U.S Foreign Policy the Issue

u.s foreign policy

The issue of the war in Iraq continues to remain a rather debated subject, particularly because of the ongoing struggle of the American troops to find a proper resolution to the fighting that still take place throughout Iraq. In this debate however, the issue of the relationship between the President and the Congress appears to be more and more an issue of each of the two parties' rights to head the foreign policy of the United States. Therefore, it can be said that the war in Iraq also represented a challenge for the internal order of the United States.

The United States Constitution has a clear definition of the role and powers of the Congress and of the President concerning the declaration of war as well and the execution of it. In this sense, "only Congress has the power to declare war" (Ehrhart, 2003) whereas the President has the right and the duty to conduct it as the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

There have been many situations however that denied this power to the Congress. In this sense, it seems that since the end of the Second World War the Congress did not declare war on a state (Lithwick, 2001). This was achieved by the President through executive orders that took the place of the legislative power in this sense. However, it is considered that this approach does not benefit the democratic evolution of the United States because it does not legitimize the power sharing inside the institutions of the state. In this sense, the justification of the Constitution relies on the fact that "the Founding Fathers thought war so grave a matter that they chose not to give the power to declare war to a single individual, not even the commander in chief, but instead placed that gravest of responsibilities in the collective hands of the people's representatives" (Ehrhart, 2003) Therefore, the Constitution established the clear distinction of powers.

The War Powers Act of 1973 clarified the idea of the presidential powers by allowing the president to declare war and engage in one without the actual consent of the Congress. More precisely, the act acknowledges the need for cooperation between the presidential and the congressional powers. Thus, "The President in every possible instance shall consult with Congress before introducing United States Armed Forces into hostilities or into situations where imminent involvement in hostilities is clearly indicated by the circumstances, and after every such introduction shall consult regularly with the Congress until United States Armed Forces are no longer engaged in hostilities or have been removed from such situations" (War power Resolution, 2008).

While recognizing the relationship between the two sides, the act in itself is also important for the fact that it lets the president engage in a conflict without the prior agreement of the Congress in this sense. Thus, the act allows the President to go to war for 60 days before requiring the particular acceptance of the legislative body (War Power Resolution, 2008). This is an important evolution in the contacts between the two sides because it offers the President the freedom to elude the authority of the Congress and thus the popular legitimacy needed for waging the war is lost.

On a practical note, the issue of war and the conduct of foreign policy were greatly put to the test in the war in Iraq. The discussion revolved around the issue of the legitimacy of the President to go to war in Iraq without the approval of the Congress. However, the prerogatives of the presidential office give him this possibility. In this sense, his quality as commander in chef of the armed forces enables him to wage war without the approval of the Congress. Also, the first war in Iraq represented a good precedent for the authority of the President to go to war. Finally, another element that were used as justification for the intervention in Iraq without congressional approval is the Congress's resolution discussing the intervention against terrorism. In this sense, "the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons" (Authorizing Use of Force 09-14-01, 2001). Therefore, these can be considered as having been the arguments invoked for the President to go to war in Iraq without the approval of the Congress.

The public opinion is an important factor in the United States for the political power it holds. In this sense, the power of the individual vote is essential for the politicians. However, at the time of the U.S. intervention in Iraq, the polls supported this action and offered the legitimacy to wage war, despite the fact that democratically speaking, it was a breach of the Constitution. On the other hand, the Congress can also limit the powers of the president by a joint resolution against the actions undergone by the president. However, this disequilibrium rarely occurs. This is why the Congress encounters some of the most interesting debates in politics.