Prospects and challenges of Free Trade Agreements unlocking business opportunities in Gulf Co-Operation Council (GCC) markets

Prospects and Challenges with Free Trade Agreements presents the results of a study that assesses the effectiveness of free trade agreements (FTAs) in unlocking international business opportunities in member states of the Gulf Cooperation ...

Free Trade Agreements and US Foreign Policy

The United States has completed numerous free trade agreements (FTAs), but the pattern of these agreements defies conventional explanations. Arguments that are based on domestic interests and economic gains cannot explain the comparative under-performance of US trade agreements. The pattern of US trade agreements is also inconsistent with explanations that focus on state power, which depict FTAs as a “reward” for loyal clients. This article finds a better explanation for the pattern of the United States’ FTAs by consideringthe systemic level of analysis, and in particular the dynamics of the international economic order. It illustrates that strong competition for bilateral trade agreements has resulted in patterns of agreements that the United States cannot easily dominate. This is not to say that the United States has no capacity to finalize trade agreements: the United States remains the world’s most influential nation-state, but the constraints of the international system necessarily limit the degree to which FTAs can serve the interests of US foreign economic policy. The recent evolution of international trade politics, however, indicates that smaller states are comparatively less vulnerable to pressure from great powers, such as the United States.

From chemical warfare to peace

Following the horrors of chemical warfare in two World Wars and the Vietnam War (see box), the international community worked to develop an encompassing treaty to prevent the use of chemical weapons. After extensive work, the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on their Destruction came into force in 1997. Commonly known as the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC), it requires member states to declare and destroy chemical weapons and provides for inspection of facilities and investigation into alleged use. The CWC has been ratified by 190 countries and is administered by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Warfare (OPCW). In 2013, the OPCW won the Nobel Peace prize "for its extensive efforts to eliminate chemical weapons". Notable in the official announcement is the reminder that neither the US nor Russia met the 2012 deadline for destruction of their stockpiles of chemical weapons, although both have made significant progress. In July 2005, an invitational joint International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC)/OPCW Conference concluded that for the work of OPCW to succeed and be sustainable, engagement in formal educational contexts and public outreach was needed. To this end, the Multiple Uses of Chemicals website

From Darfur to Sinai to Kashmir: Ethno-religious conflicts and legalization

This paper attempts to examine agreements between two high conflict states - India and Pakistan - in comparison with those between parties characterized by high degrees of conflict along ethnic and religious lines, from a theoretical perspective with a view to determining if legalization has any correlation between the commitments embodied in agreements between such states and the degree of compliance. For purposes of comparison, I examine the historic agreement between Israel and Egypt, and the Darfur Peace Agreement (DPA) as exemplars of similar conflicts where legalization has salience. I adopt the lens of legalization articulated by Abbott, et al, and bring recent advances from the intersection of international relations theory and international law to the design and structuring of agreements between states beset by persistent hostilities. I analyse agreements between India and Pakistan, Israel and Egypt, and the Darfur Peace Agreement, to demonstrate that agreements that are high on the precision-obligation-delegation matrix enjoy higher degrees of success than those that are low on this matrix when concluded between high conflict states. I conclude by arguing that India and Pakistan should aim for hard legalization to solve the Kashmir dispute, and that they must learn from the painful experience of the Darfur Peace Agreement and include non-state actors as signatories to any agreement.

Democracy, regional autonomy and peace in Aceh

 This thesis examines the dynamics of post-conflict democracy which is crucial means of permanent peace in Aceh. The study is based on the interviews with former combatants, government and political leaders during the elections in 2012 and 2014 in Aceh, Indonesia.