Understanding status of forces agreements: what shapes jurisdictional control?

What determines who gets to prosecute a crime committed by a military officer when they are stationed abroad? Status of forces agreements (SOFAs) are the military agreements that codify this process, but up until now there has not been a global dataset of these agreements. Using this new dataset this dissertation creates a single scale to measure all status of forces agreements along a single scale. There are over 30 countries around the world that have stationed forces abroad, and each time those forces are hosted in a new country, a new SOFA is established.

This thesis uses the new dataset to identify the role of strategic value or trust on how these agreements are negotiated. These agreements are incredibly important to the countries that host foreign troops, over the years SOFAs have become parts of presidential campaigns, been the source of anti-American sentiment abroad, and led to thousand-strong protests. To understand what motivates these events, and potentially reduce the more negative outcomes, the agreements that shape military presences abroad need to be understood first.

Using mixed-methods this thesis finds that trust is a significant factor in shaping these agreements, and when countries attempt to renegotiate, there needs to be both coherent demands and an immediate threat for official change to occur.