Does the executive control American foreign policy?

Who controls American foreign policy?

Controls it	Doesn’t control it
COMMANDER IN CHIEF. Traditionally Congress controlled foreign policy through its ability to declare war, however today the President has effectively exploited his role as Commander In Chief and has therefore become the main individual who has initiated a lot of US military intervention abroad such as Iraq and Afghanistan under Bush and sometimes even without Congressional approval as seen from the Libya attacks in 2011, cutting Congress out of the process.	However Congress still continues to play a vital role in, although indeed its true that they haven’t declared war since world war 2, Congress continues to control foreign policy indirectly. This is done by granting the executive congressional approval to take action overseas and this is a requirement the President must fulfill under the War Powers Act. Earlier this year the Obama administration had to submit a report to the Senate requesting congressional authorisation to use further force in the fight against the Islamic State. And this may not always go according to the Presidents wishes, during this process the Senate Foreign Relations Committee had to scrutinise key figures from the Obama administration: Ashton Carter and John Kerry before deciding whether to grant authorisation and this led to major deadlock between Democrats and Republicans with some thinking it went too far and some believing it doesn’t go far enough.
STATE OF THE UNION. Through his state of the union address it is ultimately the President who sets the tone of foreign policy and Congress who follow it. This was perhaps most prominently seen in 2015 SOTU: President Obama told Congress Republicans and Democrats to unite together in the fight against ISIS in the Middle East and pass a resolution to authorize use of force against ISIS – all of which was greeted with applause à there has already been steps taken to pass a resolution. Obama also ordered Congress to work to strengthen ties with Cuba and put aside the differences that have lasted since the 1960s by lifting the Cuba embargo, subsequently a bill was introduced in Congress to lift the half-century old embargo.	During the state of the union address the President appears to be more of a persuader in chief, merely recommending legislation to Congress and what to do in foreign affairs and recently we’ve witnessed how Congress has become increasingly obstructionist to the foreign agenda laid down by the President in his SOTU. In his state of the union address Obama talked of how ties with Iran should be strengthened, believing Iran not to pose a major threat to US security. However, in recent events Congress has disagreed with him on this and have sought to do oppose Obama’s aims towards Iranian relations, which was most clearly seen from the Israeli PM, Benjamin Netanyahu, visiting Congress which annoyed Obama – ultimately Congress’s stance towards Iran is the opposite to that of Obama’s and Netanyahu’s high profile visit to Congress epitomised how at times it may appear that the President is not in control of foreign policy.
KEY DEPARTMENTS. The executive remains in charge of foreign policy as the executive also consists of the cabinet whereby some members are heads of major departments who play a huge role in foreign policy, such as the Defence Department and State Department. The State Department under John Kerry has particularly been at the centre of all diplomatic relations during the Obama administration given the more ‘dovish’ approach to foreign policy. Kerry’s recently been on visits to Russia to discuss the Ukrainian crisis and prior to when ISIS showed up Kerry took part in meetings with Bashar al-Assad. So, it’s the executive who always remains at the forefront of American foreign policy, not Congress. (+National Security council under EXOP)	However, arguably Congress still controls foreign policy through its power of investigation which allows them to investigate any department, such as ones involved in foreign affairs, through its congressional committees. Again, in this sense Congress indirectly control foreign policy. Heads of departments are accountable to congressional committees who scrutinise their every action: most recently seen through the publication of the CIA torture report by the Senate Intelligence Committee which revealed the inhumane enhanced interrogation techniques employed by the CIA when treating suspected terrorists. And also the House Select Committee on Benghazi which investigated Hilary Clinton’s (when she was Secretary of State) poor handling of the Benghazi attacks which led to the deaths of 4 US citizens.
DIPLOMACY. It is ultimately members of the executive branch, namely the President as also diplomat-in-chief who participates in negotiations with foreign nations abroad whereas Congress remains sitting in Washington. We’ve already seen Kerry get involved in various negotiations with other world leaders and also the President in signing treaties. For instance, it was the President who negotiated the START Treaty in 2010 which sought to reduce the number of nuclear weapons both America and Russia have. So, the executive plays a part in diplomacy (he participates in G8 conferences). Also, the President can resort to executive agreements which completely eliminate Congress from the process and these don’t need to be ratified by Congress.	Congress still plays its part, they ultimately have a final say as treaties need to be ratified by Congress.
WAR ON TERROR. It is departments among the executive and agencies in the federal bureaucracy which control foreign policy as illustrated by the revelations of the mass spying programmes run by the NSA (leaked by whistleblower Edward Snownde) which has stretched spying on phone and internet records not just on US citizens but also foreign leaders and British citizens too. Similarly, the CIAs ‘enhanced interrogation’ torture programme in various parts of the world in ‘black sites’ remaining secret from Congress for over a decade shows how the executive is fully in control of everything in foreign affairs. Also, Obama’s ‘disposition Matrix’ which is effectively a kill list for drone strikes (death total 2,400+) outside of Congress’s control also epitomises how the executive controls foreign policy.	But it was Congress who authorized all of this immediately after 9/11 through the PATRIOT Act and recent attempts in Congress to end things like the NSA data collection have been limited through the USA Freedom Act. So, since it’s congressional legislation that gave the NSA and CIA permission to conduct such operations, Congress can revoke the permission. So, again, Congress has a final say.

I'd put this in the conclusion: In the very recent Zivotofsky v. Kerry case the Supreme Court made clear that it is ultimately the President’s constitutional role to conduct the nation’s foreign affairs.