Congress and Post-Cold War U.S. Foreign Policy

Politics at the Water's Edge: The Presidency, Congress, and the North Korea Policy of the United States

“…Such partisanship has continued and even increased since the end of the Cold War (Bond & Fleisher, 1990;McCormick & Wittkopf, 1990;Meernik, 1993;Sinclair, 1993;Rohde, 1994, Cooper & Young, 1997McCormick, Wittkopf, & Danna, 1997;Carter, 1998;Wittkopf, & McCormick, 1998;Pleisher, Bond, Krutz, & Hanna, 2000;Delaet, Rowling, & Scott, 2005;Pfiffner, 2006;DeLaet & Scott, 2006). Such partisan politics may facilitate or hinder the different choices in U.S. policy toward North Korea.…”

“…Meernik (1995) argues that Congress is more likely to attempt to restrict the presidential use of force under divided government. Scott & Carter (2002) Carter (1998) concludes that "the phenomenon of divided government further escalates the impact of an increasingly partisan and ideological policy making process" (128).…”

“…Carter (1998) also argues, "since the Vietnam War, no consensus regarding the preferred ends and means of U.S. foreign policy and defense policy has existed to dampen the effects of ideology and partisanship. These factors have increasingly reinforced each other, making the parties more ideological" (128).…”

“…Carter (1998) argues that in the post-Cold War era, members of Congress "were more assertive" (emphasis original, 110). According to him, it is not surprising since:…”

“…According to him, "American political leaders have been spending less time seeking a viable consensus in the center, and more time fighting for partisan and ideological advantage" (328). Carter (1998) argues that "the lack of a foreign policy consensus in society, the phenomenon of divided government, the increasingly ideological and partisan nature of foreign and defense policy debates on Capitol Hill, the decreasing influence of standing committees and the increasing influence of party leaders on both sides of the aisle combine to present a formidable challenge to presidents" (131). Theriault (2008) argues that "only when the changes within the constituency interact with the legislative process does the complete picture of party polarization in the U.S. Congress come into clearer focus" (6).…”