Foreign policy makers 629presidents” who can implement their preferred foreign policies without the consent
of Congress, the American people, or anyone else.^37 These complaints reflect a simple
truth: presidents dominate the making of American foreign policy. Thus, in 2017, when
President Trump ordered military strikes in Syria in response to that government’s use
of chemical weapons against civilians, he did not need congressional approval prior to
launching the strike. Similarly, congressional consent was not required when Trump
withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord—although if the accord
had been initially voted on as a treaty, a two-thirds vote in the Senate would have been
required for Trump’s decision to take effect.
The explanation for presidents’ dominance of foreign policy lies in the ability of
presidents to act unilaterally (see Chapter 12).^38 Although the Constitution grants the
president only several specific foreign policy powers, it does not set explicit limits
on what the chief executive can and cannot do. This ambiguity has given presidents
considerable latitude to make foreign policy as they see fit. Members of Congress who
disagree with the president must build veto-proof, two-thirds majorities in the House
and Senate to overturn presidential foreign policy actions. For example, while some
Democrats in Congress criticized Trump’s decision to withdraw from the Paris Accord,
they could not build the two-thirds majority needed to prevent it.President Obama’s trip to Vietnam
in 2016 illustrates that one type of
important foreign policy decision
involves deciding which countries the
president should visit and whom they
should shake hands with while there.Nonetheless, presidents sometimes pull back from a new foreign policy if they
believe congressional support will not be forthcoming. For example, President Trump
initially decided in 2017 to withdraw U.S. military advisers from Syria, where they were
aiding rebel forces, only to reverse the decision after criticism from senior advisers and
members of Congress. Similarly, no president has ever submitted the 1996 Nuclear
Test Ban Treaty for Senate ratification, although all presidents since Bill Clinton have
implemented a voluntary moratorium on tests. And congressional opposition was one
argument against sending ground forces to fight ISIL.
Clearly, the president dominates foreign policy—but Congress can reverse or thwart
presidential initiatives. Thus, in most cases in which presidents appear to have acted
without constraints, the reality is that members of Congress actually approved of the
president’s action, were unaware of the action, or were unwilling or unable to organize
to overturn the president’s policy.Full_18_APT_64431_ch17_614-654.indd 629 16/11/18 11:21 AM