At the beginning of the 20th century, the British writer Norman Angell wrote his famous book called The Big Illusion in which he proclaimed that economic progress and the growth of world trade had made war obsolete.. He argued that countries no longer get rich through conquest..

Industrial workers cannot be exploited like peasants. And even small countries can thrive by importing raw materials and selling goods on world markets.. Moreover, a war between economically interconnected countries will be too expensive even for the winner.. Angell did not prophesy a complete end to all wars. And this is good for his credibility, since the carnage of the First World War was just around the corner.. However, he hoped that he would convince politicians to give up dreams of military glory, writes American economist and Nobel Prize winner in economics Paul Krugman in an article for the New York Times, adding that Angell's logic suggested that closer economic ties between countries could strengthen international.

[see_also ids\u003d"

Eventually the idea of \u200b\u200bpeace through trade became the cornerstone of Western statesmanship after World War II.. Krugman recalls the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which has set the rules for international trade since 1948.. This trading system owes much of its origin to Cordell Hull, who was Secretary of State in the administration of Franklin Roosevelt.. He considered international trade a force that brings both prosperity and peace..

The road to the European Union began with the creation of the European Coal and Steel Community, one of the goals of which was to create such a greater interdependence between France and Germany that a new war in Europe would become impossible..

“But now, as I write this column, the US, which has largely built the international trading system, is imposing trade restrictions in the name of national security, frankly claiming they have the right to do whatever they want.. When the Donald Trump administration did this, it was possible to dismiss such behavior as an aberration.. Donald Trump and his entourage were pure mercantilists with no sense of the historical reasons behind trade rules.. But the same cannot be said of Joe Biden's officials, who understand both economics and history.. Did the world really end through trade ', writes Krugman.

In his opinion, this is not entirely true.. But this doctrine has largely fallen out of favor in recent times for several reasons.. First, the idea that trade makes peace is only true in democracies.. The US briefly invaded Mexico in 1916, unsuccessfully trying to capture one of the leaders of the Mexican Revolution, Pancho Villa. It's hard to imagine something like this happening today when Mexican factories have become an integral part of the North American production system..

[see_also ids\u003d"

“But can we say with equal certainty that a similar deep integration of Taiwan into the Chinese industrial system would rule out any possibility of an invasion » - asks the economist.

He notes that, unfortunately, authoritarianism has been on the rise in many countries around the world in recent times.. This was partly because some shaky democracies fell apart. Another reason is that some autocracies, especially China, have opened up to the world economically but not politically.. And these autocracies achieved rapid economic growth.

But what about the idea that greater integration with the global economy will be the driving force behind democratization This idea has been a key pillar of the economic diplomacy of some Western countries, in particular Germany, who have made a big bet on the doctrine under the slogan Wandel durch Handel or "

“But if you look at Vladimir Putin’s Russia or Xi Jinping’s China, it becomes clear that this doctrine has failed.. China opened up to international trade over 40 years ago, Russia 30 years ago. But none of these countries show any signs of becoming a democracy or a country with a strong rule of law,” notes the economist.

“In fact, international interdependence could make the current war in Ukraine more likely.. It is not foolish to assume that Putin expected his conquest of Kyiv in Europe to be accepted precisely because of the continent's dependence on Russian gas,” Krugman writes..

[see_also ids\u003d"

He emphasizes that he does not consider the idea of \u200b\u200bpeace through trade to be completely wrong.. A war in the heart of Europe (although, unfortunately, not in its vicinity) has become difficult to imagine precisely because of economic integration.. Wars over access to raw materials are less likely than before. But the dream of a “trading world” has lost much of its power..

And this, according to Krugman, is very important..

He explains that the current world order largely reflects strategic considerations.. Leaders, especially in the US, believed that more or less free trade would make the world more sympathetic to Western political values.. And the world will be safer for America. But now even internationalist politicians like Biden administration officials aren't sure about that.. Krugman emphasizes that this is a very big change..