President as a Dominant Force in Foreign Policymaking - Assignment Example

Why president is dominant force in foreign policymaking, what Congress done to assert its rooe and the important role of Congress Course: Tutor: Date: The President is the dominant force in US foreign policymaking Introduction The President is the dominant force in foreign policymaking in the United States. Ordinarily, the constitution has divided the foreign policy powers between the President and the congress and both the legislature and executive plays overlapping and different roles in foreign policymaking (Trimble, p 750). Article 1, under section 8, the constitution has granted the Congress legislative powers over numerous matters. Accordingly, Article 11, section 2 outlines the President as the Commander-in-chief of the Armed forces and provides him or her with the powers to negotiate treaties and appoint ambassadors to foreign countries. Section 3 goes further to grant the President the powers to receive ambassadors or other foreign leaders to negotiating treaties and agreements (Dumbrell & Barrett, 2005). The Congress is mandated by Article 1, Section 8 to exercise oversight power over appropriation of federal funds for the international programs, regulate commerce with foreign nations, declare of war, and regulate of the defense forces of the country including making the appropriate legislation in any of the issues listed in the section. Both the President and Congress have the opportunity to shape the foreign policy (Trimble p 752). The president is mandated by the constitution to shape the foreign policy or make US foreign policy in responses to foreign events, proposals for legislation, policy statements, policy implementation and independent action (Dumbrell & Barrett, 2005). Accordingly, the President shapes the policy through negotiation of international agreements and treaties. In the above circumstances, the Congress has a role since it can either change or support the President’s approach, but it may be difficult to change an independent action of the President in the short time (Dumbrell & Barrett, 2005). The Congress has the final voice in cases where international treaties or agreements are submitted for approval, but in most cases, it will support the actions of the President or make minimal modifications to such agreements before granting the approval (U.S Department of State, 2014). According to the words of Edward Corwin, the constitution has granted the President certain powers capable of affecting the foreign policy and certain powers of general kind to the Congress, but the decisive and final voice in the foreign policymaking is left for the events to resolve (Dumbrell & Barrett, 2005). The relative influence and roles of the two branches of government in foreign policymaking has differed over time and depends on factors such as personalities of the President, personalities of the Congress members and circumstances that exist in the international relations. The immediate post Second World War period can be classified as a period that witnessed growing Presidential power in foreign policy as evidenced by the Vietnam War and Gulf War when the Presidents were required to make decisive choices on the country’s foreign policy on military engagement outside the United States (Trimble p 753). During the Reagan and Bush administration, the President had considerable influence on the foreign policy as evidenced by the reaction to Operation Desert storm against Iraq in early 1990s (Holsti, 2006). One of the reasons why the President is a dominant force is because he or she is the initiator through response to foreign events. The President is expected to address foreign events that threaten the US interests such as terrorism and armed conflicts and expects the support of the Congress in when trying to secure the national interests (Mervin, p 125). For instance, the Congress supported President Reagan in Falklands Island when Argentina seized a United Kingdom Crown colony. The Secretary of State Alexander Haig announced that US would stop arms sales to Argentina and provide necessary logistical support to British operations. The Congress supported the move by the executive and Department of State banned the sale of military equipment to Argentina (U.S Department of State, 2014). In some cases, the Congress has criticized the foreign policy actions by the President as evidenced by Reagan authorization of multinational force in Lebanon after the terrorist bombing in Beirut in 1983 that killed about 200 US marines. Some Congress members questioned the policy of continuing military activities in Lebanon by claiming that Marines should withdraw from the country (Dumbrell & Barrett, 2005). The President claimed that US had vital interests in Lebanon and a multinational force participation would continue, but the prominent Congress members countered the move by proposing funding cuts in order to force the President to withdraw the Marines (Holsti, 2006). On the other hand, President Reagan proposed for deployment of the Marines to ships off the coast of Lebanon, but he continued to undertake measures that eventually led to withdrawal of the Marines (U.S Department of State, 2014). Another clear example of dominant force of the President in foreign policymaking is the 1990Iraqi invasion when the President applied economic sanctions and deployed US forces to defend Saudi Arabia against any attacks from Iraq. The Congress obliged with the President’s decision for continued action as per the United Nations law and immediately enacted the sanctions in to law (Mervin, p 134). In 1991, the Congress went further to authorize the use of the US military in implementing the UN Security Council resolutions in Iraq (Trimble p 754). Accordingly, President Bill Clinton did not seek the approval of the Congress in authorizing military support in aid of UN and NATO operations in Bosnia and Yugoslavia. The military participated in enforcement of the no-fly zones, aerial enforcement of the safe havens and naval monitoring of the sanctions. The Congress was entangled in a dispute over the right action of the US in Bosnia conflict (Holsti, 2006). The President is empowered by the Constitution to negotiate international agreements and seek the approval of the Congress before such agreements are signed in to law. The dominant force of the President is evident since Congress does not have the power to negotiate abroad and cannot force the President to commence such negotiations. The President can take the Congressional opinion during negotiations if the approval of the Congress is necessary for the agreement to remain valid (U.S Department of State, 2014). However, there are certain ‘sole executive agreements’ that the President is deemed to have powers to conclude without submitting to Congress approval. Examples of such agreements include the Iranian Hostage agreement of 1981 and Afghanistan Settlement Agreement of April 1988 (Holsti, 2006). Accordingly, the Congress has an important role to play in most international agreements that require approval by two-thirds majority such as military and economic assistance, nuclear energy cooperation and foreign trade agreements that seek to foster the national interests of the county. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is a trade agreement where Congress authorized negotiations and implementation due to the contentious debates that surrounded the benefits and costs of the agreements to the US economy (Holsti, 2006). The President also makes the foreign policy through policy statements. Examples include President’s Bush statement to Russia that proposed the elimination of landbased multiple warhead ballistic missiles in 1992 and President’s Clinton call for the strengthening of the United States (Mervin, p 140). The President also casts the US vote in international organizations, but Congress deliberations influences the decision made at International Organizations vote (U.S Department of State, 2014). The Congress has a role to play in policy statements since it some statements by the President require appropriations or legislation and thus Congress can either adopt the statement or modify it. The President may make independent action that entail dramatic or sudden foreign policy shifts without informing the Congress. Examples include launching military invasion in Grenada in 1983. In most cases, the Congress supports the President’s action as evidenced by the approve of $ 15 milion economic assistance grant to Grenada (Holsti, 2006). The role of the Congress in foreign policymaking The areas that Congress has adequately played its role foreign policymaking include declaration of war, making appropriations, and regulation of international trade. An example is the 2006 US-India nuclear agreement that required President Bush to seek the authorization of the Congress in order to waive the Atomic Energy Act (Holsti, 2006). The procedural legislation of the Congress can alter the contents of the foreign policy through creating executive positions, new agencies and reporting requirements in order for the new agencies to champion the foreign policy issues supported by the Congress (Trimble p 757). The Congress expected make legislation for approval of some of the administrative actions such as appropriations of money for the implementation of the foreign policy. A clear example is the President Clinton proposal for increase in US assistance to Russia in 1993. The President proposed $ 1.6 billion US assistance package including the use of concessional terms for agricultural loans and resettling Russian officers through training to return to civilian life after withdrawal from Baltics (U.S Department of State, 2014). The President had to seek the approval of the Congress for the funding of the program. The Congress has an important role in foreign policymaking since Congressional committees hold serious hearing to explore the implications of pending foreign policy especially when the policy entails constituent interests (U.S Department of State, 2014). The Congress uses direct legislation, indirect and procedural legislation and non-legislative tactics in order to make the foreign policy of the country. The Congress usually applies legislative directives that force the governemtn to focus attention on certain international issues thus changing the existing policy. An example is the International Freedom Act of 1998 that was enacted in to law in order to the country to focus on combating religious persecution worldwide. The Congress can apply legislative pressure such as the Iran Missile Proliferation Sanctions Act of 1998 that imposed sanctions on foreign countries and entities that helped Iran in the development of ballistic missiles (Holsti, 2006). In addition, the Congress applies the legislative restrictions or funding denials in order to prohibit the actions of the President in foreign policy matters. An example is the Trade Act of 1974 that aimed at preventing Nixon’s administration from resuming trade relations with Soviet Union by limiting the Export-Import Bank credits to Soviet Union to $ 300 million and ensuring that Soviet Union is granted most favored nation status in trade after implementation of liberal emigration policy (U.S Department of State, 2014). The Congress imposed sanctions on foreign companies that invested in energy production in Iran or Libya in 1996 thus forcing President Clinton to sign the Act in to law and ban trade relations with Libya (Holsti, 2006). The Congress uses oversight mechanisms through the International Relations and Senate Foreign Relations Committee that monitors public opinion regarding various international issues such as human rights violations in foreign countries (Holsti, 2006). Conclusion I agree that the President is the dominant force in foreign policymaking due to his or her position as the Commander-in-chief of the military and negotiator on behalf of the nation in international agreements. The President appoints ambassadors and receives foreign leaders in order to make agreements on trade and military assistance. The President shapes the foreign policy through response to international events like military conflicts, independent actions and policy statements that aim at facilitating foreign policy dialogue. The recent shifts in making the foreign policy have witnessed growing influence by the President, but the Congress has a role to play in making the policy. I believe the Congress has an important role in foreign policymaking as outlined by the US constitution under Article 1, section 8. The Congress has the power to make legislation on international trade to impose economic sanctions on countries that threaten the US interests and make budgetary appropriations that finance economic and military assistance to foreign nations. The Congress has the final authority to issue the War Powers resolutions and declare military invasion against identities that threaten US interests. The Congress makes the necessary legislation that requires two-thirds majority for the enactment of various foreign policy issues and thus can play an active role in shaping the foreign policy of the county. Although the War Powers Act of 1973 tried to address the imbalance, the President remains the dominance force in foreign policy matters. References: Dumbrell, J & Barrett, D.M. (2005). The making of U.S foreign policy. New York: Diane Publishing. Holsti, O.R. (2006). Making American foreign policy. New York: Taylor & Francis. Mervin, D. (1993).“The President and Foreign Policy.” The President of the United States. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1993. 115-47. Print. Trimble, P.R. (2012). “The President’s Foreign Affairs Power.” The American Journal of International Law 83.4 (1989): 750-57. JSTOR. Web. 28 Mar. 2012. U.S Department of State. (2014). “Foreign policy role of the President and Congress” (Web). Retrieved on 6th April, 2014 from http://fpc.state.gov/6172.htm. Read More