T h e U n i v e r s i t y o f T e x a s o f A u s t i n

On Foreign Policy
Javier Solis
Biased Thoughts from a Southern Baptist, Aspiring Biomedical Engineer, and
First Generation Young American.
To Mr. Peter Harris:
You have assigned me the task to determine whether the current state of the
presidential war powers need to be curbed and should provide a suggestion if I agree
or a defense if I don’t. I must then begin by laying out my thoughts on the current
world order and American’s place in it if I am to achieve a successful defense of my
position and views. I must in advance say I by no means am greatly versed in politics
and governmental affairs and I have yet to complete a single course in government in
my college career for I have been allowed with an exception to take both fundamental
government courses 310L and 312L in the same session. Thus my views are but
informed opinions and are subject to error and criticism.
On the Era of American Supremacy
It is my belief in the Sovereignty and Legitimate state of this country and the
Powers embedded in the Constitution. But, in this era of American supremacy we have
a Constitution, which is in its basis I believe is a document for limited and balanced
government biased towards the government of a small and weak state fresh in its
independence and fearful of the outside world, its own people, and itself. Thus, the
Constitution is fundamentally unprepared to take on the tasks required of it by the
world. In this I mean that the United States’ has enumerated and implied Titles and
Powers over the world government which have been reluctantly conceded to it by the
majority of the world as the world’s only super power and leader of the free world. Our
Constitution serves a sufficient and filling course for our domestic affairs and only a
bitter taste for the foreign. It was, at its written time, an effectual document for a
fledgling nation whose focus was properly inward but now it requires amendments to
fulfill those roles enacted on it by God, the World, and its People if it so desires to take
on these roles.
On A Just American World Order
It is our moral, legal, and God given right to have life, liberty, and the pursuit of
happiness only ideally achieved by true freedom and equality of conditions sought to
be secured by the Constitution. I therefore concede it is these principles that are even
more fundamental than the Constitution and must take precedent in those areas, which
the Constitution does not address if we are to preserve those unalienable rights that the
Constitution seeks to uphold. It is this ideal that gives America its uniqueness as well as
a responsibility due to its Power that many other nations desire or consciously oppose.
It is an ideal, which many people in this world wish for. So the question which, has yet
to be legally answered, is: Should we as a nation with enumerated world powers use
those powers to seek to influence our neighbors towards the ideals held by America?
No one doubts that it is in our selfish interests and even our security to live in a world
that shares our ideals. A world, which pursues democracy and upholds unalienable
rights, is I believe fundamentally better world, but is it our right to make it that way? I
believe and will argue that it is and should be approached in a limited and democratic
way. In a world so closely connected and intertwined the rising beast that is
Globalization is what compels us and every other nation to look outward. It is a threat
to our way of life if we do nothing to influence its growth, that is, we risk it being
influence by another sovereign state or a faction of powerful states with goals separate
from our ideals. If this happens then the security of our rights may become threatened
though it is by no means a certainty that our rights will be taken. But, we can choose to
take part in its growth doing so however means stretching the Constitution beyond its
original design. Globalization is an effect of Technology and Economics and cannot be
avoided unilaterally, that is, if we choose not to take part in this global affair it will
eventually creep up on the nation in an unpredictable way. As stated earlier we have
unalienable rights which are threatened by Globalization because it gives other nation
unmeasured power over our internal affairs as well as the affairs of other sovereign
states. With this I mean that the international integration of trade and transactions,
capital and investment movements, migration and movement of people, and the
dissemination of knowledge weaves a web over the world that will strengthen over
time and cause a cessation of some power and influence on our people by nations
abroad. We can already see this to a small extent and our unprepared response has
caused a rift in Powers within the government because our Constitution is not prepared
to have an influence abroad.
One the State of Power
Powers expanded in the name of national security, the good of the nation, or any
such fundamental idea as to impregnate the mind of the nation in times of passion and
tension can in those passions and tensions lead to added and unbalanced power to any
one branch of government .The powers of the executive have been expanded in times of
War and strife because of these passions. I do not argue that there are times we need to
act decisively but those times are rare, that is, in times when the security of the nation is
in grave danger. In times of peace or conflict which has little risk to our immediate
national security I argue that these added powers are unnecessary. And so at last, I will
answer the question, which is the basis of this letter. I do believe that the President’s
current war powers have been expanded beyond legitimate war and must be curbed for
the continued balance of governmental power. But, they have only expanded because
we as a Sovereign nation have entered the institution of Globalization. Thus these
powers are necessary to influence Globalization for the reasons outlined above. That is
to say that in an era of Globalization our natural rights are now increasingly dependent
on the natural rights of foreign citizens which we must then secure so as to deter any
opposing power from ever taking our rights away, with that said it is also a moral duty
to do so. Our security calls for added foreign power and influence that as stated from
the start the Constitution does not give by its very design. And therefore we see a
struggle to expand powers, which are necessary. But, by our current system, this
struggle for added foreign powers has given the majority of the Power to the executive
over foreign affairs; by giving these powers to one man and one branch of government
it creates an imbalance of governmental powers that cannot be easily checked and we
now have our rights placed in greater risk all in the name of national security. Our
rights to privacy, to bear arms, to free speech (whistle blow injustices made by our
federal government) are being attacked. This imbalance of Power has lead to internal
strife and unilateral decision making in peaceful times. This is therefore contrary to the
fundamental constitutional idea of checks and balances. I also argue that because
Globalization will increase over time, the Powers related to foreign affairs and national
security will also increase over time and if the president is dominant over these powers
then he too will gain Power which can lead to a sort of tyranny or surveillance state. For
example, if the president allows another nation to invade simple to obtain tyrannical
rule then we all fail and democracy fails. All of this has been said to state once more that
this imbalance is due to our Constitutions lack of completeness in this area, which has
been exploited, now by one branch of government at the cost the security of our natural
rights. Thus I argue we need a new Amendment, which gives greater foreign affairs
power to both the legislative and judicial branches of government so as to equally
expand the power of each branch of government.

On the Necessity an Amendment
The only idea which supersedes the Constitution is the defense of our natural
rights and thus an amendment is necessary to address effects of Globalization and to
secure our ideals of freedom, equality, and liberty both in this country and abroad
because it is in our best interest to do so. Ignoring this will only cause one level of
government to interpret the best solution on how to act abroad to secure our rights and
only add to his/her powers and create imbalance within our system that ironically ends
in the attack of our rights. Below is but an outline of my solution, which I propose. I
also argue that this plan will add legitimacy to our affairs around the world because it
gives the relevant world partners a say in our approach to foreign matters. I plan to
curb the president’s powers of war through checks and balances but overall increase the
powers of the government as a whole so as to provide effective foreign policy solutions
in times of peace and war.

An Outline for the 28

1. The Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court may extend beyond national boundaries if
so granted by relevant sovereign states. It must still use the Constitution,
however, for the basis of its decisions.
2. The Supreme Court and courts assigned international jurisdiction created by
Congress and recognized as legitimate courts by relevant foreign sovereign states
have the ability to nullify executive agreements, legislative agreements, treaties,
and any legally binding document concerning international regulation if
contradictory to our Constitution.
3. International courts created by Congress or by another foreign legislature which
has been recognized by the United States as legitimate must have domestic as
well as relevant foreign judges when dealing with international affairs of specific
sovereign bodies and the United States.
4. The President of the United States has sole authority to recognized international
courts and recommends judges, which must be approved with the advice and
consent of Congress.
5. The Supreme Court can take cases initiated from an internationally approved
court circuit, which is recognized by the United States if it is given jurisdiction to
do so by a lower international court and relevant actors.
6. All legally binding agreements or actions initiated within the United States and
sent to Congress which are directed toward specific sovereign states in times of
peace require the advise and consent of at least one legitimate branch of
government of that specific State in question.
7. Congress has the sole power to end treaties with the advice and consent of the
President of the United States unless in times of great strife though it must still
seek out the advice of the Executive during these times.
8. The Senate shall have the power to accrue funds, finances, and budgets, which
will be spent abroad. The President cannot impound domestic funds accrue to it
by Congress for foreign use.
9. Congress has the power to form legislative agreements with legitimate foreign
legislators of a sovereign state. Any legislative agreement longer than one
election cycle must seek the approval of the president of the United States.
10. Congress has the power to delegate legislation concerning international
commerce. Treaties, which include international commerce, must seek the
consent of one House of Congress.
11. The President of the United States has the sole right to impeach another
executive of a sovereign body with the consent of the Supreme Court and
legitimate leaders of relevant sovereign states unless there substantial evidence
of Crimes against Humanity. In such a case the President has the sole power to
retract his recognition of the legitimacy of such a state. The President also has the
power to accuse other executives, which are suspected of breaking international
law and can initiate an international investigation with legitimately recognized
international courts.
12. The President cannot introduce hostilities to a sovereign state without the
approval of Congress and legitimate cause, but can act in defense, peace keeping,
and special operations without Congressional approval but must still inform and
Congress of these operations.
13. The President has the power to create foreign agencies and bodies to execute
foreign policy, executive agreements, treaties, and other legally binding contracts
with sovereign states with their consent.
14. No Foreign Body can deal in the internal and domestic affairs of the United
States but can seek an audience with any branch of government provided that
the proceedings of this meeting are publically documented and published.
15. All foreign contracts cannot contradict the Constitution of the United States.

I wish I had time to explain this initial draft of the Foreign Affairs Amendment I
propose in detail but I do believe it is created in the spirit of checks and balances that
have been lacking in recent times but which include internal and external entities so as
to add legitimacy to the actions of the United States abroad. This Amendment is created
out of the necessity to ensure no foreign state can attack our rights and the rights of
over sovereign states so as to threaten democracy in the world, which is an increasing
risk and an effect of Globalization and competing world interests. This Amendment
also outlines my solution to curb the presidential powers of war which have been
increasing in power and use in times of peace by adding powers to the other branches
of government so as to rebalance that which has become imbalanced and to restore the
checks and balances which our governments powers have been correctly separated
since the conception of the Constitution of the United States.

Javier Solis

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful