Interdependence vs. Independence: Did Trade Really Prevent War?
One of the big promises of Pax Americana was that free trade would keep the peace.
This idea, often called liberal peace theory, says that countries tied together by economic interdependence are less likely to go to war. Why? Because war is bad for business—and countries with shared markets, supply chains, and investments have too much to lose.
And for decades, it seemed to hold up:
No world wars since 1945.
A massive drop in direct conflicts between major powers.
Trade grew exponentially. So did global GDP.
But now, more than 75 years later, the cracks are showing.
So it’s worth asking: Did trade really prevent war—or just change the way conflict happens?
The Theory: Peace Through Trade
After WWII, the U.S. built a system that:
Encouraged countries to trade with each other (and especially with the U.S.)
Tied global markets together
Created shared economic incentives
The logic was elegant: if your economy depends on your enemy, you can’t afford to fight them.
And to some extent, it worked:
Germany and France went from centuries of war to peaceful neighbors.
Japan and the U.S. became allies through trade.
China and the U.S. became deeply linked despite deep political differences.
The Cracks in the System
But peace didn’t always mean harmony—and trade didn’t always stop violence.
Proxy wars
The Cold War didn’t lead to direct U.S.-Soviet war, but it did fuel bloody conflicts in:
Vietnam
Korea
Latin America
Africa
Trade didn’t stop war—it outsourced it to other regions.
Exploitation and inequality
Interdependence also meant dependency.
Many countries remained locked in resource-export roles, reliant on U.S. or Western markets.
That created resentment, unrest, and long-term instability.
Strategic backfires
• China grew into a strategic rival—powered by the very trade system the U.S. built.
• Russia traded freely with the West—until it didn’t.
• Sanctions became a tool of war-by-other-means, punishing civilians while elites adapted.
The Domestic Cost: A Tradeoff Too Far?
Here’s the twist: even as global conflict declined, internal tension in the U.S. grew.
Entire industries hollowed out by offshoring.
Middle-class jobs replaced with low-wage service work.
Entire regions left behind by a system that was supposed to bring prosperity.
Trade may have stabilized the world—but it came with a bill.
And too often, American workers were the ones stuck paying it.
What Comes Next
Next week, we’ll turn the lens inward.
We’ll look at how this grand strategy—meant to spread peace, grow economies, and lift all boats—ended up capsizing industries and communities right here at home.
Because if Pax Americana was built on trade, the cracks in that system started showing not in Europe or Asia—but in places like Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania.