[Goose]

I leave with this, are we really against an interconnected world?  I'm inclined to believe that countries are far less willing to risk war with their biggest trading partners and using commerce to bind potential belligerents is not an altogether bad idea.  Until lately I've been far more worried about North Korea than China.

I am not against an interconnected world at all. I do think that having multiple sources for components is a good idea when possible. Sometimes it is just not possible because of patent protections or particular materials not being generally available. All companies and nations have to ask themselves what level of risk is associated with their source of critical items. Autarky is not possible in today's world, but getting all of a critical component from any one country is a "bad" idea, both because of politically driven actions and simple commercial greed. You will get price gouged eventually. Also, trading with the US is risky. We may sanction you at any time and then you can't buy what you need from us.
Unfortunately I think the record on belligerents being bound together by commerce is mixed at best. All the European countries are bound together by commerce yet they have fought each other regularly. Germany and the UK were big trading partners at the start of both WW I and WW II. Naturally colonies have rebelled against the "mother country" with which they traded a lot (sometimes exclusively), but that is a different case.

[Goose]

I leave with this, are we really against an interconnected world?  I'm inclined to believe that countries are far less willing to risk war with their biggest trading partners and using commerce to bind potential belligerents is not an altogether bad idea.  Until lately I've been far more worried about North Korea than China.

I am not against an interconnected world at all. I do think that having multiple sources for components is a good idea when possible. Sometimes it is just not possible because of patent protections or particular materials not being generally available. All companies and nations have to ask themselves what level of risk is associated with their source of critical items. Autarky is not possible in today's world, but getting all of a critical component from any one country is a "bad" idea, both because of politically driven actions and simple commercial greed. You will get price gouged eventually. Also, trading with the US is risky. We may sanction you at any time and then you can't buy what you need from us.
Unfortunately I think the record on belligerents being bound together by commerce is mixed at best. All the European countries are bound together by commerce yet they have fought each other regularly. Germany and the UK were big trading partners at the start of both WW I and WW II. Naturally colonies have rebelled against the "mother country" with which they traded a lot (sometimes exclusively), but that is a different case.