Another element to the Kolkos argument is that the US couldn’t relieve the economic problem they were facing in their country by themselves as the Kolkos claim they were a “capitalist nation unable to expand its internal market”. The Kolkos have little sympathy for the US and argue that because of the “vast unsalable surplus” that had built up, the aim of American prosperity was dependant to the rebuilding of European cities, with no interest of the people or resolving their issues. They suggest that the rebuilding was crucial and a principal motive behind the Marshall plan as it was this that would allow prosperity in the countries to return to normal levels and hence have the money to pay for the US goods, and fuel their aim of an American empire.

In the Kolko’s book, they are clearly anti-US, which is seen in their criticisms of the plan and its aim. This could be because around the time they were writing in 1972, American foreign policy was heavily under scrutiny from America, this is evident as during this time troops were being withdrawn from Vietnam due to the persistent backlash from the American public Kolko addressed the issues of the foreign policy as inapplicable and was notoriously anti-capitalist. Historians have said it was “no surprise: Kolko had been a socialist” which explain his views of the Americans selfish self-interest.

Rees analysis and explanation

Rees writing in the “Age of containment” has a contrasting argument to the Kolkos as he has a central focus on the containment of communism as being a key motive. Rees argues that the motives behind the Marshall plan “stems from the events of 7 November 1917, with the successful storming of the Petrograd Winter Palace” and the deep rooted ideological differences that he noted as “grave differences” at Potsdam. From this we can see that Rees first argument for the motives of the Marshall plan and his principal argument was that it was purely defendi