American Diplomacy

Highlight map


Support American Diplomacy RSS Mailing-list Subscription Email American Diplomacy Facebook

National Security Policy and the Strong Executive

1. A. Wildavsky, “The Two Presidencies,” in S. Shull, ed., The Two Presidencies: A Quarter Century Assessment (Chicago: Nelson-Hall, 1991): 11-25.

2. Ibid., 14-17.

3. M. Logan, “Elite Analysis of Democracies’ International Policy,” Perspectives on Political Science 29/1 (2000):

4. See M. Shugart, M., and J. Carey. Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992).

5. See M. Duverger, “A New Political Model: Semi-Presidential Government,” European Journal of Political Research 8 (1980): 165-87.

6. G. Sarotri, Comparative Constitutional Engineering: An Inquiry into Structures, Incentives and Outcomes, 2nd ed. (New York: New York University Press, 1997): 131-32.

7. See J. Rohr, “French Constitutionalism and the Administrative State: A Comparative Textual Study,” Administration and Society 24/2 (1992): 224-259.

8.On this, see G. Phelps, George Washington and American Constitutionalism (Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1994).

9. J. LaPonce, The Government of the Fifth Republic: French Political Parties and the Constitution (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1961), 8-9.

10. See P. Gordon, A Certain Idea of France: French Security Policy and the Gaullist Legacy (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1993).

11. See L. Fisher, Presidential War Power (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1995).

12. U.S., The Constitution of the United States of America (1789).

13. See E. Collier, The War Powers Resolution: Twenty Years of Experience (Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service, 1994).

14. D. Adler, and L. George, eds., The Constitution and the Conduct of American Foreign Policy (Lawrence: University Press of Kansas, 1996).

15. C. Lehman, Making War: The 200-Year-Old Battle Between the President and Congress Over How Americans Go to War (New York: Scribner’s, 1992).

16. See C. May, In the Name of War: Judicial Review and the War Powers (Cambridge: Harvard University, 1989).

17. See, for instance, E. Keynes, Undeclared War: Twilight of Constitutional Power (University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press, 1982).

18. G. Silverstein, Imbalance of Power: Constitutional Interpretation and the Making of American Foreign Policy (New York: Oxford University, 1996).

19. M. Kessler, La politique étrangère de la France: Acteurs et processus (Paris: Presses de Science Po, 1999), 166.

20. L. Nooman, France: The Politics of Continuity and Change (New York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, 1970), 98.

21. J. Rohr, “Executive Power and Republican Principles at the Founding of the Fifth Republic,” Governance 7 (1994), 113.

22. Rohr, “French Constitutionalism,” 224.

23. France, La Constitution, Journal officiel de la République Française (Paris: 1995).

24. G. Chaddock, “In France, Two Heads Are Not Always Better,” Christian Science Monitor (16 June 1997). 6.

25. M. Harrison, “The French Experience of Exceptional Powers: 1961,” Journal of Politics 25/1 (1961), 142.

26. Rohr, “French Constitutionalism,” 232-4.

27. Harrison, 142.

28. L. Metcalf, “Measuring Presidential Power,” Comparative Political Studies 33/5 (2000): 663-4.

29. F. Mitterrand, Le Coup d’Etat Permanent (Paris: Plon, 1964), 98.

30. J. Poulard, “The French Double Executive and the Experience of Cohabitation,” Political Science Quarterly 105/2 (1990): 243-267.

31. J. Colombani and J. Lhomeau, Le Mariage Blanc (Paris: Bernard Grasset, 1986), 207.

32. Chaddock.

33. D. Lawday, “Chirac Shrinks the Presidency”, New Statesman 127 (1998): 20-21.

34. T. Lepgold and L. McKeown, “Is American Foreign Policy Exceptional? An Empirical Analysis,” Political Science Quarterly, 110/3 (1995), 369.

35. R. Kerry, The Star-Spangled Mirror: America’s Image of Itself and the World (Savage, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, 1990), 3.

36. J. Robertson, American Myth, American Reality (New York: Hill and Wang, 1980), 17.

37. M. Dunne, “US Foreign Relations in the Twentieth Century: From World Power to Global Hegemony,” International Affairs 76/1 (2000), 27.

38. G. Almond, The American People and Foreign Policy (New York: Praeger, 1960), 53, 76.

39. Kerry, 3.

40. M. Hunt, Ideology and U.S. Foreign Policy (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1987).

41. E. Rosenberg, Spreading the American Dream: American Economic and Cultural Expansion, 1890-1945 (New York: Hill and Wang, 1982).

42. P. Boniface, “The Specter of Unilateralism,” Washington Quarterly 24/3 (2001), 157-8.

43. Grandeur in terms of foreign policy means “greatness” and is based on the notion of the exceptionalism of French culture, politics, religion and so forth, while rang is tied to notions of global rank or status; P. Cerny, The Politics of Grandeur: Ideological Aspects of De Gaulle’s Foreign Policy (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1980).

44. Gordon, A Certain Idea of France, 87.

45. France, Ministry of Defense, White Paper on Defense, 1994 (Paris: SIRPA, 1994), 64-5.

46. On the Gaullist consensus, see A. Knapp, Gaullism Since de Gaulle (Brookfield, Vt: Dartmouth Publishing, 1994).

47. S. Hoffman, “French Dilemmas and Strategies in the New Europe,” in R. Keohane, J. Nye, and S. Hoffman, eds., After the Cold War: International Institutions and State Strategies in Europe, 1989-1991 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1991), 128-9.

48. J. Becker, “Asserting EU Cohesion: Common Foreign and Security Policy and the Relaunch of Europe,” European Security 7/4 (1998), 23.

49. A. Treacher, “Europe as a Multiplier for French Security Policy: Strategic Consistency, Tactical Adaption,” European Security 10/1 (2001): 41.

50. See the essays in G. Flynn, ed., Remaking the Hexagon: The New France in the New Europe (Bolder: Westview Press, 1994).

51. Treacher, 22-3.

52. For a further examination of the French effort to develop a “third way”, see E. Kolodziej, French International Policy Under De Gaulle and Pompidou: The Politics of Grandeur (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1974).

53. D. Moïsi, “The Allure of Gaullism,” The Financial Times (19 April 1996).

54. S. Rynning, Changing Military Doctrine: Presidents and Military Power in Fifth Republic France, 1958-2000 (Westport: Praeger, 2002), 187.

55. Ibid, 182.

56. R. Grant, The Changing Franco-American Security Relationship: New Direction for NATO and European Defense Cooperation (Arlington, VA.: U.S.-CREST, 1993).

57. For a more through analysis, see M. Walker, “Post 9/11: The European Dimension,” World Policy Journal 18/4 (2001/2002), 1.

58. Article V specifically states that “an armed attack against one or more of them [NATO members] in Europe or North America shall be considered against them all; and . . . each of them . . . will assist the Party or Parties so attacked;” NATO, The North Atlantic Treaty, Washington, D.C., (4 April 1949).

59. C. Bremner, “The Great Divide,” The Times (21 May 2002).

60. C. Bremner, “‘Good Friend Jacques’ Lays on the Charm,” The Times (27 May 2002).

61. C. Hoyos, A. Parker, and H. Williamson, “Anti-terrorist Coalition threatened With Split,” Financial Times (20 December 2001).

62. J. Fitchett, “U.S. Allies Chafe at ‘Cleanup’ Role,” International Herald Tribune (26 November 2001).

63 . France, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Military Operations Outside of Afghanistan to Fight Terrorism,” Press Release (5 December 2001).

64. T. Baldwin and R. Watson, “Blair and Chirac United Against American Hawks,” The Times (30 November 2001).

65. France, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, “Fight Against Terrorism/Iraq: Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Deputy Spokesperson,” Press Release (19 February 2002).

66. George W. Bush, “Remarks at the United Nations General Assembly,” White House Office of the Press Secretary (12 September 2002).

67. George W. Bush, “National Security Strategy of the United States of America,” White House Office of the Press Secretary (17 September 2002).

68. Condoleezza Rice, “2002 Wriston Lecture at the Manhattan Institute,” White House Office of the Press Secretary (1 October 2002).

69. United Nations (UN) Security Council, “UN Security Council Resolution 1441,” UN Press Office (8 November 2002)

70. “Against America? Moi?,” Economist (13 March 2003).

71. “The Cold Calculation of War,” Economist (3 April 2003).

72. “It’s Not Easy being French,” Economist (3 April 2003).

73. Omer Taspinar, “Europe’s Muslim Street,” Foreign Policy 135-2 (2003), 76-77; “How Restive Are Europe’s Muslims,” Economist (18 October 2001); Christopher Caldwell, “The Crescent and the Tricolor,” Atlantic 287-11 (2000), 22.

Page 1 star 2 star 3 star Endnotes

Assessing the Presidency of George W. Bush at Midpoint

white starAmerican Diplomacy white star
Copyright © 2012 American Diplomacy Publishers Chapel Hill NC