Few would seriously argue that most foreign policy decisions could be fully explained through cut-and-dried analyses of business profits. Still, the actual role of economic motives in foreign policy formulation has been a major point of debate among U.S. historians. Following are arguments for and against emphasizing economics factors in the explanations of U.S. imperialism:

FOR

1. Importance of foreign trade and investment in strategic industried with control over most domestic capital.

2. Ties between major corporations, international development agencies, and government planners.

3. Cumulative effects of investment and trade based on overseas production.

4. Importance of protecting raw materials sources and outlets for foreign investment in large firms long-term planning.

5. Struggles between regional economics elites always mirrored in debates over strategies in international affairs.

AGAINST

1. Primary importance of national security and political motives.

2. Relative unimportance of foreign trade and investment for national economic performance.

3. Imperialism's harm to real U.S. interests: truly free countries would provide better markets for goods and services.

4. Businessmen's opposition to certain cases of foreign intervention.