Abstract
The question of whether economic interdependence promotes peace is more than ever relevant once and again due to a series of conflicts around the globe. Two schools advocate the two opposite beliefs; these are Realism and Liberalism. The former supports that economic interdependence does not necessarily promote peace, whereas the latter trusts that it does. In our paper, we use a financial analysis—econometric approach to realize that there is evidence that supports that economic interdependence between two states in conflict does not promote peace since it has no significant impact on the configuration of the conflict. Consequently, it does not provide a significant enhancement in the levels of national security.
Highlights
It has been long debated whether economic interdependence promotes peace or not
Last but not least, according to Realism, economic policies are supportive of security issues, since economy is a tool of foreign policy
We use as indicators of economic interdependence the Exports of Greece to Turkey, the Imports of Greece from Turkey, the Bilateral Trade, the Greek Foreign Direct Investments (FDI) flows to Turkey, the Turkish FDI flows to Greece, the Exports of Greece as a percent of its GDP to Turkey and the Exports of Turkey as a percent of its GDP to Greece
Summary
It has been long debated whether economic interdependence promotes peace or not. There are arguments in both directions represented primarily by two schools: Realism and Liberalism.Realism interprets the political and economic behavior of states. Cooperation between states creates asymmetric gains for each partner, states care about relative gains [1] Those who agree with the argument that today’s economic interdependence has changed the environment and the nature of international politics, should be more skeptical, since groups and states have managed to increase their gains through economic growth and international. When the levels of economic interdependence start rising, states become more suspicious regarding the loss of their autonomy and the costs involved, as the result of interdependence. According to Gilpin [2], those who agree with the argument that today’s economic interdependence has changed the environment and the nature of international politics, should be more skeptical, since groups and states have managed to increase their gains through economic growth and international cooperation. Hirschman’s [9] hypothesis that a stable economic growth and a global economic market would diminish the struggle for power between states through cooperation and profitability did not confirm, since economic interdependence and mutual gains has not yet diminished state’s efforts for promoting their national interests against the others
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
