US Foreign Policy

The United States is the world's largest economy and a leading military power. Its foreign policy decisions affect every country on earth. Understanding how US foreign policy is made, who the key actors are, and the doctrines that have guided American strategy since 1789 is essential for understanding American government and global affairs.

Learning Objectives

By the end of this topic, you should be able to:

• Explain how treaty-making power is divided between the President and the Senate, and how executive agreements bypass that division
• Describe the constitutional tension over war powers between the President and Congress, including the War Powers Resolution of 1973
• Identify the roles of the State Department, National Security Council, and other institutions in conducting diplomacy
• Summarize the major foreign policy doctrines (Monroe, Truman, Nixon, Reagan, Bush) and what problem each was designed to solve
• Explain the purpose and structure of NATO and the United Nations, and the US role in each
• Analyze how US foreign policy has evolved from isolationism to global superpower to great power competition

Quick Answer

US foreign policy is made through shared power between the President and Congress. The President negotiates treaties, commands the military, and conducts day-to-day diplomacy through the State Department; the Senate must ratify treaties by a two-thirds vote and confirm ambassadors; and only Congress can declare war and appropriate military funds. In practice, presidents have expanded their power through executive agreements (no Senate vote needed) and by treating the War Powers Resolution's 48-hour notification rule as more of a formality than a constraint. Since 1823, presidents have periodically issued doctrines — named foreign policy principles like the Monroe Doctrine or the Truman Doctrine — that define a strategic approach for their era. American foreign policy has moved through distinct phases: isolationism (1789–1941), Cold War containment (1945–1991), post-Cold War primacy (1991–2001), the War on Terror (2001–2021), and today's great power competition with China and Russia.

Constitutional Authority Over Foreign Policy

Foreign policy authority is shared between the executive and legislative branches — a deliberate design by the Framers that produces ongoing constitutional tension. Neither branch has full control, which is exactly what Article I and Article II intended.

The Treaty-Making Power

Definition: A treaty is a formal, binding agreement between the United States and one or more foreign nations, negotiated by the President and requiring two-thirds Senate approval (Article II, Section 2) before it takes legal effect.

How it works: The President (through the State Department) negotiates the terms of a treaty with foreign counterparts. Once signed, it goes to the Senate, which can approve, reject, or approve with reservations/amendments that require renegotiation. A rejected or unratified treaty has no binding force in US law.

Example: In 1919, President Wilson negotiated the Treaty of Versailles, including US membership in the League of Nations. The Senate rejected it twice (1919 and 1920), and the US never joined the League — a reminder that presidential negotiation guarantees nothing without Senate buy-in.

Real-world example: The New START nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia was signed by President Obama in 2010 and ratified by the Senate 71–26 — a rare instance of a controversial treaty clearing the two-thirds bar (67 votes) because enough Republicans joined Democrats.

Why it matters: The two-thirds threshold means a determined minority (34 senators) can block any treaty, forcing presidents to build broad, often bipartisan coalitions before committing the US internationally.

Common misunderstanding: Students often assume any international agreement the President signs is a "treaty" requiring Senate ratification. In practice, the vast majority of US international agreements are executive agreements, not treaties (see below).

Executive Agreements

Definition: An executive agreement is an agreement between the President and a foreign government that does not require Senate ratification, based on the President's independent constitutional authority or on prior congressional authorization.

How it works: Executive agreements come in three types — sole executive agreements (based purely on presidential power, like recognition of foreign governments), congressional-executive agreements (authorized in advance or approved afterward by a simple majority in both houses, not two-thirds of the Senate alone), and agreements made under an existing treaty. Because they avoid the two-thirds hurdle, presidents of both parties have relied on them heavily — executive agreements now outnumber treaties by roughly 10 to 1.

Example: The USMCA (replacing NAFTA in 2020) was a congressional-executive agreement — negotiated by the President but passed by simple majority votes in the House and Senate under "fast track" trade authority, not as a two-thirds treaty.

Why it matters: Executive agreements let presidents act quickly and avoid Senate gridlock, but critics argue they let presidents circumvent the Constitution's deliberate check on unilateral foreign commitments.

Common misunderstanding: Students sometimes think executive agreements are less legally binding than treaties. Internationally, both are equally binding commitments; the difference is purely about the domestic approval process.

War Powers

Definition: War powers are the constitutional authorities to initiate, conduct, and fund military action — split between the President as Commander in Chief (Article II) and Congress, which alone can declare war and control military appropriations (Article I).

How it works: In theory, Congress declares war and the President executes it. In practice, Congress has formally declared war only 11 times in US history, the last being World War II. Since 1945, presidents have committed forces to Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Panama, the Gulf War, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, and Syria without a formal declaration of war — usually citing Commander in Chief authority, a UN resolution, or a congressional "authorization for use of military force" (AUMF), which is a weaker substitute for a declaration.

War Powers Resolution (1973): Passed over President Nixon's veto in response to the undeclared Vietnam War, it requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing forces into hostilities, and to withdraw forces within 60–90 days unless Congress authorizes continued action. Every president since Nixon has treated parts of the law as unconstitutional infringements on Commander in Chief power, and none has ever fully complied with the withdrawal clause when challenged.

Real-world example: In 2011, President Obama continued US airstrikes in Libya past the 60-day window, arguing that limited air support (with no ground troops) did not constitute "hostilities" under the statute — a legal interpretation many scholars rejected, but Congress took no binding action to stop it.

Why it matters: This is the sharpest ongoing separation-of-powers dispute in foreign policy — it shows how a statute can exist on paper while being consistently unenforced in practice because courts have generally treated war powers disputes as "political questions" outside judicial review.

Common misunderstanding: Students often believe the War Powers Resolution requires Congress to approve military action within 48 hours. It does not — it only requires presidential notification within 48 hours; the 60–90 day clock is what forces withdrawal absent congressional authorization.

Diplomacy and the State Department

Definition: Diplomacy is the practice of managing international relations through negotiation, representation, and communication rather than force; the Department of State, led by the Secretary of State (a Cabinet position and fourth in the presidential line of succession), is the lead US agency for conducting it.

How it works: The State Department manages over 275 embassies, consulates, and diplomatic missions worldwide, issues passports and provides consular services to Americans abroad, negotiates international agreements, and coordinates foreign assistance. Ambassadors — the President's personal representatives abroad — are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate.

Example: Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's shuttle diplomacy after the 1973 Yom Kippur War — flying repeatedly between Israel, Egypt, and Syria to negotiate disengagement agreements — became the model for modern high-stakes American diplomacy.

Why it matters: Diplomacy is typically far cheaper and less risky than military action; the State Department's entire annual budget ($60 billion) is a small fraction of the Defense Department's ($850 billion), yet diplomatic breakthroughs (like the Camp David Accords) can achieve outcomes military force cannot.

Common misunderstanding: Many assume the Secretary of State makes foreign policy independently. In reality, the Secretary implements the President's foreign policy and competes for influence with the National Security Advisor and Secretary of Defense — the "who's really in charge of foreign policy" varies enormously by administration.

Other Key Institutions

Institution	Role
National Security Council (NSC)	The President's central forum for coordinating national security and foreign policy across agencies; statutory members include the President, Vice President, Secretary of State, and Secretary of Defense. The National Security Advisor runs it day-to-day and does not require Senate confirmation
Department of Defense (DoD)	Executes military policy under civilian control (President and Secretary of Defense); the Joint Chiefs of Staff are the senior military advisors; ~1.3 million active-duty personnel
Intelligence Community	17 agencies including the CIA (human intelligence and analysis) and NSA (signals intelligence), coordinated by the Director of National Intelligence
USAID	Administers foreign assistance — development, disaster relief, democracy promotion — across 100+ countries (~$40 billion/year)

Key Foreign Policy Doctrines

Definition: A foreign policy "doctrine" is a named, publicly articulated set of principles that a president adopts to guide US action toward a particular region or threat, usually announced in a major speech.

How it works: Doctrines function as a shorthand — once named, they signal to allies and adversaries what the US will and won't tolerate, and they give later administrations a label to invoke, extend, or reject.

Doctrine	Year	Core Idea
Monroe Doctrine	1823	Warned European powers against further colonization or intervention in the Western Hemisphere; the US would treat such intervention as hostile
Truman Doctrine	1947	US would support "free peoples" resisting communist subjugation, starting with aid to Greece and Turkey; launched the policy of containment
Nixon Doctrine	1969	US would honor treaty commitments but expect allies (e.g., South Vietnam) to bear primary responsibility for their own defense — a response to Vietnam War fatigue
Reagan Doctrine	1980s	US would actively support anti-communist insurgencies (Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Angola) to roll back Soviet influence, not just contain it
Bush Doctrine	2002	Asserted the right to preemptive military action against states or terrorist groups believed to pose a threat, justifying the 2003 Iraq invasion

Real-world example: The Monroe Doctrine was largely aspirational when announced in 1823 — the US Navy could not have enforced it against a major European power — but it became a real operative principle later in the century, invoked to justify US intervention across Latin America and the Caribbean.

Why it matters: Doctrines reveal how each era's leaders defined the central foreign policy threat of their time — European recolonization, Soviet communism, terrorism — and they show a recurring pattern of expanding presidential claims to unilateral action.

Common misunderstanding: Students often think "containment" and the "Truman Doctrine" are the same thing. The Truman Doctrine was the political announcement; containment (developed by diplomat George Kennan) was the broader strategic theory it was based on — that Soviet expansion should be resisted wherever it appeared, without seeking to roll back existing Soviet territory.

The "Two Presidencies" Theory

Political scientist Aaron Wildavsky observed that presidents succeed far more often in foreign policy than in domestic policy — Congress defers more readily to the executive in foreign affairs, especially during crises, because information asymmetries and the need for speed favor the branch that can act as one voice.

Major US Alliances and Organizations

NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization)

• Founded: 1949; a collective defense alliance formed to deter Soviet expansion into Western Europe
• Members: 32 countries, including Canada, the UK, France, and Germany, with Finland and Sweden joining in 2023–2024 in direct response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine
• Article 5: The core collective defense clause — an armed attack against one member is treated as an attack against all; invoked only once, by the US itself, after the September 11, 2001 attacks
• US role: Largest financial and military contributor; extends a nuclear deterrent umbrella over European allies
• Post-Cold War expansion: NATO expanded eastward after the Soviet collapse in 1991, a development Russia has repeatedly cited as a grievance and a contributing factor to the Ukraine conflict

United Nations (UN)

The US is a founding member (1945) and the largest single funder (~22% of the regular budget, ~27% of the peacekeeping budget). The US holds a permanent veto on the UN Security Council alongside China, Russia, the UK, and France.

Key UN bodies:

• Security Council: 15 members (5 permanent with veto power, 10 rotating); holds primary responsibility for international peace and security
• General Assembly: All 193 member states; resolutions are not binding on the Security Council
• International Court of Justice (ICJ): Settles legal disputes between states

Other Key Alliances

Alliance/Partnership	Nature
US-Japan alliance	Security treaty; US military bases in Japan underwrite Japan's defense
US-South Korea alliance	Security treaty; 28,500+ US troops stationed in South Korea
AUKUS	Australia, UK, US pact for advanced military technology sharing, including a nuclear submarine deal (2021)
Five Eyes	Intelligence-sharing partnership: US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand
US-Israel relationship	Major non-NATO ally; ~$3.8 billion/year in US military assistance
US-Saudi Arabia	Oil security and arms sales; a complex, non-treaty strategic partnership

Trade Policy

Free Trade and Trade Agreements

The US has free trade agreements (FTAs) with 20 countries. The USMCA (United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement) replaced NAFTA in 2020 and governs over $1.5 trillion in annual trade. The US is also a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO), which sets global trade rules and provides a dispute resolution mechanism.

Tariffs and Trade Wars

Section 232 tariffs (justified on national security grounds) imposed 25% tariffs on steel and 10% on aluminum from most countries starting in 2018; the following administration maintained most of them. Section 301 tariffs targeted roughly $350 billion of Chinese goods starting in 2018–2019 over intellectual property theft and unfair subsidies, and were largely maintained and expanded afterward — showing rare bipartisan continuity on China trade policy. Congress revoked Russia's Permanent Normal Trade Relations (PNTR) status in 2022 following its invasion of Ukraine, raising tariffs on Russian goods.

The Evolution of US Foreign Policy

Era	Approach
Isolationism (1789–1941)	Washington's Farewell Address warned against "permanent alliances"; the Monroe Doctrine (1823) warned Europe against colonizing the Western Hemisphere while the US avoided involvement outside it
World War II and the emergence of a superpower (1941–1945)	Pearl Harbor ended isolationism; the US emerged as the world's dominant economic and military power
Cold War (1945–1991)	Containment of Soviet communism via the Truman Doctrine and Marshall Plan; NATO founded; proxy wars in Korea and Vietnam; détente; nuclear arms race
Post-Cold War (1991–2001)	The "unipolar moment" — the US as sole superpower; NATO expansion; humanitarian interventions in Bosnia and Kosovo
War on Terror (2001–2021)	September 11 attacks triggered the Bush Doctrine, the Afghanistan invasion, and the Iraq War, alongside drone strikes and expanded surveillance
Great Power Competition (2017–present)	China's rise as a peer competitor; the US-China trade war; Russia's invasion of Ukraine; AUKUS; industrial policy such as the CHIPS Act

Foreign Policy Decision Flow

Key Terms

Term	Definition	Related Concept
Treaty	A formal international agreement negotiated by the President requiring 2/3 Senate ratification to take legal effect	Executive agreement
Executive agreement	An international agreement made by the President that does not require Senate ratification; used far more often than treaties	Congressional-executive agreement
War Powers Resolution (1973)	Law requiring presidential notification to Congress within 48 hours of committing forces and withdrawal within 60–90 days absent authorization	Commander in Chief
Containment	Cold War strategy of resisting Soviet expansion without seeking to roll back existing communist territory	Truman Doctrine
Monroe Doctrine	1823 policy warning European powers against colonizing or intervening in the Western Hemisphere	Foreign policy doctrine
Bush Doctrine	2002 policy asserting the right to preemptive military action against threats before they fully materialize	War on Terror
NATO Article 5	Collective defense clause treating an attack on one member as an attack on all; invoked only after 9/11	NATO
Two-thirds Senate rule	Constitutional requirement (Article II) that treaties need a 2/3 Senate vote to be ratified	Treaty power
State Department	The lead US federal agency for diplomacy, headed by the Secretary of State	Diplomacy
Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF)	Congressional resolution granting the President authority to use military force for a specific purpose, short of a formal declaration of war	War powers
Isolationism	The pre-1941 US foreign policy tradition of avoiding permanent alliances and staying out of foreign conflicts	Monroe Doctrine
USMCA	The United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, a 2020 congressional-executive trade agreement that replaced NAFTA	Executive agreement

Common Mistakes

Misconception: The President can single-handedly commit the US to a binding international treaty. Why it's wrong: Article II, Section 2 explicitly requires two-thirds Senate approval before a treaty takes legal effect. Presidential signature alone only signals intent to be bound; it creates no domestic legal obligation until ratified. Correct understanding: The President negotiates and signs; the Senate ratifies. When presidents want to avoid this hurdle, they use executive agreements instead, which is why those vastly outnumber formal treaties in practice.

Misconception: The War Powers Resolution requires congressional approval before the President can use military force. Why it's wrong: The statute only requires the President to notify Congress within 48 hours of introducing forces into hostilities and to withdraw within 60–90 days without further authorization — it does not require prior approval to act in the first place. Correct understanding: Presidents have generally treated the notification requirement as the only truly binding part and have used ambiguous legal interpretations (such as arguing certain operations don't constitute "hostilities") to avoid triggering the withdrawal clock, as with Libya in 2011.

Misconception: "The Monroe Doctrine" and "containment" are interchangeable labels for the same general idea of the US resisting foreign influence. Why it's wrong: They address entirely different threats in different centuries. The Monroe Doctrine (1823) was about excluding European colonization from the Western Hemisphere; containment (1947 onward) was a Cold War strategy for resisting global Soviet communist expansion. Correct understanding: Each doctrine responds to the specific threat perceived in its era — European recolonization, Soviet communism, terrorism — and should be identified by its historical context, not treated as a generic synonym for "American assertiveness abroad."

Comparison and Connections

Feature	Treaty	Executive Agreement
Approval needed	2/3 Senate vote	None, or simple majority in both chambers (congressional-executive agreement)
Speed	Slow; can be blocked indefinitely	Fast; President can act immediately
Frequency	Rare (fewer than 20 per year on average)	Common (hundreds per year)
Example	New START (2010)	USMCA (2020)
Reversibility	Harder to exit; often requires formal withdrawal process	Easier for a future president to modify or abandon

Feature	Congress's Foreign Policy Role	President's Foreign Policy Role
War	Declares war; controls funding	Commands forces as Commander in Chief
Treaties	Senate ratifies (2/3 vote)	Negotiates and signs
Personnel	Senate confirms ambassadors	Nominates ambassadors
Trade	Constitutionally regulates commerce	Negotiates trade deals under delegated authority
Day-to-day diplomacy	Oversight and appropriations	Directs the State Department and conducts relations

Practice Questions

Recall

1. What vote threshold does the Senate need to ratify a treaty, and which constitutional article establishes it? Answer guidance: A two-thirds vote of the Senate present, established in Article II, Section 2.

2. Name three US foreign policy doctrines and the year each was announced. Answer guidance: Monroe Doctrine (1823), Truman Doctrine (1947), Nixon Doctrine (1969), Reagan Doctrine (1980s), or Bush Doctrine (2002) — any three with correct years.

Understanding

3. Why do executive agreements vastly outnumber formal treaties in US foreign policy practice? Answer guidance: Treaties require a difficult two-thirds Senate vote that a determined minority of 34 senators can block, while executive agreements require no Senate ratification (or only a simple majority for congressional-executive agreements). This lets presidents act faster and avoid gridlock, though critics see it as circumventing the Constitution's check on unilateral commitments.

4. Explain the difference between the Truman Doctrine and the broader strategy of containment. Answer guidance: The Truman Doctrine (1947) was the specific political announcement pledging support to Greece and Turkey against communist pressure. Containment, developed by George Kennan, was the broader Cold War theory that Soviet expansion should be resisted wherever it appeared without trying to roll back existing communist territory — the Truman Doctrine was one application of that larger strategy.

Application

5. In 2011, President Obama kept US forces conducting airstrikes in Libya beyond the War Powers Resolution's 60-day limit without new congressional authorization. Using what you know about war powers, explain how this was legally justified and why it was controversial. Answer guidance: The administration argued that limited airstrikes with no ground troops did not constitute "hostilities" under the statute's meaning, so the 60-day withdrawal clock never started. Critics, including many legal scholars, argued this was a strained reading designed to avoid the law's plain intent. Congress did not take binding action to force compliance, illustrating the resolution's weak enforcement mechanism.

6. A president wants to commit US forces to defend a NATO ally that has been attacked. Walk through which constitutional and treaty powers are triggered. Answer guidance: NATO's Article 5 treats an attack on one member as an attack on all, giving political and treaty grounds for a response. Domestically, the President can act immediately as Commander in Chief, but under the War Powers Resolution must notify Congress within 48 hours, and continued action beyond 60–90 days requires congressional authorization (formal declaration of war or an AUMF) unless Congress agrees to extend the deployment.

Analysis

7. Compare the Monroe Doctrine and the Bush Doctrine. What does the shift from "exclude foreign powers from our hemisphere" to "preemptively strike threats anywhere" reveal about the growth of presidential foreign policy power? Answer guidance: The Monroe Doctrine (1823) was defensive and regional — warning outside powers away from the Western Hemisphere, with limited capacity to enforce it. The Bush Doctrine (2002) asserted a global, offensive right to preemptive action against perceived threats before they fully materialize, used to justify the Iraq invasion. The comparison shows a long-term trend toward expanding claims of unilateral presidential authority to use force, moving from a defensive posture to an assertive, anticipatory one.

8. Some scholars argue the War Powers Resolution has failed to meaningfully constrain presidential war-making since 1973. Evaluate this claim using historical examples. Answer guidance: Strong support for the claim: no president has fully complied with the withdrawal provision when tested (Reagan in Lebanon and Grenada, Clinton in Kosovo, Obama in Libya), and courts have treated these disputes as non-justiciable "political questions." Counterargument: the 48-hour notification requirement has generally been honored, giving Congress at least information and an opportunity to act, and the law's existence still shapes how administrations frame legal justifications, even if it hasn't stopped action outright.

FAQ

Why does Congress rarely formally declare war anymore, even though it clearly has the power? Formal declarations of war carry heavy legal and diplomatic consequences (they trigger wartime statutes, alter treaty obligations, and signal all-out national commitment), so presidents and Congress have increasingly relied on more flexible tools instead — UN resolutions, NATO obligations, or an Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), which grants military authority for a specific conflict without the full weight of a declared war. The last formal declaration was against Japan, Germany, and their allies during World War II; every subsequent major conflict, from Korea to Iraq, has been fought without one.

If the War Powers Resolution is so often ignored, why does it still matter? Even imperfectly enforced laws shape behavior. Presidents still go through the motions of notifying Congress and crafting legal justifications (like the "not hostilities" argument used in Libya) rather than simply ignoring the statute outright, which suggests it still carries real political and legal weight even without full compliance. It also gives Congress a formal mechanism, however underused, to force a debate and vote on continued military action.

What's the practical difference between the Secretary of State and the National Security Advisor? The Secretary of State runs the State Department, a Senate-confirmed Cabinet position responsible for the diplomatic bureaucracy — embassies, treaty negotiations, and formal foreign relations. The National Security Advisor is a White House staff position (no Senate confirmation needed) who runs the National Security Council and often has more direct daily access to the President. Depending on the administration, either person can be the more influential foreign policy voice; the balance of power between the two roles varies significantly from president to president.

Why do presidents get named "doctrines" while their foreign policy approaches are often continuations of earlier ones? A named doctrine functions as political branding — it clarifies, for both the public and foreign governments, what a president's core foreign policy commitment is. Some doctrines mark a genuine break (the Nixon Doctrine, scaling back direct US involvement after Vietnam), while others (the Reagan Doctrine building on containment) extend an existing strategy more aggressively. Naming a doctrine helps historians and students organize decades of policy into recognizable eras, even when the underlying continuity is greater than the label suggests.

Does the US Constitution actually require Congress's permission before the President can use force abroad? In theory, yes for anything rising to the level of "war" — Article I gives Congress that power exclusively. In practice, the line between a use of force that requires congressional declaration and one the President can order unilaterally as Commander in Chief has never been definitively settled, and courts have generally declined to resolve the dispute, treating it as a "political question" for the elected branches to work out themselves. This ambiguity is precisely why every modern president has been able to commit forces to combat without a formal declaration of war.

Quick Revision

• Treaty-making requires 2/3 Senate ratification (Article II); executive agreements do not, and vastly outnumber treaties in practice
• Only Congress can declare war (Article I); the last formal declaration was in World War II
• The War Powers Resolution (1973) requires 48-hour notification and a 60–90 day withdrawal deadline absent congressional authorization — no president has fully complied with the withdrawal clause
• The State Department, led by the Secretary of State, runs day-to-day diplomacy through 275+ embassies and consulates worldwide
• The National Security Council (NSC), led by the National Security Advisor, coordinates foreign policy across agencies and doesn't require Senate confirmation
• Key doctrines: Monroe (1823, no European colonization in the Western Hemisphere), Truman (1947, containment of communism), Nixon (1969, allies bear more of their own defense), Reagan (1980s, roll back Soviet influence), Bush (2002, preemptive strikes)
• NATO (1949) is a collective defense alliance; Article 5 (attack on one is attack on all) has been invoked only once — by the US after 9/11
• The US holds a permanent veto on the UN Security Council alongside China, Russia, the UK, and France
• USMCA (2020, replacing NAFTA) is a congressional-executive agreement governing $1.5+ trillion in annual trade
• Section 232 and Section 301 tariffs targeted steel/aluminum imports and Chinese goods respectively, and were largely maintained across changes in administration
• US foreign policy evolved: isolationism (1789–1941) → Cold War containment (1945–1991) → post-Cold War primacy (1991–2001) → War on Terror (2001–2021) → great power competition (2017–present)
• The "Two Presidencies" theory holds that presidents get more deference from Congress on foreign policy than on domestic policy

Related Topics

Prerequisites: The Three Branches of Government (separation of powers between Congress and the President), basic Cold War history, the structure of the Executive Branch and Cabinet

Related Topics: The Constitution and Founding (Article I and Article II war/treaty powers), Congress (appropriations and Senate confirmation process), Federalism and separation of powers more broadly

Next Topics: Comparative government and international relations theory; the history of US military interventions since 1945; the structure and function of international organizations like the UN and WTO