Many types of executive agreements include ordinary daily water from diplomatic mills. These include slight territorial adaptations, border remediation, border surveillance, regulation of fishing rights, private money rights against another government or its nationals, in the words of Story « the only rights deprived of sovereignty ». 467 Crandall lists a large number of such agreements concluded with other governments with the approval of the President468 These agreements generally concerned specific and relatively trivial disputes, and the settlement which they have as their effect ipso facto loses their effects. There are also diplomatic means as venerable as the « protocol », which marks a phase of negotiation of a contract, and the modus vivendi, which must serve as a temporary substitute for you. Executive agreements become constitutional if they are a determining factor for future foreign policy and, therefore, for the fate of the country. Especially as a result of our participation in the Second World War and our immersion in the conditions of the prevailing international tensions and after the war, presidents reached agreements with other governments, some of which brought temporary alliances closer together. However, it cannot rightly be said that they acted without significant support from precedents. At that time, John Hay, as McKinley`s foreign minister, launched his « open door » policy with notes to Britain, Germany, and Russia, quickly followed by similar notes in France, Italy, and Japan. The end result of this series of executive agreements affecting U.S. relations in and with the Far East was the result of President Wilson`s diplomacy. This was the Lansing Ishii Agreement, embodied in an exchange of letters of November 2, 1917, by which the United States recognized Japan`s « special interests » in China and reminded Japan of the open door principle in that country.480 The Garamendi diktat recognizes some of the issues that may be raised by Zernig. .

. .