Foreign Affairs and the Constitution
Reviews the constitutional relationship between the US president and Congress in the area of foreign affairs, and of war and peace in particular. There is a sizeable twilight zone of concurrent authority. Reviews constitutional developments and considers their implications for war powers, nuclear strategy, spending powers, covert actions and treaty-making. Notes that the USA is a republic which has become a democracy, and concludes that although the president provides leadership, Congress represents the people, so that "good government as well as democracy demands fewer decisions by one representative alone, for war or in peace."
Louis Henkin is University Professor, Columbia University. An earlier version of this essay was delivered at a symposium on "The Constitutional Bases of Political and Social Changes in the United States of America," at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in May 1987. Copyright © 1987 by Louis Henkin.
We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.
Related
Those who serve in government, especially when under attack, are likely to be conscious--somewhat defensively perhaps--of the spirit of the old Spanish proverb: "It is not the same to talk of bulls, as to be in the bullring." The memory of that sentiment has had some bearing on my observations from the safe distance of private life. It has commended a focus on institutional problems--those that transcend partisanship.
When Congress swings the budget ax, it cripples U.S. foreign policy. Now is the time to make a virtue of necessity and craft a system both leaner and better able to promote America's aims abroad.
Trade Representative Mickey Kantor's tough talk may have won concessions abroad. But the administration has failed to conquer the greatest threat to open trade: protectionist sentiment at home.
