This is my IA:`Was the Marshall Plan (1948-1951) a Tool of American Imperialism Used To Control Europe?

Identification and Evaluation of Sources

In this document I will be investigating and answering the question: “Was the Marshall Plan (1948-1951) a tool of American imperialism used to control Europe?”

I will mainly be using two sources for this investigation. The first source (Source 1) views the Marshall Plan as an attempt at economic imperialism while Source 2 provides the counter perspective that the Marshall Plan was an act of altruism that aimed to provide humanitarian aid. A further breakdown of the sources:

Source 1 (NAME_1):

Origin: Political scientist NAME_1, writing in 1999. This is a secondary source.

Purpose: To argue that the Marshall Plan amounted to "economic imperialism" by the United States to exert control over Western Europe.

Content: NAME_2 contends the Marshall Plan aid came with strings attached that allowed the US to shape Western European economies and politics to serve its own strategic interests in the Cold War. The aid resulted in Western Europe's "capitulation" of independence to the US.

Value: Provides a critical counterpoint to the view of the Marshall Plan as altruistic or ‘benevolent’. He argues that the US had imperial designs to gain power over Western Europe through economic means. 

Limitations: NAME_2 overstates the constraints and influence that came with the Marshall Plan aid. He does not fully consider the agency and choices of European leaders.

Source 2 (NAME_3 et al.):

Origin: Historian NAME_3 and others, writing in 1986. This is a secondary source.

Purpose: To argue that the primary motivations behind the Marshall Plan were humanitarian - to provide disaster relief, aid allies, and promote recovery after WWII. 

Content: NAME_4 and NAME_5 claim the Marshall Plan represented an "unprecedented act of peacetime generosity" with open-ended aid and few conditions to impose US control. The US wanted to help Europeans help themselves without dependence on the US. Strategic interests in containing communism were secondary motives.

Value: Provides a counterpoint to more critical views like NAME_2's. Argues the benevolent and altruistic motivations behind the Plan, which has been argued by other historians as well. They make a case that the Plan aimed for European autonomy, not US dominance.

Limitations: They do not consider the strategic motivations and implications of the Plan in the context of Cold War rivalries because they 