Too Much Foreign Policy Power for Presidents?

As our textbook states, by design there will always be a perpetual tug of war between the president and Congress. This is do to the separation of powers that does not allow one branch to entirely make decisions or dominate a specific responsibility without the possibility of some resistance. Although this is present in all forms of a president’s powers, presidents seem to have the most free reign when it comes to foreign policy. According to “Power and the Presidency from Kennedy to Obama” “President’s control over foreign affairs had been growing since the Theodore Roosevelt administration (and still grows today)” This has been occurring do to a number of reasons but the biggest being our status as a global policer that developed in this time period in addition to the importance of appearing to be a unified nation when it dealing with other countries.

Donald Trump has certainly taken advantage of his status as the foreign policy leader. When dealing with issues abroad (as with domestic) he has been extremely aggressive. This can be shown through his promise to North Korea that he will unleash the “fire and fury” if Kim Jong Un was to continue his missile tests and recurring threats. He also has made a point to reverse foreign policy such as that that been enacted by past presidents. Trump referred to President Obama’s nuclear deal as “one of the worst deals ever negotiated.” This language and his attempts to entirely revamp foreign policy are evidence of the power that he holds as the leader of foreign policy.

So where is congress in all of this? Trump has been continually utilizing a strategy that involves him taking a strong hard-line stance on foreign policy issues and then gradually decreasing his stance in order to find a ground where congress seems paralyzed and must comply. By doing this Trump has been able to get his way on many foreign policy issues leaving the opinion of the public and of Congress as an afterthought.

Whether one agrees with the actual policies that Trump is enacting is subjective but the implications of how he is going about it are much more important. Many critics say that by acting in such an aggressive manner he is tarnishing the reputation of America and destroying global relations. On the other side of the argument people argue that Trump’s strategy is necessary for the safety of America.

I believe that one hand Trump’s foreign policy is beneficial because it is prioritizing American safety. On the other hand the manner that he is doing it is fundamentally flawed. As I stated earlier, presidents are given foreign power to appear to be a unified front. Trump has not done a good job of unifying the country and as a result Trump’s policies seem to reflect the his will as opposed to the will of the people. In addition, I would argue that too much power lays in the hand of Trump and other presidents when it comes to foreign policy. Congress should play a larger role to ensure that decisions are always made rationally.

https://campaigningforhistory.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/05/09/an-endless-tug-of-war-with-congress/

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/trump-s-foreign-policy-pure-trump-it-s-working-him-n815636

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/power-and-the-presidency-from-kennedy-to-obama-75335897/

3 Responses to "Too Much Foreign Policy Power for Presidents?"

Spencer Yacos says:

November 28, 2017 at 11:53 am

The president’s power over foreign policy and ability to wage war has steadily increased over the decades, especially after the September 11th attacks. For instance, Barack Obama approved of intervention in the Libyan Civil War without authorization from Congress. Even now there is talk of intervention in Syria, and what the ramifications of engaging in such a far-away conflict would be. If Trump were to intervene in a country like Syria, would he consult Congress first? If he didn’t, would his Republican constituents like Mitch McConnell object? If personally believe that although they might complain and grumble to morning talk show hosts, congressional Republicans would ultimately drop the issue for the sake of party unity. Therefore, using this line of reasoning, Trump’s ability to wage war without Congress, and thus the abilities of the President as a whole, can only expand more.

As for your second point of Trump prioritizing American safety I have to strongly disagree with you. While he may preach about protectionism and the America First movement, embracing such factions weakens America’s standing on the international stage and gives off the impression that we wish to be isolationist in a time where the world is more and more globalized. Just like before WWII, I believe isolationism can only lead to further disinterest and disengagement by the international community. A Chinese or Russian hegemony will happily take our place in the developing world.
Grant Golden says:

November 28, 2017 at 3:22 pm

In terms of foreign policy power, I think that the president indeed has a lot of influence and I think it should stay that way if not increase. With the United States being the leader of the free world, I think it is important for our elected leader to have immense power in foreign policy decisions. I believe that our elected leader should be making these decisions as he is our representative whether we like them or not. This obviously has a down side when a certain president, such as trump, is extremely irrational. Even though I think the president should have the majority of the power with this topic, there definitely needs to be some balance from congress. With that being said, even though I do not agree with virtually anything that Trump says, I do not totally disagree with him in terms of foreign policy. There is obviously high political tension across the world today in various countries and I think there are some extreme, perhaps some may consider irrational decisions that need to be made to protect the United States. Even though Trumps policies and ideas seem this way, they do have the intentions to protect the American people and going off of what Spencer said in the comment above, I don’t think some form of isolationism would be a bad idea due to the tension that the world is in today. Overall, I think what needs to be done is what is best for the American people and as long as our president is trying to do that (at least in foreign policy because he is not doing any good anywhere else in regards to Trump) then they should continue to have this power in foreign policy.
Hannah Dunn says:

November 29, 2017 at 8:04 pm

After learning about the latest successful North Korean missile test, I have to agree with your assertion that President Trump’s near total control over American foreign policy is dangerous. Trump’s threats to North Korean leader Kim Jong Un serve as provocations and do little to ensure the safety of American citizens. In fact, I think that Trump’s commentary on North Korea is less about foreign policy and more about conveying superiority. Additionally, Trump’s lack of general political experience or expertise is concerning in the face of such a grave crisis. I worry that he lacks the decision making skills to determine a course of action against Kim Jong Un which is both productive and does not endanger civilians, whether American or North Korean.

However, I do find comfort in the fact that Trump has advisors who theoretically have more political experience than himself. I think it is important that the President never really acts alone, as his senior staff and Defense Secretary, along with Homeland Security, are all incentivized to make sure the President makes the right foreign policy decisions for the good of the country and their own jobs.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/28/world/asia/north-korea-missile-test.html?_r=0

Comments are closed.