Centerbii. Democratic Control

3609. Almond, Gabriel A. The American people and foreign policy. New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1950. 269 p. 50–6254 E744.A47

Half title: Institute of International Studies, Yale University.

An attempt to place American foreign policy in its psychological and sociological context. The author considers complex questions of foreign policy as being frequently beyond the comprehension of non-specialists, and states that the function of the public under a democratic regime is to set up certain policy criteria in the form of widely held values and expectations and judge the results of foreign policy thereby. What is needed, he concludes, is to inform and moderate the views of the leadership of the various interest groups which influence public opinion. Mr. Almond thinks that our professional idealism is particularly out of touch with moral and historical realities, and that it is unduly influential upon the attitudes of women and young people.

3610. Cheever, Daniel S., and Henry Field Haviland. American foreign policy and the separation of powers. Cambridge, Harvard University Press, 1952. 244 p. 52–5390 JK570.C45

The authors regard the relationship between the executive and legislative branches of government as the weakest and most critical link in the process of making our foreign policy. The present period is one of unprecedented difficulty, requiring extraordinary presidential powers, a consistency difficult to attain when our institutions encourage conflict between the President and Congress over foreign policy, and rapid decision. The book consists principally of a historical survey of relations between Congress and the President in the realm of foreign affairs, with special attention to the larger problems that have arisen since World War II. Various means of establishing cooperation through improved administrative techniques are suggested. Organizational adjustments must be accompanied by "a far stronger spirit of mutual trust between the two branches." Failure to achieve this, it is maintained, will be at the expense of American interests and prestige.

3611. Dahl, Robert A. Congress and foreign policy. New York, Harcourt, Brace, 1950. 305 p. 50–8588 JK1081.D32

Half title: Institute of International Studies, Yale University.

According to Mr. Dahl, the traditional role of Congress in the process of foreign policy formulation, that of mediator between the preferences of the citizenry and the realities of international affairs as interpreted by executive proposals, is now made obsolete by the need for quick decisions. He discusses alternate solutions to the problem, which a democracy must solve in order to survive. An increased competence of the electorate in international affairs is desirable, but neither readily obtainable nor able to assert itself without adequate policy-making processes. The President’s responsibility could go on expanding until it excluded Congress from any concern with foreign policy. The level of Congressional competence should be raised through more and better use of experts on committee staffs, and by establishing some agency to advise and assist Congress on policy alternatives. Collaboration between the executive and Congressional foreign policy specialists requires Congressional confidence in executive policy decisions, as is the case in Great Britain. Volume 289 of The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science is entitled Congress and Foreign Relations (Philadelphia, 1953. 245 p.) and provides, in a group of informed articles, basic information on the processes of Congressional foreign policy functions and legislative-executive relations.

3612. Dangerfield, Royden J. In defense of the Senate; a study in treaty making. Norman, University of Oklahoma Press, 1933. xvii, 365 p. diagrs. (1 fold.) 33–3594 JK1170.D3. Bibliography: p. [353]–357.

The effect of the constitutional requirement that treaties obtain a two-thirds majority in the U. S. Senate is discussed on the basis of 832 treaties signed before 1928. The treaties which have led to violent controversy have been relatively few but of great importance. The history of the treaty-making power, the development of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, and cases of the amendment or obstruction of treaties are considered. The treaties studied are tabulated and classified in the appendix.

3613. Graebner, Norman A. The new isolationism; a study in politics and foreign policy since 1950. New York, Ronald Press, 1956. 289 p. 56–11573 E835.G7

The "new isolationists," in the author’s view, continue an unrealistic attitude toward foreign policy which grew up in the 19th century when America’s swift successes were made possible by the British Navy and the European balance of power. The continuing illusion of American invincibility has led, in recent foreign relations, to an attitude rather than a policy of "unilateral action aimed at utopian moral goals." Soon after the election of 1948 the isolationists asserted themselves in and out of Congress and blamed the frustrations of our foreign policy upon "incompetence and even betrayal by successive administrations." The Truman and Eisenhower administrations have both come to terms with their critics by relying less upon negotiation, and more upon an inflexible attitude based upon military force, almost to the exclusion of diplomacy. The rest of the Free World has no stomach for a policy of liberation which must keep all on the brink of war, andwould like to meet the altered Russian attitude since the death of Stalin with genuine negotiation, especially in the economic sphere. The author calls for "a flexible and imaginative [American] policy geared to a world that can find no alternative to coexistence."

3614. Kirk, Grayson L. The study of international relations in American colleges and universities. New York, Council on Foreign Relations, 1947. 113 p. 47–5856 JX1293.U6K5

The author, at the time of publication professor of international relations, is now president of Columbia University. The book represents his reactions to a series of six regional conferences on teaching and research in international relations sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in 1946. The question of whether international relations should remain a subdivision of political science or become a separate discipline is taken up. Problems in undergraduate, graduate, and postdoctoral training and research are surveyed, and constructive suggestions made. Chapter 3 on graduate training reviews the types of professional career to which it may lead, and urges the rigorous selection of candidates by the universities which provide it.

3615. Markel, Lester. Public opinion and foreign policy, by Lester Markel and [others.] New York, Published for the Council on Foreign Relations by Harper, 1949. 227 p. 49–1714 E744.M355

CONTENTS.—Introduction: Opinion, a neglected instrument, by Lester Markel.—Foreign policy and opinion at home: Dark areas of ignorance, by Martin Kriesberg. The number one voice, by James Reston. The mirror called Congress, by Cabell Phillips. When the big guns speak, by H. W. Baldwin. More than diplomacy, by W. P. Davison.—Foreign policy and opinions abroad: Chart of the cold war, by Shepard Stone. Voices of America, by W. P. Davison. Assignment for the press, by C. D. Jackson. Two vital case histories, by Arnaldo Cortesi and "Observer."—Conclusion: Opportunity or disaster? By Lester Markel.

A cooperative project of the Council on Foreign Relations which had for chairman the Sunday editor of The New York Times. It is held that Americans have failed to give public opinion "the emphasis and direction it must have if it is to be the vital instrument we need." As a result, it is alleged, American foreign policy is understood neither at home nor abroad. Prejudice and lack of interest are presented as among the reasons why many Americans view foreign affairs with indifference. In their effort to present American policies and motives in a fair light, our agencies of information have to contend, not only with an unscrupulous Communist counter-propaganda, but with European stereotypes of American luxury and cultural vacuity.

3616. Westerfield, Bradford. Foreign policy and party politics: Pearl Harbor to Korea, by Holt Bradford Westerfield. New Haven, Yale University Press, 1955. 448 p. 55–5990 E806.W455. Bibliography: p. 429–435.

Congressional reaction to administration foreign policy is examined statistically through its voting record, descriptively by party organization for foreign policy control and historically as manifested by the role of the parties in American foreign relations from World War II to the outbreak of the Korean War. The author contends that the problem of adequate democratic control of foreign policy may be resolved through partisanship, bipartisanship, or extrapartisanship. In the latter, a term coined by the author, the administration seeks to remove important foreign policy decisions from the presidential election by securing support outside party lines from influential opposition leaders, and by relying upon party discipline within its own party.