Texas Trading & Milling Corp. and other companies brought an action for breach of contract against the Republic of Nigeria and its central bank. Nigeria, a rapidly developing and oil-rich nation, had contracted to purchase more cement from Texas Trading than it could use. Unable to accept delivery of the cement, Nigeria repudiated the contract, claiming immunity under the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976 because the buyer of the cement was the Nigerian government. Assume that you are the judge in the trial court hearing this case and answer the following questions.
1. What section of the FSIA is particularly applicable to this dispute?
2. Given the provisions of that section, should the doctrine of sovereign immunity remove the dispute from the jurisdiction of U.S. courts? Explain your reasoning.