H-Diplo Review Essay 140 on Ballots, Bullets, and Bargains: American Foreign Policy and Presidential Elections

George Fujii Discussion

H-Diplo Essay No. 140
An H-Diplo Review Essay
Published on 25 May 2016

H-Diplo Essay Editors:  Thomas Maddux and Diane Labrosse
H-Diplo Web and Production Editor:  George Fujii
Commissioned for H-Diplo by Thomas Maddux

Michael H. Armacost.  Ballots, Bullets, and Bargains: American Foreign Policy and Presidential ElectionsNew York: Columbia University Press, 2015.  ISBN:  9780231169929 (hardcover, $35.00/£26.00).

URL: http://tiny.cc/E140

Reviewed by Meena Bose, Hofstra University

Substantive debates about American foreign policy are punctuated quadrennially in the United States by presidential elections.  Presidential candidates are attentive to ongoing policy decisions and debates, particularly when U.S. troops are deployed for military action, and they seek to keep partisan politics from intruding upon national security.  At the same time, presidential campaigns bring opportunities to assess foreign-policy choices and propose new approaches to defining the U.S. role in global affairs.  Each presidential election cycle raises new issues and questions about American interests abroad, but the structure of those debates illustrates continuity over time, particularly in the post-World War II era, when the United States has remained systematically engaged in global politics (albeit with significant variation across administrations).  Michael Armacost’s thoughtful analysis examines how foreign policy informs the road to the White House in presidential elections.  In so doing, it develops a compelling narrative with engaging and informative case studies of American foreign policy from the mid-twentieth century to the present.

The U.S. presidential selection process has significant implications for the substance of American foreign policy.  As Armacost writes, “the process through which we select our presidents exerts its own impact on policy.  So does the manner in which our Constitution and political traditions inform the way victorious candidates get their administrations up and running” (1). The analysis begins with an overview of presidential selection, explaining the historical evolution of party nominations from convention negotiations in the nineteenth century through the 1960s, to the modern-day system of primaries and caucuses.  The consequences of moving away from brokered conventions for campaign finance, voter turnout, media coverage, and ideological debates within and between political parties also are discussed.  Subsequent chapters examine how foreign policy is addressed in nominating contests; different expectations that incumbents and challengers face in discussing foreign policy in the general election campaign; and the responsibilities that the winning candidate assumes during the transition period and early months in office.  The book concludes with a discussion of how post-World War II presidential elections have both prompted adjustments in identifying U.S. foreign-policy goals and resources, and demonstrated continuity in defining America’s role in the world.  Proposals for election reform are addressed as well.

This timely study recognizes the strengths and the challenges of fixed election cycles for foreign policy making.  After all, “elections challenge the continuity of policy, and policy adjustments are often timely and useful” (222), and regular elections provide an opportunity to put “new management in charge” (223).  At the same time, presidential campaigns “encourage incumbents to oversell their achievements abroad, contenders to exaggerate the mess left by incumbents, and all candidates to embrace democracy promotion as a magic solvent for most of the world’s ills” (221). Armacost examines systemic reforms such as a single six-year presidential term and a condensed nomination period, but the feasibility and likely consequences of such major changes raise concerns.  Instead, he proposes more modest but nevertheless important reforms such as a speedier confirmation process for new executive appointees and greater bipartisanship in foreign affairs. And while foreign-policy expertise is helpful for presidential candidates, judgment and character are recommended more highly.  As the book concludes, “selecting men or women possessing these qualities will best sustain the nation’s ability to thrive in a dangerous world” (247).

This tightly structured and clearly written analysis makes a persuasive case that the U.S. presidential election system does not impede coherent foreign policy.  It may sacrifice some efficiency for democratic accountability, but recent history demonstrates that complementing consistency in American foreign policy with periodic change is beneficial.  A fuller assessment of proposed structural reforms, particularly for presidential nominations and campaign finance, would be instructive, as would more specific discussion of how to achieve increased bipartisanship in foreign policy.  The book provides a solid foundation for discussing these and other proposals, and its comprehensive study of how U.S. presidential elections influence American foreign policy will be instructive for scholars as well as for classroom use.

 

Meena Bose is Executive Dean of Hofstra University’s Peter S. Kalikow School of Government, Public Policy, and International Affairs and Director of Hofstra’s Peter S. Kalikow Center for the Study of the American Presidency.  She is the author or editor of several books on the American presidency and American politics, and she is third author of the American Government: Institutions and Policies textbook (15th edition, 2016). 

© 2016 The Author.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States License