International Studies Quarterly (2008)52,737-758 Power or Plenty?Economic Interests, Security Concerns,and American Intervention BENJAMIN O.FORDHAM Binghamton University (SUNY) This paper evaluates the effect of economic interests and security con- cerns on American intervention in civil and international conflict.Gener- alizations about the relative importance of these considerations have played critical role in the historiography of American foreign relations. Although statistical analysis is well suited for evaluating such generaliza- tions,quantitative researchers have devoted relatively little attention to the issue.Existing large-n research has generally found that security con- cerns matter more.but has not considered how the economic and secu- rity concerns thought to affect intervention might also influence each other.These subsidiary relationships complicate efforts to assess the rela- tive importance of these two influences on intervention.Evidence con- cerning intervention in international crises and civil wars indicates that, while alliance commitments and rival behavior have a greater immediate impact on American intervention,exports have an important indirect effect by shaping alliance commitments in the long run. The Correlates of War Project records 2,007 disputes between states during the 20th century,129 of which escalated to war.There were also 35 wars between states and non-state entities outside their borders as well as 141 civil wars.Over the same period,there were also many other incidents of violence that were con- sequential for world politics but not recorded in the most frequently used data sets.In spite of the fact that the American role in world politics steadily expanded over the course of the century,the United States intervened in rela- tively few of these international conflicts.What explains American decisions about whether or not to become involved? This is one of the most important questions facing scholars of American for- eign policy.Answers illuminate policy makers'perceptions of national interest, and may thus help explain decisions about a wider range of foreign policy ques- tions.This article will focus on the relationship between two of the most impor- tant sources of explanation for American intervention:security concerns and economic interests.Although economic and security concerns are often posed as competing alternatives,most observers would probably concede that both matter. The question here is what role each plays in the process leading to intervention. Author's note:I would like to thank Michelle Benson,David H.Clark,Michael Colaresi,Patrick Regan,Elizabeth Saunders,and participants in the World Politics workshop at Binghamton University for their comments and sug gestions on carlier versions of this paper,as well as Viner (1948)for assistance with the title of this work.Any remaining errors are my responsibility.The data used in this article can be obtained from the author at(http:// bingweb.binghamton.edu/-bfordham/),or from the International Studies Quarterly Dataverse Network page at (http://dvn.iq.harvard.edu/dvn/). 2008 Intemational Studies AssociationPower or Plenty? Economic Interests, Security Concerns, and American Intervention Benjamin O. Fordham Binghamton University (SUNY) This paper evaluates the effect of economic interests and security con￾cerns on American intervention in civil and international conflict. Gener￾alizations about the relative importance of these considerations have played critical role in the historiography of American foreign relations. Although statistical analysis is well suited for evaluating such generaliza￾tions, quantitative researchers have devoted relatively little attention to the issue. Existing large-n research has generally found that security con￾cerns matter more, but has not considered how the economic and secu￾rity concerns thought to affect intervention might also influence each other. These subsidiary relationships complicate efforts to assess the rela￾tive importance of these two influences on intervention. Evidence con￾cerning intervention in international crises and civil wars indicates that, while alliance commitments and rival behavior have a greater immediate impact on American intervention, exports have an important indirect effect by shaping alliance commitments in the long run. The Correlates of War Project records 2,007 disputes between states during the 20th century, 129 of which escalated to war. There were also 35 wars between states and non-state entities outside their borders as well as 141 civil wars. Over the same period, there were also many other incidents of violence that were con￾sequential for world politics but not recorded in the most frequently used data sets. In spite of the fact that the American role in world politics steadily expanded over the course of the century, the United States intervened in rela￾tively few of these international conflicts. What explains American decisions about whether or not to become involved? This is one of the most important questions facing scholars of American for￾eign policy. Answers illuminate policy makers’ perceptions of national interest, and may thus help explain decisions about a wider range of foreign policy ques￾tions. This article will focus on the relationship between two of the most impor￾tant sources of explanation for American intervention: security concerns and economic interests. Although economic and security concerns are often posed as competing alternatives, most observers would probably concede that both matter. The question here is what role each plays in the process leading to intervention. Author’s note: I would like to thank Michelle Benson, David H. Clark, Michael Colaresi, Patrick Regan, Elizabeth Saunders, and participants in the World Politics workshop at Binghamton University for their comments and sug￾gestions on earlier versions of this paper, as well as Viner (1948) for assistance with the title of this work. Any remaining errors are my responsibility. The data used in this article can be obtained from the author at (http:// bingweb.binghamton.edu/~bfordham/), or from the International Studies Quarterly Dataverse Network page at (http://dvn.iq.harvard.edu/dvn/). 2008 International Studies Association International Studies Quarterly (2008) 52, 737–758