The views expressed here are those of the CEO and co-CIO of Eurizon SLJ asset management.

By Stephen Jen

LONDON, June 5 (Reuters) - What do four of the world's most important tech economies - the U.S., Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea - have in common? They love baseball.

This may be more than a coincidence, raising questions about the economic prospects of two other baseball-loving nations: Venezuela and Cuba.

Baseball was developed in the U.S. in the mid-nineteenth century as a derivative of cricket and rounders. Just as British sports tend to be popular in Commonwealth countries, baseball is dominant among populations that have had extended interactions with America.

After World War Two, the U.S. had a heavy military presence in Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea, and, as a result, baseball became very popular there.

Fast forward to today, and these three economies, together with the U.S., represent around 90% of the roughly $40 trillion in global tech market cap. The U.S. is responsible for the bulk of that, but the other three still account for almost 13%.

This may not be mere chance.

Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan have all benefited from their focus on education in the post-war era, which has helped create highly numerate populations, as well as their lack of natural resources, which has compelled them to develop export-oriented industries. But their close relationship with the U.S. has arguably also played a critical role.

In the decades following World War Two, it was not only the U.S. military that influenced this part of Asia, but also American companies. Over time, this became particularly notable in technology.

Indeed, interactions between various companies in Silicon Valley and entities (both companies and universities) in Taiwan, South Korea, and Japan have been deep and steady for years.

In fact, over 20% of the 10 million tech workers in the U.S. are Asian, and many Asian students are also educated in the U.S. Exchanges of research and ideas have been the norm for four decades.

China complicates the thesis, of course. It is a tech giant, but not a baseball country. Its rise came through state direction, scale, and access to the U.S.-led global economic system, not historical links with America.

That distinction may prove the point. Baseball is not the cause of tech success, but a marker of deep American influence. It helps explain why China's relationship with Silicon Valley is so different from those of the other Asian tech giants.

ON DECK?

This raises an interesting question. What about two other baseball-loving nations: Venezuela and Cuba? They certainly aren't economic superstars.

Their shared affinity for baseball points to their historical ties with the U.S. The question is whether these past links could be converted into renewed economic, institutional, and strategic alignment.

Oil was discovered in Venezuela in the early twentieth century, and the South American country quickly became one of the world’s largest producers.

In the mid-twentieth century, U.S. oil companies began investing heavily in the exploration and extraction of oil in Venezuela, which, in turn, supplied a great deal of crude to America.

It was also during this time that American oil workers helped popularize baseball in Venezuela, where it rapidly became a national pastime.

However, the relationship between the two nations sharply deteriorated after rising inequality and falling energy prices helped pave the way for Hugo Chavez's socialist movement in the late 1990s.

Most U.S. oil companies left, but baseball remained.

Indeed, some may recall that weeks after the U.S. captured and arrested Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in January, Venezuela’s baseball team beat the U.S. in the World Baseball Classic final, something U.S. President Donald Trump highlighted in a press conference.

I mention baseball not to suggest that it causes tech success, but to highlight the strong relationship that Venezuela and the U.S. had for a very long time. It would not be difficult to imagine such a relationship being rekindled and rebuilt.

In the days before Chavez, Venezuela produced some 3.5 million barrels per day of oil, half of which was exported to the U.S. It now produces only 1.0 million bpd because of an extended period of under-investment.

While Venezuela is certainly not South Korea – and decades of corruption and mismanagement won’t be undone overnight – the country’s historical ties with the U.S. and its enormous energy reserves mean it could become a natural ally once again.

Given the now warmer relationship between Washington and the current government in Caracas, this doesn’t seem so far-fetched.

JOINING THE TEAM

Finally, there’s Cuba. The island nation learned to play baseball in the late 1800s from students returning from the U.S. as well as visiting Americans. It took off quickly, and now some 400 Cubans have played in the U.S. major leagues.

Again, this affinity reflects a strong historical relationship with the U.S.

After the Spanish-American War of 1898, Cuba was placed under U.S. military protection until it gained independence in 1902, though the U.S. retained the right to intervene in Cuban affairs until 1934. This history, combined with geographic proximity, helped strengthen ties between the countries.

Over the decades, however, corruption, inequality, and poor governance culminated in the rise of Fidel Castro, who overthrew the Batista government in 1959, aligning Cuba with the USSR during the Cold War.

Cuba, unlike oil-rich Venezuela, has no clear natural pathway forward.

Its current economic situation is dire, with economic stagnation, high inflation, blackouts and other shortages, partly because it no longer receives cheap energy supplies from Caracas.

However, given Cuba's proximity to the U.S. - a fact that represented an acute danger during the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962 - it’s in the interest of the world’s biggest economy to support any positive changes in the small country.

Given today’s complex geopolitical backdrop, if the U.S. wants to push for change outside its borders and build strategic alliances, history suggests it should focus on countries capable of calling balls and strikes.

(The views expressed here are those of Stephen Jen, the CEO and co-CIO of Eurizon SLJ asset management.)

Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, and X.

And listen to the Morning Bid daily podcast on Apple, Spotify, or the Reuters app. Subscribe to hear Reuters journalists discuss the biggest news in markets and finance seven days a week.