# Marshall Islands - United States Department of State

- Republic of the Marshall Islands Constitution Day Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateOn behalf of the Government of the United States of America, I congratulate the citizens of the Republic of the Marshall Islands as you celebrate your 45th Constitution Day on May 1.Our unique friendship and cooperation with the Republic of the Marshall Islands is the foundation of our shared vision for a free, open, resilient, and flourishing Pacific Islands region. We are excited to continue this unique friendship and look forward to next steps for our new agreements related to the Compact of Free Association.We appreciate the Republic of the Marshall Islands&#8217; leadership on environmental protection and are committed to working together to combat the climate crisis, while partnering with the Pacific Islands in adapting to and managing the impacts of climate change on lives, health, and livelihoods. We also will work together to support their leadership on gender equality issues within the Pacific.Together, we will continue our cooperation on the security, economic development, public health, and climate resilience of the Marshall Islands.I send my warmest wishes to all people of the Marshall Islands, at home and abroad.
- Marshall Islands HomeReportsBureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices&#8230;Marshall Islands				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Country Reports on Human Rights Practices: Marshall Islands																																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																																																																																							Download Report																																																							Translations																																																																 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																																									a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																																											b. Disappearance																																																																											c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																																			Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																																																		d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																																			Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																																																		e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																																			Trial Procedures																																																								Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																																																		f. Transnational Repression																																																																											g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																																											h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																																																	Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																																									a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																																			Internet Freedom																																																																																																																		b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																																											c. Freedom of Religion																																																																											d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																																											e. Protection of Refugees																																																																																	Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																																									Elections and Political Participation																																																																																	Section 4. Corruption in Government																															Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																															Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																																									Women																																																																											Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																																											Children																																																																											Antisemitism																																																																											Trafficking in Persons																																																																											Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																																											Persons with Disabilities																																																																																	Section 7. Worker Rights																																																									a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																																											b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																																											c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																																											d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																																											e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																																																																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				There were no significant changes in the human rights situation in the Marshall Islands during the year.Significant human rights issues included credible reports of serious government corruption and trafficking in persons.The government had mechanisms in place to identify and punish officials who committed human rights abuses.																														Section 1.													 Respect for the Integrity of the Person												    																																																a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings										There were no reports the government or its agents committed arbitrary or unlawful killings.																																				b. Disappearance										There were no reports of disappearances by or on behalf of government authorities.																																				c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses										The constitution prohibited torture and inhuman or degrading treatment.  Majuro and Ebeye jail authorities routinely held drunk prisoners naked.  Government officials stated they adopted this practice so prisoners could not use their clothing to attempt suicide.An outer island local police chief was charged with attempted murder and aggravated assault after shooting a man in the face in October 2022; a preliminary hearing was set for October.																Prison and Detention Center Conditions						Treatment of prisoners and prison conditions were harsh and at times degrading, particularly in the Majuro 24-hour holding facility.Abusive Physical Conditions:  A chief complaint in Majuro’s holding facility was the lack of adequate ventilation.  Prisoners were held in cramped cells with no air conditioning, windows, or fans, in which temperatures often exceeded 90 degrees.  Prisoners had to supply their own fans.  Lighting in cells was inadequate; prisoners had to supply their own lighting.  The facility was unsanitary, guards reported there were no janitors, and prisoners were given cleaning products.Administration:  Although authorities permitted inmates to submit complaints regarding their treatment without censorship and investigated credible allegations of inhumane conditions, there were no known complaints of physical abuse submitted during the year.Independent Monitoring:  The government permitted prison visits by independent human rights observers and by religious groups visiting imprisoned members throughout the year.																										d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention										The constitution prohibited arbitrary arrest and detention and provided for the right of any person to challenge the lawfulness of an arrest or detention in court, and the government generally observed these requirements.																Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees						Under the constitution a warrant issued by a court was required for an arrest if there was adequate time to obtain one.  The courts interpreted this requirement to exempt situations such as a breach of the peace or a felony in progress.  The law provided detainees the right to a prompt judicial determination of the legality of their detention.  Authorities generally respected this right and informed detainees promptly of the charges against them.There was a functioning bail system, and detainees could request bond immediately upon arrest for minor offenses.  The constitution required bail be set at a reasonable rate.  Most serious offenses required the detainee to remain in jail until authorities could arrange a hearing, normally the morning after arrest.  Detainees were allowed access to a lawyer of their choice and, if indigent, to one provided by the state.  The law stipulated the first court appearance had to occur within 24 hours of the first working day after arrest.																										e. Denial of Fair Public Trial										The constitution provided for an independent judiciary, and the government generally respected judicial independence and impartiality.																Trial Procedures						The constitution provided for the right to a fair and public trial, and an independent judiciary generally enforced this right.						Political Prisoners and Detainees						There were no reports of political prisoners or detainees.																										f. Transnational Repression										Not applicable.																																				g. Property Seizure and Restitution										Not applicable.																																				h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence										The constitution prohibited such actions, and there were no reports the government failed to respect these prohibitions.																																					Section 2.													 Respect for Civil Liberties												    																																																a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media										The constitution provided for freedom of expression, including for members of the press and other media, and the government generally respected this right.  An independent media, an effective judiciary, and a functioning democratic political system combined to provide for freedom of expression, including for media members.																Internet Freedom						The government did not restrict or disrupt access to the internet or censor online content.																										b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association										The constitution provided for the freedoms of peaceful assembly and association, and the government respected these rights.																																				c. Freedom of Religion										See the Department of State’s International Religious Freedom Report at  https://www.state.gov/religiousfreedomreport/.																																				d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country										The constitution provided for freedom of internal movement, foreign travel, emigration, and repatriation, and the government generally respected these rights.																																				e. Protection of Refugees										Access to Asylum:  The law did not provide for granting asylum or refugee status, and the government had no system for providing protection to refugees.  The country had no history of receiving refugees or asylum seekers.																																					Section 3.													 Freedom to Participate in the Political Process												    																						The constitution provided citizens the ability to choose their government, including their representatives in the legislature (Nitijela), in free and fair periodic elections held by secret ballot and based on universal and equal suffrage.  The constitution also recognized the hereditary Council of Iroij’s right to decide on matters of custom and tradition, including land tenure.  The council consisted of 12 traditional clan chiefs.																										Elections and Political Participation										Abuses or Irregularities in Recent Elections:  National legislative elections in 2019 were generally regarded as fair and free of abuses and irregularities.Participation of Women and Members of Marginalized or Vulnerable Groups:  No laws limited participation of women or members of marginalized or vulnerable groups in the political process; two of 33 members of the legislature elected in 2019 were women, and one of 33 mayors was a woman.  Perceptions of women’s and men’s traditional leadership roles, the expectation women should be caregivers, and lack of awareness of women’s contributions to society created barriers for women to obtain political qualifications or experience.																																					Section 4.													 Corruption in Government												    																						The law provided criminal penalties for corruption by officials, and although the government generally implemented the law effectively, officials sometimes engaged in corrupt practices with impunity.  Freedom House reported corruption was a chronic problem, particularly in foreign aid allocation, government procurement, and transfers.  High-ranking public officials were rarely prosecuted for corruption, often due to conflicts of interest.Corruption:  In May, two dual People’s Republic of China-Marshallese citizens were convicted and sentenced to 42 and 31 months in prison for conspiracy in connection with a multiyear scheme to bribe five high-level officials to win their support for the establishment of a semiautonomous administrative zone on Rongelap Atoll.In March the trustee stated a trust fund supporting displaced residents of an atoll affected by nuclear testing, valued at $71 million in 2016, had less than $100,000 remaining in the fund.  According to press reports, large sums were diverted to personal accounts associated with the local mayor when the local government controlled the fund.For additional information concerning corruption in the country, please see the Department of State’s Investment Climate Statement for the country, and the Department of State’s International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, which includes information on financial crimes.																											Section 5.													 Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights												    																						Domestic and international human rights groups generally operated without government restriction to monitor or investigate human rights conditions or cases and publish their findings.  Government officials often were cooperative and responsive to their views.																											Section 6.													 Discrimination and Societal Abuses												    																																																Women										Rape and Domestic Violence:  Rape, including by a spouse, was a crime with a maximum penalty of 25 years’ imprisonment; the law was gender neutral, although there were no cases of men alleging rape.  Domestic violence was also a crime.  Complainants could file for either a temporary or a permanent protective order, which required the alleged perpetrator keep 150 feet away from the complainant.  Temporary protective orders had a duration of 28 days.  Permanent protective orders remained in effect until the complaint was withdrawn.  The law also required all citizens to report suspected domestic violence.  The government did not enforce laws on rape and domestic violence effectively.Police response to allegations of rape and domestic violence was intermittent, although there was a police domestic violence unit with both an investigative and community outreach role.  The Attorney General’s Office prosecuted rape cases brought to its attention.  Prosecutions for domestic violence were sporadic, and awareness of the law was low outside the capital.  Court rules protected women during testimony in rape cases, primarily by shielding a survivor who testified as a witness from the accused, but human rights advocates reported hesitancy among survivors to report these crimes to police despite awareness-raising efforts.Various studies have suggested sexual violence of all types was common but frequently unreported.  Government health offices provided limited counseling services when spousal (or child) abuse was reported, but there were no government shelters for domestic violence survivors.  Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) continued efforts to raise awareness of domestic violence through marches and information sessions.  The NGO Women United Together in the Marshall Islands partnered with government and other donors for its Weto in Mour (A Place of Life) Violence against Women and Girls Support Service, which provided survivors with safe accommodations, basic necessities, and transport fares to enable them to attend legal appointments.  The nonprofit Micronesian Legal Services Corporation offered free legal services to survivors to obtain protective orders.Other Forms of Gender-based Violence or Harassment:  Sexual harassment was a crime, defined as unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature that made a person feel offended, humiliated, or intimidated.  The law was generally not well enforced.Discrimination:  Women generally enjoyed the same legal rights as men; the government generally enforced these rights.  The inheritance of property and traditional rank was matrilineal on most atolls, although representation of property rights was often delegated to male family members.  Tribal chiefs, customarily the husband or eldest son of the woman landowner, were the traditional authorities in the country.Women were represented in the workforce in proportion to their share of the general population and served in a wide range of important roles in the government bureaucracy.  There was no law on equal pay for equal work, although equal pay was in effect for government employees.  Women faced strict dress codes that restricted wearing pants in some government buildings.Reproductive Rights:  There were no reports of coerced abortion or involuntary sterilization on the part of government authorities.Access to contraceptives including emergency contraceptives, prenatal care, skilled attendance at delivery, and postpartum care was available on Majuro and Kwajalein Atolls, and outer island dispensaries.  On remote atolls only infirmaries with minimally trained attendants were available, limiting the quality of available care, particularly prenatal care.  Parents or guardians had to provide consent for medical treatment affecting reproductive health for children.  Cultural and religious barriers sometimes blocked access to contraception.The government provided sexual and reproductive health services to sexual violence survivors, including emergency contraception and postexposure prophylaxis, on Majuro and Kwajalein Atolls.																																				Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination										No laws specifically addressed the protection of members of racial or ethnic minority groups from persecution.  The constitution provided equal protection and freedom from discrimination for all persons and prohibited the creation of laws or judicial actions that discriminated against any person based on race, color, religion, language, gender, political opinion, place of birth, national or social origin, family status, or descent.																																				Children										Child Abuse:  Child abuse and neglect were criminal offenses, but public awareness of children’s rights remained low, and the government did not enforce the law effectively.  The law required teachers, caregivers, and other persons to report child abuse and exempted them from civil or criminal liability for making such a report.  Child abuse and neglect remained common.Child, Early, and Forced Marriage:  The legal minimum age for marriage was 18 for both men and women.  Marriage before age 18 required parental consent.  According to the UN Population Fund database, 26 percent of women ages 20-24 were married before age 18.  There were no known government measures to prevent or mitigate early marriage.Sexual Exploitation of Children:  Sexual relations were illegal for boys younger than age 15 and for girls younger than age 16.  The statutory rape law, which provided penalties of up to 25 years’ imprisonment for violators, was largely unenforced.  The law criminalized the commercial sexual exploitation of children, including child sex trafficking, child pornography, and other forms of sexual exploitation, and prescribed penalties of up to 20 years’ imprisonment, a fine, or both.  The law stipulated authorities could not punish child survivors of commercial sexual exploitation and these survivors should have access to support services.  The law was generally enforced, although reports of child sexual exploitation persisted.																																				Antisemitism										There were few Jewish residents in the country, and there were no reports of antisemitic incidents.																																				Trafficking in Persons										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics										Criminalization:  No law criminalized consensual same-sex sexual conduct between adults, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, and queer (LGBTQI+) persons were not disproportionately targeted under neutral laws.Violence and Harassment:  While there were no official reported acts of violence against LGBTQI+ persons, NGOs and activists reported such acts could go unreported or misreported due to societal discrimination.Discrimination:  Neither the constitution nor law provided specific protection against discrimination for LGBTQI+ persons.  Traditional cultural and societal norms meant LGBTQI+ individuals rarely reported instances of discrimination and generally had little possibility of recourse.  The country’s religious culture could bring indirect social costs to publicly revealing one’s sexuality.  Same-sex marriage was not legal.Availability of Legal Gender Recognition:  The government did not allow changes to legal documents to reflect an individual’s gender identity.  Nonbinary or intersex options were not available on government documents.Involuntary or Coercive Medical or Psychological Practices:  There were no reports of so-called conversion therapy being practices in the country.Restrictions of Freedom of Expression, Association, or Peaceful Assembly:  There were no formal restrictions on organizing or speaking out about LGBTQI+ matters.  Cultural and religious beliefs, however, discouraged public expression of LGBTQI+ matters or organized events.																																				Persons with Disabilities										Persons with physical, sensory, intellectual, and mental disabilities faced difficulties in obtaining employment and accessing education, health care, public buildings, transportation, and other state services on an equal basis with others.The public school system was responsible for supporting special education for children with disabilities and continued to incorporate awareness programs for students with disabilities, in particular those with hearing disabilities.																																					Section 7.													 Worker Rights												    																																																a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining										The law provided for freedom of association, and the government interpreted this right as allowing persons to form and join independent labor unions.  The law did not address collective bargaining or the right to strike.  The law did not specifically prohibit antiunion discrimination, nor did it require the reinstatement of workers fired for union activity.In view of the absence of unions or worker organizations, there were no reports of government enforcement of laws respecting their establishment or operation.  Legal penalties were commensurate with those for other laws involving denials of civil rights, such as discrimination, and penalties were rarely applied against violators.There were two NGOs promoting the rights of workers.																																				b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor										See the Department of State’s Trafficking in Persons Report at  https://www.state.gov/trafficking-in-persons-report/.																																				c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment										The law prohibited exploitation of children younger than age 18, including in the worst forms of child labor, child begging, and child domestic work.  The government effectively enforced the law.  There was no law or regulation setting a minimum age, hours of work, or occupational health restrictions for employment of children.  Government inspections found no evidence of child labor.  Penalties for child labor were commensurate with those for other analogous crimes such as kidnapping and were rarely applied against violators.Children typically did not work in the wage economy, but reports persisted it was common for them to assist their families in fishing, agriculture, retailing, and other small-scale enterprises.  Additionally, children often sold food on behalf of churches and other religious groups.  Particularly in the subsistence economies of the more remote atolls, copra (dried coconut kernels) production could take children from school and reduce educational outcomes.  The government reported it found no evidence of this during its inspections.																																				d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																														e. Acceptable Conditions of Work										Wage and Hour Laws:  The law established a minimum wage which was not above the poverty line.  Foreign employees and local trainees of private employers who invested in or established a business in the country were exempt from minimum-wage requirements, provided the employer received government authorization.  The cabinet could also exempt qualified export-oriented industries from minimum wage laws.  Most foreign workers, who constituted approximately 30 percent of the workforce (excluding agroforestry), and most of the professional and technical classes in the country earned considerably more than the minimum wage.  The law provided for a standard 40-hour workweek but placed no restrictions on the amount of overtime that could be worked.Occupational Safety and Health:  Occupational health and safety (OSH) standards were generally appropriate for the main industries of the country.  OSH experts did not actively identify unsafe conditions.  No legislation provided protection for workers who filed official complaints regarding conditions that endanger their health or safety.  The law did not provide for workers to remove themselves from situations that endanger health or safety without jeopardy to their employment.Wage, Hour, and OSH Enforcement:  The government did not effectively enforce minimum wage, overtime, and OSH laws.  Penalties for violations were not commensurate with those for similar crimes and penalties were rarely applied against violators.The Department of Labor conducted inspections related to wages, hours, and occupational safety and health.  Inspectors had the right to conduct unannounced inspections and issue sanctions.  The number of inspectors were insufficient to enforce compliance.Informal sector workers, an estimated 25 percent of the workforce, were not covered by wage, hour, OSH, and other labor laws and inspections.																																				    							View report by:																				Afghanistan											Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bhutan											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Central African Republic											Chad											Chile											China (Includes Hong Kong, Macau, and Tibet)											Colombia											Comoros											Costa Rica											Côte d&#8217;Ivoire											Croatia											Cuba											Cyprus											Czech Republic											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guinea-Bissau											Guyana											Haiti											Honduras											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iran											Iraq											Ireland											Israel, West Bank and Gaza											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kiribati											Kosovo											Kuwait											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Liechtenstein											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Monaco											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Nauru											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Korea											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Russia											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											San Marino											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Solomon Islands											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Sudan											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Syria											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											The Gambia											The Netherlands											Timor-Leste											Togo											Tonga											The Bahamas											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Turkey (Türkiye)											Turkmenistan											Tuvalu											Uganda											Ukraine											United Arab Emirates											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vanuatu											Venezuela											Vietnam											Yemen											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																Section 1. Respect for the Integrity of the Person																																							a. Arbitrary Deprivation of Life and Other Unlawful or Politically Motivated Killings																																																						b. Disappearance																																																						c. Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, and Other Related Abuses																																																				Prison and Detention Center Conditions																																																																																				d. Arbitrary Arrest or Detention																																																				Arrest Procedures and Treatment of Detainees																																																																																				e. Denial of Fair Public Trial																																																				Trial Procedures																																												Political Prisoners and Detainees																																																																																				f. Transnational Repression																																																						g. Property Seizure and Restitution																																																						h. Arbitrary or Unlawful Interference with Privacy, Family, Home, or Correspondence																																																			Section 2. Respect for Civil Liberties																																							a. Freedom of Expression, Including for Members of the Press and Other Media																																																				Internet Freedom																																																																																				b. Freedoms of Peaceful Assembly and Association																																																						c. Freedom of Religion																																																						d. Freedom of Movement and the Right to Leave the Country																																																						e. Protection of Refugees																																																			Section 3. Freedom to Participate in the Political Process																																							Elections and Political Participation																																																			Section 4. Corruption in Government																Section 5. Governmental Posture Towards International and Nongovernmental Monitoring and Investigation of Alleged Abuses of Human Rights																Section 6. Discrimination and Societal Abuses																																							Women																																																						Systemic Racial or Ethnic Violence and Discrimination																																																						Children																																																						Antisemitism																																																						Trafficking in Persons																																																						Acts of Violence, Criminalization, and Other Abuses Based on Sexual Orientation, Gender Identity or Expression, or Sex Characteristics																																																						Persons with Disabilities																																																			Section 7. Worker Rights																																							a. Freedom of Association and the Right to Collective Bargaining																																																						b. Prohibition of Forced or Compulsory Labor																																																						c. Prohibition of Child Labor and Minimum Age for Employment																																																						d. Discrimination (see section 6)																																																						e. Acceptable Conditions of Work																																																									Tags																					Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor																								Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Marshall Islands
- Digital Press Briefing with Taylor V. Ruggles, Department of State Senior Advisor for COFA Implementation, and Keone Nakoa, Department of the Interior Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs Taylor V. Ruggles, Senior Advisor for COFA Implementation, U.S. Department of StateKeone Nakoa, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs, U.S. Department of the InteriorMODERATOR:  Greetings from the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Media Hub.  I would like to welcome journalists to today’s on-the-record briefing with Taylor V. Ruggles, the U.S. Department of State’s Senior Advisor for COFA Implementation, and Keone Nakoa, the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs.  Senior Advisor Ruggles and Deputy Assistant Secretary Nakoa will provide an overview of the recent enactment of U.S. legislation providing approval and funding to bring into force new assistance agreements related to the Compacts of Free Association between the United States and, respectively, the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau, collectively referred to as the Freely Associated States.The speakers will also discuss what is contained in the new agreements, the uniquely close nature of the U.S. relationships with the Freely Associated States, and the positive impact that the compacts continue to have on people in the Freely Associated States.With that, let’s get started.  Senior Advisor Ruggles, thanks for joining us.  I’ll turn it over to you for your opening remarks.MR RUGGLES:  Great, thank you, and good evening from Washington; good morning to those of you on the other side of the date line.  We’re really thrilled to have this opportunity to speak with you all about the recent passage by the U.S. Congress of legislation related to the Compacts of Free Association, or COFA.  The enactment of this legislation is really a historic occasion and one worth celebrating.On March 9th, President Biden signed into law the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2024, and this represents another milestone in our deep and abiding relationships with the Federated States of Micronesia, Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau, collectively known as the Freely Associated States.  As Secretary Blinken said following the law’s enactment, “Our special and uniquely close relationships with the Freely Associated States, underpinned by the Compacts, have been an anchor of U.S. engagement in the Pacific for decades,” and now, “We look forward to working with our partners in the  over the next two decades of COFA-related cooperation.”In the case of the Marshall Islands, it’s important to note that action by the Nitijeļā, their parliament, is required to approve the agreements.  I understand that the Nitijeļā is considering the COFA-related agreements this week and that the foreign minister tabled the legislation on Monday.  So we’ll be excited and interested to follow that process.I’ll just note that the enactment of this legislation by the United States provides approval and funding for new assistance agreements between the United States and each of the Freely Associated States.  In total, the new COFA-related agreements include $7.1 billion in assistance for a full 20 years.  The long-term nature of the package is a reflection of the unwavering U.S. commitment to these key Pacific partners and affirms our shared visions for the future.To our friends in the Freely Associated States, we acknowledge that the past few months have been uncertain at times.  We’ve heard your concerns about the need to get COFA-related agreements done, and frankly, we shared them.  Getting COFA-related agreements across the finish line was a top priority for the administration, and we worked hard with the Congress, with the White House, our overseas embassy teams and interagency partners, especially the Department of the Interior, to make that happen.  And with continued strong bipartisan support in Congress for these agreements, we got it done.Now, while the impetus for our discussion today was the recent successful passage of the legislation, it might be worth recalling that this is a – in this historic moment, where we came from, and why the compacts received such bipartisan support.  I think DAS Nakoa will provide a little bit of historical context of our relationships that date back to World War II – the Freely Associated States – but if I can just touch on some recent history, I’ll mention that these agreements, the economic assistance agreements, are only renegotiated every 15 to 20 years.  So starting in the 1980s, this was the third iteration of such negotiations, and the legislation that President Biden signed on March 9th concluded a process that began nearly five years ago when then-Secretary Pompeo announced the start of negotiations to extend the Compact-related assistance.The negotiations picked up pace when President Biden appointed Ambassador Joseph Yun as Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations in March of 2022, and throughout ’22 and into 2023, we were gradually able to reach agreements with our FSM, Palau, and RMI counterparts on a range of agreements establishing the parameters for U.S. economic support for the next 20 years.  And this includes funding in key areas including environment, health, education, infrastructure, and more.One thing I wanted to underscore is the flexible nature of the funding that’s provided through the COFA-related agreements.  It reflects the kind of relationship the United States maintains with the Freely Associated States, one of partnership, not prescription.  We believe the economic package contained in these agreements is going to play a vital role in building and maintaining a brighter, more prosperous future for the people of the Freely Associated States.I’ll just also add that while the topline figures and the nature of COFA-related assistance over the next two decades is now secured, we’re continuing negotiations with the Marshall Islands and Palau for federal programs and services agreements.  So those remain active and ongoing.In terms of protocol, there’s a process for these agreements to formally enter into force, with the United States and each country required to take certain steps.  For FSM and Palau, an exchange of diplomatic notes effectively brought them into force.  Earlier today, Deputy Secretary Kurt Campbell and FSM President Simina exchanged notes, and last Friday, March 15th, President Whipps of Palau and our ambassador in Palau, Joel Ehrendreich, exchanged notes.  And as I mentioned before, the next step for the Marshall Islands is that their legislature will consider the new agreements in the Nitijeļā.I’ll just conclude saying these are very carefully negotiated agreements that reflect the hard work of our teams together, and we believe they provide an excellent framework through which we will propel our partnerships forward in continued support of a more secure, stable, free, and prosperous Pacific.So let me stop there and turn it over to my friend and colleague, DAS Keone Nakoa from the Department of the Interior.MR NAKOA:  Thank you, Taylor, Senior Advisor Ruggles.  I appreciate it.  Aloha.  This is Keone Nakoa, the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs.  And I am here on behalf of the leadership at the Interior who joins Taylor and the rest of the world, really, in applauding the finalization of the amendments to the COFA, Compacts of Free Association, which would provide another 20 years of economic assistance to the FAS.The $6.5 billion of assistance is critical for economic stability and quality of life for people in the FAS, which is the FSM, the RMI, and Palau.  The packages will provide an economic assistance of $3.3 billion to the FSM; $2.3 billion to the RMI; and $889 million to Palau – all over the span of 20 years, or through FY2043.The funding will provide support for basic public service deliveries such as health and education, improve infrastructure, and bolster the health of the Compact Trust Funds previously established for each of the FAS.  Congress also included $634 million over the next 20 years to ensure the continued provision of U.S. Postal Service to the FAS.As recently stated by Secretary of the Interior Deb Haaland, “Strong ties between the United States and the Pacific Islands form the foundation of our engagement and presence in the Pacific. The provision of 20 years of new economic assistance sends a clear signal of the United States’ commitment to the long, historical relationships we have held with the Freely Associated States.”The FAS have been important to the U.S. national interest in the Indo-Pacific for more than 75 years, and the Interior has played an important role in that relationship, starting during the UN Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands.The new amendments in the – to the Compacts of Free Association deepen our relationships with the FAS over the coming decades and serve as a clear signal of the United States commitment to achieving and maintaining a free and secure Indo-Pacific region.  Interior has proudly served as a lead domestic implementing agency, providing and administering funding for the U.S. Government to the FAS under the Compacts of Free Association for the last four decades, during compact one from 1986 to 2001 for the FSM and RMI, and then compact two from 2003 to 2023; and then for Palau from 1994 to 2009, and 2010 through 2024.We believe the new Compacts maintain strong U.S. oversight over every taxpayer dollar being proposed, and at the same time we have carved out room to accommodate FSM, Palau, and RMI requests for more autonomy and flexibility in framing the annual budget proposals for the effective expenditure of economic assistance.As Senior Advisor Ruggles mentioned, through the Interior’s Office of Insular Affairs, we have a long history of serving and working with the FAS through the administration of Compact funding and also through the administration of other discretionary funds that Congress has provided to the OIA for insular areas, which includes the FAS.The Joint Economic Committee with the FSM and the Joint Economic Committee with the RMI, JEMCO and JEMFAC, currently are chaired by Assistant Secretary Carmen G. Cantor and have been chaired for the Interior for more than the past 20 years – or I’m sorry, for the past 20 years.  I am also currently serving as the Compact Trust Fund Committee chair for the FSM and for the RMI, and this committee has also been chaired by the Interior for the past 20 years as well.Every year, the OIA administers discretionary assistance and funding outside of the Compact that provides important support to the FAS as their populations – and their populations in additional ways, including through Close Up and Junior State foundation, Prior Service Benefits Trust Fund for retirees, TAP and MAP funds to the FAS, and support for regional groups such as the Island Government Finance Officers Association, the Association of Pacific Islands Public Auditors, and the Executive Leadership Development Program.Another important piece of this passage was the inclusion of CIFA, the Compact Impact Fairness Act, which passed with the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act of 2024.  Through this measure, Congress addressed longstanding challenges for citizens of each of the FAS who chose or choose to reside lawfully in the United States as provided for under the Compact agreements.  This law restores eligibility for key federal programs for the FAS individuals while they are lawfully present in the United States – an important long-term solution to the financial impacts that some FAS communities have – may have on U.S. state and territorial governments.  Restoring access to federal public benefits will address gaps in needed social services for families and have a significant impact on the communities where they reside.The law also ensures that the federal government provides without significant additional administrative costs a significant portion of the financial burden currently being borne by state and territorial governments of the FAS – or for the FAS communities.  Benefits and compensation from the federal government will be available to FAS individuals in whichever state or territory within the United States they choose to reside.The COFA, though previously negotiated between our respective administrations, as Taylor mentioned, must also be passed and approved by our respective legislative bodies.  The Congress of the FSM and the National Congress of the Republic of Palau, or the OEK, have both passed the Compact of Free Association Amendments Act, and as we speak the legislation is being deliberated by the national parliament of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, the Nitijeļā.  We applaud the quick legislative action that has already been conducted in the FSM and Palau, and we look forward to a fruitful and positive response from the RMI as they conduct their own democratic process.In closing, the Department of the Interior is proud to partner with the Department of State in honoring and upholding the U.S. Government’s commitments to the FSM, RMI, and Palau, and we look forward to carrying out our responsibility to implement these cornerstone agreements for the next 20 years and beyond.MODERATOR:  Thank you so much, Deputy Assistant Secretary.  We will now turn to the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  Our first question came in in advance from Mar-Vic Cagurangan from the Pacific Island Times, based in Guam, who asks:  “Regarding CIFA, some of the benefits that are now available to COFA migrants, such as the Supplemental Security Income, do not apply to U.S. citizens living in Guam or other territories.  Will FAS migrants living in Guam be eligible for SSI?  If yes, then how does the U.S. Government intend to address the apparent distortion?”MR NAKOA:  Thank you for the question.  It’s important, and I appreciate raising awareness on this.  I think there’s been some confusion about what benefits CIFA transfers or transmits in the past.  So to be clear, CIFA will not provide eligibility to FAS communities living in Guam or anywhere else where the local residents do not also include those benefits.  Essentially, CIFA just places the COFA communities in the same shoes as the residents living in whatever state or territory that they choose to reside.  So in California they have the benefits that any California resident would have, in Hawaii the same, and in Guam the same.  Hopefully that is able to shed some light on what CIFA does or does not do.  But happy to answer any follow-ups.MODERATOR:  Okay.  The next question comes to us from Dave Rising at the Associated Press, based in Bangkok, Thailand, who asks:  “In February, the presidents of Palau, Micronesia, and the Marshall Islands wrote a joint letter expressing their concerns that the COFA agreements had not yet been implemented, suggesting that the delay had opened the door to, quote, ‘undesirable opportunities for economic exploitation’ by China.  Does this put the U.S. at a disadvantage as it now works to implement COFA?  What obstacles now need to be overcome?  And more broadly, how great is the U.S. fear of these three nations falling under – more under Chinese influence and what can the U.S. do to counter this?”MR RUGGLES:  Thank you.  I’ll take that.  I’ll note that we have really a unique and special relationship with the Freely Associated States, arguably one of the closest relationships possible between sovereign nations.  Their citizens serve in the U.S. military.  They can travel and work freely in the United States.  Our military provides for the national defense of these countries.  We’re as close as countries can be, and this has been a longstanding relationship that the Compact has underpinned.  And so this relationship really supports the security, stability, freedom, and prosperity throughout the Indo-Pacific.We understand the past several months have been frustrating for and uncertain for our friends in the Pacific.  We heard their concerns about getting COFA done, and frankly, we shared those frustrations and that priority.  It was a top priority for this administration, top levels of the State Department, the Interior Department, the Pentagon, working with the Congress, the White House to secure that bipartisan support in Congress.And I’ll just note that for observers of the United States, clearly there are a number of national security priorities that are still being hammered out with Congress.  But I think it’s notable of all these that COFA is the one that made it through.  I think that speaks volumes to the bipartisan support and importance that COFA holds for the United States.And so these agreements have a total of $7.1 billion in funding for a full 20 years.  There’s not going to be annual appropriations.  This locks in place assistance numbers for 20 years.  And we believe that the economic package in these agreements is going to play a vital role in building and maintaining a brighter future for the people of the region.  And we’re – continue to be committed to work with the Freely Associated States to preserve an open, secure, and prosperous region.I’ll just say that our vision for a free and open Indo-Pacific does not exclude any country, but we’ll continue to build on this already strong relationship and of course follow any developments closely, working closely with our regional partners.  Thank you.MODERATOR:  Okay.  Next we’ll go to the live queue.  We have Cleo Paskal from The Sunday Guardian, based in New Delhi.  Cleo, you should be able to unmute yourself now.QUESTION:  Oh, there you go.  Can you hear me?MODERATOR:  Yes, we can.QUESTION:  Okay, great.  Thank you.  First of all, congratulations to you both and to the entire team for getting this through.  I know it was a tough haul, and you did a great job.  Two questions.  One, is there still an option for universal basic income in the RMI agreement?  And how was the congressional logjam over funding broken?  Did it involve an offset?  Thank you.MR RUGGLES:  Thank you, Cleo.  You have played a – you’ve been a great partner and voice in highlighting the importance of the COFA, and appreciate your support and engagement on these important relationships.  I just wanted to acknowledge that.The agreement with the RMI as with the other two countries was designed to reflect the priorities of the – of our Pacific partners, the Freely Associated States.  And so in negotiating – and I’ll invite DAS Nakoa to maybe elaborate, but I’ll just say that in negotiating the agreement with RMI, they wanted to at least preserve the option of having some sort of direct individual support distributions for the population.  We’ll need to sit down with them on the implementation phase and through the Trust Fund Committee that DAS Nakoa chairs and the JEMFAC that Assistant Secretary Cantor chairs to go over those priorities.  But it’s a bit premature to (inaudible) since we haven’t had those discussions.In terms of offsets, I don’t have direct knowledge of that part of the agreement.  The Office of Management and Budget handled the negotiations with the Hill on getting the final agreement, so I might refer you to them or to contacts on the Hill on what finally secured the deal.  But again, we’re just happy it made it through and thrilled at the overwhelming support.  Thank you.MR NAKOA:  Thank you.  This is Keone Nakoa.  First, I want to echo Taylor’s comments to thank you and a lot of your work.  I don’t know that there was perhaps any single specific thing, but there was kind of, like, a groundswell of support.  I’m not sure how much to credit any individual, but I know people were definitely paying attention to some of your articles and there were several letters from FAS, from ambassadors, from other countries, and there was also a very strong championing of several members of Congress, particularly of Senate Natural Resource – or House and Senate Natural Resources, Foreign Affairs and Foreign Relations, and HASC and SASC.  So I think it was a culmination of a lot of support.From what I understand, there was no specific offset provided other than things that were contained within the continuing appropriations act in general.  And I believe, yes, there – I’ll have to consult the letter of the RMI Trust Fund Agreement, but there is the possibility to have distributions that would resemble universal distributions.  But that’s something that Nitijeļā would have to pass or have additional action if they wanted to access, and then there are specific pieces of the Trust Fund Agreement that would need to be satisfied.MODERATOR:  Okay, I think we have time for one last question.  We have Jessica Stone from VOA, based in Washington.  Jessica, you should be able to unmute yourself now.QUESTION:  Okay, thank you so much and thanks for doing this call, guys, and congratulations to both of you as well.  I wanted to drill down a little bit on the nuclear legacy in the RMI and how that is being handled.  As I reported a few months ago, that was a major sticking point.  I wonder if that’s still your view on it that that was really the thing that had to be settled to get the agreement signed.  We all know the congressional saga, but I’m curious how you view handling the nuclear legacy in the RMI going forward.MR RUGGLES:  Hey, thanks, Jessica.  I think just objectively this is a sensitive issue, and we remember just on March 1st we commemorated Nuclear Remembrance Day.  And I’ll just say that the United States has long recognized the effects of the nuclear testing program and has accepted and acted on its responsibility.  But the – in negotiating the agreements with RMI, as I mentioned in response to Cleo’s question, it’s really a desire to be responsive to RMI’s priorities and needs while at the same time observing and respecting the fact that we have this agreement from 1986, the so-called Section 177 Agreement where we reached a full and final settlement concerning those issues.And so I don’t want to be – I don’t want to belabor the point.  As I said, the Nitijeļā is considering legislation.  I think we’ve found an agreement that is robust and provides great discretion for the Government of the RMI to respond to the needs, the health, environmental needs of its population.  I don’t want to convey the impression that this is a closed chapter or that this is not something that will continue to pop up, that we’ll need to work through together, but I do think that the negotiators on our side, led by Ambassador Yun, have crafted an agreement that respects the interests and priorities of both countries.  Thank you.MODERATOR:  Oh, I’m sorry.  Senior Advisor Ruggles, thank you so much.  If you have any closing remarks, I’ll turn it back to you now.MR RUGGLES:  Oh, thank you.  I’ll just say, one, I appreciate the interest.  As I said, we had President Simina of FSM in town today.  It was a great opportunity meeting with the Deputy Secretary, and I know he also met with Secretary Haaland in Interior and the Peace Corps director and many other meetings that they’ll have this week.  We certainly are going to be looking for other opportunities to highlight and celebrate implementation of COFA.  I do not want to prejudice the outcome of the deliberations in the Marshall Islands, so we’ll watch that process carefully and look forward to working with all three governments moving forward.But really, a historic moment and I’m pleased that we’ve passed this milestone.  So thank you.MODERATOR:  Thank you, Senior Advisor Ruggles.  Deputy Assistant Secretary Nakoa, if you have any last words, please go ahead.MR NAKOA:  Thank you so much.  And I just really want to echo what Taylor just said.  Very much appreciative of all the work of everyone on this call and the interest in this topic.  I think that was definitely a piece of how Congress – or why Congress acted.  And very much looking forward to implementation stage of this next third generation, or compact three, or however it’s being called – working with the United States and the Freely Associated States.So there’s a lot more to come, a lot – a very busy year ahead of us.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  That brings us to the end of our time for today.  Thanks for your questions, and huge thanks to Senior Advisor Ruggles and Deputy Assistant Secretary Nakoa for joining us.  We will provide a transcript of this briefing to participating journalists as soon as it’s available, and we’d also love to hear your feedback.  You can contact us at any time at AsiaPacMedia@state.gov.  Thanks again for your participation and we hope you can join us for another briefing soon.  Take care.
- On the Enactment of Compact-Related Legislation Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateThe Department welcomes the enactment of legislation providing approval and funding to bring into force new assistance agreements under the Compacts of Free Association (COFA). Passage of this legislation, which was signed into law by the President today, serves as another milestone in our relationships with the Freely Associated States (FAS) of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and the Republic of Palau.This step follows the successful negotiation of the Compact-related economic assistance agreements between the United States and the Freely Associated States.  The 20-year duration and commitment of $7.1 billion of mandatory funding is reflective of our steadfast commitment to these strategically important partners.  We appreciate the continued strong bipartisan support for COFA in Congress.Our special and uniquely close relationships with the Freely Associated States, underpinned by the Compacts, have been an anchor of U.S. engagement in the Pacific for decades.  Extending Compact-related assistance is a critical component of the Administration’s Pacific Partnership, Indo-Pacific, and National Security Strategies.  We look forward to working with our partners in the Freely Associated States over the next two decades of COFA-related cooperation.
- Leveraging Tools to Promote Accountability and Counter Global Corruption HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;Leveraging Tools to Promote Accountability and Counter Global Corruption				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										Leveraging Tools to Promote Accountability and Counter Global Corruption																																		Fact Sheet																														December 11, 2023																																							On the occasion of&nbsp;International Anti-Corruption Day and the opening of the Conference of States Parties to the UN Convention Against Corruption, the United States is taking the following actions to promote accountability for corrupt actors around the world. &nbsp;The Department of State is designating over 30 individuals pursuant to Section 7031(c) of the Department of State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs Appropriations Act, 2023 (Div. K, P.L. 117-328), as carried forward by the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2024 (Div. A, P.L. 118-15). &nbsp;The Department of the Treasury is designating two individuals and 44 entities pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 13818, which builds upon and implements the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act. &nbsp;&nbsp;Section 7031(c) provides that in cases where there is credible information that officials of foreign governments have been involved in significant corruption or a gross violation of human rights, those individuals and their immediate family members are generally ineligible for entry into the United States and must be either publicly or privately designated. &nbsp;&nbsp;ACTIONS TAKEN TO PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR CORRUPT ACTORS&nbsp;&nbsp;AfghanistanMir Rahman Rahmani, former Afghan Speaker of Parliament,&nbsp;and Ajmal Rahmani, former Member of the Afghan ParliamentPursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Mir Rahman Rahmani and Ajmal Rahmani for their involvement in significant corruption. This transnational corruption scheme spanned the globe as the Rahmani’s stole millions of dollars from U.S. government-funded fuel contracts. &nbsp;As part of this action, their immediate family members (Jamila Jushan Haji Mohamad Hossin, Tamana Mir Rahman, Yalda Mir Rahman, Lina Mir Rahman, and Tahmina Tajali) are also designated. &nbsp;Concurrently, Treasury is also designating Mir Rahmani and Ajmal Rahmani and 44 associated entities pursuant to E.O. 13818.&nbsp;Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH)&nbsp;Diana Kajmakovic, former state prosecutor in Bosnia and HerzegovinaPursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Kajmakovic for her involvement in significant corruption.  In support of narcotics traffickers and other criminals, Kajmakovic helped hide evidence, prevent prosecution, and otherwise assist criminal activity in exchange for personal gain. She also attempted to block an investigation into her apparent criminal affiliates, including Osman Mehmedagic. Previously Kajmakovic was designated by the Department of Treasury pursuant to Executive Order (E.O.) 14033 for being responsible for or complicit in corruption or the undermining of democratic processes or institutions in the Western Balkans.Osman “Osmica”&nbsp; Mehmedagic, former Director General for BiH’s Intelligence Security AgencyPursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Mehmedagic for his involvement in significant corruption.  Mehmedagic collaborated with criminal networks and abused his public position to enrich himself. As part of this action, his wife Amela Mehmedagic Sehovic is also designated.  Previously, the Department of Treasury designated Mehmedagic pursuant to E.O. 14033 for being complicit in, or having directly or indirectly engaged in, corruption related to the Western Balkans, including corruption by, on behalf of, or otherwise related to a government in the Western Balkans, or a current or former government official at any level of government in the Western Balkans, such as the misappropriation of public assets, expropriation of private assets for personal gain or political purposes, or bribery.Dominican Republic&nbsp;Jean Alain Rodriguez Sanchez, former Attorney General&nbsp;Pursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Rodriguez for his involvement in significant corruption by misappropriating public funds intended for state-financed infrastructure projects and government institutions. &nbsp;As part of this action, his immediate family members are also designated, including his spouse Maria Isabel Perez&nbsp;Sallent&nbsp;and two minor children.Haiti&nbsp;Jean-Max Bellerive, former Prime Minister&nbsp;and Minister of Planning and External CooperationPursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Bellerive for abusing his public position by participating in corrupt activity that undermined the integrity of Haiti’s government. &nbsp;As part of this action, his immediate family members are also designated, including his spouse Myriam Estevez De Bellerive and his adult daughters Diana Jennifer Bellerive and Jessica Bellerive.Nenel Cassy, former&nbsp;SenatorPursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Cassy for abusing his public position by participating in corrupt activity that undermined the integrity of Haiti’s government. &nbsp;As part of this action, his immediate family members are also designated, including his spouse Katherine Cassy Chery and one minor child.Herve Fourcand, former Senator&nbsp;Pursuant to Section 7031(c), the Department of State is publicly designating Fourcand for abusing his public position by participating in corrupt activity that undermined the integrity of Haiti’s government.&nbsp;Liberia&nbsp;Samuel&nbsp;Tweah, Liberian Minister of Finance and Development Planning, and Liberian Senators Albert Chie and Emmanuel&nbsp;Nuquay&nbsp;Pursuant to Section 7031(c), the United States is publicly designating&nbsp;Tweah,&nbsp;Chie, and&nbsp;Nuquay, afor their involvement in significant corruption by abusing their public positions through soliciting, accepting, and offering bribes to manipulate legislative processes and public funding, including legislative reporting and mining sector activity.&nbsp;As part of this action, their immediate family members are also designated, including their spouses Delecia Berry Tweah, Abigail Chie, and Ruthtoria Brown Nuquay,&nbsp; and Tweah and Nuquay’s minor children.Additionally, on December 8, Treasury designated Mayor of Monrovia Jefferson Koijee pursuant to E.O. 13818 for engaging, or having been a leader of an entity that has engaged in serious human rights abuse and corruption.&nbsp; In addition to serious human rights abuse, Koijee engaged in corrupt acts, including bribery and misappropriation of state assets and pressuring anti-corruption investigators to halt all corruption investigations.Republic of the Marshall IslandsKessai Note, Minister of Transportation and Communication, Senator, and former President of the Republic of the Marshall Islands, and Senator Mike HalfertyPursuant to Section 7031(c), the United States is publicly designating Note and Halferty, for their involvement in significant corruption by&nbsp;accepting articles of monetary value and other benefits in exchange for acts in the performance of their public functions. Specifically, Note and Halferty accepted bribes in the form of services and cash, in exchange for their legislative support of a bill in the RMI legislature to create a semi-autonomous region in the RMI.&nbsp;&nbsp;						Tags																													7031(c)																															Afghanistan																																														Anti-Corruption and Transparency																															Bosnia and Herzegovina																								Bureau of African Affairs																								Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs																								Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs																								Bureau of South and Central Asian Affairs																								Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs																																Corruption																															Dominican Republic																								Haiti																																Human Rights																															Liberia																								Marshall Islands																								Office of the Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption																								Office of the Spokesperson																																Sanctions																																							United Nations																																							Visas
- The United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands Sign Three Compact of Free Association-Related Agreement HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases&#8230;The United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands Sign Three Compact of Free Association-Related Agreement				hide		if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}																										The United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands Sign Three Compact of Free Association-Related Agreement																																		Media Note																														October 17, 2023																																							On October 16, the United States and the Republic of the Marshall Islands signed three agreements related to the U.S.-Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) Compact of Free Association: (1) an Agreement to Amend the Compact, as Amended, (2) a new Fiscal Procedures Agreement, and (3) a new Trust Fund Agreement.&nbsp; The conclusion of these agreements affirms the close and continuing partnership between the United States and the RMI.Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations Joseph Yun signed the agreements for the United States and&nbsp;Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Jack Ading&nbsp;signed for the Republic of the Marshall Islands.&nbsp;The Republic of the Marshall Islands President David Kabua, Chief Negotiator Phillip Muller, and several other senior RMI officials attended the signing in Honolulu, as did U.S. Department of the Interior Assistant Secretary for Insular and International Affairs Carmen G. Cantor.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;The signing of these three agreements reflects the strong and historic cooperation between our nations and affection between our people.&nbsp; The U.S.-RMI Compact continues to underpin our special relationship that is deep and enduring, and that furthers the U.S. commitment to a Pacific that is secure, free and open, and more prosperous.&nbsp;U.S. Congressional and RMI Parliament (Nitijela) action is necessary before the agreements can be brought into force, and we appreciate Congress’ bipartisan and bicameral support on this matter.&nbsp;						Tags																					Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Hawaii																																Indo-Pacific																															Marshall Islands																								Office of the Spokesperson																								The Secretary of State																																														Treaties and International Agreements
- Digital Press Briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania Daniel J. Kritenbrink, Assistant SecretaryBureau of East Asian and Pacific AffairsDr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and NSC Senior Director for East Asia and OceaniaMODERATOR:  Greetings from the U.S. Department of State’s Asia Pacific Media Hub.  I would like to welcome journalists today to the on-the-record briefing with Daniel J. Kritenbrink, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, and Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper, Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for East Asia and Oceania.  The speakers will provide a readout on the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.With that, let’s get started.  Dr. Rapp-Hooper, I’ll turn it over to you for your opening remarks.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, and thanks to you all for being here this evening, this morning.  We’re glad to have the opportunity to read you out the President’s really consequential summit of Pacific Islands Forum leaders here in Washington just a few days ago, and thrilled to be joining my friend and colleague Dan Kritenbrink to do so.As you know, this week, leaders of the Pacific Islands Forum were all in Washington for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Island Leaders Summit.  By all accounts, this was an extremely successful and productive visit for the PIF leaders and for the President.  I’ll start with a brief recap of the leaders’ engagements over the past few days, and then I’ll discuss in brief some of the key deliverables that were announced over the course of the summit before handing the floor over to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.In advance of the formal meetings that took place in Washington, we got our summit started early on Sunday when Pacific Island Forum leaders took a trip from New York on a special Amtrak train down to Baltimore.  In Baltimore, the leaders attended a Baltimore Ravens game, where they were recognized for their role as American friends in the Indo-Pacific.  They even made it onto the field, where they were recognized before the game began.After the game, they toured a Coast Guard cutter ship in the Baltimore Harbor, the USS Forward, and had a meeting and opportunity to exchange views with Commandant of the Coast Guard Admiral Linda Fagan on key issues to Pacific Island leaders, including combating illegal fishing and effectively managing maritime domains.Following the Pacific Island Forum leaders’ trip to Baltimore, the leaders came to Washington, where they were hosted by President Biden at the White House on Monday for the second-ever U.S.-Pacific Summit.  They also attended a climate roundtable hosted by Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry as well as a dinner hosted by Secretary Blinken and Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield about which Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink will say more in just a moment.On Tuesday, the leaders also met with members of the philanthropic community, U.S. businesses, and members of Congress.  We closed out the summit with a reception hosted by our friends at the Australian embassy, emphasizing the depths of our people-to-people ties.  And I look forward to Dan speaking to those engagements in a bit more detail very soon.At the summit with PIF leaders on Monday, President Biden reaffirmed the United States’ commitment to shared regional priorities and to deepening our cooperation, including to tackling the climate crisis, advancing economic growth, promoting sustainable development, countering illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, and expanding our people-to-people ties.Before getting into the deliverables that we unveiled on Monday, I’d first like to take a step back and recognize the milestones of engagement with PIF countries that we have passed over the course of the last couple of years.Just in the last year, we have opened new embassies in the Solomon Islands and Tonga in record time, thanks in no small part to the extraordinary work of our colleagues at the State Department.  We opened a USAID regional mission in Fiji and are returning the Peace Corps to the region after years of relative absence.  We are enhancing our engagement with the Pacific Islands Forum as the region’s leading institution, and we continue to expand U.S. cooperation and assistance programs throughout the region.At this year’s summit, we announced expanded ties with our recognition, our diplomatic recognition, of the Cook Islands and Niue, and the establishment of diplomatic relations with both of these Pacific Island nations.Since last year’s summit, this May, Secretary Blinken met with the Pacific Island Forum leaders in Papua New Guinea, and at this week’s summit, the Biden-Harris administration has continued to show that we are delivering on our promises.  All told, we have now announced a commitment to work with Congress towards over $8 billion in new funding and programs for the Pacific Island region.  And again, this is just in the last year.On Monday, President Biden announced a new slate of activities, including plans to work with Congress to request and provide nearly $200 million in new funding.  These programs seek to address the priority issues we hear about from Pacific Island leaders, including the climate crisis – which is existential for many of our Pacific Island friends – and we always stand shoulder to shoulder with them as they work to meet the challenge to achieve net zero emissions by 2050.The President on Monday also reaffirmed his commitment to the security of the Blue Pacific Continent, and to combat illegal, unreported, and unregulated fishing, the United States has announced that it will provide over $11 million to bring cutting-edge maritime domain awareness technology to the Pacific through the Indo-Pacific Partnership for Maritime Domain Awareness to help improve the maritime picture and law enforcement information analysis and provision amongst our Pacific Island friends.We’re also delivering on our promise to invest in the prosperity of the region.  As the President has announced, we will invest an additional $40 million working with Congress to expand our Pacific Islands Infrastructure Initiative.  Through this initiative, we’re bringing technical assistance and project preparation work needed to identify commercially viable projects through partners in the U.S. Government, including the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.These are just a few of the key initiatives announced as part of our summit.  One more that I’d flag that we’re happy to go into during our question-and-answer period involves a new microfinance facility that will offer small and micro loans to Pacific Island businesses so that entrepreneurs there have the chance to thrive.  And these deliverables we are working towards illustrate the depths of our collaboration with the Pacific Islands and the promise of expanding our partnership for many years to come.As President Biden has said, the United States is and will long remain a proud Pacific nation.  And as a Pacific nation, the United States is here for the long haul and will continue to deliver on our promises to our partners in the region.I’ll hand the floor over to Dan to talk more about Secretary Blinken’s consequential engagements with the PIF leaders throughout the summit.  Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, thanks so much, and good evening, everyone.  I think, as my esteemed colleague Dr. Mira Rapp-Hooper has outlined, this was a tremendously successful summit that I think demonstrates further the breadth and depth of America’s commitment to the Pacific.  And Mira, I thought that was really a tremendous rundown of a momentous series of events related to the U.S.-Pacific Islands Forum Summit.I thought that I would focus my remarks a bit more narrowly on some of Secretary of State Antony Blinken’s significant engagements with the Pacific Island leaders here in Washington, and then also mention briefly the engagement involving the Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry’s meetings during the summit as well.As Secretary Blinken put it, our engagements were designed to show that we’re seizing on the possibilities of this moment to build a more secure, resilient, inclusive, and prosperous Pacific region.As Secretary Blinken also said on Monday night, the fundamental fact is this:  Our fates are tied together.  We’ve long been committed development partners to the Pacific Islands, and we’re excited to bring new energy and resources to the Pacific, working with partners in the Pacific Islands on our shared goal of meeting Pacific priorities and supporting Pacific institutions.We saw this last week, last Friday at the UN – at the end of the UN General Assembly High-Level Week, when Secretary Blinken hosted a Partners in the Blue Pacific ministerial in New York.  And at that meeting on Friday, we aimed to highlight the tremendous work we’ve done to advance more effective and efficient cooperation and engagement with our Pacific partners, designed to strengthen Pacific regionalism and to facilitate and encourage other partners and institutions to engage and consult with the Pacific.  And of course those efforts flowed nicely into the Pacific Islands Forum Summit itself, which began, as Mira indicated, on Monday.I think a clear sign of our commitment to the Pacific region came through the establishment of diplomatic relations with both Niue and the Cook Islands.  Following an announcement from President Biden earlier on Monday, Secretary Blinken hosted Niue Premier Dalton Tagelagi and Cook Islands Prime Minister Mark Brown for two separate signing ceremonies here in the State Department Treaty Room to make these momentous occasions.  These historic announcements reaffirmed our joint commitments to deepen our cooperation as equal and sovereign partners, guided by respect, genuine engagement, and partnership.  We fully anticipate working even closer with Niue and the Cook Islands on our shared priorities, which include the climate crisis, renewable energy, Pacific regionalism, and good governance, among many others.Secretary Blinken then had the pleasure of joining the millennium compact corporation CEO Alice Albright and iKiribati President Taneti Maamau for a signing ceremony for an MCC-Kiribati threshold program grant agreement that will provide up to $29.1 million to promote safe, accessible, decent, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers, both in Kiribati and across the region.  This will be the United States’ largest direct grant investment in Kiribati to date, and it is an agreement that we believe will deliver clear results and benefits to people in the Pacific Islands and solve real challenges to shape our future.I wanted to mention, also on Monday evening, Secretary Blinken hosted really a spectacular dinner here at the State Department in the newly renovated Benjamin Franklin Room, which was an opportunity for the Secretary and other leaders across the U.S. Government to meet with all of the Pacific Island leaders and to discuss in more detail ways that we can expand our cooperation in the future.  The Secretary was delighted to host the banquet with his co-host, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield – of course, America’s Permanent Representative to the UN – and at the dinner, Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield announced that she will be America’s representative to the next Pacific Islands Forum Leaders Summit in November of this year.I think the final event of the summit, the two-day summit, for Secretary Blinken was his meeting with representatives from the Freely Associated States.  Namely, he met with Marshall Islands Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ading, he met with Federated States of Micronesia President Simina, and with Palau President Whipps.  That was on Tuesday, late Tuesday afternoon.During the meeting, the Secretary took the opportunity to underscore the strong people-to-people ties and shared history underpinned by the Compacts of Free Association between the U.S. and these three Freely Associated States.  The Secretary commended the dignitaries for the progress in the negotiations on the compact-related agreements, which we believe signals a new era in our partnerships that will help advance a secure, free, and open Pacific.  And we look forward to further progress on these Compacts of Free Association agreements in the months to come.Finally, of course, climate change, as Mira indicated, was a major topic of discussions since it is such an existential challenge, and we recognize it, as our partners do, as the single greatest threat facing the Blue Pacific.Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry met with Pacific leaders on Monday to discuss the climate crisis and ocean resilience.  Secretary Kerry reiterated the United States’ new policy on sea-level rise and statehood that President Biden had earlier announced as well as new investments in strengthening early warning systems and sustainable development.So in the interest of time, why don’t I stop there.  I know that Mira and I will be delighted to take your questions.  Thanks.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  Thank you, Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink.  We’ll now turn it over to the question-and-answer portion of today’s briefing.  The first question will go to Ralph Jennings from the South China Morning Post in Hong Kong, who sent his question in advance:  “How does the recent U.S. engagement with the South Pacific help offset China’s economic influence in the region?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, do you want to take that one first or you want me to dive in?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  I’m happy to take that one, Dan.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Please.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  And I’ll turn to you in just a moment to add your thoughts.  Thanks for the question.  I would say just as a topline matter, when we’re working with our Pacific Island friends, we’re really not focused principally on China.  We’re focused on what the United States can offer as a likeminded partner to this group of countries.  And we are very focused on delivering positive, attractive alternatives to these countries that can help them and their people thrive.  But it’s really about what we stand for together alongside our Pacific Island partners, not about who or what we’re against.But with that in mind, I will note that, as the President announced, our $200 million in new programs for Pacific Island Forum nations do include some really consequential new programs that we believe are going to help our friends in the Pacific to generate the economic dynamism that they’re looking for to offset and combat climate change and to continue their recovery from the pandemic, where they were especially hard-hit.Just as a few examples, we’re stepping up our infrastructure efforts.  Specifically, as I mentioned, the President announced $40 million to new infrastructure projects in the Pacific Islands.  He also announced that the United States will be undertaking new submarine cable projects in the Pacific Islands to build secure, reliable connectivity amongst Pacific Island nations and to ensure that our friends there have the basic digital infrastructure that they need, like reliable, speedy internet on which so many businesses and individuals rely.  And of course, that submarine cable work builds on work we have been doing in recent years, including with the East Micronesia Cable, where we’ve already begun work to improve high-quality and more reliable secure communications for over 100,000 people in the Pacific Islands.  So infrastructure is a big part of our work.We are also delivering a new Millennium Challenge Corporation project with the Government of Kiribati, which is intended to advance economic growth in Kiribati in partnership with the International Labor Organization and American Councils of International Education to bolster and promote safe, accessible, and inclusive employment opportunities for Kiribati workers.Through the Quad, we are partnering with the Government of Palau to implement the deployment of a new ORAN network that is a next-generation, secure mobile network to help Palau get the secure connectivity that it needs.  And as we mentioned at the top of the call, the U.S. Trade and Development Agency is working throughout the Pacific Islands to identify through its technical work opportunities for more viable projects in the months and years to come.So this is just a sampling of the work that we’re doing to try to bring the economic tools we have to bear to help Pacific economies thrive, but I’ll hand it back to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink to see what he might like to add.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, that’s a brilliant answer.  I – all I could really do is foot-stomp what Mira has already said.  We approach the region from the perspective of advancing our affirmative agenda – the shared interests and values that we hold in common with our Pacific partners.That’s our focus, not any notion of focusing on a third party.  And as we often say, we have a regional strategy.  We’re focused on our affirmative agenda.  And I think if we continue to deliver benefits to our partners in the Indo-Pacific, I’m very confident and optimistic about our future together.In particular, as Dr. Rapp-Hooper has indicated, our entire approach to the Pacific is predicated on meeting our Pacific Island friends where they live.  In other words, in conversation with our Pacific partners, we have understood clearly what their needs and concerns and interests are, as outlined very clearly in the Pacific Islands Forum’s 2050 Strategy for the Blue Pacific Continent.  And by design, our work and the work of our other partners through the Partners in the Blue Pacific is specifically designed to address the needs that they themselves have outlined in their strategy.Again, that is the focus of our efforts, not any third parties.  Thank you.MODERATOR:  Okay.  The next question is going to go to Rurika Imahashi, who submitted the question on the chat, the Q&amp;A box here on Zoom.  “Our understanding is that the Marshall Islands parliament will soon certify the compact deal with the U.S.  What is the U.S. understanding on the development of the agreement?”  So we’ll answer that part.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, why don’t I take an initial stab at this one and we’ll ask you, obviously, to add anything else that you would like.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Sounds good.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I guess what I would say to any friends with questions about the compacts, I would just simply underscore that the compacts remain of vital importance to the United States.  I think they recognize our deep and historic ties to the three Freely Associated States.  I think they embody the strong ties between the peoples and the governments of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau.  And we remain very optimistic about the progress that we’ve made in the compact-related negotiations.I know when Secretary Blinken sat down with the leaders of the three Freely Associated States, he really commended them for the progress that we’ve made.  I think as everyone is tracking, we signed COFA-related agreements with Palau in May and with the Federated States of Micronesia in May, and we’ve made tremendous progress with our friends in the Marshall Islands.  We’re confident that we will conclude all of these agreements very soon and we will continue to build out these incredibly significant relationships that are central to everything we hope to achieve in the Pacific.And I think, as friends are tracking, that these compacts really are extraordinary agreements that are 20-year agreements in duration, and again, we’re confident that we will conclude them and implement them very soon.But, Mira, would you like to add anything to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Not much that I could add, Dan, except just to foot-stomp the point that we believe we are well on our way; we’ll soon be at a successful conclusion and very much look forward to being able to mark that milestone after months of really terrific cooperation with all of the Freely Associated States.  That’s all for me.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Yeah, and maybe just one final comment.  I think Mira’s comments reminded me that I do want to recognize that obviously this work is all being done at the direction of President Biden and Secretary Blinken, but our Special Presidential Envoy for Compact Negotiations Joe Yun and his team have also done a brilliant job and I really commend them.  And as Mira indicated, we’re very close and look forward to implementing them very soon.MODERATOR:  The next question will go to Stephen Wright from Radio Free Asia’s BenarNews Service.  Stephen, I also see that your hand is up.  If you’d like to unmute and ask your question, please go ahead.  Yeah, please go ahead and unmute.QUESTION:  Yeah, thanks.  Prime Minister Sogavare didn’t attend the recent summit and subsequently he said the U.S. should show respect to Pacific Island leaders and not lecture them at summits.  What do you think that shows about the progress of U.S. and Solomon Islands relations?  And are there any plans to have an ambassador at the new but smaller embassy in the Solomon Islands?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks very much.  This is Mira; I’m happy to take a first crack at this, and Dan, perhaps I’ll pass to you just on the embassy piece.We were disappointed that Prime Minister Sogavare was unable to attend the summit in Washington.  We did reach out, including at the very highest levels, to encourage him to join us for this terrific conversation that we’ve been laying out for you here, this opportunity to engage amongst friends, and we’re disappointed that he declined to do so.I don’t have much to say about the specific comments except to note, I think as we have been throughout this call tonight, that the conversation with the President, with the Secretary of State, with every cabinet official and member of Congress at the Pacific Island Forum leaders met with was collaborative, constructive, forward-looking, and I think most importantly involved an incredible amount of listening by U.S. Government officials to continue to refine their understanding of what our Pacific Island Forum friends are most looking for from us.So that’s the approach that we’re going to continue to take.  We continue to believe that it’s the right approach.  We feel that our three really dynamic days of programming show that we’re on the right track, and we look forward to continuing that work on the road ahead.Dan, over to you.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Thank you, Mira.  Maybe specifically on the question regarding our presence in the Solomon Islands, I’ll just note that we were excited and honored to open our new U.S. embassy in Honiara in January of this year, which was less than one year after Secretary Blinken announced our intent to do so.  Really excited about the work that our embassy colleagues there, led by Chargé Russ Comeau – excited about the work that they’re doing, again, to build our friendship and our ties with the people of the Solmon Islands and ensure that we work to deliver tangible benefits to our partners there.Of course, any new first step in opening an embassy involves staffing it, and of course our chargé d’affaires currently leading our embassy efforts there, and we recognized him for his really stellar work there.I would simply say at this point we have taken a number of steps internally to identify the U.S. ambassador, the next U.S. ambassador to the Solomon Islands, and I don’t have anything to announce to you this evening.  But I hope we’ll have something to announce in the near future, but we are certainly working towards that end.  Thank you.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Dan, if I may just jump in really quickly to add one additional detail.  I did want to note, as Dan noted, the – our wonderful Chargé Russ Comeau in the Solmon Islands was given a really important inaugural award at the dinner so graciously hosted by Secretary Blinken during the Pacific Island Forum Summit.  That inaugural award commemorates intrepid diplomacy in the Pacific Islands, and Chargé Comeau really embodies that to a T.  He has been just absolutely indefatigable in working to build U.S.-Solomons ties.I underscore that because I do want to make clear that the purpose of an award like this is to continue to draw attention to and raise up Americans who are doing their utmost on the ground to build ties with the Pacific Islands.  And I think the fact that we’ve established this award this year, that it was given by the Secretary of State, is just yet another demonstration that we are continuing to create incentives, recognize achievements so that Americans continue to step up and deliver on our promises throughout the Pacific.MODERATOR:  Okay.  I realize that we’re running a little bit over.  We started a few minutes late, so we’ll take a couple more questions.  We have one from Daniel Hurst from The Guardian.  “To what extent is the United States concerned about the newly announced comprehensive strategic partnership between Timor-Leste and China?  Why or why not?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Perhaps I can take an initial crack at that one and then ask Mira to chime in.  Look, I think as we indicated earlier, our message to partners in the region is that we’re not asking countries to choose.  We’re in the business of trying to ensure that countries have the ability to make their own sovereign decisions and their own choices free from coercion.My second point would be, as indicated earlier, we’re focused on our affirmative agenda in the region, including with friends in Timor-Leste, and we’ll continue to do that.  We’ll focus on how we can further build out our friendship and partnership with counterparts in the region, including Timor-Leste, and focus on the great work that we can do together.But again, we’re not in the business of asking countries to choose, and I don’t really think it’s beneficial to try to get into some kind of a comparison game or comment on engagement of other partners with the PRC.But, Mira, what would you like to add to that?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  I’m in violent agreement.MODERATOR:  Great.  We are – let’s see.  If the speakers are okay, can we take one more question?ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Absolutely.  Please.MODERATOR:  Great.  Great.  And this one is from Mar-Vic Cagurangan from the Pacific Island Times, based in Tamuning, Guam, who sent it in advance:  “How will a federal shutdown affect the Compact of Free Association, COFA?  Will the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of Marshall Islands, and Palau continue to receive funds throughout the shutdown?  Do you think this affect – this will affect the U.S. credibility with the Freely Associated States?”ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  Mira, perhaps I could provide an initial answer on this one as well and then be happy to turn to you.  Yeah, I really do appreciate the question, and I’ll just underscore what I mentioned earlier.  We’re really excited about the progress we’ve made in the compact negotiations and we’re confident that all of these agreements will be concluded soon.The issue that you raised here was discussed in some detail in the meeting between Secretary Blinken and the three leaders from the Freely Associated States, and I can assure you that we are in very close and constant communication with our friends both in the Freely Associated States and with leaders on Capitol Hill to make sure that we have a plan going forward under all circumstances that will allow us to meet our obligations under the compacts.I think, as friends may be tracking, that the draft Compact of Free Association agreements, the draft legislation on the Hill includes authority to continue programs and services at the same levels provided under current agreements until the new agreements are in place so as to avoid a lapse in services.  And we’re also working very closely with our friends so that if there were to be any kind of a lapse in appropriations that we can take the appropriate mitigating steps wherever possible to minimize any possible impacts on our friends in the Freely Associated States.But I think that I can assure you we’re in close and frequent contact with our friends in the Freely Associated States and I’m confident we have a plan to work through any contingency.Mira, what would you like to add?DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Nothing to add, Dan.  Thanks so much.MODERATOR:  Thank you.  And for our closing remarks, I’d like to turn it back to Dr. Rapp-Hooper.DR RAPP-HOOPER:  Thanks so much, folks, for joining us this evening.  I think from this conversation you’ve gotten a pretty good lay of the land of the incredibly substantive set of conversations that took place in Washington this week.  The point I want to emphasize before we let you go is that for us, this project, this promise to renew our ties, renew our commitment to the Pacific Islands, is really about much more than a three-day summit.  It’s about delivery on the promises that we’ve made in the last two years, which I think we showed in spades this week, but on delivery on those new conversations and those new commitments that have been made just this week.We have clear instructions from the President, the Secretary of State, the National Security Advisor, and many others to move out expeditiously on everything that we announced alongside our Pacific Island friends earlier this week, and we intend to literally put our money where our mouth is and deliver on everything that we seek to do together in the Pacific, whether that is providing finance so that friends in the Pacific can more quickly and readily adapt to climate change or providing micro and small loans to entrepreneurs and small businesses so that women leaders in particular can get the financing they need to allow them to contribute to increasingly dynamic Pacific economies.So we’re really just still in the opening chapter of the new Pacific story that we’re writing here under the Biden administration, but we feel like we have made tremendous progress in just the last two years, and we are emerging from this week’s summit energized and ready to hit the ground running with this new set of programs and new set of promises, and we look forward to being back in touch to share more about how this exciting work is all going.MODERATOR:  And Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink, I’ll turn it over to you for any closing remarks.ASSISTANT SECRETARY KRITENBRINK:  I can’t say it any better than that.  Beautifully summarized by Mira.  Really grateful to all of our friends in the media for joining us here tonight.  And as Mira indicated, we’re committed to now implementing all of the agreements and the objectives that we’ve set out flowing from this latest summit, and very optimistic, again, about our future ahead with friends in the Pacific.  Thanks again for joining us tonight.MODERATOR:  That brings us to the end of our time today.  Thank you for your questions and thank you to Assistant Secretary Kritenbrink and Dr. Rapp-Hooper for joining us.  We will provide a transcript of this briefing to participating journalists as soon as it is available.  We’d also love to hear your feedback, and you can contact us at any time at AsiaPacMedia@state.gov.  Thank you again for your participation and we hope you can join us for another briefing soon.
- Secretary Blinken’s Meeting with Marshall Islands Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Ading, the FSM President Simina, and Palau President Whipps Office of the SpokespersonThe below is attributable to Spokesperson Matthew Miller:Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken met today with the Republic of the Marshall Islands Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade Jack Ading, the Federated States of Micronesia President Wesley Simina, and Palau President Surangel Whipps, Jr., in Washington, DC. The Secretary underscored the strong people-to-people ties and shared history that are underpinned by the Compacts of Free Association between the United States and the three countries, collectively known as the Freely Associated States (FAS). The Secretary commended the FAS dignitaries for the progress in the negotiations on Compact-related agreements, which signal a new era in our partnerships and help achieve a secure, free, and open Indo-Pacific.
- Secretary Blinken, FSM President Simina, Palau President Whipps, Jr., and Republic of the Marshall Islands Minister for Foreign Affairs and Trade Ading Before Their Meeting Antony J. Blinken, Secretary of StateWashington, D.C. Treaty RoomSECRETARY BLINKEN:  Well, good afternoon.  It’s a real pleasure to welcome our colleagues from Palau, from Micronesia, from the Marshall Islands.  We’ve had a, I think, very, very invigorating couple of days working with all of our colleagues from the Pacific Islands, but it’s particularly good to be here with our colleagues as we are working on the important compacts that I think we’ve made tremendously good progress on, and we’re really grateful for that.These compacts of free association really go to the heart of our collective security, our collective prosperity, and they build on decades and decades of friendship, of collaboration, people-to-people ties.  But the compacts that we’ve been negotiating I think so effectively really take us into a new era, and I’m grateful to the presidents, the foreign minister for the terrific work that we’ve been able to do together.  So we’re committed to getting this done and committed to strengthening even more the compacts of free association that we enjoy with Palau, with Micronesia, with the Marshall Islands.Thank you all very much.
- Marshall Islands HomeReportsBureau of Economic and Business Affairs2023 Investment Climate Statements&#8230;Marshall Islands				hide	document.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded", function(event) {	if(window.jQuery) {		jQuery( document ).ready(function() {			if (jQuery(".bc_middle").hasClass("collapse")) {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});				jQuery(".bc_hide").click(function(){					jQuery(".bc_hide").toggleClass("visible");					jQuery(".bc_middle").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_ellipse").toggle();					jQuery(".bc_content").toggleClass("noflex");					jQuery(".block_breadcrumbs_content").toggleClass("noflex");				});			} else {				jQuery(".bc_ellipse").hide();			}		});	}});																							2023 Investment Climate Statements: Marshall Islands																																																																																												 In this section										/																							EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																																													EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																															1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																																									Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																																											Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																																											Business Facilitation																																																																											Outward Investment																																																																																	2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																															3. Legal Regime																																																									Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																																											International Regulatory Considerations																																																																											Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																																											Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																																											Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																																											Expropriation and Compensation																																																																											Dispute Settlement																																																																			ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																																								Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																																								International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																																																		Bankruptcy Regulations																																																																																	4. Industrial Policies																																																									Investment Incentives																																																																											Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																																											Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																																																	5. Protection of Property Rights																																																									Real Property																																																																											Intellectual Property Rights																																																																																	6. Financial Sector																																																									Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																																																														Money and Banking System																																																																											Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																																			Foreign Exchange																																																								Remittance Policies																																																																																																																		Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																																																	7. State-Owned Enterprises																																																									Privatization Program																																																																																	8. Responsible Business Conduct																															9. Corruption																																																									Resources to Report Corruption																																																																																	10. Political and Security Environment																															11. Labor Policies and Practices																															12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																															13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																															14. Contact for More Information																																																					EXECUTIVE SUMMARY				With a total population of approximately 42,782 people (20,963 in the labor force) spread out over 1,200 small islands and islets across 750,000 square miles of ocean but just 70 square miles of total land mass, the Republic of the Marshall Islands (RMI) has a tiny economy with an annual GDP of around USD 259 million, per capita GDP of USD 6,172 and a 1.1 percent real growth rate.   The remoteness of the RMI from major markets (2,300 miles from Honolulu, 1,900 miles from Guam, and 2,800 miles from Tokyo) severely impacts the economy. The Marshallese economy combines a small subsistence sector in the outer islands with a modest urban sector in Majuro and Kwajalein. The RMI government is the country’s largest employer, employing approximately 63 percent of the salaried work force.  The U.S. Army Garrison – Kwajalein Atoll (USAG-KA) is the second largest employer. A semi-modern service-oriented economy is in Majuro and Ebeye, on Kwajalein Atoll, and is largely sustained by government expenditures and by USAG-KA. Primary commercial industries include wholesale/retail trade, business services, commercial fisheries, construction, and tourism. Fish, coconuts, breadfruit, bananas, taro, and pandanus cultivation constitute the subsistence sector. However, as the land in RMI is not very nutrient rich, the agricultural base is limited. The RMI has a narrow export base and limited production capacity and is therefore vulnerable to external shocks. Primary export products include frozen fish (tuna), tropical aquarium fish, ornamental clams and corals, coconut oil and copra cake, and handicrafts. The RMI continues to rely heavily on imports and continues to run trade deficits (USD 45.8 million in 2018).The Marshallese economy remains dependent on donor funding. The RMI is part of the former US-administered Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands that gained independence in 1986 and continues to use the U.S. dollar as its currency. Since independence it has operated under a Compact of Free Association with the United States. Since 2004, the U.S. has provided nearly USD one billion in direct assistance, subsidies, and financial support to the Marshall Islands, equivalent to approximately 70 percent of the country’s total GDP during the same period. The Marshall Islands has received additional aid from Australia, Japan, Taiwan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), Thailand, the European Union, and organizations such as the World Bank, Asian Development Bank, and UN Development Programme.The U.S., China, South Korea, Japan, Germany, and the Philippines are the Marshall Islands’ major trading partners. Top U.S. exports to RMI include food products, prefabricated buildings, recreational boats, excavation machinery, aircraft parts, tobacco, and wood/paper products.The Government of the Marshall Islands is increasing its efforts to attract foreign investment and recognizes its significant role in growing private sector development, although it occasionally pursues questionable cryptocurrency schemes. Most local government officials encourage foreign investment, though attitudes may differ from island to island. The government particularly encourages foreign investment in fisheries, aquaculture, deep-sea mining, manufacturing, tourism, renewable energy, and agriculture and provides certain investment incentives for foreign investors.Foreign investment in the Marshall Islands is complicated, however, by laws that prevent non-Marshallese from purchasing land. There is no public land in the country and foreign businesses must lease land from private landowners to operate in the country. The high cost of doing business due to the country’s remoteness, its dependence on imported materials and services, and its limited infrastructure, especially transportation links, create additional challenges. Finally, due to the RMI’s exceptionally low elevation, the potential threats of climate change and sea level rise make attracting FDI to the Marshall Islands even more difficult.The major foreign direct investments are concentrated in the fisheries sector, including a tuna loining plant and a tuna processing plant along with several fishing purse seiners, the majority of which are owned by investors from China and Taiwan. There has been no significant foreign investment over the past year.Table 1: Key Metrics and RankingsMeasureYearIndex/RankWebsite AddressTI Corruption Perceptions Index202257th Percentilehttp://www.transparency.org/research/cpi/overviewGlobal Innovation Index2022Not Listedhttps://www.globalinnovationindex.org/analysis-indicatorU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, historical stock positions)2021USD $3.1Billionhttps://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheetWorld Bank GNI per capita2021USD $6,172http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GNP.PCAP.CD																																					1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment						    																																																Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment										The government of the RMI publicly expresses interest in finding ways to increase foreign investment, but there are many structural impediments to foreign investment and economic progress, such as land rights, which are unlikely to be changed soon.Foreign investment is governed through the Foreign Investment Business License (Amendment Act (2000)), which established the Registrar of Foreign Investment and which details restrictions on foreign investments. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Development, Trade and Investment Division administers the law in coordination with the Office of the Attorney General.Land issues and disputes concerning leases are subject to customary law governing land tenure, and proceedings can take a protracted time to resolve.  Land cannot be purchased by investors; it can only be leased through customary practices.																																				Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment										Although the Marshall Islands generally encourages foreign investment, the Foreign Investment Business License (Amendment) Act established a National Reserved List, which restricts foreign investment in certain small-scale retail and service businesses. However, this law is not consistently enforced, and foreign investors may enter partnership agreements with local Marshallese businesses. Officially, foreign investment is prohibited in the following business ventures:Small scale agriculture and marine culture for local marketsBakeries and pastry shopsMotor garages and fuel filling stationsLand taxi operations, not including airport taxis used by hotelsRental of all types of motor vehiclesSmall retail shops with a quarterly turnover of less than USD 1,000 (including mobile retail shops and/or open-air vendors/take-outs)Laundromat and dry cleaning, other than service provided by hotels/motelsTailor/sewing shopsVideo rentalHandicraft shopsDelicatessens, Deli Shops, or Food take-out																																				Other Investment Policy Reviews										In the past three years the Government of the Marshall Islands has not conducted an investment policy review through any organization or institution.																																				Business Facilitation										The government of the Marshall Islands created the Office of Commerce and Investment and Tourism (OCIT) three years ago to assist foreign investors.  OCIT’s website at  https://www.rmiocit.org/  has helpful information regarding investment and doing business in the Marshall Islands.  The OCIT is currently in the process of developing a one-stop-shop online business registration process, but currently there is no online website for registering a business in the Marshall Islands.  This must be done in person.  After a foreign investor receives a Foreign Investment Business License (FIBL), detailed in the Laws and Regulations on FDI, the business owner must complete the following steps:Check the uniqueness of the proposed company name with the Registrar of Corporations. This costs USD 100 and takes one day.Have the company charters notarized. Notarization can be done at the Office of the Attorney General.  It takes two days on average and costs USD 10.Register the company with the Registrar of Corporations. This takes five days and costs USD 250.  Limited Liability Companies need to file a Certificate of Formation and need to have LLC agreements detailing how the LLC will be operated, managed, and distributions divided.Obtain an Employer Identification Number from the Marshallese Social Security Administration. This number will also serve as the company’s tax identification number.  This process takes two days and costs USD 20.Apply for a business license. The business owner needs to submit a company charter along with the business license.  Business licenses are usually issued in seven days.  Licensing fees vary depending on the type of business.  Fees are as follows:Retail Business: USD 250Banks: USD 5,000Professional: USD 300Hotels: USD 500The Ministry of Finance segments the business sector for tax purposes using annual gross revenue amounts, not number of employees.  There are no other segmentations recognized by the Marshall Islands.  There is a Small Business Development Center in Majuro.																																				Outward Investment										The RMI government does not actively promote, incentivize, or restrict outward investment.																																												2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties						    																						The Marshall Islands does not have a bilateral investment treaty with any country.																																		3. Legal Regime						    																																																Transparency of the Regulatory System										Regulatory and accounting systems are generally transparent and consistent with international norms. Bureaucratic procedures are generally transparent, although nepotism and customary hierarchal relationships can play a role in government actions. Proposed laws and regulations are available in draft form for public comment pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, Title 6 of the Marshall Islands Revised Code. Generally, tax, labor, environment, health and safety, and other laws and policies do not impede investment. There are no informal regulatory processes managed by nongovernmental organizations or private sector associations.																																				International Regulatory Considerations										The Marshall Islands has rejoined the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) after briefly leaving the organization in 2022 over a leadership dispute. The PIF has a model regulatory and policy framework focused on competition, access and pricing, fair trading, and consumer protections.  The RMI has sought to implement PIF-agreed standards domestically; however, the capacity for enforcement remains weak.																																				Legal System and Judicial Independence										The Republic of the Marshall Islands has a responsive judiciary that consistently upholds the sanctity of contracts. The legal system in the Marshall Islands is patterned on common law proceedings as they exist in the United States. The country has a judicial branch composed of a Supreme Court, a High Court, a Traditional Rights Court, District Courts, and Community Courts. The Supreme Court is made up of one Chief Justice and two Associate Justices.  The High Court consists of the Chief Justice and one Associate Justice. The Chief Justices are both U.S. Citizens serving 10-year terms.  There are also three Traditional Rights Court judges, two District Court judges, and several Community Court judges serving the Marshall Islands. On certain occasions, as necessary, the Marshall Islands Judicial Service Commission recruits qualified judges on contract from the United States to serve with the Chief Justice on the Supreme Court and to temporarily fill vacancies on the High Court as there are few qualified and independent Marshallese who can fill these positions.  The Traditional Rights Court deals with customary law and land disputes.The Marshall Islands Courts are generally considered fair, without undue influence or interference.  Marshall Islands Court rulings, legal codes, and public law can be found on their website:  http://www.rmicourts.org/ .																																				Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment										All non-citizens wishing to invest in the Marshall Islands must obtain a Foreign Investment Business License (FIBL). The FIBL is obtained from the Registrar of Foreign Investment in the office of the Attorney General. In coordination with the Investment Promotion Unit at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Commerce, the Ministry of Finance reviews the application and ensures that the business does not fall under the categories of the National Reserved List listed above. The application process usually takes 7-10 working days. The FIBL grants non-citizens the right to invest in the Marshall Islands, provided the investment remains within the scope of business activity for which the FIBL was granted.The 2015 amendment to the Foreign Investment Business License Act requires all holders of FIBLs to maintain reliable and complete accounting records and records of ownership, and that all business records must be kept in such a way that they can be converted into written form at the request of an authorized inspector.  These records must be retained for a period of five years.																																				Competition and Antitrust Laws										The Marshall Islands does not currently have any anti-trust legislation or agency which reviews transactions for competition-related concerns.																																				Expropriation and Compensation										All land is privately owned by Marshallese citizens through complex family lineages. Although the Government of the Marshall Islands may legally expropriate property under the country’s constitution, the government has only exercised this right on one occasion and only for a temporary period of time. Given the importance of private land ownership in customary law and practice, it is very unlikely that the government will exercise this right soon.If a business activity is subsequently added to the reserved List, the Registrar of Foreign Investment may not cancel or revoke an existing Foreign Investment Business License if the investment has already commenced.																																				Dispute Settlement																										ICSID Convention and New York Convention						The Marshall Islands has been a signatory to the Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards (the 1958 New York Convention) since 2006, but is not a member of the International Center for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID), nor does it have plans to become a member at this time.						Investor-State Dispute Settlement						There are no ongoing investment disputes involving the Government of the Republic of the Marshall Islands and foreign investors.   There is a very limited record of foreign investment disputes in the Marshall Islands due to the small size of foreign investment in the country. The most common type of business disputes is with landowners over land use, and land rights issues, and as there is currently no official dispute resolution procedure, these are frequently resolved informally or only after protracted court disputes. Domestic civil society has traditionally not been actively engaged in dispute resolution.  The Marshall Islands Courts are generally considered fair, without undue influence or interference.  There is no history of extrajudicial action against foreign investors.						International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts						The Republic of the Marshall Islands does not have any alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms or domestic arbitration bodies available as a means for setting disputes between two private parties.  There is no known history of the RMI enforcing foreign commercial arbitral decisions.																										Bankruptcy Regulations										There is no legal provision for bankruptcy in the Marshall Islands.																																												4. Industrial Policies						    																																																Investment Incentives										The Republic of the Marshall Islands offers a range of investment incentives, many of which can be found at  https://www.rmiocit.org .The Marshall Islands offers tax and duty exemptions for investments in certain private sector industries. These investment incentives apply uniformly to both domestic and foreign investors through submission of a letter to the Minister of Finance. Tax incentives are specified by law, but have been rarely awarded, given the relative lack of large-scale investment.All imports are subject to import duties, and the only current duty exemptions are for renewable and alternative energy items. Import duties are generally low ad valorem rates on cost, insurance, and freight (CIF), and the number of tariff categories is small to facilitate administration. Goods in transit are exempt from the import tax, and the import tax on re-exported goods is refundable.  The Marshall Islands has no taxes on exports. Due to weak infrastructure and enforcement, tax and revenue continue to seep through the economy at a loss of about USD 60 million.Under the terms of the Compact of Free Association, as amended, all items grown, made or produced in the Marshall Islands are exempt from U.S. duties with the following exceptions:Watches, clocks, and timing apparatus provided for in Chapter 91, excluding heading 9113, of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States;Buttons (whether finished or not finished) provided for in items 9606.21.40 and 9606.29.20 of such schedule;Textile and apparel articles which are subject to textile agreements; andFootwear, handbags, luggage, flat goods, work gloves, and leather wearing apparel which were not eligible for the generalized system of preferences in the Trade Act of 1974.Tuna in airtight containers exported to the U.S. is duty-free, provided it does not exceed 10 percent of total U.S. tuna consumption during the previous calendar year. The Compact also stipulates that U.S. products imported to the Marshall Islands receive Most-Favorable Nation status, and the country must consult with the U.S. should they enter into a Free Trade Agreement with another country or customs territory.Investors who invest a minimum of USD 1 million or provide employment and wages in excess of USD 150,000 annually to Marshallese citizens are exempt from paying gross revenue tax for a five-year period in the following sectors:Off-shore or deep-sea fishingManufacturing for export, or for both export and local useAgricultureHotel and resort facilitiesInvestors in seabed hard mineral mining are exempt from paying all taxes, duties, and other charges (except taxes on wages and salaries, individual income tax, and social security contributions). In return, investors are required to pay the Government of the Marshall Islands a share of net proceeds accruing from the investment in the form of royalties, production charge, or some combination thereof as agreed to between the government and investor.																																				Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation										There are no geographic foreign trade zones or free ports in the Marshall Islands.																																				Performance and Data Localization Requirements										The RMI government requires all investors employing non-resident workers to agree to:Cover the cost of repatriating non-resident workers to the place hired,Train one or more citizen workers to perform the work for which the non-resident worker is employed,Pay a levy of USD 0.25 per hour for every hour of work performed by non-resident worker, to be paid to the Resident Workers Training Account for the purposes of training citizen workers, and repatriating non-resident workers should the need arise.This requirement is set and evaluated on a case by case basis and is usually included as part of a whole package that also includes investment incentives such as favorable taxation statuses.U.S. Citizens do not require a visa to enter the Marshall Islands, and may be employed in the Marshall Islands without obtaining a work permit or a visa.  They must register as an alien with the Department of Immigration on an annual basis.  Though use of local products is encouraged, the government does not follow “forced localization.”The RMI does not currently have laws or regulations on domestic storage or localization requirements.																																												5. Protection of Property Rights						    																																																Real Property										Land rights are a highly complex and frequently contentious issue in the Marshall Islands. Land ownership is through family lineage and according to social class. Paramount Chiefs (Iroij) have title to entire islands or portions of islands within an atoll, clan elders (alaps) have title to several parcels of land under their Paramount Chiefs, and workers (dri-jerbal) have title to the parcel of land associated with their Paramount Chief on which they live. Each parcel of land is thus owned by at least three separate individual landowners, one each from the classes described above. Non-Marshallese may not purchase land, and land purchases by Marshallese are also very rare. Paramount Chiefs may grant land rights to others, though they retain their share of ownership in all circumstances.Available land for development is scarce, particularly in the two major urban areas of Majuro and Ebeye. Non-citizen investors must negotiate lease agreements directly with customary groups of landowners. Land may be leased in perpetuity with many leases having a term of 50 years, and options for renewal.  The Kwajalein land lease to the U.S. Government runs fifty years (to 2066) with an option to renew for another twenty years, for example. Mortgages against the title of land are not permitted, but commercial lease agreements and land lease payments may be used as collateral. There is limited written documentation of titles to land in the Marshall Islands, although local citizens generally know who controls each parcel of land on their particular atoll. In 2003, the Government of the Marshall Islands established a Land Registration Authority to create a voluntary register of customary land and establish a legal framework for recording documents related to ownership rights.																																				Intellectual Property Rights										The Marshall Islands is not a member of the World Trade Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), or any other international agreement on intellectual property rights. There is inadequate protection for intellectual property, patents, copyrights, and trademarks. The only intellectual property-related legislation relates to locally produced music recordings, and it has never been enforced.  The Marshall Islands are not listed on the USTR’s Special 301 Report, nor are they listed in the notorious market report. Pirated DVDs and CDs imported from off-island are readily available.For additional information about national laws and points of contact at local IP offices, please see WIPO’s country profiles at  http://www.wipo.int/directory/en/ .																																												6. Financial Sector						    																																																Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment										There are no stock exchanges or financial regulatory institutions in the country.																																																																							Money and Banking System										There are currently three banks with branches in the Marshall Islands. The Bank of Guam is a publicly owned U.S. company with its headquarters in Guam. It complies with all U.S. regulations and is FDIC-insured. The Bank of the Marshall Islands is a privately-owned Marshallese company with headquarters in Majuro. The Pacific Regional Bank is another privately-owned bank with headquarters in Majuro. Both The Bank of the Marshall Islands and The Pacific Regional Bank are not FDIC-insured.																																				Foreign Exchange and Remittances																										Foreign Exchange						The government does not impose any restrictions on converting or transferring funds associated with an investment. The Marshall Islands uses the U.S. dollar as its official currency, and there is no central bank. There are no official remittance policies and no restrictions on foreign exchange transactions. There have been no reported difficulties in obtaining foreign exchange as the vast majority of funds are denominated in U.S. dollars.						Remittance Policies						While the government encourages reinvestment of profits locally, there are no laws restricting repatriation of profits, dividends, or other investment capital acquired in the Marshall Islands. To comply with international money laundering commitments, cash transactions and transfers exceeding USD 10,000 are reported by the banks to the Banking Commission, which monitors this information and has the authority to investigate financial records when necessary. To date, however, the country has not successfully prosecuted any money laundering cases.																										Sovereign Wealth Funds										The Marshall Islands has no sovereign wealth fund (SWF) or asset management bureau (AMB), but the Compact of Free Association established a Trust Fund for the Marshall Islands that is independently overseen by a committee composed of the United States and Marshall Islands representatives.																																												7. State-Owned Enterprises						    																						Nearly all major industries are controlled by state-owned enterprises (SOEs). The SOE sector, comprising 11 public enterprises, continues to underperform and to impose significant risks and burden on the fiscal system and economy.  In the Republic of the Marshall Islands Single Audit for FY2019, the government recognized the need for continued reforms at SOEs.  Air Marshall Islands, Marshall Islands Resort, and Tobolar have negative cash flows and require subsidies each year, although AMI reportedly broke even for the first time last year.  The Marshall Islands Marine Resource Authority (MIMRA) is the only SOE to be a net revenue provider for the Marshall Islands, but the audit cautioned that the long-term future support from the fisheries sector cannot be taken for granted.  The Marshall Islands is not a member of the WTO.In 2015 the Marshallese parliament passed the State-Owned Enterprises Act which set standards for the formation and operation of SOEs.  The Act changed the way the boards of directors of SOEs are structured, and set minimum reporting requirements for the 11 SOEs.  Boards must consist of at least three but no more than seven directors, only one of which can be a public official and that public official may not hold a term longer than three years.  A public official may not be selected as Chairman of the Board.All SOEs are required to have their books independently audited as part of the government’s overall audit.																										Privatization Program										There is no formal privatization program in the RMI.  Currently, foreign investors are allowed to purchase shares only in the National Telecommunications Agency, but foreign investors may not own a majority of shares. Bidding criteria are not readily available, and the process remains largely controlled by the national government.																																												8. Responsible Business Conduct						    																						The Marshall Islands has some basic worker protection laws, including a minimum wage and protections for foreign workers.  With the exception of a few retail businesses, the banking sector, and the ship registry, there is little general awareness of corporate social responsibility or responsible business conduct among producers or consumers. Firms that pursue these objectives are viewed neither favorably nor unfavorably.  The Marshall Islands does not have significant human or labor rights concerns and does not have a private security industry.																																		9. Corruption						    																						There are credible allegations and periodic prosecutions for misuse of government funds and abuse of public office for private gain. Government procurement and transfers appear most vulnerable to corruption, and personal relationships sometimes play a role in government decisions. Government officials at all levels are permitted to invest in and own private businesses without regard for conflict-of-interest considerations. Foreign aid has been abused and past audits report a number of financial irregularities connected to donor-funded activities. Bribery is a second-degree felony, whether to a domestic or foreign official. The Marshall Islands acceded to the UN Convention against Corruption in September 2011.Domestic and international firms as well as NGOs have repeatedly identified corruption as a problem in the business environment and a major detractor for international firms exploring investment or business activities in the local market.																										Resources to Report Corruption										Bernard AdiniwinAttorney GeneralRMI Attorney General OfficePO Box 890Majuro, Republic of the Marshall Islands 96960bernardadiniwin@gmail.comTel: +692 625 3244Fax: +692 625 5218No international, regional, or local watchdog organizations operate in the country.																																												10. Political and Security Environment						    																						There have been no reported incidents involving politically motivated damage to projects or installations.																																		11. Labor Policies and Practices						    																						The RMI workforce is estimated at 20,963 based on the 2021 economic summary, of which 63 percent work in the public sector. Results from the 2021 Marshall Islands census indicate the country has a 6 percent unemployment rate, and a significant portion of the population remains underemployed as well.Under the Compact of Free Association, Marshallese citizens are entitled to live, attend school, and work in the United States visa-free as “nonimmigrant residents.” Accordingly, many skilled and professional workers migrate to the U.S. for its higher wages and standards of living. Professional, medical, management, and other special labor skills are in high demand in the Marshall Islands.Given the scarcity of resident qualified workers, the Marshall Islands allows investors to employ non-resident workers provided they agree to cover the cost of repatriation, that they hire and train at least one citizen to perform the same work, and pay a levy of USD 0.25 per hour for every hour of work performed by non-resident worker, to be paid to the Resident Workers Training Account for the purposes of training citizen workers, and repatriating non-resident workers should the need arise.  Non-citizen investors issued with a foreign investment business license are exempted from obtaining a work permit for themselves. Also, citizens of the United States, Federated States of Micronesia and Palau do not require work permits to work in the Marshall Islands. Investors and nationals of these countries, however, are required to register with the Labor Office. The RMI government may also issue investors work permit exemptions if investors can demonstrate that their investments will provide substantial economic benefits to the country. Such exemptions are limited to export-oriented investments. Applications for such exemptions should be submitted to the Chief of Labor.Foreign workers are generally hired on a contract basis with opportunities for annual renewals.  The National Training Council provides training resources for Marshallese workers. While many consider the law discriminatory against foreign workers, employers are willing to pay the fee in order to hire skilled labor, which is not widely available in the country. Some companies, particularly in fisheries, seeking to expand business and hire additional workers are limited by other infrastructure constraints, such as the lack of available land, water, and power.There are no laws that require employers to pay a severance package when an employee is released from service, either due to firing or lay-offs.  Arrangements for severance payments are generally made at the time of hire through terms in the hiring instrument.  There is no employment insurance or any other social safety net programs for unemployed individuals.There is no legislation concerning collective bargaining or trade union organization. The country has a very limited history or culture of organized labor. The only union ever created in the country, the Teachers’ Union, was formed several years ago and is inactive. The Marshall Islands has been a member of the International Labor Organization (ILO) since 2007.																																		12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs						    																						The U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) provides investment insurance, financing, and loan guarantees in the Marshall Islands for qualified investors. Because the Marshall Islands uses the U.S. dollar as its national currency, there are no convertibility risks. The Marshall Islands is not a member of the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency.																																		13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics						    																						Table 2: Key Macroeconomic Data, U.S. FDI in Host Country/EconomyHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or International Source of Data:BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherEconomic DataYearAmountYearAmountHost Country Gross Domestic Product (GDP) ($M USD)2021$6,1722021$70,249www.worldbank.org/en/countryForeign Direct InvestmentHost Country Statistical source*USG or international statistical sourceUSG or international Source of data:BEA; IMF; Eurostat; UNCTAD, OtherU.S. FDI in partner country ($M USD, stock positions)2021$3.1 Billion2021$6,489 BillionBEA data available athttps://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/Host country’s FDI in the United States ($M USD, stock positions)2021N/AN/AN/ABEA data available athttps://apps.bea.gov/international/factsheet/Total inbound stock of FDI as % host GDP2021N/AN/AN/AUNCTAD data available athttps://unctad.org/topic/investment/world-investment-reportTable 3: Sources and Destination of FDIData not available.																																		14. Contact for More Information						    																						Allen C. HodgesPolitical/Economic/Consular OfficerU.S. Embassy Majuro;Republic of the Marshall IslandsTel: +692-247-4011 Ext. 2062HodgesAC1@state.govhttp://majuro.usembassy.gov/ http://www.facebook.com/usembassymajuro 																										    							View report by:																				Albania											Algeria											Andorra											Angola											Antigua and Barbuda											Argentina											Armenia											Australia											Austria											Azerbaijan											The Bahamas											Bahrain											Bangladesh											Barbados											Belarus											Belgium											Belize											Benin											Bolivia											Bosnia and Herzegovina											Botswana											Brazil											Brunei											Bulgaria											Burkina Faso											Burma											Burundi											Cabo Verde											Cambodia											Cameroon											Canada											Chile											China											Colombia											Costa Rica											Côte d’Ivoire											Croatia											Cyprus											Czechia											Democratic Republic of the Congo											Denmark											Djibouti											Dominica											Dominican Republic											Ecuador											Egypt											El Salvador											Equatorial Guinea											Eritrea											Estonia											Eswatini											Ethiopia											Fiji											Finland											France and Monaco											The Gambia											Gabon											Georgia											Germany											Ghana											Greece											Grenada											Guatemala											Guinea											Guyana											Honduras											Haiti											Hong Kong											Hungary											Iceland											India											Indonesia											Iraq											Ireland											Israel											Italy											Jamaica											Japan											Jordan											Kazakhstan											Kenya											Kosovo											Kyrgyz Republic											Laos											Latvia											Lebanon											Lesotho											Liberia											Libya											Lithuania											Luxembourg											Macau											Madagascar											Malawi											Malaysia											Maldives											Mali											Malta											Marshall Islands											Mauritania											Mauritius											Mexico											Micronesia											Moldova											Mongolia											Montenegro											Morocco											Mozambique											Namibia											Netherlands											Nepal											New Zealand											Nicaragua											Niger											Nigeria											North Macedonia											Norway											Oman											Pakistan											Palau											Panama											Papua New Guinea											Paraguay											Peru											Philippines											Poland											Portugal											Qatar											Republic of the Congo											Romania											Rwanda											Saint Kitts and Nevis											Saint Lucia											Saint Vincent and the Grenadines											Samoa											Sao Tome and Principe											Saudi Arabia											Senegal											Serbia											Seychelles											Sierra Leone											Singapore											Slovakia											Slovenia											Somalia											South Africa											South Korea											South Sudan											Spain											Sri Lanka											Suriname											Sweden											Switzerland											Taiwan											Tajikistan											Tanzania											Thailand											Timor-Leste											Togo											Trinidad and Tobago											Tunisia											Türkiye											United Arab Emirates											Uganda											Ukraine											United Kingdom											Uruguay											Uzbekistan											Vietnam											West Bank and Gaza											Zambia											Zimbabwe															Build A Custom Report																						On This Page				search													>																										EXECUTIVE SUMMARY																1. Openness To, and Restrictions Upon, Foreign Investment																																							Policies Towards Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Limits on Foreign Control and Right to Private Ownership and Establishment																																																						Other Investment Policy Reviews																																																						Business Facilitation																																																						Outward Investment																																																			2. Bilateral Investment and Taxation Treaties																3. Legal Regime																																							Transparency of the Regulatory System																																																						International Regulatory Considerations																																																						Legal System and Judicial Independence																																																						Laws and Regulations on Foreign Direct Investment																																																						Competition and Antitrust Laws																																																						Expropriation and Compensation																																																						Dispute Settlement																																																				ICSID Convention and New York Convention																																												Investor-State Dispute Settlement																																												International Commercial Arbitration and Foreign Courts																																																																																				Bankruptcy Regulations																																																			4. Industrial Policies																																							Investment Incentives																																																						Foreign Trade Zones/Free Ports/Trade Facilitation																																																						Performance and Data Localization Requirements																																																			5. Protection of Property Rights																																							Real Property																																																						Intellectual Property Rights																																																			6. Financial Sector																																							Capital Markets and Portfolio Investment																																																																			Money and Banking System																																																						Foreign Exchange and Remittances																																																				Foreign Exchange																																												Remittance Policies																																																																																				Sovereign Wealth Funds																																																			7. State-Owned Enterprises																																							Privatization Program																																																			8. Responsible Business Conduct																9. Corruption																																							Resources to Report Corruption																																																			10. Political and Security Environment																11. Labor Policies and Practices																12. U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (DFC), and Other Investment Insurance or Development Finance Programs																13. Foreign Direct Investment Statistics																14. Contact for More Information																						Tags																					Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs																								Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs																								Marshall Islands