Barbieri: Economic Interdependence: A Path to Peace or a Source of Interstate Conflict?

Barbieri, K. 1996. “Economic Interdependence: A Path to Peace or a Source of Interstate Conflict?.” Journal of Peace Research 33:29.

“Four propositions about the trade-conflict relationship are easily identified among a broad group of theorists” (30). These are the liberal argument linking trade to peace, the neo-Marxist argument that symmetry in trade promotes peace, the (realist) idea that trade promotes conflict and the final belief that the two variables are not related.

These four positions are explored.

Of interest: “Interdependence generally implies relations of mutual need and, by extension, mutual vulnerability between actors, while dependence denotes asymmetrical relations. A further distinction is made by Keohane and Nye (1977, pp. 8-9), between interdependence and interconnectedness. Interconnectedness merely represents weak linkages among states incapable of having a significant influence eon interstate relations; while interdependence entails a vulnerability and sensitivity not found in less extensive linkages” (33).

Barbieri then puts forth 4 hypotheses that deal with the degree of economic salience in a trading relationship as well as the symmetry.

Uses Mitiliarized Interstate Dispute Dataset.

Thorough review of the literature on the operationalization of interdependence, and the difficulties in identifying interdependence.

The article finds that there is an interesting, curvilinear relationship between interdependence and MID conflict: if there is asymmetrical conflict, the chance of conflict is high. If there is a very high degree of symmetrical interdependence, there is also a very high degree of conflict.