It is widely believed that war is, at times, unavoidable.  I don’t completely disagree.  There are circumstances where there is a completely hostile nation that is invading your own nation it is your government’s duty to protect your property and your rights by repelling the invading force.  However, in the twentieth century and into the twenty-first we have only seen wars fought on foreign soil.  It has led me to wonder if these wars are at all avoidable.  After all, war destroys lives and costs unimaginable sums of money – two things that most anyone would hope to avoid.

How would a nation go about avoiding conflict with other nations?  Free trade.  As difficult as this question seems, the answer to avoiding war is remarkably simple.  In virtually every conflict the United States has engaged in within the past century the nation with which we were quarrelling was not one with which we traded freely.

The following is a list comprising the top 10 trade partners of the United States for 2007:

1.    Canada – 18.0%
2.    China – 12.4%
3.    Mexico – 11.1%
4.    Japan – 6.7%
5.    Germany – 4.6%
6.    United Kingdom – 3.4%
7.    South Korea – 2.6%
8.    France – 2.2%
9.    Taiwan – 2.1%
10.    Netherlands – 1.6%

Since 2004 the only deviation from this list has been Malaysia in the place of the Netherlands.  The United States has had no serious military conflict with any of these nations since the end of the Korean War in 1953 (North Korea was heavily backed by China in that conflict, whereas China was only a minor influence in the Vietnam War).

There are currently no military hostilities between the United States and any one of those nations.  It is not a coincidence.  Of the major wars in the 20th and 21st centuries, WWI, WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, Afghanistan War, and the Iraq War have all included the United States battling with a country with which it did not open up free trade prior to the hostilities.

Pre-WWI Europe was flush with high tariffs and other suffocating trade barriers that prohibited much trade between nations.  The United States had passed the McKinley Act, which had increased already protective tariffs and duties to levels that all but eliminated trade.  After President Taft tried to rally congress to lower tariffs they passed the Payne-Aldrich Tariff Act, which did virtually nothing to lower tariffs.  Trade was stagnant as World War I broke out.  Having no ties to U.S. trade the German Navy began sinking U.S. merchant ships.  The United States abandoned its neutral position on the war and millions of people were slaughtered and countless sums of money were spent as a result of World War I.  It was only after World War I that the United States signed a trade agreement with Germany that would allow for a freer flow of goods and services between inhabitants of the nations.  Unfortunately that agreement would not last long.

In 1934, under President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the United States severed its trading ties to Germany, making trade with the nation impossible.  In July of 1941 the United States and other western nations severed all trade with Japan.  Having nothing left to lose, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941.  Again, all trade had been cutoff with both the United States’ to-be-enemies before there was ever any hostile action.  As a result, hostile action became an incentive and the U.S. was dragged into the Second World War, where again millions of people and countless sums of money were disposed of.  As was the case with the previous World War, free trade between the United States and its foes was only reopened after a devastating war had taken place.  Trade between the U.S., Japan, and Germany has proven to be very constructive to each economy and there are now no military tensions between any of the nations where there used to be a societal hatred.

Subsequent to World War II, Japan’s reign in Korea ended and Korea was left with the capitalist government of the South and the communist government of the North.  Both governments wished to control the nation.  The United States and its allies did not trade with the communist North and the USSR and its allies did not trade with the capitalist South.  Eventually there was a civil war from 1950 to 1953 between the north and the south; the United States defended the South and China defended the North.  Eventually a stalemate ended in the nation being divided in two, leaving North Korea and South Korea.  The United States still maintains crippling tariffs on any goods coming from North Korea, effectively shutting down trade with the nation.  Hostilities are still rampant between the United States and North Korea today.  South Korea and the United State have, conversely, opened up free trade and both nations have benefited greatly.

Prior to the Vietnam War the United States and Vietnam had made trade very difficult as they had enacted tariffs approaching 50% on nearly every good that each country might export.  Trade between the United States and North Vietnam was virtually non-existent, as they were communist and received subsidized goods from the USSR.  Tensions between the North and the South led to a civil war with the United States financing and committing military forces to the defense of the South and the USSR and China financing, though only providing limited military forces to, the defense of the North.  Subsequent to the U.S. exit from the conflict all trade relations with Vietnam were cutoff.  It was only after the fall of the Soviet Union that the United States reopened trade with Vietnam and both nations have greatly benefited and have no tensions today.

Total trade (exports + imports) between the United States and Afghanistan in 2000 amounted to $8.8 million.  In 2001 that amount shrunk to $6.8 million.  In essence, there was no trade between the two nations.  After the events of September 11, 2001, the United States needed a target and what better target than the nation with which it engaged in the least trade?  Since the United States gained control of Afghanistan trade relations have improved, but the total trade between the two nations is still minimal.  The United States still occupies Afghanistan today and fighting continues.

In 1990 the UN placed sanctions on Iraq that prohibited trade with the nation as retaliation for their annexation of Kuwait.  The income per capita in Iraq fell from $3,510 in 1989 to $450 in 1994.  Trade remained restricted until after the United States invaded Iraq in 2003.  In 2002, prior to the States invasion, the United States only exported $31.6 million worth of good to Iraq.  The U.S. did import a good deal of oil, but knowing that the nation would only lose $31.6 million in exports and would be able to secure oil fields relatively easily did not offer much resistance to the notion of war.

The old phrase “do not bite the hand that feeds” translates well to the world of trade.  Why would two nations that benefit by the way of trading with the other wish to quarrel unless there was very good reason?  The fact that nations benefit by trading with each other gives strong incentive to be cordial with one another.  A good example is the relationship between the United States and Saudi Arabia.  Though the two countries have virtually nothing in common and in fact citizens of both nations have strong prejudices or even hatred of citizens of the other nation, the two nations get along very well on a diplomatic level.  The only reason this is so is because both nations rely on each other for goods and services that the other can provide.  Another example is the vast expansion of trade between the United States and China; two nations that used to be very hostile toward one another are now very friendly.

Trade will not end war, but it will dramatically reduce the frequency and severity it.  By freely buying and selling goods and services around the world a nation can not only dramatically improve its economy, but it can also improve its international relations.  Additionally, the United States has entered into a sort of worldwide charity since World War II; continuously giving handouts to less privileged nations around the world.  A better solution would be to open up free trade with those nations as to inspire labor for export and improve the income of the citizens.  Trade is a tool that provides only good and we should use it more often.

I will note that there is an obvious “chicken or the egg” dilemma here with regard to whether a lack of trade causes tensions or tensions cause a lack of trade.  I would say that it has historically gone both ways, but in any circumstance there is virtually no reason to cutoff trade, it will only serve to escalate an already volatile situation and citizens of both nations will be harmed – not only by war but also by a lowered standard of living as a result of reduced trade.

Sources: Top trade partners, Iraq profile, Iraq trade stats, Afghanistan trade stats, Iraq import breakdown, Japan trade, Korean War, Germany trade, Pre-WWI trade, North Korea profile, Vietnam profile, Vietnam War, Vietnam tariffs