This is related to the various immigration threads. The WTO/GATT, which is quickly getting every nation on board, governs TRADE among member nations. And, the general notion is that you can not pass protectionist trade laws. WTO governance, once you sign on, is not optional (like the ICJ) - all members can be called into the WTO tribunal by any other member. The text of the WTO Treaty documents that constitute international law is at:
http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/final_e.htm
Generally, protectionist laws are stricken down... erm, rather sanctioned. There are exceptions to try to pigeon-hole yourself into (several in Article XX of GATT, and the side agreements on Technical Barriers to Trade and on Sanitary/Phytosanitary measures), but generally they're quite limited. EU got it's ban on hormone-treated beef and definitions of bananas (to only include the ones it wanted to buy) sanctioned. The US has had its foreign tax credit knocked about and (mark my words) is about to get slapped for steel tarriffs (Bush was even vocal about protectionism). Now, the penalty for being protectionist: the country you offended with your sanctions gets to tax you an equal $$$ in tariffs to make up for the wrongdoing. Usually, these are unrelated things. Regarding past protectionist laws, the EU has been sanctioned by allowing the US to impose higher tarriffs on such inane things as Ducati motorcycles.
But, there's a juggle-the-system shell game that goes on. When your first protectionist law is found to violate the WTO/GATT, just draft another one that tries to be protectionist in an okay way. At least you buy yourself time - usually a year or two. EU rewrote the definition of "banana" 3 or 4 times; the US is again reinventing its foreign tax credit.
Now, the rest of this post assumes that this enforceable but unweildy system actually gets nations to change their tarriff structures and comply.
THE LABOR BIT: In the end, this leads to the movement of labor. Take steel as an example. If the US decreases its tarriffs to comply with the WTO, US steelworkers, making $20-$30/hr, will drive the US businesses under when competing against foreign steelworkers making less - especially in industries where labor is a huge % of the costs. Jobs will flee the country, or cheap labor must be found. Americans won't work for less than minimum wage, but illegal immigrants will gladly do so. The tarriff regime sets in motion an inevitable shift in the economy that will trigger the movement of labor.
THE ENVIRONMENT BIT: As another example of a by-product of the WTO, let's look to the environment. Again, US products that have to comport with a higher enviro standard necessarily carry a higher cost for doing so. They ultimately can't compete against cheaper products made in countries where there are no environmental controls (which is why the products are cheaper to begin with). Thus, these situations create a "race to the bottom."
THE REAL PROBLEM: The real problem is that the WTO, the only enforceable, relative-quick-to-act form of internation governance concerns one thing: TRADE. But, that thing implicates many other things, such as labor and the environment. Thus, while TRADE - one of government's functions - is governed internationally, nothing else really is. Thus, there is no international Labor treaty to offset the labor problems created by GATT/WTO. And, when asked about this, the WTO quite blatantly states: "We do TRADE, nothing else." It's like having the SEC as the only government agency.
I think in the long run, either (A) sister organizations will pop up to deal with the other parts of our budding international governmental system, or (B) the WTO will start expanding its scope to deal with the problems it causes. Either way, any solution puts us further down the path to a global government that will ultimately develop.
[ 11-04-2002, 11:47 AM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]