Anderton & Carter claim that war significantly diminishes trade, challenging the earlier argument by Barbieri & Levy that there is no apparent systematic relationship between war and trade. Three main problems with Anderton & Carter's analyses are identified. First, and most importantly, they do not pay sufficient attention to the political dimension of trade or war. Second, they attribute more specificity to commercial liberal theory than actually exists. Third, the authors' empirical findings provide mixed support for liberal theory. While Anderton & Carter advance the debate, there is not enough evidence to support their conclusion that, on balance, war significantly impedes trade and that this fact deters leaders from engaging in war.