must be able to assume the
responsibilities of membership and that Allies must agree
inclusion of any new members would serve overall European
stability. It does not pre-commit us to Baltic
membership or extend any surrogate security guarantees.
The Baltic states reaffirm their commitment to continue
market-oriented reforms. The four governments pledge to
enhance joint efforts to promote cooperative relations
throughout the Baltic region, including with Russia.
The Charter notes the progress of existing bilateral
working groups on defense and establishes a new working
group on trade, investment, and related fields. It also
establishes a Partnership Commission of senior officials,
who will hold annual stock-taking meetings.
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
CONFIDENTIAL
3
W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
Moving Ahead Along. As evidence of our commitment to
pursuing Charter goals, you will announce at the signing
ceremony the establishment of a Baltic-American Partnership
Fund -- using $7.5 million of our assistance money and
matching funds from George Soros -- whose charter will be
to foster the development on non-governmental organizations
in these states. Also during their visit here, Charlene
Barshefsky will sign a bilateral investment treaty with
Lithuania (Estonia and Latvia have accords already), Bob
Rubin will sign treaties against double taxation with all
three states, and Attorney General Reno and FBI Director
Freeh will announce enhanced cooperation among the three in
administration of justice and combating organized crime.
Likely Topics
NATO Membership. The Baltic Presidents will raise their
aspirations for NATO membership. They all hope there will
be a second tranche of new members in 1999, and at least
Lithuania believes it is well on the way to qualifying.
Lithuania, with the largest population, has, in fact,
devoted the most resources and made the greatest progress
of the three in building its armed forces. But even they
have very limited capabilities to work with NATO in defense
of their territory or in peacekeeping missions elsewhere.
While continuing to advance the public line that all Baltic
states belong in NATO, both Tallinn and Riga realize that
they won't be ready militarily to join soon and that most
Allies have serious reservations about their membership
because of Russian objections. Thus, they have focused
their efforts on joining the EU. In their meeting with
you, the presidents will accept the view that it is
premature to discuss the "next tranche" and that the
Charter does not commit the United States to support their
bid. However, they will seek reaffirmation that NATO's
door remains open, and, as Strobe has put it, that we are
working seriously to help them walk through that door.
You should urge them to focus on taking advantage of the
many programs we and the Allies are offering, including
$18 million in military assistance next year, to help
them enhance their security, ability to work with NATO,
and preparations for membership. You might remind them
that the Charter is neither a security guarantee nor a
firm commitment to support their membership.
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
CONFIDENTIAL
4
/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
Investment, EU and WTO. The Baltic economies are all still
in transition, but Estonia and Latvia are the furthest
along. U.S. investment in the region has been slow to
develop, now totaling about $550 million, only 19 percent
of all their foreign investment.
Estonia has made steady progress across the board and in
1996 became the first Central European country to
"graduate" from our assistance program Support for East
European Democracy (SEED). In December, it was the only
Baltic state invited to commence EU accession talks.
Latvia is close to getting an offer from the EU to begin
accession talks. Its strong progress was slowed by
lagging privatization and a 1995 banking crisis.
Lithuania has made steady progress in privatization but
has suffered from very slow growth (linked to taxation
policies and a lagging financial sector).
Regarding the WTO, Latvia has been the most aggressive of
the three in pursing this goal. Its bid, however, is being
held up over the issue of audiovisual services, which pits
us against the EU and puts Latvia and the other two Baltic
EU aspirants in between. The EU is insisting that Latvia
make no commitment to open its market to audiovisual
services. While ready to accept Latvia's adoption of
current (51 percent foreign) EU content restrictions, we
want Riga to go no further and believe this is a
significant concession.
You should tell the Presidents that we are very
supportive of their accession to the EU and the WTO -- on
defensible terms -- and hope the audiovisual issue with
the EU can be resolved soon. You might also note our
interest in expanding trade and investment.
Russians & Hansa. The Baltic leaders cooperate well with
each other and most of their neighbors. The Nordics and
the United States have supported several initiatives that
promote regional security and compatibility with NATO,
including the Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion (Baltbat). The
Nordics have extensive trade and investment in the region.
Lithuanian-Russian relations are the best of the three, in
large part because Russian speakers account for only 8
percent of the population. In October, Presidents Yeltsin
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
CONFIDENTIAL
5
W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
and Brazauskas signed a demarcation agreement of the land
border with Kaliningrad. Vilnius remains concerned,
however, about transit through Lithuania from this heavily-
militarized Russian province to its west.
Latvia and Estonia, which have much larger ethnic Russian
communities, maintain normal but cool relations with
Russia. Estonia and Latvia have not reached border
agreements, primarily because of Moscow's linkage of
conditions on the treatment of the Russian-speaking
minorities (29 and 33 percent respectively). They have,
however, begun practical cooperation with Russia on such
problems as border controls and countering crime.
In August 1994, with your intervention, Russia withdrew its
troops from Latvia except for about 800 technicians who
stayed to operate the Skrunda missile early-warning radar
facility until it shuts down this August. Russia has
allowed agreed inspections of this facility. But Latvia is
concerned that departure of the technicians and the
commencement of dismantlement may be slowed due to
construction delays in the essential replacement facility
in Belarus. Based on political signs and available
intelligence, we expect Russia to abide fully by the terms
of the agreement with Latvia, which Yeltsin has previously
affirmed to you.
In December, as part of an emerging "charm offensive,"
President Yeltsin floated the notion of enhanced economic
cooperation with the Baltic states, but linked it to Baltic
neutrality and offers of joint security guarantees. The
Balts promptly rejected the latter notions, making clear
that they aspire to be members of NATO.
Rather than fight Moscow on Baltic membership in NATO, we
have sought to focus on areas where there is a common
ground. Madeleine and Strobe have told their Russian
interlocutors, that we must agree to disagree on NATO,
but we want to help promote expanded cooperation between
northeastern Europe and northern Russia (as existed in
Hanseatic period) in trade, energy development, the
environment, and combating transnational problems such as
organized crime. You should encourage the Baltic
Presidents to pursue a similar tack as a way to show
Moscow that Baltic integration will create opportunities.
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
CONFIDENTIAL
6
SECRET ATTACHMENTS
III. PARTICIPANTS
See Scenario at Tab B.
IV. PRESS PLAN
See Scenario at Tab B.
V. SEQUENCE
See Scenario at Tab B.
Attachments
Tab A
Points to be Made
Tab B
Scenario
Tab C
Biographies
Tab D
Secretary of State Memo to the President
Tab E
Summary of The Charter of Partnership
CONFIDENTIAL W/SECRET ATTACHMENTS
CONFIDENTIAL
0131
POINTS TO BE MADE FOR MEETING WITH
ESTONIAN PRESIDENT MERI, LATVIAN PRESIDENT ULMANIS AND
LITHUANIAN PRESIDENT BRAZAUSKAS
Partnership Charter
Charter important for United States, Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania because it marks how far we have come toward our
shared goal of building a new Europe and advancing your
integration into West. Also maps out clear directions for
road ahead.
Charter makes clear our "real, profound and enduring
interest" in independence, sovereignty, and territorial
integrity and security of your countries.
Can be very proud of your individual and collective efforts
to advance goals of Charter even before it was completed.
Need to keep working to promote respect for rights of all
citizens and deal with legacy of past.
Together, you are creating facts of integration on ground
through your participation in PFP, IFOR, and host of
regional initiatives.
Charter gives us many opportunities to expand and improve
relations in both security and economic fields. Events of
last few days -- signing of double tax treaties,
initiatives on justice and organized crime, and creation of
Baltic-American Partnership Fund - show that we are already
moving to build on this framework.
NATO Enlargement
Welcome your desire and support your efforts to become
members of NATO. Want to underscore that NATO's door will
remain open.
Your membership will depend on satisfaction of NATO
principles, including your ability to contribute to overall
security.
First round of enlargement will not be last. But it's too
soon to talk about next steps. We must all focus on
getting first round "right" and securing Senate
ratification. Welcome your help in this regard. The
CONFIDENTIAL
DECLASSIFIED
Reason: 1.5(b,d)
PER E.O. 13526
Declassify On: 1/9/08
2014-0656-m (1.52)
4/27/2022 rz
CONFIDENTIAL
2
stronger our success in integrating Poland, Hungary, and
Czech Republic, easier next steps will be.
This is good time to make use of intensified dialogue,
Partnership for Peace enhancements and Euro-Atlantic
Partnership Council to deepen your engagement with
Alliance.
We are committed to helping you advance these goals in more
systematic ways. Fully support work of our military
experts to assess needs of your countries' armed forces and
help you develop realistic defense plans. We will increase
our security assistance next year and work closely with
other donor states.
EU/WTO Accession
Support each of your efforts to join EU, but recognize
decisions will be made by Europeans.
We support your accession to WTO on appropriate terms.
Will be as flexible as can; hope EU will do same.
As Ambassador Barshevsky explained, we will continue to
work with EU on what we think is reasonable compromise on
audovisual content that is consistent with goals of EU
Broadcast Directive and protects our interest in
maintaining an open market.
Relations with Neighbors
Applaud effort to develop cooperative relationship with
each other, Nordics, and Russia.
Especially pleased with your joint effort to promote
regional security and interoperability with NATO through
participation in Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion (Batlbat),
Baltic Sea Squadron (Baltron), and regional airspace
initiative (Baltnet).
Now it's time to explore in detail opportunities for
building economic and other non-security cooperation
throughout Baltic region. Am fully committed to enhancing
our involvement in Nordic/Baltic and Baltic/Russian
cooperative ventures.
CONFIDENTIAL
CONFIDENTIAL
3
Russia
Encouraged by recent signature of Kaliningrad border
agreement between Presidents Brazauskas and Yeltsin in
Moscow.
Agreement meets one of fundamental responsibilities in
relationship between neighboring states, establishment of
common borders in mutually satisfactory manner. With
border agreements in place, Lithuania and Russia can move
on to other areas of cooperation.
Hope Russia will sign similar agreements with Estonia and
Latvia soon. Pleased that Estonia and Latvia are committed
to expanding practical cooperation with Russia on common
concerns.
Know Latvia concerned that Russia may delay departure from
Skrunda radar facility. We expect Russia to abide fully by
terms of agreement with Latvia. Have strong indications
that Russia intends to do so.
Note Russia has proposed security guarantees to you. As we
stated publicly, agree sovereign states have right to
choose their own security orientation, including whether or
not to become member of an Alliance. Your choice is clear.
Want to work with you and Nordics to expand cooperation
between northern Europe and Russia in areas where we all
have common interests. Charter notes increased cooperation
in economic development, trade, environmental arena as well
as in fight against organized crime. As you have heard in
meetings earlier this week, we are ready to move on this
agenda in practical ways.
CONFIDENTIAL
TAB B
SCENARIO TO BE PROVIDED
TAB C
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001d. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001e. report
U.S. Government Report (1 page)
01/12/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001f. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001g. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001h. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
12/30/1997
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
Withdrawal/Redaction Marker
Clinton Library
DOCUMENT NO.
SUBJECT/TITLE
DATE
RESTRICTION
AND TYPE
001i. report
U.S. Government Report (2 pages)
01/06/1998
P1/b(1)
COLLECTION:
Clinton Presidential Records
National Security Council
Central and Eastern European Affairs (Flanagan, Stephen)
OA/Box Number: 1785
FOLDER TITLE:
Latvia, 1997-1998 [1]
2011-1037-F
ke2181
RESTRICTION CODES
Presidential Records Act - [44 U.S.C. 2204(a)]
Freedom of Information Act - [5 U.S.C. 552(b)]
P1 National Security Classified Information [(a)(1) of the PRA]
b(1) National security classified information [(b)(1) of the FOIA]
P2 Relating to the appointment to Federal office [(a)(2) of the PRA]
b(2) Release would disclose internal personnel rules and practices of
P3 Release would violate a Federal statute [(a)(3) of the PRA]
an agency [(b)(2) of the FOIA]
P4 Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
b(3) Release would violate a Federal statute [(b)(3) of the FOIA]
financial information [(a)(4) of the PRA]
b(4) Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential or financial
P5 Release would disclose confidential advice between the President
information [(b)(4) of the FOIA]
and his advisors, or between such advisors [a)(5) of the PRA]
b(6) Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
P6 Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of
personal privacy [(b)(6) of the FOIA]
personal privacy [(a)(6) of the PRA]
b(7) Release would disclose information compiled for law enforcement
purposes [(b)(7) of the FOIA]
C. Closed in accordance with restrictions contained in donor's deed
b(8) Release would disclose information concerning the regulation of
of gift.
financial institutions [(b)(8) of the FOIA]
PRM. Personal record misfile defined in accordance with 44 U.S.C.
b(9) Release would disclose geological or geophysical information
2201(3).
concerning wells [(b)(9) of the FOIA]
RR. Document will be reviewed upon request.
TAB D
SECRETARY OF STATE MEMO
TO PRESIDENT TO BE PROVIDED
BALTIC CHARTER SUMMARY
The Charter of Partnership is a political statement of common
principles that will guide the deepening of mutual cooperation
and advance common objectives, including Baltic integration into
the European and transatlantic communities. It makes clear the
Baltic states are part of the U.S. vision for a new Europe and
that they will not be left out or discriminated against due to
factors of history or geography.
It notes that the United States has a "real, profound, and
enduring" interest in their security and independence of the
three Baltic states.
The Charter begins with expression of commitments by the four
governments to shared principles and a common vision for a
secure, prosperous, and undivided Europe. It notes how U.S.-
Baltic cooperation can contribute to the integration of the
Baltic states.
In that context, the Charter notes the goal of Baltic
integration into European and transatlantic institutions, such
as the European Union, OSCE, the World Trade Organization and
NATO.
On NATO, the Charter recalls the Madrid Summit Communique
language recognizing the Baltic states as aspiring members,
and notes that the United States welcomes Baltic aspirations
and supports their efforts to join NATO. It also reaffirms
U.S. policy that NATO's partners can become members as each
aspirant proves itself able and willing to assume the
responsibilities and obligations of membership, and as NATO
determines that the inclusion of these nations would serve
European stability and the strategic interests of the
Alliance.
The Charter affirms a shared commitment to promotion of
harmonious and equitable relations among individuals belonging
to diverse ethnic and religious groups. The Charter stresses
the promotion of close cooperative relationships throughout the
Baltic region, in particular to the enhancement of bilateral
relations among the Baltic states and neighboring states.
The Charter takes note of the progress of existing bilateral
working groups on security and military affairs, and establish a
new working group on economic reform, trade, investment and
2
related fields. Each year these groups will review progress on
our bilateral objectives and set the agenda for the year ahead.
The Charter also establishes a "Partnership Commission,"
headed by a senior State Department official, to review
annually the activities of the independent military and
economic bilateral working groups.
What the Charter Isn't.
While the Charter welcomes Baltics aspirations for NATO
membership, it in no way pre-commits the United States to Baltic
membership. The Baltic states will have to meet the same
criteria and standards expected of other states.
Neither does the Charter offer "back-door" security guarantees.
The Baltic governments understand, and have said so publicly,
that such guarantees can only come through NATO membership. The
Charter is not an alternative to NATO membership, nor is it an
effort to regionalize the security of the Baltic states.
A CHARTER OF PARTNERSHIP
AMONG THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
AND THE REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA, REPUBLIC OF LATVIA, AND
REPUBLIC OF LITHUANIA
Preamble
The United States of America, the Republic of Estonia, the Republic
of Latvia, and the Republic of Lithuania, hereafter referred to as
Partners.
Sharing a common vision of a peaceful and increasingly integrated
Europe, free of divisions, dedicated to democracy, the rule of law,
free markets, and respect for the human rights and fundamental
freedoms of all people;
Recognizing the historic opportunity to build a new Europe, in which
each state is secure in its internationally-recognized borders and
respects the independence and territorial integrity of all members of
the transatlantic community;
Determined to strengthen their bilateral relations as a contribution
to building this new Europe, and to enhance the security of all
states through the adaptation and enlargement of European and
transatlantic institutions;
Committed to the full development of human potential within just and
inclusive societies attentive to the promotion of harmonious and
equitable relations among individuals belonging to diverse ethnic and
religious groups;
Avowing a common interest in developing cooperative, mutually
respectful relations with all other states in the region;
Recalling the friendly relations that have been continuously
maintained between the United States of America and the Republic of
Estonia, the Republic of Latvia, and the Republic of Lithuania since
1922;
Further recalling that the United States of America never recognized
the forcible incorporation of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania into the
USSR in 1940 but rather regards their statehood as uninterrupted
since the establishment of their independence, a policy which the
United States has restated continuously for five decades;
Celebrating the rich contributions that immigrants from Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania have made to the multi-ethnic culture of the
United States of America, as well as the European heritage enjoyed
by the United States as a beneficiary of the contributions of
intellectuals, artists, and Hanseatic traders from the Baltic states
to the development of Europe; praising the contributions of U.S.
citizens to the liberation and rebuilding of Estonia, Latvia and
Lithuania.
Affirm as a political commitment declared at the highest level, the
following principles and procedures to guide their individual and
joint efforts to achieve the goals of this Charter.
Principles of Partnership
The United States of America has a real, profound and enduring
interest in the independence, sovereignty, and territorial integrity,
and security of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
The United States of America warmly welcomes the success of Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania in regaining their freedom and resuming their
rightful places in the community of nations.
The United States of America respects the sacrifices and hardships
undertaken by the people of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to re-
establish their independence. It encourages efforts by these states
to continue to expand their political, economic, security, and social
ties with other nations as full members of the transatlantic
community.
The Partners affirm their commitment to the rule of law as a
foundation for a transatlantio community of free and democratic
nations, and to the responsibility of all just societies to protect
and respect the human rights and civil liberties of all individuals
residing within their territories.
The Partners underscore their shared commitment to the principles
and obligations contained in the United Nations Charter.
The Partners reaffirm their shared commitment to the purposes,
principles, and provisions of the Helsinki Final Act and subsequent
OSCE documents, including the Charter of Paris and the documents
adopted at the Lisbon OSCE Summit.
The Partners will observe in good faith their commitments to promote
and respect the standards for human rights embodied in the above-
mentioned Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
documents and in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. They
will implement their legislation protecting such human rights fully
and equitably.
The United States of America commends the measures taken by
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to advance the integration of Europe
by establishing close cooperative relations among themselves and
with their neighbors, as well as their promotion
of regional cooperation through their participation in fora such as
the Baltic Assembly, Baltic Council of Ministers, and the Council of
Baltic Sea States.
Viewing good neighborly relations as fundamental to overall security
and stability in the transatlantic community, Estonia, Latvia, and
Lithuania reaffirm their determination to further enhance bilateral
relations between themselves and with other neighboring states.
The Partners will intensify their efforts to promote the security,
prosperity, and stability of the region. The Partners will draw on
the points noted below in focusing their efforts to deepen the
integration of the Baltic states into transatlantic and European
institutions, promote cooperation in security and defense, and
develop the economies of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania.
A Commitment to Integration
As part of a common vision of a Europe whole and free, the Partners
declare that their shared goal is the full integration of Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania into European and transatlantic political,
economic, security and defense institutions. Europe will not be
fully secure unless Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania each are secure.
The Partners reaffirm their commitment to the principle,
established in the Helsinki Final Act, repeated in the Budapest and
Lisbon OSCE summit declarations, and also contained in the OSCE Code
of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security, that the
security of all states in the Euro-Atlantic community is
indivisible.
The Partners further share a commitment to the core principle, also
articulated in the OSCE Code of Conduct and reiterated in subsequent
OSCE summit declarations, that each state has the inherent right to
individual and collective self-defense as well as the right freely
to choose its own security arrangements, including treaties of
alliance.
The Partners support the vital role being played by a number of
complementary institutions and bodies -- including the OSCE, the
European Union (EU), the West European Union (WEU) the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), the Euro-Atlantic Partnership
Council (EAPC), the Council of Europe (COE), and the Council of
Baltic Sea States (CBSS) -- in achieving the partners' shared goal
of an. integrated, secure, and undivided Europe.
They believe that, irrespective of factors related to history or
geography, such institutions should be open to all European
democracies willing and able to shoulder the responsibilities and
obligations of membership, as determined by those institutions.
The Partners welcome a strong and vibrant OSCE dedicated to
promoting democratic institutions, human rights, and fundamental
freedoms. They strongly support the OSCE's role as a mechanism to
prevent, manage, and resolve conflicts and crises.
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania each reaffirm their goal to become
full members of all European and transatlantic institutions,
including the European Union and NATO.
The United States of America recalls its longstanding support for
the enlargement of the EU, affirming it as a core institution in the
new Europe and declaring that a stronger, larger, and outward-
looking European Union will further security and prosperity for all
of Europe.
The Partners believe that the enlargement of NATO will enhance the
security of the United States, Canada, and all the countries in
Europe, including those states not immediately invited to membership
or not currently interested in membership.
The United States of America welcomes the aspirations and supports
the efforts of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to join NATO. It
affirms its view that NATO's partners can become members as each
aspirant proves itself able and willing to assume the
responsibilities and obligations of membership, and as NATO
determines that the inclusion of these nations would serve European
stability and the strategic interests of the Alliance.
The United States of America reiterates its view that the
enlargement of NATO is an on-going process. It looks forward to
future enlargements, and remains convinced that not only will NATO's
door remain open to new members, but that the first countries
invited to membership will not be the last. No non-NATO country has
a veto over Alliance decisions. The United States notes the Alliance
is prepared to strengthen its consultations with aspirant countries
on the full range of issues related to possible NATO membership.
The Partners welcome the results of the Madrid Summit. They support
the Alliance's commitment to an open door policy and welcome the
Alliance's recognition of the Baltic states as aspiring members of
NATO. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania pledge to deepen their close
relations with the Alliance through the Euro-Atlantic Partnership
Council, the Partnership for Peace, and the intensified dialogue
process.
The Partners underscore their interest in Russia's democratic and
stable development and support a strengthened NATO-Russia
relationship as a core element of their shared vision of a new and
peaceful Europe. They welcome the signing of the NATO-Russia
Founding Act and the NATO-Ukraine Charter, both of which further
improve European security.
Security Cooperation
The Partners will consult together, as well as with other
countries, in the event that a Partner perceives that its
territorial integrity, independence, or security is threatened or at
risk. The Partners will use bilateral and multilateral mechanisms
for such consultations.
The United States welcomes and appreciates the contributions that
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania have already made to European
security through the peaceful restoration of independence and their
active participation in the Partnership for Peace. The United
States also welcomes their contributions to IFOR, SFOR, and other
international peacekeeping missions.
Building on the existing cooperation among their respective
ministries of defense and armed forces, the United States of America
supports the efforts of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania to provide
for their legitimate defense needs, including development of
appropriate and interoperable military forces.
The Partners welcome the establishment of the Baltic Security
Assistance Group (BALTSEA) as an effective body for international
coordination of security assistance to Estonia's, Latvia's and
Lithuania's defense forces.
The Partners will cooperate further in the development and expansion
of defense initiatives such as the Baltic Peacekeeping Battalion
(BaltBat), the Baltic Squadron (Baltron), and the Baltic airspace
management regime (BaltNet), which provide a tangible demonstration
of practical cooperation enhancing the common security of Estonia,
Latvia, and Lithuania, and the transatlantic community.
The Partners intend to continue mutually beneficial military
cooperation and will maintain regular consultations, using the
established Bilateral Working Group on Defense and Military
Relations.
Economic Cooperation
The Partners affirm their commitment to free market mechanisms as
the best means to meet the material needs of their people.
The United States of America commends the substantial progress its
Baltic Partners have made to implement economic reform and
development and their transition to free market economies.
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania emphasize their intention to deepen
their economic integration with Europe and the global economy, based
on the principles of free movement of people, goods, capital and
services.
Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania underscore their commitment to
continue market-oriented economic reforms and to express their
resolve to achieve full integration into global economic bodies,
such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) while creating conditions
for smoothly acceding to the European Union.
Noting this objective, the United States of America will work to
facilitate the integration of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania with the
world economy and appropriate international economic organizations,
in particular the WTO and the Organization for Economic Cooperation
and Development (OECD), on appropriate commercial terms.
The Partners will work individually and together to develop legal
and financial conditions in their countries conducive to
international investment. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania welcome
U.S. investment in their economies.
The Partners will continue to strive for mutually advantageous
economic relations building on the principles of equality and non-
discrimination to create the conditions necessary for such
cooperation.
The Partners will commence regular consultations to further
cooperation and provide for regular assessment of progress in the
areas of economic development, trade, investment, and related
fields. These consultations will be chaired at the appropriately
high level.
Recognizing that combating international organized crime requires a
multilateral effort, the partners agree to cooperate fully in the
fight against this threat to the world economy and political
stability. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania remain committed to
developing sound legislation in this field and to enhance the
implementation of this legislation through the strengthening of a
fair and well-functioning judicial system.
The U.S.-Baltic Relationship
In all of these spheres of common endeavor, the Partners , building
on their shared history of friendship and cooperation, solemnly
reaffirm their commitment to a rich and dynamic Baltic-American
partnership for the 21st century.
The Partners view their partnership in the areas of political,
economic, security, defense, cultural, and environmental affairs as
contributing to closer ties between their people and facilitating
the full integration of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania into European
and transatlantic structures.
In order to further strengthen these ties, the Partners will
establish a Partnership Commission chaired at the appropriately
high level to evaluate common efforts. This Commission will meet
once a year or as needed to take stock of the Partnership, assess
results of bilateral consultations on economic, military and other
areas, and review progress achieved towards meeting the goals of
this Charter :
In order to better reflect changes in the European and transatlantic
political and security environment, signing Partners are committed
regularly at the highest level to review this agreement.
FOR THE UNITED STATES
OF AMERICA:
FOR THE REPUBLIC
OF ESTONIA:
FOR THE REPUBLIC
OF LATVIA:
FOR THE REPUBLIC
CF LITHUANIA
Washington D.C.
January 16, 1998
5210
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
July 22, 1998
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR GLYN T. DAVIES
FROM:
STEPHEN J. FLANAGAN
SAF
SUBJECT:
Statement of Administration Policy on HR 3460
Governing International Fishery Agreement Between
the United States and Latvia and Reauthorization
of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention
Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act
Attached at Tab I is your memorandum to James Jukes, providing
NSC concurrence to subject document.
Concurrences by: Mara Rudman, per Mary DeRosa/per
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the memo at Tab A.
Attachments
Tab I Memo to OMB
Tab A
Incoming correspondence
5210
NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20504
MEMORANDUM FOR JAMES J. JUKES
FROM:
GLYN T. DAVIES
SUBJECT:
Statement of Administration Policy on HR-3460
Governing International Fishery Agreement Between
the United States and Latvia and Reauthorization
of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention
Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act
The NSC concurs with no changes.
Attachment
Tab A Incoming correspondence
JUL-21-1998 08:05 TO:83 - NSC
FROM:GAYMON, D.
P.1/6
5210
Total Pages:
LRM ID: JAW363
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
Washington, D.C. 20503-0001
Monday, July 20, 1998
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL MEMORANDUM
TO:
Legislative Liaison Officer - See Distribution below
FROM:
James J. Jukes (for) Assistant Director for Legislative Reference
OMB CONTACT:
Jeffrey A. Weinberg
PHONE: (202)395-3457 FAX: (202)395-3109
Jan
SUBJECT:
Statement of Administration Policy on HR3460 Governing International
Fishery Agreement Between the United States and Latvia and
Reauthorization of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act and the
Atlantic Tunas Convention Act
DEADLINE:
3PM Thursday, July 23, 1998
In accordance with OMB Circular A-19, OMB requests the views of your agency on the above
subject before advising on its relationship to the program of the President. Please advise us if this
item will affect direct spending or receipts for purposes of the "Pay-As-You-Go" provisions of Title
XIII of the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990.
COMMENTS: HR 3460 was reported, as amended, by the House Resources Committee on July
14th. The text of the reported version is enclosed. The draft SAP has been prepared in
anticipation of House floor action.
DISTRIBUTION LIST
AGENCIES:
25-COMMERCE - Michael A. Levitt - (202) 482-3151
19-Council on Environmental Quality - Judy Jablow - (202) 456-6448
59-INTERIOR - Jane Lyder - (202) 208-4371
61-JUSTICE - L. Anthony Sutin - (202) 514-2141
76-National Economic Council - Sonyia Matthews - (202) 456-6630
83-National Security Council . Glyn T. Davies - (202) 456-9221
114-STATE - Paul Rademacher - (202) 647-4463
117 and 340-TRANSPORTATION - Tom Herlihy - (202) 366-4687
128-US Trade Representative - Fred Montgomery - (202) 395-3475
EOP:
Ken Schwartz
Louisa Koch
Chris Botnick
Christine J. Lindsey
Chuck Brain
Kate P. Donovan
Jim Murr
JUL-21-1995
08:05
10:83
NSC
FROM:GAYMON, D.
LRM ID: JAW363
SUBJECT:
Statement of Administration Policy on HR3460 Governing
International Fishery Agreement Between the United States and Latvia and Reauthorization of the
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act and the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act
RESPONSE TO
LEGISLATIVE REFERRAL
MEMORANDUM
If your response to this request for views is short (e.g., concur/no comment), we prefer that you respond by
e-mail or by faxing us this response sheet. If the response is short and you prefer to call, please call the
branch-wide line shown below (NOT the analyst's line) to leave a message with a legislative assistant.
You may also respond by:
(1) calling the analyst/attorney's direct line (you will be connected to voice mail if the analyst does not
answer); or
(2) sending us a memo or letter
Please include the LRM number shown above, and the subject shown below.
TO:
Jeffrey A. Weinberg Phone: 395-3457 Fax: 395-3109
Office of Management and Budget
Branch-Wide Line (to reach legislative assistant): 395-3457
FROM:
(Date)
(Name)
(Agency)
(Telephone)
The following is the response of our agency to your request for views on the above-captioned subject:
Concur
No Objection
No Comment
See proposed edits on pages
Other:
FAX RETURN of
pages, attached to this response sheet
JUL-21-1998 18:05 TO:83 - NSC
FROM:GAYMON, D.
P.3/6
DRAFT - NOT FOR RELEASE
July 20, 1998
(House)
H.R. 3460 - Fishery Agreement and Reauthorizations
(Saxton (R) New Jersey)
The Administration supports House passage of H.R. 3460. The bill would: approve the
governing fishery agreement between the United States and the Republic of Latvia; and
reauthorize, with amendments, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Act and the Atlantic Tunas
Convention Act.
*****
1998 08:05 TO:83 - NSC
FROM: GAYMON, D.
P.46
HR 3460 RH
Union Calendar No. 346
105th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3460
[Report No. 105-613]
To approve a governing international fishery agreement between the United States and the Republic of
Latvia, and for other purposes.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
March 12, 1998
Mr. Resources SAXTON (by request) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on
July 14, 1998
Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the
Union, and ordered to be printed
[Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert the part printed in italic]
[For text of introduced bill, see copy of bill as introduced on March 12, 1998]
A BILL
To approve a governing international fishery agreement between the United States and the Republic of
Latvia, and for other purposes.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in
Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. GOVERNING INTERNATIONAL FISHERY AGREEMENT WITH
LATVIA.
Norwithstanding section 203 of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act
(16 U.S.C. 1823), the governing international fishery agreement between the Government of the
United States of America and the Government of the Republic of Latvia, as contained in the
message to Congress from the President of the United States dated February 3, 1998, is approved
as a governing international fishery agreement for the purposes of such Act and shall enter into
force and effect with respect to the United States on the date of enactment of this Act.
SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE NORTHWEST ATLANTIC FISHERIES
CONVENTION ACT OF 1995.
(a) REAUTHORIZATION- Section 211 of the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of
1995 (16 U.S.C. 5610) is amended by striking 'for each of and all that follows through the end of
1 of 3
JUL-21-1998 08:05 TO:83 - NSC
FROM:
GAYMON, D.
P.5/6
the sentence and inserting 'for each fiscal year through fiscal year 2001.'.
(b) MISCELLANEOUS TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS- The Northwest Atlantic Fisheries
Convention Act of 1995 is further amended--
(1) in section 207(e) (16 U.S.C. 5606(e)), by striking 'sections' and inserting `section';
(2) in section 209(c) (16 U.S.C. 5608(c)), by striking `chapter 17' and inserting `chapter
171'; and
(3) in section 210(6) (16 U.S.C. 5609(6)), by striking 'the Magnuson Fishery' and inserting
the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery'.
(c) REPORT REQUIREMENT- The Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995 (16
U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is further amended by adding at the end the following:
'SEC. 212. ANNUAL REPORT.
'The Secretary shall annually report to the Congress on the activities of the Fisheries
Commission, the General Council, the Scientific Council, and the consultative committee
established under section 208.'
(d) NORTH ATLANTIC FISHERIES ORGANIZATION QUOTA ALLOCATION PRACTICE- The
Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention Act of 1995 (16 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) is further amended
by adding at the end the following:
'SEC. 213. QUOTA ALLOCATION PRACTICE.
'(a) IN GENERAL- The Secretary of Commerce, acting through the Secretary of State, shall
new
promptly seek to establish a new practice for allocating quotas under the Convention that--
'(1) is predictable and transparent;
'(2) provides fishing opportunities for all members of the Organization; and
'(3) is consistent with the Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement.
'(b) REPORT- The Secretary of Commerce shall include in annual reports under section 212-
'(1) a description of the results of negotiations held pursuant to subsection (a);
'(2) an identification of barriers to achieving such a new allocation practice; and
practice. '(3) recommendations for any further legislation that is necessary to achieve such a new
'(c) DEFINITION- In this section the term Straddling Fish Stocks Agreement' means the United
Nations Agreement for the Implementation of the Provisions of the United Nations Convention on
Straddling Fish Stocks and Highly Migratory Fish Stocks.'.
the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982 Relating 10 the Conservation and Management of
SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE ATLANTIC TUNAS CONVENTION ACT
OF 1975.
(a) REAUTHORIZATION- Section 10(4) of the Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of 1975 (16 U.S.C.
971h(4)) is amended by striking 'For fiscal year 1998,' and inserting 'For each of fiscal years
1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001,'.
2 of 3
JUL-21-1998 08:05 TO:83 - NSC
FROM:GAYMON, D.
P.6/6
(b) MISCELLANEOUS TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS- (1) The Atlantic Tunas Convention Act of
1975 is further amended--
(5); (A) in section 2 (16 U.S.C. 971), by redesignating the second paragraph (4) as paragraph
(B) in section 5(b) (16 U.S.C. 971c(b)), by striking fisheries zone' and inserting exclusive
economic zone';
(C) in section 6(c)(6) (16 U.S.C. 971d(c)(6))--
line thereof; and
(i) by designating the last sentence as subparagraph (B), and by indenting the first
(ii) in subparagraph (A)(iii), by striking `subparagraph (A)' and inserting 'clause (i)';
(D) by redesignating the first section 11 (16 U.S.C. 971 note) as section 13, and moving that
section so as to appear after section 12 of that Act;
(E) by amending the style of the heading and designation for each of sections 11 and 12 so
and as to conform to the style of the headings and designations of the other sections of that Act;
Fishery'. (F) by striking `Magnuson Fishery' each place it appears and inserting Magnuson-Stevens
(2) Section 3(b)(3)(B) of the Act of September 4, 1980 (Public Law 96-339; 16 U.S.C.
971i(b)(3)(B)), is amended by inserting of 1975' after 'Act'.
Union Calendar No. 346
105th CONGRESS
2d Session
H. R. 3460
[Report No. 105-613]
A BILL
Latvia, and for other purposes.
To approve a governing international fishery agreement between the United States and the Republic of
July 14, 1998
Reported with an amendment, committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the
Union, and ordered to be printed
END
3 of 3
UNCLASSIFIED
RECORD ID: 9803572
NSC/RMO PROFILE
RECEIVED: 18 MAY 98 10
TO: PRESIDENT
FROM: BERGER
DOC DATE: 24 JUN 98
STEIN, L
SOURCE REF:
WH EXECUTIVE CLERK
KEYWORDS: LATVIA
LEGAL ISSUES
CONGRESSIONAL
TREATIES
CM
PERSONS:
SUBJECT: CONVENTION BTW US & LATVIA FOR AVOIDANCE OF DOUBLE TAXATION &
PREVENTION OF FISCAL EVASION
ACTION: PRESIDENT SGD PER WH EXEC CLERK
DUE DATE: 23 MAY 98 STATUS: C
STAFF OFFICER: FLANAGAN
LOGREF:
FILES: WH
NSCP:
CODES:
DOCUMENT DISTRIBUTION
FOR ACTION
FOR CONCURRENCE
FOR INFO
FLANAGAN
NSC CHRON
COMMENTS:
DISPATCHED BY
DATE
BY HAND W/ATTCH
OPENED BY: NSGP
CLOSED BY: NSDRS
DOC 3 OF 3
UNCLASSIFIED
UNCLASSIFIED
RECORD ID: 9803572
ACTION DATA SUMMARY REPORT
DOC ACTION OFFICER
CAO ASSIGNED ACTION REQUIRED
001 FLANAGAN
Z 98051810 PREPARE MEMO FOR BERGER
002 BERGER
Z 98061917 FWD TO PRESIDENT FOR SIGNATURE
002 STEIN, L
Z 98062215 FOR SIGNATURE
002
X 98062914 KERRICK SGD MEMO
002
X 98062914 ORIGINAL NOT RETURNED TO NSC/RMO
003 PRESIDENT
Z 98062512 FOR SIGNATURE
003
X 98062914 PRESIDENT SGD PER WH EXEC CLERK
DISPATCH DATA SUMMARY REPORT
DOC DATE
DISPATCH FOR ACTION
DISPATCH FOR INFO
003 980624
VICE PRESIDENT
003 980624
WH CHIEF OF STAFF
UNCLASSIFIED
National Security Council
The White House
PROOFED BY:
LOG # 3572
URGENT NOT PROOFED:
SYSTEM PRS NSC INT ARS
BYPASSED WW DESK:
DOCLOG 8mD A/O
SEQUENCE TO
DISPOSITION
TOP Cosgriff
1
192 INITIAL/DATE 6/18 James
Rice
Davies
Kerrick
2
K
6/22
6
Sign
Steinberg
copy
Berger
capy
Situation Room
West Wing Desk
3
TmA6.22
greenhage
Records Mgt.
A = Action
I = Information
D = Dispatch
R = Retain
N = No Further Action
CC:
COMMENTS:
'98 JUN 18PM 6153
Exec Sec Office has diskette no
Dean, Susan W.
From:
Dean, Susan W.
Sent:
Friday, June 26, 1998 2:52 PM
To:
Flanagan, Stephen J.; Brown, Keirn C.; Baker, James E.; Rudman, Mara E.
Cc:
@LEGAL - Legal Advisor; @LEGISLAT - Legislative Affairs; @EXECSEC - Executive
Secretary; @UP - APNSA Special Assistants; @WWVD - West Wing Desk; @CEE -
Central/Eastern Europe; @EUROPE - European Affairs
Subject:
Package 3572 -- Convention with Lativa [UNCLASSIFIED]
Package 3572, Convention Between the U.S. and the Republic of Latvia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and
Prevention of Fiscal Evasion, was signed by the President today (June 26, 1998), per the White House Executive Clerk.
The Clerk's office will dispatch to the Hill today.
1
3572
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 24, 1998
ACTION
President Executive sgd Clerk per 6/26/98 WH SUD
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
THE EXECUTIVE CLERK
FROM:
LARRY STEIN JJS
SAMUEL BERGER Bin K
SUBJECT:
Convention Between the United States and the
Republic of Latvia for the Avoidance of Double
Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion
Purpose
Transmit the Convention to the Senate.
Background
This Convention will be the first taxation treaty between the
United States and Latvia and is similar to the tax treaties
between the United States and OECD nations, and the other two
Baltic republics. Your letter transmits the Convention, signed
at Washington on January 15, 1998. It also transmits the report
of the Department of State concerning the Convention.
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the transmittal message at Tab A.
Attachments
Tab A
Transmittal Letter to the Senate
Tab B
Report from Department of State
Tab C
Treaty
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff
TO THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES:
I transmit herewith for Senate advice and consent to
ratification the Convention Between the United States of America
and the Republic of Latvia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation
and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on
Income, signed at Washington on January 15, 1998. Also
transmitted is the report of the Department of State concerning
the Convention.
This Convention, which is similar to tax treaties between
the United States and OECD nations, provides maximum rates of
tax to be applied to various types of income and protection from
double taxation of income. The Convention also provides for
resolution of disputes and sets forth rules making its benefits
unavailable to residents that are engaged in treaty shopping.
I recommend that the Senate give early and favorable
consideration to this Convention and that the Senate give its
advice and consent to ratification.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
3572
S/S 9808362
DEPARTMENT OF STATE
WASHINGTON
May 15, 1998
The President:
I have the honor to submit to you, with a view to its
transmission to the Senate for advice and consent to
ratification, the Convention Between the United States of
America and the Republic of Latvia for the Avoidance of
Double Taxation and the Prevention of Fiscal Evasion with
Respect to Taxes on Income, signed at Washington on
January 15, 1998 ("the Convention").
This Convention will be the first such Convention
between the United States of America and the Republic of
Latvia. This Convention is similar to the tax treaties
between the United States and OECD nations. It provides
for maximum rates of tax to be applied to various types of
income, protection from double taxation of income,
exchange of information, and contains rules making its
benefits unavailable to persons that are engaged in treaty
shopping. The proposed withholding rates, while in some
respects higher than those in the U.S. model, are the same
as those in many other Latvian tax treaties. Like other
U.S. tax conventions, this Convention provides rules
specifying when income that arises in one of the countries
and is attributable to residents of the other country may
be taxed by the country in which the income arises (the
"source" country).
In many respects, the rates under the new Convention
are the same as those in many recent U.S. tax treaties,
including some with OECD countries. Pursuant to
The President,
The White House.
2
Article 10, dividends from direct investments are subject
to tax by the source country at a rate of five percent.
The threshold criterion for direct investment is ten
percent, consistent with other modern U.S. treaties, in
order to facilitate direct investment. Other dividends
are generally taxable at 15 percent. Under Article 12,
royalties for the use of industrial, commercial, or
scientific equipment derived and beneficially owned by a
resident of a Contracting State are subject to a
five-percent tax by the source country; all other
royalties are subject to tax at a maximum rate of ten
percent.
Under Article 11 of the proposed Convention, interest
arising in one Contracting State and owned by a resident
of the other Contracting State is subject to taxation by
the source country at a maximum rate of ten percent.
However, interest earned on trade credits and on
government debt, including debt guaranteed by government
agencies, is exempt from taxation by the source country.
The reduced withholding rates described above do not
apply if the beneficial owner of the income is a resident
of one Contracting State who carries on business in the
other Contracting State in which the income arises and the
income is attributable to a permanent establishment or
fixed base. If the income is attributable to a permanent
establishment, it will be taxed as business profits, and,
if the income is attributable to a fixed base, it will be
taxed as independent personal services.
The maximum rates of withholding tax described in the
preceding paragraphs are subject to the standard
anti-abuse rules for certain classes of investment income
found in other U.S. tax treaties and agreements.
3
The taxation of capital gains, described in Article 13
of the Convention, generally follows the rule of recent
U.S. tax treaties, the U.S. model and the OECD model.
Gains on real property are taxable in the country in which
the property is located, and gains from the sale of
personal property are taxed only in the State of residence
of the seller, unless attributable to a permanent
establishment or fixed base in the other State.
Article 7 of the proposed Convention generally follows
the standard rules for taxation by one country of the
business profits of a resident of the other. The
non-residence country's right to tax such profits is
generally limited to cases in which the profits are
attributable to a permanent establishment located in that
country. The source country may, however, tax sales or
activities as though they were performed by a permanent
establishment if it is ascertained that such activities
were structured with the intent to avoid taxation in the
State in which the permanent establishment is situated.
As do all recent U.S. treaties, this Convention precerves
the right of the United States to impose its branch taxes
in addition to the basic corporate tax on a branch's
business.
Consistent with U.S. treaty policy, Article 8 of the
proposed Convention permits only the country of residence
to tax profits from international carriage by ships or
aircraft and income from the use, maintenance, or rental
of containers used in international traffic. This
reciprocal exemption also extends to income from the
rental of ships and aircraft if the rental income is
incidental to income from the operation of ships and
aircraft in international traffic. However, income from
the international rental of ships and aircraft that is
4
non-incidental to operation of ships and aircraft is taxed
at the rate of five percent as a royalty paid for the use
of the equipment.
Like several U.S. treaties, the proposed Convention
with Latvia (at Article 21) provides that income derived
from the offshore exploration for and exploitation of the
seabed and sub-soil is taxable by the source State if the
activities are carried on for more than 30 days in any 12-
month period.
The taxation of income from the performance of
personal services under Articles 14 through 17 of the new
Convention is essentially the same as that under recent
U.S. treaties with OECD countries.
Article 23 of the proposed Convention contains
significant anti-treaty-shopping rules making its benefits
unavailable to persons engaged in treaty-shopping.
The proposed Convention also contains rules necessary
for its administration, including rules for the resolution
of disputes under the Convention and for exchange of
information (Article 27).
The Convention would permit the General Accounting
Office and the tax-writing committees of Congress to
obtain access to certain tax information exchanged under
the Convention for use in their oversight of the
administration of U.S. tax laws.
This Convention is subject to ratification. In
accordance with the provisions of Article 29, it will
enter into force when the Governments notify each other
through diplomatic channels that their constitutional
requirements for entry into force have been met. They
will have effect for payments made or credited on or after
the first day of January following entry into force with
respect to taxes withheld by the source country; with
5
respect to other taxes, the Convention will take effect
for taxable periods beginning on or after the first day of
January following the date on which the Convention enters
into force.
The proposed Convention (like those with Estonia and
Lithuania) provides at Article 29 that the appropriate
authorities of the two Contracting States will meet within
five years to discuss the application of the proposed
Convention to income derived from new technologies.
The proposed Convention will remain in force
indefinitely unless terminated by one of the Contracting
States, pursuant to Article 30. That Article provides
that either State may terminate the Convention by giving
prior notice through diplomatic channels at least six
months before the end of any calendar year.
The Department of the Treasury and the Department of
State cooperated in the negotiation of the Convention. It
has the full approval of both Departments.
Respectfully submitted,
Modelice
3572
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
ACTION
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
THROUGH:
THE EXECUTIVE CLERK
FROM:
SAMUEL BERGER
LARRY STEIN
SUBJECT:
Transmission to the Senate of the Convention
Between the United States and the Republic of
Latvia for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and
Prevention of Fiscal Evasion
Purpose
the Convention to
To transmit to the Senate, the Convention between the United
States and the Republic of Latvia for Avoidance of Double
Taxation and Prevention of Fiscal Evasion
Background
It
transmits the
Attached at Tab A is your letter to the Senate transmitting the
Convention, between the United States and the Republic of s Latvia,
signed at Washington on January 15, 1998. Also transmitted is
the report of the Department of State concerning the Convention.
This Convention will be the first taxation treaty between the
United States and Latvia and is similar to the tax treaties
between the United States and OECD nations, and the other two
Baltic republes
RECOMMENDATION
That you sign the transmittal message to the Senate at Tab A.
Attachments
Tab A
Transmittal Letter to the Senate
Tab B
Report from Department of State
Tab C
Treaty
CC: Vice President
Chief of Staff