Presidents Use Executive Agreements: A Tool for Foreign Policy

The power to make treaties is vested in the U.S. Senate by the Constitution. However, presidents have the authority to make executive agreements without Senate approval. While executive agreements are similar to treaties, they differ in the fact that they do not require the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate. This makes them a convenient tool for presidents to use in situations when a treaty is difficult to negotiate or obtain Senate approval.

An executive agreement is a binding agreement between the United States and a foreign government that does not require Senate approval. It is often used to address issues that are not addressed in traditional treaties, such as trade, commerce, and military cooperation. While treaties require the advice and consent of two-thirds of the Senate, executive agreements do not, which makes them much easier to negotiate.

Presidents have used executive agreements throughout history to address a wide variety of issues. For instance, President Woodrow Wilson entered into executive agreements with Mexico, Cuba, and Panama to build the Panama Canal. President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed an executive agreement with Great Britain to lend and lease military equipment during World War II. President Barack Obama signed an executive agreement with Iran to limit its nuclear capabilities.

Executive agreements have become an essential tool for presidents to use in foreign policy, especially when traditional treaties are difficult to negotiate or ratify. They allow presidents to act quickly and decisively in situations that require immediate attention. Executive agreements are also much easier to negotiate and require fewer resources than traditional treaties.

However, executive agreements also face criticism. Some argue that they undermine the power of Congress to approve international agreements and that they lack the democratic legitimacy of treaties. Others argue that they are too powerful and that presidents use them to bypass the checks and balances of the U.S. government.

In conclusion, executive agreements are an essential tool for presidents to use in foreign policy. They allow presidents to act quickly and decisively, especially in situations that require immediate attention. However, they also face criticism for undermining the power of Congress and lacking democratic legitimacy. As such, executive agreements must be used judiciously and with careful consideration of the implications for the U.S. government`s system of checks and balances.