The president has advantages over congress in conducting the American foreign policy. This is the case since the president has both constitutional and informal powers which give him an upper hand in the origin of the foreign policy. The constitution of the United States gives the president and the congress separate powers in the making of the foreign policy. The roles played by the executive and legislative are different, but often overlap and the roles have the ability to initiate and change foreign policy.
There are important constitutional powers which enable the president to make the foreign policy. Firstly, the president has the power to respond to foreign events. The current events or current actions in a foreign country usually challenge the interests of the United States. As the head of the Foreign Service, the intelligence service, the bureaucracy and as the spokesperson: the president responds to such events and hence initiating a foreign policy. In such cases, the congress is expected to support the president, but in exceptional cases seeks a change in policy (Grimmett).
Secondly, the constitution gives the president powers to administer proposals for legislation on foreign policy. Occasionally, the executive branch wants to initiate foreign policy program that requires appropriations or legislation and accordingly proposes legislation to the congress. The approval of the congress is very essential in such situations. The congress could play an active role in the development of the legislation, either in modifying the Administration bill or developing new legislation on foreign policy. An example of such a policy is the Marshall plan (Ulrich 227-228).
Thirdly, the president has the power of negotiation of international agreements. This power enables the president to have a dominant role in the making foreign policy through international agreement, but the president is expected to take into account the opinion of the congress. Such agreements are approved by the congress and indicate through various means the kind of agreement which is acceptable clearly attaching reservations or other conditions when approving the agreement. A few international agreements are sole executive agreements since the president considers his authority final and does not need approval from the congress.
Fourthly, the constitution gives the president the power to establish foreign policy through unilateral or joint policy statements issued by other governments. At times, the unilateral policy statements are a description of the American goals and objectives. Other times, the president articulates the foreign statement on a specific issue for instance, when President Bush proposed that Russia and the United States to remove their land based warhead missiles. Joint policy statements made with other nations are not legally binding international agreements, but they commit the president to a course of action. Congress can support the policy as enunciated by the president or make a decision to change it. The executive branch makes a policy statement by casting the United States vote in international organizations forums.
Moreover, the president has the power to implement policy. After the congress establishes the foreign policy through legislation, the executive continues to shape it by the interpretation and application of various provision of the law. A good example is the arms sales policy where the executive branch makes daily decisions about the sale to various countries and what weapons systems to provide despite the role of congress to establish the objectives and criteria for the arms sale.
Lastly, the president has the power to independent action. On occasion, the president undertakes a sudden and dramatic foreign policy action before the congress is fully aware about it. Congress usually supports the president, but on occasion tries to reverse the policy or pass legislation to restrain the president from such action in the future.
On the other hand, the congress has constitutional powers, which enable it, to participate in making of foreign policy by either originating or shaping the foreign policy. Firstly, has the power to make foreign policy through resolutions and policy statements. Each year the congress introduces numerous simple or concurrent resolutions stating the sense of congress on foreign policy and many of the resolutions are adopted. They express the policy of a single branch of government, but their effect is weak since congress does not execute policy. Nevertheless, these resolutions often play a significant role in launching new idea or promoting a new policy.
Secondly, the congress has the legislative directive power. This enables it to initiate foreign policy by using legislation to establish a new program, set of guidelines and objectives, direct and authorize the president to undertake specified activities and by earmarking appropriations. The executive branch influences this form of policy initiative by regularly seeking administration views in the process of formulating legislation. Thereafter the president must approve the legislation if not passed over a presidential veto followed by implementation by the executive.
Thirdly, the congress has the power to make influence policy making by the use of legislative power. In such cases, the congress pressures the president into taking a new direction in foreign policy by means of threatening to pass legislation even when the legislation is enacted or by exhortation of a policy. An example is the congressional effort to pass legislation imposing economic sanctions against South Africa in 1980s.
Fourthly, the congress has the power to use legislative restrictions and funds denials in the making of foreign policy. This is visible when the congress places prohibitions and other limitations on the president’s freedom of action in matters foreign affairs. Often this entails legislation to authorize or appropriate funds that the president was unlikely to veto. The use of funding restrictions is an example of power of the purse in the constitution.
Finally, the congress has the power to shape foreign policy by conducting regular oversight of the executive on implementation of foreign policy by using mechanisms such as investigations and hearings. The Senate foreign Relations committee oversee the foreign affairs agencies and the armed services committee oversee the Defence department. The hearings and investigations may be on any subject within a committee’s jurisdictions and, therefore, raise questions and influence activities and policies.
The formal power, which gives the president advantage over the congress in policy making, is that of independent action. This enables the president to take sudden action on foreign policy before the congress is fully informed especially in situations where the country is attacked or attack appears imminent. For instance, when President Reagan launched a military invasion of Grenada in 1983, and in 1989 when President Bush ordered the invasion of Panama. Secondly, the president’s power to respond to foreign events gives him an advantage over the congress. This is usually the sole role of the president, and the congress is only left to support the president (Moe & Howell 132-133).
The President has informal powers, which give him an advantage over the congress in conducting foreign policy. While the congress has the powers to pass legislation about foreign affairs, the executive has the ability to go to the people and appeal through the media; to garner public support and in return pressure the congress to pass legislation which is favourable to him. This is referred to as “bully pit”.
In addition, the president is capable of assuming the role of a ‘crisis manager’ in extreme conditions and act in situations without the approval of the congress. United States military intervention in Libyan regime in 2011, it was stated that the congressional approval was not required since the limited military operations anticipated were not a war. The Cuban missile crisis required a quick solution to avoid future implications on the national security. Such a decision was almost impossible to de agreed on by 535 members of the congress and hence the president had to manage the crisis (Ulrich 70-72).
In conclusion, the making of the US foreign policy entails a complex process with both the legislative and executive branches playing different but important roles, which frequently overlap. The president directs officials and machinery in conduct of diplomacy and he has the principal responsibility to advance US foreign policy interests. Congress, in its oversight role, affects the course of policy making through legislation governing the foreign relations and appropriation of funds. This shows that the cooperation between both branches is inevitable for a strong and effective United States foreign policy.
Works cited
Grimmett Richard F. Foreign policy roles of the president and congress. 1999. Web.
Moe Terry M., Howell William G. The Presidential Power of Unilateral Action. N.d. Web
Ulrich Marybeth P. National security powers: Are the checks in balance? N.d. 67-83. Web.
Ulrich Marybeth P. Presidential leadership and national security policymaking. N.d. 223-237. Web.
