Which statement best describes the main weakness of the Articles of Confederation?

• A. Weak national government.
• B. Strong federal authority.
• C. Balanced powers.
• D. Dominant executive.

Answer: (A)

The main idea here is that the Articles of Confederation left a weak national government, and that weakness defined the period. Under the Articles, the central government could conduct foreign relations, wage war, and handle money only to a limited extent, but it had no power to tax, regulate commerce, or enforce its laws. It relied on the states for money and for compliance, and it required widespread consensus—needing amendments to be approved by all states and major laws needing the approval of most states—so it couldn’t respond effectively to internal problems or external threats. There was no separate executive to enforce laws or national courts to resolve disputes, and each state retained broad sovereignty, which weakened national cohesion.

This is why the statement describing a weak national government is the best answer. The other options describe situations that did not exist: there was no strong federal authority, no dominant executive, and powers weren’t balanced in a way that created a capable national government. The Articles intentionally avoided concentrating power at the national level, which is precisely why their central government proved inadequate for governing a new nation.