TRADE IS A COMMUNICATION OF CULTURES AND VALUES, WHEN TRADE STOPS, WAR COMES.

Edward Gibbon’s history of the Roman Civilization is a lofty testimony to the development and decay of the Roman Empire. The foremost reason behind its fall, Gibbon argues, was the ‘end of trade, and start of the war.’ many historians have concurred and adopted the ‘seizure of trade’ model to explain the collapse of several other civilizations. Shireen Ratnagar, for example, blames the end of trade for Harappa’s death.

The story of human development has been a story of communication. The interaction, transaction, and application of ideas and people between diverse cultures have been the cornerstone of growth. V. Gordon Childe wrote of this communication as the giving and taking of philosophical as well as material interests. He declared ‘trade’ as the first marker of surplus distribution between early societies.

The changing nature of trade was reflected in the changing modes of communication of cultures and values, said Romila Thapar. The internal trade between villages and cities grew to form elaborate webs of external trade between counties and continents.

Trade acted as the integration of the globe through the land, air, and water. So much so that today it is pegged at a massive value of 80 trillion dollar exchange by volume. This explosion has been, however, threatened by specters of conflict time and again.

The silk route of the 2nd century BCE was the most extensive trade circuit of intercontinental trade that unfortunately succumbed to the spoils of war. The trade of Atlantic suffered similar barriers during the Napoleonic wars. The trade of the Indian Ocean and the Pacific Ocean had to deal with similar fates during the Carnatic wars and world wars respectively.

George Bernard Shaw once said that the ‘single misconceived notion’ about communication happens to be the idea that ‘it has taken place’. Thus, we can see that as erring human beings sometimes disrupt relationships due to miscommunication, Shaw says, even mighty nations become victims of their own flawed interests.

These flawed interests Adam Smith would argue in his ‘The Wealth of Nations’ include the yearning for monopolizing trade. This urge for commercial domination represents conflicting perspectives and the eventual outbreak of war. The seizure of communication, therefore, is a factor as well as a consequence of war.

The trade war relationship faces questions of their legitimacy through various channels. Sometimes trade might lead to war, as argued above by Smith. An unfavorable balance of trade, inequitable distribution of profit, mercantilist philosophy of commerce, and colonialism are all ‘drivers of trade’ that have led to war. East India Company is a primary example.

However, many times, war leads to an increase in trade. The boost to manufacturing industries, banks, and trading groups of Ruhr Valley, Saar Region, and Danzig in Germany during world war first and second are all fitting examples of this.

The ‘gifts of trade’ which include political ideas of the French and American Revolutions, as well as socio-cultural influences through art, music, and architecture are seen as ‘ entities to be protected’ against the ravages of war, political instability, and authoritarianism. However, we must realize that war perpetuates its own set of beliefs.

Friedrich Nietzsche argued that war involves a sense of duty, heroism, nationalism, and pride. On the other hand, trade, argued Milton Friedman, saved us from the blindness of pride and heroism. It caused material progress in times of peace and prosperity, hence, it was a higher ‘human virtue’ than war.

Friedrich Hayek in his book ‘The Road to Serdom’ says that trade is a natural instinct of civilization. And thus, it can never be totally suppressed, not even through war. Black economy, organized smuggling, counterfeiting currency, and cross-border trafficking is consequences of attempts to suppress the trade.

The above result from a war between regions that lead to a decline in trade, termination of services, and high instability. Antonio Gramsci wrote of ‘war’ as a means to propagate inflation, unemployment, anarchy, and economic crisis. Therefore, the underground trade becomes a natural mode of survival. Woodrow Wilson once said ‘war ends commerce.’

In today’s scenario ‘trade war’ has become a buzzword. The rising tendencies of protectionism, hard power, sanction diplomacy, and trade embargos have rendered the realm of commerce vulnerable. US sanctions on Iran, North Korea, Russia, and China, and their reciprocation have deeply affected global economic stability.

Moreover, the trade war has proliferated through allies such as NATO Countries to suit national interests. Brexit blues in European Union and Venezuela’s hyperinflation in South America are other modes of heightening a trade war situation. Developing countries like India, Kenya, Uganda, Indonesia, and Brazil have been on the receiving end of these impending threats.

The middle east has been in an influx of crises since the 20th century’s beginning. Politics of oil prices, refugee migration, and religious conflict have become sources of thousands of ‘micro-wars’, as Kenneth Waltz describes, that have severed trade ties that once flourished here.

Noam Chomsky emphasizes the tenet of trade as a unifier. He says that it is not necessarily a ‘Zero Sum’ game but a universally beneficial activity. Examples of Asian Tiger economics which rose in the 1990s and intensified growth in India as well as the Trans atlantic nations. Thus, global trade remains tethered to global order.

The ‘End of History’ by Francis Fukuyama briefly mentions that war can be exercised through several means, for example, cultural condemnation, tariffs, or even consumerist propaganda. These affect trade without a declaration of war. Cold War was a classic case of this. India - Pakistan ties are also an example of this - with trade at only 3 billion dollar year despite having a close neighborly proximity and common boundary.

Trade can turn around the fortunes of countries in an age of ‘Clash of Civilizations says Samuel Huntington. Japan has become a prime global trade-based economy after repudiating the policy of imperialism and war since World war second.

Thus, we must realize as a global community that the preservation of liberal thinking and globalization is rooted in the flow of goods, cultures, and values. The popularity of Bollywood in Africa, Japenese Ramen noodles in India, American Rock Music in Turkey, and the values of Confucian, Buddha, and Lao Tzu worldwide are the gifts of trade that must be cherished.

There are several mechanisms for promoting trade. Regional organizations like RCEP, NAFTA, SAFTA, EFTA; bilateral FTAs between nations, and ultimately the global institutions of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the World Bank, and the International Monetary Fund are of primacy here.

India’s demand for convergence between North (Developed nations) and South (Developing states) according to Brandt Line must take the lead as a vanguard of international trade. Our commitment to the Rules-Based Multilateral Trading Order with a non-discriminatory policy must be ascertained.

Trade will not only lead to the subsiding of conflicting tendencies and war it will also cause a homogeneity of interests toward innovation, entrepreneurship, and 4th industrial revolution, according to the recent world economic forum meeting at Davos. The emerging realms of Cyberspace, Artificial Intelligence, and IoT will also be dependent on bilateral and multilateral trade relations.

India has been a conducive Labitat for trade development since the Rig Vedic story of Mathava who traded cattle to resolve the war between tribes. India, as a forward-looking, realistic, and peaceful land of spiritual as well as materialistic human growth, must reiterate its commitment to maintaining trade as a conduit of positive relations and chain war to its evitability. As Kautilya Chanakya remarks in ‘Arthashastra’ trade is a ‘jewel in a sovereign’s crown’ while ‘war is the land’ that yearns to topple it.