Comparing the approaches of the presidential candidates.

PositionSymposium: Presidential Power and Foreign Affairs - Discussion

Ms. ANDERSEN: I am very pleased to welcome today two individuals who are representatives of the two candidates. They both want me to be very clear, they are not officially representing the campaign for the candidates, but they both have long and close ties to the two camps, and they know their positions well and will reflect them well, I am sure.

So, first, I would like to introduce, taking the position on the left here, Professor Bill Burke-White, who is Deputy Dean and Professor of Law at the University of Pennsylvania School of Law and has most recently, between 2009 and 2011, served as a member of the policy planning staff at the U.S. State Department in the Obama Administration under Secretary Clinton. And there, among many other things, he was a principal drafter of the Administration's Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review, so a very important document that sets out this Administration's foreign policy priorities and approach. So, Bill, go ahead and assume the position there.

And then on the right here, I would like to welcome Ambassador Pierre Prosper, who is currently of counsel at Arent Fox, but previously served in a number of positions in public life as a prosecutor for the United States, a prosecutor at the Rwanda Tribunal, and as the ambassador for wax crimes issues in the Bush Administration. He has also been an advisor to the Romney campaign and will be representing that perspective here. And I am going to play Gwen Eiffel in the middle.

Our format is going to be relatively informal, debate style. I am going to pose some questions to each of the two representatives, hopefully try to find the fault lines, and spark a little debate between them. After we have three or four questions and discussion of those among us, we will open it up to the floor and welcome your questions as well. And I understand, timekeepers, that we are allowed to go a little bit over, so indulge us. We were only allotted 30 minutes, and we have lots to talk about.

Let me start with a general framing question about the candidates' approach to presidential power and foreign policy, and I will start with you, Bill. We have had a discussion today--and this has been a critique that we heard elsewhere, too--that in terms of exerting the presidential authority in foreign affairs, many have characterized the Obama Administration as representing more similarities to the prior Bush Administration than differences. Do you think that that's a fair and accurate characterization, and would you expect to see any difference in a second Obama Administration? Are we going to have a little bit more flexing of muscles when you don't face re-election, or will the president be the ultimate lame duck?

PROF. BURKE-WHITE: So thanks for the question, and four years ago it was great fun, right? We were on all these policy teams, you know, dreaming up policy for then Senator and candidate Obama.

Now, as Pierre and I were just remarking, I am constrained because I am in a sense representing administration policy because that is, in fact, the president's campaign platform, which does sort of narrow how one can respond on some of these issues. I would also say that four years ago I was perhaps more of a naive academic, who could tell you all of the reasons that presidential power was too inflated and was a dangerous thing. And then I got to government and quickly said that, well, where is that presidential power that we thought the Bush Administration had and realized that there is an awful lot more constraint than, as perhaps academics, we had once argued. So that, again, kind of constrains me.

Jack Goldsmith this morning, I think, answered that question better than perhaps I possibly could, but let me try to focus on the question of what we might see differently going forward, and I think the things that will drive possible differences are less internal, less, you know, policy shifts than they are external.

And I would point to three specific things that might lead to changes in how the president approaches presidential authority in foreign policy making. The first is the fact that we have enormous gridlock on Capitol Hill, and that makes it much more difficult than it was--I don't want to say in the past four years because I think there has been some continuity--but certainly looking further back in terms of ways one can work with Congress. (1) And I think the president, as he said last night, is eager to work with Congress, (2) but it is awfully hard to do so. That means when choices like Libya come along the thought of going to the Hill is a real, difficult, binding constraint if one takes the approach that that's necessary. So partisan politics and where that goes, I think, will, to some degree, frame the president's approach.

Second is technology, and this is something we have heard a lot about today, but the changes in technology, whether it is in terms of surveillance or drones, all shift the kind of frameworks of thought about where those presidential authorities lie and where Congress needs to be involved. That means that some of the existing legislation is probably outdated, and that's not to say that we need to, therefore, ignore it, but how we collectively respond to those technology changes may shape that response.

And finally is external events. That's not to say that the president will completely shape his view based on those events, but 9/11 was a fundamental shift, and to the degree that we see changes in the external environment, that may also shape to some degree what occurs in the next four years.

I think ultimately this is a president who has and will continue to talk about limits on the executive, but I think that Jack was very much right this morning to say there are elements of continuity not with the Bush Administration of 2004 but certainly with the Bush Administration of 2008. So I will stop there and turn it over.

Ms. ANDERSEN: Okay. Pierre, I will turn to you and ask you to look into your crystal ball and tell us what President Romney would do in terms of his general approach.

AMB. PROSPER: Well, thank you.

First, it is a pleasure for me to be here, and as Betsy said, I do work with the Romney campaign. But here today I am speaking as an observer and in my personal capacity.

You know, I agree--I am going to start off by agreeing, you know, with Bill, who I have known for a long time and is a friend-regarding the factors that will influence a president, the next president's decision on how to use power. But what I want to do is rather than getting into some of the legal points, I want to give you a little bit of the mindset of the Governor, which will help you understand a bit how he may choose to exercise this power. And the way to do it a little bit is also to contrast with President Obama.

Now, you hear the Governor say a lot he wants America to lead, and we hear a lot about this, you know, leadership. (3) The United States should be out there leading. And I was thinking about it on the way here, how do you define leadership? Does it mean we need to be out there at the point end of the stick, if you will, on military engagements, or what else does it mean? And where the governor is coming from--and you see it in his book No Apologies (4)--is that he is looking for America to set the tone. He is looking for America to set the agenda. It is not that we need to be out in front from the military perspective, but we need to guide the way. I know my predecessor, Ambassador [David] Scheffer, I know can speak to this, but oftentimes when we travel around the world, nations want to know where does the United States stand? What is the United States' position on something?

Now, they may not agree, but it gives them the ability to then react. And now the criticism that the governor has of President Obama is that that leadership, as I have just described, is lacking. (5) It is almost a preference not to use some of the presidential powers and authorities that he has externally to really shape the policy, shape the agenda of the world.

Now, the other thing the governor believes in, you hear a lot about, obviously, he wants to increase the Navy and the military, but he does talk a lot about soft power and the rule of law, and again, I recommend you look at that chapter in his book because he believes that soft power is critical. (6) In order for soft power to be effective, you need hard power. They go hand in hand, so when you have hard power, soft power is credible and vice versa. So he wants to get out there, promote the rule of law for the obvious reasons that we know but also for economic reasons to build a better environment for America, businesses, and Americans as they travel.

Now, that's not, you know, deep into some of the legal weeds that you all have been getting into today, but it gives you a sense of the mindset and where things may go.

MS. ANDERSON: Okay, great. Let me follow up then with you Pierre. We have talked a fair amount this morning about presidential powers and the balance of powers between the president and Congress with respect to war powers. And there was a fair amount of critical discussion about the Obama Administration--its stretching of the AUMF (7) to exert power in the post-9/ll period, and also its failure to go back to Congress to get authorization under the War Powers Resolution for its operations in Libya. (8) There was also a fair amount of discussion that that was maybe, again, more continuity than change in recent years.

But what can we expect from the Romney Administration in terms of that division of labor between Congress and the presidency? Perhaps President Romney would have a more welcome reception in Congress, and would that make a difference in the approach?

AMB. PROSPER: Well, you know, it may. And I think the key here is the engagement with Congress, and I think you can expect to see Governor Romney engage on these issues.

Now, whether he would be successful...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT