If you meant France then it'd be B
They only traded with their home countries or cities.
African goods were subject to falling prices on the world market
If you are talking about the United States during World War I OR World War II, here is your answer.
The US federal government took over significant control of private corporations during wartime. The government forced many businesses to switch from their normal operations in order to produce goods for the war effort. For example, during World War II, companies like Ford switched from making cars to things like tanks and ammunition. This type of government intervention would ensure the US was completely prepared for the war.
Publius claims that citizen "safety" is the first task of all governments. That safety would most likely be threatened by wars with foreign powers or by conflicts between two or among more of the thirteen states. Whether either might occur because of "real or pretended" causes, or because certain circumstances might arise that "provoke or invite them," a single nation composed of all the former colonies was the most likely successfully to meet such challenges. Publius explains that only the population of a single "united states" could provide the a broad enough base from which competent diplomats might be recruited--skills essential to resolving conflicts between nations or states by measures short of physical force. Similarly, a single interpretation from one union of states would be much preferable to several interpretations from various confederacies and certainly far superior to thirteen. Lastly, since smaller states naturally seek to align themselves with strong foreign powers in an effort to discourage larger neighbors from coveting their territory or resources, one union would eliminate still another frequent source of war. War, Publius observes, unfortunately is related to human nature, and nations wage war whenever there is something to be gained.5
\
==
