In The Choice for Europe Andrew Moravcsik develops a "commercial" interpretation of Charles de Gaulle's European policies. Moravcsik claims that his revisionist analysis succeeds because he, as opposed to almost all other students of European Community policymaking, has relied not on "soft" sources but on hard primary sources. An investigation of his claim shows that it cannot be substantiated. Both the quality of his sources and his handling of them are poor. His commercial interpretation of de Gaulle's policy is based on a serious misreading of the two sources on which his argument depends. Finally, his restatement in 2000 ofhis original argument—a restatement intended to overcome the problem that, as his critics pointed out, he failed to produce any direct supporting evidence—leads only to further problems.


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 89-139
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.