F. with the participation of the High-Level Joint Committee on the Status of Other Bilateral Scientific and Technological Arrangements regarding the political framework of this agreement; International agreements to promote cooperation in scientific research and development can be bilateral or multilateral, at the level of government or at the level of individual technical agencies (. B, for example, the National Science Foundation or the National Institutes of Health). This document focuses on bilateral government-wide agreements, also known as framework agreements, framework agreements or simple S-T agreements. Scientific cooperation between the United States and other countries requires a large number of agreements, ranging from informal scientific cooperation to cooperation between research institutes, to formal agreements between technical agencies. While S-T agreements are not necessary for such interactions, other nations often seek S-T agreements with the United States because they have the weight of being legally binding and being negotiated on behalf of the U.S. government. These agreements aim to create a framework to promote international scientific cooperation while protecting intellectual property, creating benefit sharing and preventing the taxation of research equipment. The content of an S-T agreement generally contains common features such as types of cooperation activities and opportunities for access to facilities and personnel, as well as clarification that certain information or equipment, such as those that need to be protected for national security reasons, is not covered by the agreement. There are three areas in which the text of the treaty often varies: (1) the preamble, which is not legally binding and is often used to highlight the public motivations behind the agreement; (2) the Intellectual Property Rights Annex, which describes how parties share and exploit the intellectual property produced; and (3) the implementation plan, including the establishment of a joint committee that meets regularly to review the implementation of the agreement. In the case of Libya, the signing of an S-T agreement in 2006 was a sign of a radical change in political relations. In December 2003, after more than three decades of strained relations, the United States declared Libya the godfather of terror, announced its intention to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction and long-range missile programs, and began cooperating with international partners. With these measures, the United States gradually recommitted itself, sensitive to public concerns about compensation for the families of the victims of the Lockerbie airliner and the Berlin disco bombings.

American diplomats returned to Tripoli in February 2004 after a 24-year absence. In the summer of 2006, a week after the U.S. State Department rescinded Libya`s appointment for terrorism, Paula Dobriansky, Secretary of State for Democracy and Global Affairs, was on a plane to Tripoli, accompanied by a high-level delegation of U.S. scientific officials. Science has been at the forefront of this diplomatic journey, which was to mark a “new phase in U.S.-Libyan relations” and demonstrate the U.S. commitment to bilateral cooperation in areas such as disease surveillance that would benefit Libyan society.5 “Just as we have seen tremendous regional progress in the Abraham Accords, we also see the tangible benefits of President Trump`s policy on bilateral cooperation with Israel. After the protocol signed here in Judea and Samaria comes into force, other Israeli partners will be entitled to funds for scientific cooperation in the most diverse fields.