of loans.152 Indeed, in its interpretation of Article 2 para. 1 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights considers that "the phrase 'to the maximum of its available resources' was intended by the drafters of the Covenant to refer to both the resources existing within a State and those available from the international community through international cooperation and assistance", noting in this regard "the essential role of such cooperation in facilitating the full realization of the relevant rights is further underlined by the specific provisions contained in articles 11, 15, 22 and 23 which refer to international cooperation."153 It also has repeatedly called on States to seek assistance where needed to realise economic, social and cultural rights.154 Indeed, when it sought the clarify the meaning of the "maximum available resources" clause in the context of the Optional Protocol opening a right to victims to file individual communications, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights informed the States parties that "should a State party use 'resource constraints' as an explanation for any retrogressive steps taken, the Committee would consider such information on a country- by-country basis [in particular] in the light of [...] whether the State party had sought cooperation and assistance or rejected offers of resources from the international community for the purposes of implementing the provisions of the Covenant without sufficient reason".155 Foreign aid and loans are considered in turn. a) Seeking international assistance and cooperation The duty of States to seek international support loses much of its significance in the absence of clear duties of other States, or of international agencies, to provide such support as may be requested. Such obligations however still remain "imperfect", in the sense that they are too diffuse and general: both the duty-bearers and the content remain vague and contested, making such obligations unenforceable unless and until they are further clarified.156 The Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has repeatedly affirmed that international assistance and cooperation for the realization of economic, social and cultural rights is "particularly incumbent on those States in a position to assist",157 as well as "other actors in a position to assist".158 That, however, is hardly sufficient to allow a State in need of obtaining support to be able to claim such support from any State to which it turns for assistance. 152 See Alston and Quinn, ‘The Nature and Scope of State Parties’ Obligations under the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights’, cited above note 18, at 179-180 (referring to the positions of various governmental delegates negotiating what became the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, and asserting that the resources available should be seen as including resources from international assistance and cooperation). 153 General Comment No.3, cited above note 41, para. 13. See also Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Statement on an Evaluation of the Obligations to Take Steps to the ‘Maximum Available Resources’ under an Optional Protocol to the Covenant (Thirty-eighth session, 2007) (E/C12/2007/1), para. 5: "The undertaking by a State party to use “the maximum” of its available resources towards fully realizing the provisions of the Covenant entitles it to receive resources offered by the international community. In this regard, the phrase “to the maximum of its available resources" refers to both the resources existing within a State as well as those available from the international community through international cooperation and assistance". 154 See for instance, Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Concluding Observations: Democratic Republic of the Congo (E/C.12/COD/CO/4) (2009), paras. 16-17. 155 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Statement on an Evaluation of the Obligations to Take Steps to the ‘Maximum Available Resources’ under an Optional Protocol to the Covenant, cited above note 153, para. 10, f). 156 The notion of "imperfect obligations", though originally derived from Kant, is inspired here by Amartya K. Sen, ‘Rights and Capabilities’, in A. K. Sen (ed.), Resources, Values and Development (Oxford: Blackwell, 1984), at 310-315; Amartya K. Sen, The Idea of Justice (Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 2009) 359-361 and 382-383. This raises the important question, of course, whether there can be a "right" (in this case, a right of a State to be provided support) if the correlative obligations are only "imperfect" (because neither the actor which should provide support, nor the level of support to be provided, are clearly defined). Comp. O. O'Neill, Towards Justice and Virtue: A Constructive Account of Practical Reasoning (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), at 127-128, with A.K. Sen, ‘A Positive Concept of Negative Freedom’, in E. Morscher and R. Stranzinger (eds.), Ethics: Foundations, Problems and Applications, Proceedings of the 5th International Wittgenstein Symposium (Vienna: Holder-Pichler-Tempsky, 1981), 2-20. 157 General Comment No. 3, cited above note 41, para. 14; General Comment No. 14 (2000), cited above note 30, para. 45; Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Statement on Poverty adopted on 4 May 2001 (E/C.12/2001/10), para. 16; Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No.17: The right of everyone to benefit from the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author (art. 15 (1) (c)) (E/C.12/GC/17) (2006), para. 37. 158 General Comment No. 14 (2000), cited above note 30, para. 45; Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, Statement on Poverty, cited above note 157, para. 16. 33