Http://www.gwu.edu/~elliott/faculty/aaronson.cfm

Scholars and policymakers have long believed that the interdependence encouraged by trade relations encourages trust and peaceful relations.  In this article, we examine the role of the GATT/WTO (and the trade it supposedly encourages) in conflict zones.  Although the WTO is built on the notion that trade stimulates peace, policymakers really don’t know how more or less trade affects the human rights conditions of citizens living in zones of conflict.  Policymakers often try to reduce trade in such zones in the hopes that sanctioning trade will reduce conflict.  Yet, at other times, policymakers try to encourage trade in conflict zones.  We show that policymakers have used several avenues under the WTO to discuss and address human rights in member states experiencing conflict or in post-conflict recovery.  We then focus on how policymakers can achieve greater coherence among trade and human rights policies in conflict zones

As the major players in globalization, firms often operate in states where human rights may not be respected. Without direct intent, firms may be complicit in human rights violations. In 2008, John Ruggie, the United Nations (UN) Special Representative on business and human rights, developed a framework for policymakers to protect human rights and for executives to respect human rights. On 16 June 2011, the UN Human Rights Council endorsed Ruggie’s “Guiding Principles” (GPs) for implementing this framework. This article describes how firms, states, and to a lesser extent nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), have responded to this delineation of the human rights responsibilities of business. This article makes four key points: 1) the GPs are an important advance in global governance; 2) the process of developing the GPs was a model of transparent, inclusive twenty-first century governance, although the public is generally unaware of the issue or the new policy; 3) the GPs are a creative and broad rethinking of how to evaluate the human rights performance of corporations; and 4) the GPs are unlikely to have much influence unless policymakers educate their national firms and their citizens regarding the human rights responsibilities of business and press these executives to act.

Executive Summary: A growing number of nations including Canada, Chile, the EU, New Zealand, Norway, Switzerland and the US, now include labor rights provisions in their free trade agreements. But we don't yet know if such links actually empower workers or lead to improved labor rights governance. Moreover, because each government takes a different approach to these agreements, policymakers may be sending confusing signals on how to promote labor rights; what labor rights are internationally accepted core labor rights; and ...