This resolution urges that all future U.S. trade agreements must mandate reasonable cooperation from partner nations to facilitate the search and recovery of missing American service members from past conflicts.
Glenn Thompson
Representative
PA-15
This resolution expresses the sense of Congress that all future U.S. trade agreements must require partner nations to provide reasonable access and collaboration for the search and recovery of missing U.S. service members. It directs that cooperation on accounting for Prisoners of War/Missing in Action (POW/MIA) be a mandatory component of international trade partnerships. The goal is to streamline and accelerate efforts to bring closure for families of personnel missing from past conflicts.
Future Trade Deals Must Include POW/MIA Search Access, Congress Says
This Concurrent Resolution is Congress essentially sending a strong memo to the State Department and trade negotiators: from now on, any new trade agreement the U.S. signs needs to come with a non-negotiable clause. That clause requires the partner country to provide “reasonable access and collaboration” for the U.S. to conduct searches, investigations, and recovery efforts for our service members still missing from past conflicts.
Leveraging Trade for Closure
Think of this as Congress using America’s economic leverage to finally address a humanitarian issue. Currently, the Department of Defense (DOD) has to navigate slow, country-specific diplomatic channels to get access to sites in places like Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, and the Korean Peninsula. This resolution is an attempt to streamline that process. Instead of negotiating access on a case-by-case basis, the cooperation—the ability to look for the 1,566 service members missing from the Vietnam era or the 71,853 from WWII—would be baked into the trade deal itself. For the thousands of families still waiting for answers, this could potentially accelerate the process of bringing their loved ones home.
The Fine Print: What is 'Reasonable'?
While the intent is clear and positive, the actual implementation hinges on some vague language. The resolution calls for “reasonable access and collaboration.” This is where things get interesting for the trade teams and the businesses they represent. In a negotiation, one side’s definition of “reasonable” might look very different from the other’s. If a country is trying to finalize a crucial trade agreement that will open up new markets for U.S. manufacturers or agriculture, and the U.S. side insists on a level of access the partner finds difficult or politically sensitive, that vagueness could become a major sticking point. This could slow down the trade deal itself, impacting U.S. industries that rely on swift finalization.
The Real-World Trade-Off
This resolution creates a mandatory link between two very different policy areas: military accountability and global commerce. The goal—securing closure for military families—is universally supported. However, the mechanism—tying it to every future trade agreement—means that the humanitarian mission now becomes a mandatory part of the economic bargaining chip. For the foreign nations involved, this adds another layer of complexity and potential cost to doing business with the U.S. They might see the cooperation clause as a potential hurdle or even a bargaining chip against other U.S. demands. While the resolution itself is not legally binding in the same way a bill is (it’s a “sense of Congress”), it signals a clear policy priority that future administrations will likely have to follow in trade negotiations. It’s a move that prioritizes accountability and history, but it also introduces a new variable into the often-delicate balance of international trade talks.