Moravcsik's reply to the six commentaries deals with sources omitted from the original article, the use of evidence in his analysis of the Fouchet Plan and the “empty chair” crisis, and broader critiques of (and proposed alternatives to) the commercial interpretation of French policy on European integration during the presidency of Charles de Gaulle. Moravcsik concedes some of the points raised by the critics and offers a more qualified and nuanced restatement of his argument, but he sticks to his basic contention that “commercial interests were a dominant and sufficient motivation for French policy in Europe.”