“I control foreign policy.” Discuss [45 marks]

The President is granted the role as commander in chief with the ability to control foreign policy in the way that he wants. Despite this power, recent and past attempts by Congress have aimed to roll back the President’s ability to control foreign policy in the way that he wants but these have been largely unsuccessful. Furthermore, there is also more peripheral controls and restrictions on the President’s ability to control foreign policy but these have largely been weak. Although it is correct to say that President Trump has the exact same constitutional powers as President George Washington had with his ability to control foreign policy - the way that modern presidencies have conducted themselves and their approach shows instead marked difference. As a result of these lack of effective checks, the President is able to control the foreign policy that he wants. 
One major way in which the President is able to control foreign policy is because the attempts that have been made by Congress have been futile and unsuccessful to control the President’s foreign policy agenda. One major power of Congress is the power to declare war. Despite this existing in the Constitution itacts as no effective check on the role of the President to ensure that Congress also agrees to go into combat before he can go ahead. This check was been completely unsuccessful in recent years allowing Bill Clinton to go to war in Serbia, Bush for the war on terror in Iraq and Trump’s bombing of Syria. This can be seen in the reaction that came from Congress who are continually irritated by the fact that the President can so fragrantly abandon the views of Congress. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham(R.S.C.) criticized President Donald Trump's strikes on three Syrian chemical weapons sites as a "missed opportunity," calling it a "major step backwards" for his military approach in the region. Graham scrutinized the round of air strikes, carried out in April 2018 in response to a suspected poison gas attack against civilians near Damascus, which he framed as dealing an insufficient blow to Syrian leader Bashar Assad, whom U.S. officials have accused of deploying chemical weapons. Furthermore, Sen. Rand Paul said that he wants Congress to exercise its constitutional authority to declare war before any further actions in Syria. And he had sharp words for those who say a post-9/11 law gives President Trump that power, calling them "dishonest" and "not intellectually serious." The Republican from Kentucky had said that without "a vote in Congress," Trump's missile strikes in Syria were an "inappropriate way to start a war” and were not in the national interest. However, the fact that Congress repeatedly calls out the President for their use of force actually reinforces the point that Congress are powerlessas the President can continue to have the foreign policy in the way that he wants despite the competing demands that Congress might have. Today, the US backs up most of its military activity using broad congressional legislation known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force. The joint resolution, which Congress passed in 2001 after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, allows the president to "use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons." This has essentially become a carte blanche for the US president to fight terrorism wherever it rears its head. Additionally, the authority through the War Powers Act 1973has been unsuccessful as no president has ever recognised it as constitutional, it has never been successfully used to bring military action to a halt and the judiciary has resisted attempts by members of Congress to use the courts to enforce it. However, Congress might be more successful in trying to block appointments to the President’s cabinet instead to ensure that as little war hawks make it into the President’s deliberation room. Sen. Rand Paul has joined Democrats in opposing Mike Pompeo, President Trump’s nominee for secretary of state. His possible “no” vote on Pompeo puts the former CIA director’s confirmation in jeopardy. Additionally, Rand Paul also stated that he would block the new CIA director Gina Haspelfor the enjoyment of interrogating people with waterboarding. Though this may only have an indirect effect on his foreign policy agendait does show how Congress might find alternative means of influencing the foreign policy away from what the President may want.