[stickfigure]

Trade goes both ways. The seller of goods is just as dependent on the exchange as the buyer. Nobody stays in business going to war with their customers. And there are truly very few products that cannot be sourced from alternates given a little time and money.

I think the "global interdependence reduces war" hypothesis is pretty strong.

[tomp]

Money is fake in a way that physical products aren't. So the parties have very unequal bargaining positions, the one with the "real" stuff (products) can walk away much more easily than the one with the "fake" stuff (money).

[SAI_Peregrinus]

Oracle certainly seems to disagree here.

And if the seller is a monopoly on a critical good while the buyer is a tiny fraction of their business, the relationship is asymmetrical and the seller won't suffer nearly as much from a war.