argument top image

< Back to question What are the advantages and disadvantages of globalization? Show more Show less

Proponents of globalization say it improves citizens' lives via the distribution of jobs, capital, and technology across borders, promoting peace through deeper economic ties between nations. Others claim the globalized movement of goods and people has fuelled inequality, environmental degradation, and deepened economic inequalities.

Globalization is good Show more Show less

Globalization has created jobs, lowered the price of consumer goods, fuelled innovation and contributed to peace on earth.
(1 of 2) Next position >

Globalization promotes peace

The deeper the economic ties between nations, the greater the incentive to avoid conflict.
economics globalization politics
< (4 of 5) Next argument >


Not sure yet? Read more before voting ↓



A state that is more dependent on another is not likely to engage in actions that could lead to conflict with that state. In those nations, the business elites, who stand to lose the most from trade disruptions, will also lobby the government to avoid conflict or military aggression against a trading partner.

The Argument

A recent study examined inter-state military conflict between 290,040 country pairs between 1950 and 2000. It concluded that the higher the interdependence in bilateral trade between the country partners, the lower the chance of military conflict. For every 10% increase in bilateral trade, the probability of military conflict between the partners decreases by 0.1%. If the two states share a border, the probability decreases by 1.9%.[1] Even if the two states do not have substantial bilateral trade, if the pair are part of trading blocs like the EU, the Mercosur or ASEAN, and other nations in the bloc have significant import and export levels with the opposing nation, they are also less likely to engage in military conflict. Because the promotion of global trade and international open markets is at the heart of globalization, it can be seen as a pacifying force.

Counter arguments

This argument has been debunked by history. Famously, Norman Angell published a book shortly after the turn of the century entitled ‘The Great Illusion’. Angell argued that Germany and Britain were so deeply economically interdependent that war between the two great nations was unthinkable. Within a few years of the book’s publication, Britain and Germany were engaged in battle in the First World War. [2] It, therefore, becomes impossible to conclude that globalization and increased bilateral trade leads to peace. The two bloodiest and most mutually destructive wars in history, the First World War and the Second World War, saw nations with strong economic ties clash on the battlefields of Europe.


[P1] States with higher levels of bilateral trade are less likely to engage in military conflict. [P2] Globalization promotes bilateral trade between states. [P3] Therefore, Globalization promotes peace.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] History shows this premise to be inaccurate.



This page was last edited on Wednesday, 22 Jul 2020 at 09:20 UTC

Explore related arguments