The political issue of SOFA is complicated by the fact that many host countries have mixed feelings about foreign bases on their soil and that SOFA renegotiation requests are often linked to calls for a total withdrawal of foreign troops. Issues of different national practices may arise – while the United States and host countries in general agree on what constitutes a crime, many American observers believe that the host country`s judicial systems offer much lower protection than the United States and that the host country`s courts may be under pressure from the public to be found guilty; In addition, U.S. service members who are invited to send shipments abroad should not be forced to waive their rights under the Rights Act. On the other hand, observers of the host country who do not have a local equivalent of the law of rights often feel that these are irrelevant excuses for special treatment and resemble the extraterritorial agreements demanded by Western countries during colonialism. A host country where such sentiment is widespread, South Korea, itself has forces in Kyrgyzstan and has negotiated a SOFA that gives its members total immunity from prosecution by the Kyrgyz authorities for any crime, which goes far beyond the privileges that many South Koreans enter into their country`s couch with the United States.  The temporary deployment in Germany of armed forces from the Partnership for Peace (PfP) and other third countries requires an agreement under the Visiting Forces Act of 20 July 1995 (Bundesgesetzblatt 1995 II, p.554, Bundesgesetzblatt 2002, p.2482). Under Article 1 of the Act, the federal government can make such agreements with foreign states effective regarding the entry and short-term presence of their armed forces in Germany for exercises, overland transit and legal instrument training. So far, the federal government has concluded such agreements with Poland (agreement of 23 August 2000) and the Czech Republic (agreement of 31 July 2003). The presence of NATO troops stationed in Germany on the basis of a special agreement is subject to the NATO Agreement on the Status of the Armed Forces (SOFA) of 19 June 1951 (agreement between the contracting parties to the North Atlantic Treaty on the Status of their armed forces, Bundesgesetzblatt 1961 II p.1190) and the additional SOFA agreement of 3 August 1959 (agreement complementing the agreement between the contracting parties to the North Atlantic Treaty on the status of (Bundesgesetzblatt 1961 II P.1218). The additional agreement contains detailed provisions on all matters relating to troops stationed in Germany. Following German unification, it was deeply revised by the agreement of 18 March 1993 (Bundesgesetzblatt 1994 II, p.2594).
An Agreement on the Status of the Armed Forces (SOFA) is an agreement between a host country and a foreign nation that deploys military forces in that country. CANPAÉs are often included with other types of military agreements as part of a comprehensive security agreement. A CANAPÉ is not a safety device; it establishes the rights and privileges of foreign staff in a host country in order to support the greater security regime.  Under international law, a force status agreement differs from military occupation. A recent example of a bilateral agreement on the status of German armed forces abroad is the German-Russian transit agreement of 9 October 2003 (agreement between the Government of the Federal Republic of Germany and the Government of the Russian Federation on the transit of defence equipment and personnel through the territory of the Russian Federation with regard to the contributions of the Federal Army to the stabilization and reconstruction of Afghanistan , Bundesgesetzblatt 2003 II P.1620).