Congress: Essential Ingredient in a Sound Foreign Policy

CONGRESS: ESSENTIAL INGREDIENTIN A SOUND FOREIGN POLICY Dale Bumpers ?.? the last two years there has been renewed skirmishing in the long-running philosophical war over the proper role of Congress in the making of U.S. foreign policy, a conflict that first began shortly after the ink was dry on our Constitution. This past spring Secretary of State George P. Shultz told a Senate subcommittee: This issue of how the Congress and the executive branch should interact in the field of foreign affairs ... is an extremely important issue, and whether you think it is in the right place or not now, it has moved in recent years in the congressional direction. It seems to me in some of our recent experience we could see some of the downside of that.1 A few days later Secretary Shultz questioned the constitutionality ofthe 1973 War Powers Act and complained that the administration's ability to control its foreign policy had been "constantly undercut" by congressional meddling. This charge was also echoed by President Reagan.2 1.Hearings, Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, Departments of Commerce, Justice, and State, the Judiciary and Related Agencies Appropriations for Fiscal Year 1985, Wednesday, 28 March 1984, 17. 2.Secretary of State George P. Shultz, as quoted in the New York Times, 3 April 1984, A6. At about the same time, President Reagan said the Lebanon debate had set back U.S. attempts to help negotiate a political solution in Lebanon, and that calls for the withdrawal of our Marines had "hindered the ability of our diplomats to negotiate, encouraged more intransigence from the Syrians and prolonged the violence." New York Times, 8 April 1984, sec. 4, 1. Senator Dale Bumpers (D.-Ark.) was governor of Arkansas from 1970 to 1974 and has represented Arkansas in the United States Senate since 1974. He is a member of the Appropriations and Energy committees and has been actively involved in nuclear disarmament and other defense and foreign policy issues. 51 52 SAIS REVIEW Three days after the remaining troops of the U.S. Marine peacekeeping force left Lebanese soil, Secretary Shultz questioned the value of the debate on Lebanon under the War Powers Act, stating that it "totally took the rug out from under our diplomatic effort."3 This verbal fusillade came at a time ofincreasing congressional concern over U.S. involvement in both Lebanon and Central America. While the executive branch's recent chafing over congressional attempts to modify certain aspects of U.S. foreign policy is understandable, it is seriously misguided in terms of both Congress's constitutionally mandated role and historical experience. Of the many strengths this country enjoys, one of the most subtle, yet significant, is that the Founding Fathers understood the value ofweaving creative tension into the fabric of our government. The system of checks and balances within our government is one of the most significant features of the Constitution. The Founding Fathers gave us a system that, by design, does not have the efficiency enjoyed by more authoritative governments, but neither does it allow the monstrous excesses that such governments often create. Although the role of Congress concerning domestic policy matters in the executive branch is widely accepted, it is much more controversial in the area of foreign policy. This duality of views reached its peak a year ago when, with substantial public support, congressional pressure played a major role in the resignations ofJames Watt from the Department of the Interior and Anne Burford from the Environmental Protection Agency. At the same time, the insistence ofCongress in applying the War Powers Act to the presence of U.S. troops in Lebanon was attacked in no small part because the president succeeded in convincing many that Congress had no business meddling in the matter. Incidentally, the president has not been as successful in swaying public opinion on his Central American policies. Contrary to the criticism of those who believe that Congress too often stands in the way of an effective foreign policy, the Constitution requires that Congress have an essential role in a successful U.S. foreign policy. The fundamental problem in the U.S. foreign policy process is that flawed policies are...