RSG #327: How To Investigate International Agreements the Government Failed To Disclose

Resistance Survival Guide #327

Governments make international commitments through treaties, executive agreements, memoranda of understanding, joint declarations, security arrangements, diplomatic notes, side letters, and documents wearing titles so harmless they sound like office supply requests.

Some create legally binding obligations. Others carry political or moral weight without creating legal obligations. Both can influence foreign policy, military cooperation, migration, trade, intelligence sharing, technology, public spending, sanctions, environmental policy, and the rights of people who never knew the document existed.

Congress expanded federal transparency requirements in 2023 because the old system left too many international commitments beyond meaningful oversight. The executive branch now must generally report international agreements and certain significant nonbinding instruments to Congress and publish qualifying information for the public.

Unfortunately, passing a transparency law does not automatically cause transparency to appear. Apparently nobody included the ceremonial summoning instructions.

This Resistance Survival Guide explains how to investigate an international agreement or political commitment that appears to have been reported late, published incompletely, or omitted entirely. It shows you how to identify the document, determine its legal character, reconstruct its timeline, find its authority, trace its implementation, and document what the government still refuses to explain.

Why International Commitments Can Be Difficult To Find

The United States makes international commitments through several legal and political forms. A treaty is an international agreement submitted by the president to the Senate for advice and consent. Approval requires two thirds of the senators present.

An international agreement other than a treaty may be concluded under authority supplied by an existing treaty, legislation, or the constitutional authority of the president. These agreements may be legally binding under international law even though the Senate never considered them as treaties.

A nonbinding instrument does not create legal rights or obligations under domestic or international law. However, it may carry political or moral weight and shape what agencies, foreign governments, and private organizations do.

The title does not decide the category. A memorandum of understanding may be binding or nonbinding. A joint statement may contain meaningful commitments. An exchange of diplomatic notes may form an international agreement.

Calling something a framework, arrangement, understanding, partnership, roadmap, or declaration does not answer the legal question. Government loves a soft noun when the underlying commitment has sharp edges.

What the Case Zablocki Act Requires

The Case Zablocki Act was originally enacted in 1972 after Congress discovered that executive branch officials had entered into international agreements without congressional knowledge.

Congress significantly expanded the law through the National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2023. The amendments took effect on September 19, 2023.

Under the amended law, federal agencies must generally provide the Department of State with the text of an international agreement within fifteen days after it is signed or otherwise concluded. Agencies must also provide qualifying nonbinding instruments within fifteen days after they are concluded or finalized.

The Department of State must report covered agreements and instruments to congressional leaders and the appropriate committees. Reporting generally occurs twice. The first report follows signature, conclusion, or finalization. The second follows the agreement entering into force or the instrument becoming operative.

The public reporting requirement comes later. The State Department Case Act Reporting page explains that covered texts and legal authority information generally must be published within 120 days after an agreement enters into force or a qualifying nonbinding instrument becomes operative.

Certain records are exempt from public publication. These can include classified materials and documents separately published by an international depositary. Therefore, failure to find a document on the public website does not automatically prove a violation.

It does, however, mean the investigation has begun.

The New Evidence of Reporting Failures

A June 2026 Government Accountability Office investigation examined State Department reporting between October 2023 and March 2025. State reported 311 agreements and qualifying nonbinding instruments during that period. GAO found that 90 were reported late at one or both required reporting points. That was nearly one third of the commitments reviewed.

GAO also found that State missed the 120 day public publication deadline about half of the time in its generalizable sample. The department scattered texts and legal authority information across four webpages without providing a way to search the complete collection by country, agency, or subject.

State also lacked a system for readily determining which agencies submitted agreements late. It did not consistently collect the legal authority for qualifying nonbinding instruments. As of May 2026, State had not established a formal mechanism for personnel to report suspected noncompliance.

In other words, the office responsible for tracking international agreements could not systematically track who reported them late. It is difficult to improve satire when the agency insists on doing the writing. Hissssssssss!

Know What Counts as a Qualifying Nonbinding Instrument

Not every diplomatic statement or international memorandum qualifies for mandatory reporting. Under 22 CFR Part 181, a qualifying nonbinding instrument generally involves the United States or a federal agency and one or more foreign governments, international organizations, or foreign entities.

It must also reasonably be expected to have a significant impact on United States foreign policy, unless the chair or ranking member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee or House Foreign Affairs Committee specifically requests it in writing.

Federal regulations identify several factors that can indicate significance. These include whether an instrument represents a substantial new commitment, affects state law, requires changes in federal law, creates significant financial commitments, affects the rights or responsibilities of people in the United States, or is expected to attract substantial public or congressional interest.

There are important statutory exclusions. Nonbinding instruments signed or implemented under authorities relied upon by the Department of Defense, the armed forces, or an element of the intelligence community are excluded from the statutory definition of a qualifying nonbinding instrument.

That exclusion does not mean every military or intelligence agreement is invisible. Legally binding international agreements involving those agencies can still be subject to reporting rules. The precise legal form matters.

Step by Step Guide

Step One: Identify the Commitment You Are Investigating

Begin with the public event that suggested an international commitment exists. This may be a joint press conference, diplomatic visit, foreign ministry announcement, military exercise, new migration program, technology partnership, sanctions arrangement, security deployment, aid package, or sudden change in agency operations.

Record the exact language officials used. Look for words such as agreement, arrangement, understanding, memorandum, framework, partnership, declaration, exchange of notes, joint statement, roadmap, protocol, commitment, initiative, accord, compact, or terms of reference.

Save the announcement, transcript, video, briefing, and archived webpage.

Do not assume the public announcement contains the complete arrangement. Governments frequently announce the smiling handshake while the annex remains home alphabetizing its secrets.

Step Two: Identify Every Participant

Record every government, ministry, agency, international organization, corporation, nonprofit organization, and foreign entity mentioned in connection with the commitment. Identify the officials who negotiated, signed, announced, approved, and implemented it.

Search the American agency and every foreign participant separately. Foreign governments sometimes publish documents the United States has not made easy to find. Also search in the official languages of the other participants. Use translated versions of agreement, memorandum, cooperation, security, migration, technology, financing, implementation, and joint declaration.

Compare the names and titles used by each participant. One government may call the document an agreement while another calls it a memorandum. That difference can reveal a dispute over legal character or a creative attempt to keep the paperwork in separate drawers.

Step Three: Determine Whether the Commitment Is Binding

Look for language showing whether the participants intended to create legal obligations.

Binding agreements may use words such as shall, agree, undertake, obligation, enter into force, terminate, amend, depositary, dispute resolution, governing law, or parties.

Nonbinding instruments often use language such as intend, expect, plan, may, seek, understand, participants, or politically committed. They may expressly state that the document does not create rights or obligations under domestic or international law.

Do not rely on one word. Examine the complete document, the authority cited, the conduct of the participants, and how officials described it.

A document labeled memorandum of understanding can still be legally binding. A document labeled agreement may be expressly nonbinding.

Classification requires evidence, not title astrology.

Step Four: Search the State Department Case Act Pages

Visit the State Department Case Act Reporting page.

Search the pages for international agreements, qualifying nonbinding instruments, agreement texts, and legal authority information.

Use the country, agency, official title, subject, signature date, operative date, and distinctive phrases from the public announcement. Because State publishes related information across separate pages, search for the text and the legal authority independently. A document appearing on one page may have its authority posted elsewhere.

Save a copy of every page and note the date accessed. Record whether you found the document text, authorizing authority, implementing authority, entry into force date, and operative date. A search result is not complete merely because one lonely title appears and looks pleased with itself.

Step Five: Search the Treaties and Other International Acts Series

The Treaties and Other International Acts Series is the State Department’s official publication series for United States treaties and other international agreements.

Search Treaties and Other International Acts Series using the country, subject, agreement title, signature date, and TIAS number if one is available.

Review the complete text, including annexes, appendices, exchanges of notes, amendments, extensions, and implementing documents.

Compare the TIAS text with the version released by the foreign government. Record missing attachments, wording changes, different signature pages, or conflicting effective dates.

An agreement without its annexes can resemble a recipe that lists “ingredients to be provided separately.” Technically a document. Practically a dare.

Step Six: Check Treaties in Force

Use the State Department’s Treaties in Force collection to determine whether a bilateral or multilateral agreement was listed as active on January 1 of the relevant year.

Search by country and subject.

Treaties in Force is useful for confirming continuing legal relationships, but it is not a complete substitute for current Case Act reporting. Newly concluded agreements may not appear immediately, and terminated or amended arrangements may require additional research.

Compare several annual editions. An agreement that appears, disappears, or changes description may point to termination, replacement, amendment, or a classification issue requiring further investigation.

Step Seven: Search the United Nations Treaty Collection

The United Nations Treaty Collection contains multilateral treaty information and international agreements registered under Article 102 of the United Nations Charter.

Search the participants, subject, dates, and registration number.

Compare the United Nations text with the American and foreign government versions. Check reservations, declarations, amendments, entry into force dates, depositary notifications, and participant status.

Registration at the United Nations does not replace every domestic reporting requirement. However, it can confirm that an international agreement exists when the American public record is delayed or fragmented.

When the international organization has a cleaner copy than the government that signed it, the transparency hierarchy has developed a sense of humor.

Step Eight: Find the Legal Authority

Every agreement should have an identifiable legal basis. Possible sources include the Constitution, a treaty, an act of Congress, an appropriation, an executive order, delegated authority, or a combination of authorities.

Search the State Department legal authority pages, the agreement text, Circular 175 documents, agency memoranda, congressional reports, executive orders, and implementing regulations.

Record the specific constitutional provision, treaty article, statute, appropriation, or delegation cited.

Then read the cited authority. Determine whether it actually covers the subject, participants, duration, financial commitment, and actions promised.

“The president has foreign affairs authority” is not the end of the analysis. It is the moment the analysis finally removes its coat.

Step Nine: Locate the Circular 175 Record

The State Department’s Circular 175 procedure governs the negotiation and conclusion of treaties and other international agreements.

The Foreign Affairs Manual Circular 175 guidance explains that significant international agreements generally require written authorization before negotiation and separate authority before signature.

A Circular 175 memorandum may identify the agreement’s purpose, legal basis, participating agencies, policy concerns, congressional consultation, funding requirements, public interest, and proposed classification.

Search State Department reading rooms, agency records, congressional materials, and litigation exhibits for the memorandum.

If it is unavailable, request the authorization memorandum, clearance records, legal analysis, negotiation instructions, and signature authority through the Freedom of Information Act.

The signature ceremony is for cameras. The Circular 175 memorandum is where the adult supervision was supposed to happen.

Step Ten: Search for Side Letters and Implementing Arrangements

Do not stop after finding the principal agreement.

Under federal regulations, the text of an agreement can include annexes, appendices, codicils, side agreements, side letters, implementing agreements, and other documents serving similar purposes when entered into contemporaneously and in conjunction with the main commitment.

Search for attachments, technical arrangements, classified annex references, operating protocols, financing schedules, implementation plans, diplomatic notes, and later exchanges of correspondence.

Compare references inside the main document with the attachments publicly available. If Article Seven requires procedures described in Annex B and Annex B is missing, document that gap.

Request every document incorporated by reference.

The main agreement may announce cooperation. The side letter may explain who gets the data, weapons, money, access, immunity, or convenient absence of public oversight.

Step Eleven: Reconstruct the Reporting Timeline

Create a timeline containing the negotiation authorization, signature date, conclusion date, finalization date, State Department submission date, congressional reporting date, entry into force date, operative date, public publication date, and implementation date.

Under the amended Case Zablocki framework, agencies generally have fifteen days to provide covered documents to State. State reports covered commitments to Congress monthly. Public publication generally must occur within 120 days after an agreement enters into force or a qualifying nonbinding instrument becomes operative.

Calculate each deadline separately.

Do not treat signature, entry into force, and implementation as the same event. Some agreements become binding upon signature. Others require an exchange of diplomatic notes, legislative action, ratification, approval, or another condition.

A government can announce an agreement in January, activate it in June, and publish it in October. Without a proper timeline, all four months begin wandering around pretending to be compliance.

Step Twelve: Compare American and Foreign Government Records

Search the official website, gazette, parliamentary record, treaty database, procurement system, and budget documents of every foreign participant.

Record how the foreign government classified the commitment. Determine whether its parliament approved, reviewed, funded, or objected to it.

Compare the foreign language text with the English text. Note different annexes, dates, participants, legal citations, territorial descriptions, financial amounts, and termination provisions.

Search foreign court decisions and legislative hearings for disputes over the arrangement.

One government may describe a document as a historic security agreement while the other calls it a routine technical understanding. That is not merely a branding disagreement. It may reveal different expectations about what was promised.

Step Thirteen: Trace the Money Used To Implement It

Search USAspending.gov for grants, contracts, cooperative agreements, direct payments, and other awards connected with the commitment.

Search by agency, recipient, foreign country, program, assistance listing, award description, and relevant dates.

Review agency budget justifications, appropriations laws, congressional notifications, foreign assistance records, reprogramming notices, and inspector general reports.

Identify the appropriation and legal authority supporting implementation. Compare the public financial commitment with actual obligations and outlays.

A nonbinding document may still produce binding contracts, grants, transfers, or procurement decisions. Political weight becomes remarkably physical when it lands in an account.

Step Fourteen: Trace Security and Military Implementation

Search Defense Department announcements, security cooperation records, arms sale notices, base agreements, training exercises, deployment orders, and congressional notifications.

Check the Defense Security Cooperation Agency for major arms sale announcements and security cooperation information.

Look for changes in troop access, basing rights, logistics, intelligence cooperation, technology transfers, equipment placement, and status protections.

Handle missing records carefully. The statute excludes certain Defense Department, armed forces, and intelligence community nonbinding instruments from the definition of qualifying nonbinding instruments. Classified materials can also be exempt from public publication.

An absent public document may reflect a statutory exclusion or classification. It may also reflect late reporting, incomplete reporting, or an agreement described under a title you have not discovered yet.

Document the alternatives before selecting one.

Step Fifteen: Search Congressional Oversight Records

Search the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, House Foreign Affairs Committee, relevant armed services committees, appropriations committees, and country or subject specific hearings.

Look for questions for the record, member letters, hearing transcripts, nomination testimony, legislative restrictions, funding conditions, and requests for agreements or implementing materials.

Congressional leaders can request implementing agreements and arrangements that were not otherwise required to be submitted. The law also allows certain committee leaders to request nonbinding instruments that may then qualify for reporting.

Compare what lawmakers were told with what agencies announced publicly.

A senator asking “when did you plan to mention this?” is often a useful search phrase even when nobody phrases it quite that honestly.

Step Sixteen: Search Litigation and Administrative Records

Search federal court dockets for cases challenging the agreement, its implementation, or the legal authority supporting it.

Review complaints, declarations, exhibits, motions, agency affidavits, and judicial decisions.

Litigation may produce copies of agreements, memoranda, implementation instructions, and legal analyses that were not easily available through agency websites.

Also search Federal Register notices, regulations, permit decisions, sanctions actions, immigration directives, and procurement records connected with implementation.

Do not assume a court filing proves every allegation it contains. Separate party claims from authenticated exhibits, sworn testimony, stipulated facts, and judicial findings.

Step Seventeen: Request the Missing Records

Use FOIA.gov to identify the correct federal agencies and request procedures.

Request the agreement, qualifying nonbinding instrument, Circular 175 memorandum, negotiation authorization, signature authority, legal review, annexes, side letters, implementing arrangements, diplomatic notes, transmittal to State, congressional reporting records, publication decision, and implementation documents.

Name the foreign participants, American agencies, officials, subject, and date range.

Ask for records showing when the agreement was transmitted to the State Department Treaty Office and when it was reported to Congress.

Request correspondence discussing whether the document was binding, reportable, classified, exempt, or expected to have significant foreign policy effects.

Do not ask for every international agreement since George Washington located a quill. Precision limits delay and reduces the agency’s opportunity to collapse theatrically onto the nearest fainting couch.

Step Eighteen: Build a Disclosure Matrix

Create one row for every agreement, instrument, annex, side letter, and implementing arrangement.

Record the title, participants, type, signing date, operative date, legal authority, reporting deadline, actual reporting date, publication deadline, actual publication date, source, implementation activity, spending, and missing records.

Label the disclosure status as confirmed on time, confirmed late, apparently missing, exempt, classified, disputed, or unknown.

Do not label a commitment undisclosed merely because your first search failed. Search alternate titles, foreign sources, archived pages, parliamentary records, and related implementation documents.

The strongest investigation shows the searches performed and explains why the missing document should have existed.

Step Nineteen: Separate Confirmed Facts From Inferences

A confirmed fact may be that two governments announced a memorandum on a specific date.

Another confirmed fact may be that the foreign government published the text while no matching document appeared on the State Department public pages within the expected period.

An inference may be that the United States reported the document late or classified it incorrectly.

A stronger conclusion requires evidence about the instrument’s legal character, operative date, reporting status, statutory exclusions, and public publication requirements.

Do not describe every confidential negotiation as unlawful secrecy. Governments may negotiate privately. The accountability question becomes sharper after officials make a commitment, begin implementation, or trigger a reporting duty.

Step Twenty: Send the Evidence to Independent Oversight

Prepare a concise evidence package containing the public announcement, document text, foreign government version, legal authority, timeline, spending records, missing attachments, and outstanding questions.

Send it to relevant congressional committees, the State Department inspector general, the inspector general of the implementing agency, and the Government Accountability Office.

For public reporting, approach independent and nonprofit outlets with foreign policy, national security, government accountability, or public records expertise. These may include Responsible Statecraft, ProPublica, MuckRock, The Center for Public Integrity, and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project.

Lead with the records. A reporter can do much more with a missing annex, foreign government copy, legal citation, and calculated reporting deadline than with an email announcing that diplomacy appears suspicious in general.

Red Flags That Deserve Closer Examination

Investigate further when a foreign government publishes an agreement that cannot be located on American government websites.

Other warning signs include conflicting titles, missing annexes, absent legal authority, implementation beginning before public disclosure, congressional complaints about inadequate notice, spending that predates the announced arrangement, or officials refusing to state whether a document is binding.

Watch for memoranda described as nonbinding while agencies treat their provisions as mandatory.

Examine agreements reported after substantial implementation has already occurred. Reporting an agreement after the policy, money, personnel, and equipment have moved may satisfy somebody’s filing instinct, but it does very little for timely oversight.

Also flag commitments renewed repeatedly without a clear public record of extensions, amendments, or termination decisions.

What a Strong Investigation Should Prove

A responsible investigation should answer several central questions.

What commitment did the United States make?
Who negotiated and approved it?
Was it legally binding or politically significant?
What authority allowed officials to conclude it?
When was it signed, finalized, activated, and implemented?
When should the agency have submitted it to State?
When should State have reported it to Congress?
When should the public have received the text and legal authority?
Were annexes, side letters, and implementing arrangements disclosed?
What money, personnel, technology, data, or security cooperation followed?

If the evidence cannot answer one of these questions, document the gap. A missing agreement is concerning. A missing agreement surrounded by observable implementation is considerably more interesting.

What Not To Claim Without Evidence

Do not call every memorandum a treaty.

Do not assume that the Senate must approve every international agreement.

Do not describe every nonbinding instrument as meaningless.

Do not claim that a missing public text was never reported to Congress. Classified materials and other statutory exceptions may affect public publication.

Do not assume an agreement is illegal simply because it was reported late.

Do not accuse officials of treason because two governments signed a document you dislike. International agreement law is already complicated. It does not improve when constitutional analysis arrives wearing a Viking helmet.

Turning the Findings Into Accountability

Ask the State Department to create a searchable central database containing every publishable agreement, qualifying nonbinding instrument, legal authority, participant, agency, signature date, operative date, amendment, and implementation document.

Ask agencies to identify their Chief International Agreements Officer and publish compliance procedures.

Request regular reporting on late submissions and late public publication.

Ask congressional committees to compare foreign government announcements with State Department reporting and request missing implementing arrangements.

Recommend that inspectors general review whether agencies identified all reportable commitments, preserved complete records, met the fifteen day submission requirement, and cited valid legal authority.

Transparency should not require researchers to search four State Department pages, three foreign ministries, two budget systems, and a diplomatic partridge tree.

In Closing

International commitments can redirect money, military cooperation, migration policy, technology, sanctions, intelligence relationships, and public authority. Their impact does not become smaller because officials call them understandings instead of agreements.

Begin with the announcement. Find the text. Identify the participants. Determine the legal character. Locate the authority. Reconstruct the deadlines. Compare American and foreign records. Trace implementation. Then document what remains missing.

The purpose is not to publish sensitive information recklessly or treat every diplomatic relationship as sinister. The purpose is to determine whether the government followed the reporting rules Congress created and whether the public received the information the law requires.

Resistance Kitty respects diplomacy. She simply believes secret commitments should not become public policy before the public learns that anyone committed to them.