Talk:Wassenaar Arrangement

Treaty status
Since the Arrangement is not a treaty, its categorization under treaties should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lockfoot (talk • contribs) 18:21, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

not sure whether the statement "the arrangement is not a treaty" is correct. Usually every international organization must be based on a treaty. However I could not find such a treaty. And it is strange that the organisation is named "arrangement" and not "agreement". There is no trace on the organisations website. Could somebody elaborate on this aspect ? Is the arrangement a "quasi-treaty"? How much binding force derives out of the cooperation of States under an arrengement in the absence of a treaty ? What is the reason for saying arrangement and not agreement ? Interesting questions of Public International Law ! 80.187.106.27 (talk) 09:48, 10 April 2014 (UTC)

Regardless of it status as a treaty or not-a-treaty, it should still be categorized under the appropriately "Treaties of X country" and "Treatities by year". Senator2029 “Talk” 15:03, 6 February 2018 (UTC)