Editing Economic interdependence (section)

== Economic interdependence and conflict ==
International relations scholars are divided as to whether economic interdependence contributes to peace or conflict. Statistical analyses indicate that economic interdependence can lead both to war and peace, with various factors that condition the effect of interdependence.<ref name=":3">{{Cite book|last=Copeland|first=Dale C.|title=Economic Interdependence and War|date=2015|volume=148 |publisher=Princeton University Press|isbn=978-0-691-16159-4|location=|pages=1–25|doi=10.2307/j.ctt7ztkw2 |jstor=j.ctt7ztkw2}}</ref> [[Dale C. Copeland]] argues that expectations about future trade affects whether economic interdependence is likely to lead to peace or conflict; when leaders do not believe that future trade patterns will be favorable, they are more likely to engage in conflict and competition than when they believe that future trade patterns will be beneficial to their state.<ref name=":3" /> According to [[Henry Farrell (political scientist)|Henry Farrell]] and [[Abraham L. Newman]], states can "weaponize interdependence" by fighting over control of important nodes in global networks of informational and financial exchange.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal |last1=Farrell |first1=Henry |last2=Newman |first2=Abraham L. |date=2019 |title=Weaponized Interdependence: How Global Economic Networks Shape State Coercion |journal=International Security |volume=44 |issue=1 |pages=42–79 |doi=10.1162/isec_a_00351 |issn=0162-2889 |s2cid=198952367|doi-access=free }}</ref> Realists such as [[John Mearsheimer]] and [[Joseph Grieco]] argue that interdependence increase the risk of conflict by creating dependencies and vulnerabilities that states will seek to rid themselves off; for example, states will fear that other states cut off access to key resources.<ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|last=Mearsheimer|first=John J.|date=1994|title=The False Promise of International Institutions|journal=International Security|volume=19|issue=3|pages=5–49|doi=10.2307/2539078|jstor=2539078|s2cid=153472054|issn=0162-2889}}</ref><ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|last=Grieco|first=Joseph M.|date=1988|title=Anarchy and the Limits of Cooperation: A Realist Critique of the Newest Liberal Institutionalism|journal=International Organization|volume=42|issue=3|pages=485–507|doi=10.1017/S0020818300027715|jstor=2706787|s2cid=148193812 |issn=0020-8183}}</ref>

[[Beth A. Simmons|Beth Simmons]] and Patrick McDonald argue that interdependence creates groups in liberal capitalist states with vested interests in the status quo, which makes conflict less likely.<ref name=":4">{{Cite book|last=McDonald|first=Patrick|title=The invisible hand of peace: capitalism, the war machine, and international relations theory|publisher=Princeton University Press|year=2009|isbn=978-7-5097-9283-4|location=|pages=|oclc=988390516}}</ref><ref name=":6">{{Cite book|last=Simmons|first=Beth|title=Economic interdependence and international conflict: new perspectives on an enduring debate|date=2003|publisher=University of Michigan Press|isbn=0-472-09827-6|location=|pages=|chapter=Pax Mercatoria and the Theory of the State|oclc=51304096}}</ref> However, illiberal states or states where domestic groups benefit from trade barriers may be more likely to end up in conflict over trade relations.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Mcdonald|first1=Patrick J.|last2=Sweeney|first2=Kevin|date=2007|title=The Achilles' Heel of Liberal Ir Theory? Globalization and Conflict in the Pre-World War I Era|journal=World Politics|volume=59|issue=3|pages=370–403|doi=10.1017/S0043887100020864|jstor=40060163|s2cid=154331885|issn=0043-8871}}</ref><ref name=":4" /> According to Stephen G. Brooks, globalization of production has had a pacifying impact on great powers by (i) making it hard for great powers to have cutting edge military technology without being part of global supply chains, (ii) reducing incentives to conquer the territory of economically advanced countries, and (iii) facilitating regional integration.<ref name=":5" />

The [[outbreak of World War I]] during a period of unprecedented globalization and economic interdependence has often been cited as an example of how economic interdependence fails to prevent war or even contributes to it.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Rowe|first=David M.|date=2005|title=The Tragedy of Liberalism How Globalization Caused the First World War|journal=Security Studies|volume=14|issue=3|pages=407–447|doi=10.1080/09636410500323153|s2cid=144723501|issn=0963-6412}}</ref> Other scholars dispute that World War I was a failure for liberal theory.<ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last1=Gartzke|first1=Erik|last2=Lupu|first2=Yonatan|date=2012|title=Trading on Preconceptions: Why World War I Was Not a Failure of Economic Interdependence|journal=International Security|volume=|pages=|doi=10.2139/ssrn.1706942|issn=1556-5068|url=http://repository.essex.ac.uk/8630/1/ISEC_a_00078.pdf }}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Gowa|first1=Joanne|last2=Hicks|first2=Raymond|date=2017|title=Commerce and Conflict: New Data about the Great War|url=https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/british-journal-of-political-science/article/abs/commerce-and-conflict-new-data-about-the-great-war/8F6B8410BDB042EFA5E43DA17E72FC70|journal=British Journal of Political Science|language=en|volume=47|issue=3|pages=653–674|doi=10.1017/S0007123415000289|s2cid=155842355|issn=0007-1234|via=|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

According to a 2005 assessment of existing research, the existing research indicated that trade linkages reduce conflict.<ref name=":5">{{Cite book|last=Brooks|first=Stephen G.|title=Producing Security: Multinational Corporations, Globalization, and the Changing Calculus of Conflict|date=2005|volume=102 |publisher=Princeton University Press|doi=10.2307/j.ctt7sjz7 |jstor=j.ctt7sjz7|isbn=978-0-691-13031-6}}</ref>