Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T14:48:32.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

U.S.-Vietnam Trade Agreement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 March 2017

Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Contemporary Practice of the United States Relating to International Law
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 94 , Issue 4 , October 2000 , pp. 700 - 702
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See U.S. Normalizes Diplomatic Relations with Vietnam, 6 U.S. Dep’t State Dispatch 551 (1995); Nash, Marian (Leich), Contemporary Practice of the United States, 90 AJIL 79 (1996)Google Scholar.

2 Tide IV of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, addresses trade relations with states that currently do not receive nondiscriminatory treatment. The Jackson-Vanik amendment, 19 U.S.C.A. §§2432, 2439 (West 1999), contained within Title IV requires the president to deny most-favored-nation treatment (now called “normal trade relations”) to a “nonmarket economy country” that (1) was ineligible for such treatment as of january 3, 1975, and (2) denies or seriously restricts the right of its citizens to emigrate. A state ineligible for normal trade relations may not, among other things, be a party to commercial agreements with the United States or participate in federal credit and investment-guarantee programs. The president can waive the requirement of unrestricted emigration if doing so “will substantially promote the objectives” of the act and if he has “received assurances” from the state that its emigration procedures “will henceforth lead substantially to the achievement of the objectives” of the act.

3 See Exec. Order No. 13, 079, 3 C.F.R. 143 (1998); Letter to Congressional Leaders Transmitting Documentation on the Extension of Normal Trade Relations Status with Vietnam, 35 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1032 (June 7, 1999); Memorandum on Normal Trade Relations Status for Vietnam, 36 Weekly Comp. Pres. Doc. 1272 (June 12, 2000).

4 See Kahn, Joseph, Vietnam and U.S. Sign Pact Aimed at Promoting Trade, N.Y. Times, July 14, 2000, at A3 Google Scholar.

5 White House Press Release on Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement: Historic Strengthening of the U.S.-Vietnam Relationship (July 13, 2000) <http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/fs-us-vietnam_trade_000713.html>.

6 White House Press Release on Remarks by the President on the Announcement of Vietnam Bilateral Trade Agreement (July 13, 2000) <http://www.state.gov/www/regions/eap/000713_clinton_us-vietnam.html>.