> That is definitely not what I have read¹. What era are you thinking of?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Romana
From the article: "As the world becomes more interconnected, the powerful have ever more incentives to avoid the catastrophic economic consequences of going to war too. Conflict isn’t good for your economy in a world of dense trade networks and digital flows."
The exact same argument was put forward just before WWI. Then all hell erupted.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Illusion
In historical terms the decline is insignificant in duration. It just marks the point from the end of the Cold War, when there remained one sole global superpower (and most of the wars in the last 20+ years, from the Gulf, to Yugoslavia, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc are wars where it fought or helped fuel). The article mistakes a decline in war during the end of the Cold War (when a global player emerged) for some long term trend.
Obviously there are more and more signs that this is not to be so -- with other players emerging like China, tension rising in different areas, even neo-fascists coming back into play in various countries governments.