Abstract
AbstractExtraterritorial maritime interdiction is a common tactic used by destination states to keep unwanted migrants from reaching their borders. But it is problematic, raising legal concerns about refoulement as well as political concerns about sovereignty. Where did extraterritorial interdiction come from, and how has it become so widespread? This article draws on archival sources and contemporaneous legal opinions from within the Reagan administration to tell the origin story of the pivotal 1981 United States–Haiti agreement that pioneered this model of border control. Even at the time of adoption, this agreement faced legal challenges, and was viewed as a solution of last resort. Yet many of the legal challenges of modern extraterritorial interdiction trace back to the unique circumstances shaping this first agreement—including the need to cooperate with countries of embarkation, anticipatory determination of attempted entry and the offshoring of protection responsibilities. They were locked in by path-dependent feedback mechanisms domestically and then diffused internationally.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
