In a column from two years ago, I emphasized the importance of global trade. Since then, it has become increasingly apparent how important building infrastructure that supports trade across borders is for geopolitical influence.

Tanks and jets might decide a battle, but industry dictates the fate of wars, and the infrastructure behind it shapes the politics of peacetime diplomacy. Major countries across the globe, particularly China and Russia, understand this concept well and prioritize investments in infrastructure both at home and abroad, whereas the United States still faces an investment gap.

To maintain its sphere of influence abroad, the U.S. government must consider investing in projects that benefit transport and economic growth. The paths available for business between countries decide how international relations are established. As the modern world economy is dependent on global trade, resources and services rely on the efficiency of their transportation to outcompete their rivals.

Our modern and collective reliance on trade results in a simple yet critical process for international business: the country that reaches the world more quickly and efficiently gains more money and influence in diplomacy. Cultures and ideologies promoted by sovereign states are spread across the globe on the backs of containers, railcars and tankers that economically bridge nations together, which is precisely the method the United States used to become the superpower it is.

Starting from the aftermath of World War II, though arguably since at least the turn of the 20th century, the United States became increasingly influential in global affairs through its large manufacturing industry and the web of global trade routes it controlled. An economy built on the export of goods made the U.S. dollar the most prominent international currency, which then made the global economy Washington, D.C.’s responsibility.

In 1948, the Marshall Plan gave the United States its biggest geopolitical victory of the century by realigning Western Europe to the economic interests of the country. Investments in reconstruction efforts opened the European markets to U.S. goods, and the trade connections established over the Atlantic were the foundation for the military pacts between Western Europe and the United States.

Investing in infrastructure as a diplomatic strategy has precedence in United States history. The 21st century is relentlessly putting this system to the test, but leaders fail to seize opportunities. If the United States wishes to remain a superpower, it must prioritize securing, overhauling and expanding trade infrastructure.

Washington, D.C. is indisputably lagging in construction capabilities compared to its geopolitical rivals. The most comprehensive example of this is China’s Belt and Road Initiative, a collection of international rail and naval infrastructure projects to construct new transit routes and trade hubs.

In practice, building ports and railways allows for easier shipment of goods, making trade with China more efficient compared to Europe or America. In theory, this also allows Beijing to exert greater influence over the countries where these projects take place.

Control of trade relations allows for control of diplomatic and political decisions in favor of China. Especially in Southeast Asia, China’s efforts to build paths for trade represent a deeper effort to make countries in the region more reliant on China, allowing Beijing to subvert the United States’ influence to establish a political sphere of its own across the Far East. [3]

Today, the United States is far less capable of supporting strategic investments than China and is critically damaging its foreign policy by pursuing trade wars with other countries. Washington, D.C. must assess and take the initiative to assist in solving the infrastructure issues of its allies and partners.

Notably, Germany and the United Kingdom face economic stagnation due to the inefficiency of their railroads, while oil production and export in the Middle East become increasingly risky due to vulnerability to Iranian efforts to disrupt and blockade oil trade in the region. Foreign aid — the reduced scope of which today mostly covers arms exports to conflict zones — must expand into the business of building new and modern infrastructure that connects industries, speeds up travel between countries and secures the transport of resources and raw materials.

Efforts to invest in new projects require cooperation and vision. Common problems that often limit grand projects in the West consist of corruption, bureaucracy and budget mismanagement. These issues are not faced by China when it seeks to expand its trade network rapidly.

More importantly, the disruptive strategy of tariffs and trade restrictions has made the United States an unreliable trade partner and, consequently, an untrustworthy diplomatic partner.

Maintaining a robust network of trade is not only vital but also nonnegotiable for the United States. Unless efforts are made to improve and expand the infrastructure that underpins international trade, Washington, D.C. will lose the initiative to other countries like Beijing, which are more than eager to establish themselves as a more reliable trade partner.

Management of foreign aid to allies and close partners must focus on prospects aiming to create better links between nations over land, air and sea to preserve the United States’ position of power in the world.

Deniz Gulay is a junior double-majoring in history and Russian.

Views expressed in the opinions pages represent the opinions of the columnists. The only piece that represents the view of the Pipe Dream Editorial Board is the Staff Editorial.