by foreign flag vessels. The government also questions the standing of RCCL to litigate rights under international law treaties as treaty rights, if any, generally accrue to sovereign nations and not to individual defendants. See, e.g., U.S. v. Noriega, 746 F.Supp. 1506, 1533 (S.D.Fla.1990) (“The rationale behind this rule is that treaties are ‘designed to protect the sovereign interests of nations, and it is up to the offending nations to determine whether a violation of sovereign interests occurred and requires redress’ ” (quoting U.S. v. Zabaneh, 837 F.2d 1249,1261 (5th Cir.1988)). Individuals may possess standing under an international law treaty if there is a treaty and it is self-executing. See, e.g., Haitian Refugee Center v. Baker, 949 F.2d 1109,1110-11 (11th Cir.1991) (<HOLDING>); see also U.S. v. Thompson, 928 F.2d 1060,
holding that article 33 of the 1967 united nations protocol relating to status of refugees did not afford enforceable rights to haitian refugees because it is not selfexecuting and thus provides no enforceable rights holding federal regulations have the force of law and may create enforceable rights holding that a waiver of right to appeal contained in a plea agreement is enforceable holding that waivers of  2255 collateral attack rights must be expressly stated to be enforceable holding that because federal regulations have the force of law they may create enforceable rights under  1983