mgimoreviewВестник МГИМО-УниверситетаMGIMO Review of International Relations2071-81602541-9099MGIMO Universty Press10.24833/2071-8160-2018-4-61-219-240mgimoreview-799Research ArticleИССЛЕДОВАТЕЛЬСКИЕ СТАТЬИRESEARCH ARTICLESОТНОШЕНИЯ МЕЖДУ ПРЕЗИДЕНТОМ И КОНГРЕССОМ В СФЕРЕ ПРИНЯТИЯ ВНЕШНЕПОЛИТИЧЕСКИХ РЕШЕНИЙ В США: ТЕОРЕТИЧЕСКИЙ АНАЛИЗPRESIDENTIAL-CONGRESSIONAL RELATIONS IN US FOREIGN POLICY DECISION-MAKING: A THEORETICAL TREATISEАсадиТ.AsadiT.

аспирант Факультета глобальных исследований,

16th Azar St., Enghelab Sq., Tehran

PhD student in American Studies, Faculty of World Studies, 

16th Azar St., Enghelab Sq., Tehran

T.Asadi@ut.ac.irАрджмандМ.ArjmandM.

PhD, преподаватель Факультета глобальных исследований,

16th Azar St., Enghelab Sq., Tehran

PhD in American Studies, Faculty of World Studies, 

16th Azar St., Enghelab Sq., Tehran

mz.javadi@ut.ac.irТегеранский университетИранUniversity of TehranIslamic Republic of Iran20182109201804(61)219240Copyright © Асади Т., Арджманд М., 20182018Асади Т., Арджманд М.Asadi T., Arjmand M.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://www.vestnik.mgimo.ru/jour/article/view/799

Цель данной статьи – предложить концептуальные рамки анализа отношений президента и Конгресса США в сфере принятия внешнеполитических решений. Формирование внешней политики США происходит, по всей видимости, при столкновении двух сил – рациональной бюрократической логики компромиссов и уступок, а также идеологических, партийных, институциональных и личных интересов лиц, принимающих решения. С учётом этого авторы приходят к выводу, что институт президентства, как правило, способен более оптимально работать на внешнеполитическом направлении, в то время как границы полномочий Конгресса в этой сфере подвижны, зависят от типа принимаемых решений и особенно чётко проявляются при распределении ресурсов для ведения внешней политики. В статье делается попытка вписать данный тезис в теоретический контекст моделей принятия решений Г. Аллисона, моделей практических ожиданий от внешней политики Л. Гамильтона, а также в контекст трансформации взаимоотношений Конгресса и президента США после холодной войны.

The present paper aims to offer a conceptual exploration of the Presidential-Congressional relations in the US foreign policy decision-making. The US foreign policy decision-making arguably takes place within a functional synthesization of compromised bureaucratic rationality on the one hand, and the ideological, partisan and institutional interests and tendencies of individuals in possession of power on the other. In such a setting, the argument being put forth is that the Presidency is generally situated and equipped reasonably the best to deal with foreign affairs while the gamut of the Congressional authority in foreign policy varies based on the type of decisions made, playing a key role in distribution of resources to achieve particular objectives. In other words, the process of US foreign policy decision-making occasionally lacks the essential structural efficiency to prevent the executive branch from circumventing the Constitution. An executive branch operating in secrecy without legislative accountability is undoubtedly dangerous; therefore, a host of specialized means and preventive measures are required to be taken and practiced in order to avoid such danger and help keep US political structure in checks and balances. Attempt is made to contextualize this argument within a) the domain of decision-making theoretical models presented by G. Allison, and then b) rather practical discussions on requirements of foreign policy proposed by L. Hamilton followed by, c) a brief overview on actual developments affecting power relations in US foreign policy after the Cold War.

СШАКонгресспрезидентвнешняя политикапринятие решенийтеоретические моделиUSACongresspresidentforeign policydecision-makingtheoretical modelsReferencesAberbach J.D. Keeping a Watchful Eye: The Politics of Congressional Oversight. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1990. 288 p.Aberbach J.D. Keeping a Watchful Eye: The Politics of Congressional Oversight. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1990. 288 p.Allison G.T. Essence of decision. Boston: Little, Brown 536, 1971. 338 p.Allison G.T. Essence of decision. Boston: Little, Brown 536, 1971. 338 p.Anderson P.A. Justifications and precedents as constraints in foreign policy decision-making // American Journal of Political Science. 1981. Vol. 25. No. 4. Pp. 738-761.Anderson P.A. Justifications and precedents as constraints in foreign policy decision-making // American Journal of Political Science. 1981. Vol. 25. No. 4. Pp. 738-761.Apple Jr. R.W. 25 Years Later; Lessons From the Pentagon Papers // New York Times, 23.06.1996.Apple Jr. R.W. 25 Years Later; Lessons From the Pentagon Papers // New York Times, 23.06.1996.Arin K.Y. Think Tanks, the Brain Trusts of US Foreign Policy. s.l.: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2014. 95 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-02935-7Arin K.Y. Think Tanks, the Brain Trusts of US Foreign Policy. s.l.: Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden, 2014. 95 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-658-02935-7Art R.J. Bureaucratic politics and American foreign policy: A critique // Policy Sciences. 1973. Vol. 4. No. 4. Pp. 467- 490.Art R.J. Bureaucratic politics and American foreign policy: A critique // Policy Sciences. 1973. Vol. 4. No. 4. Pp. 467- 490.Bailey C.J. President Reagan, the U.S. Senate, and American Foreign Policy, 1981-1986 // Journal of American Studies. 1987. Vol. 21. No. 2. Pp. 167-181.Bailey C.J. President Reagan, the U.S. Senate, and American Foreign Policy, 1981-1986 // Journal of American Studies. 1987. Vol. 21. No. 2. Pp. 167-181.Baldwin D.A. Congressional initiative in foreign policy // The Journal of Politics 1966. Vol. 28. No. 4. Pp. 754-773. DOI: 10.2307/2127673Baldwin D.A. Congressional initiative in foreign policy // The Journal of Politics 1966. Vol. 28. No. 4. Pp. 754-773. DOI: 10.2307/2127673Balmer T.A. The Use of Conditions in Foreign Relations Legislation // Denver Journal of International Law and Policy. 1977. Vol. 7. Pp. 197 -238.Balmer T.A. The Use of Conditions in Foreign Relations Legislation // Denver Journal of International Law and Policy. 1977. Vol. 7. Pp. 197 -238.Beck C. Bureau of intelligence and research and Washington politics: Master Thesis. s.l.:University of Georgia, 2005. 101 p.Beck C. Bureau of intelligence and research and Washington politics: Master Thesis. s.l.:University of Georgia, 2005. 101 p.Beehner L. Do Democratic Candidates Suffer ‘Audience Costs’? // Josef Korbel Journal of Advanced International Studies. 2011. No. 3. Pp. 59-76.Beehner L. Do Democratic Candidates Suffer ‘Audience Costs’? // Josef Korbel Journal of Advanced International Studies. 2011. No. 3. Pp. 59-76.Bendor J. & Hammond T.H. Rethinking Allison’s models // American Political Science Review. 1992. Vol. 86. No. 2. Pp. 301-322.Bendor J. & Hammond T.H. Rethinking Allison’s models // American Political Science Review. 1992. Vol. 86. No. 2. Pp. 301-322.Bodenheimer T. & Gould R. Rollback!: right-wing power in US foreign policy. Boston: South End Press, 1989. 296 p.Bodenheimer T. & Gould R. Rollback!: right-wing power in US foreign policy. Boston: South End Press, 1989. 296 p.Van Bouwel J. Explanatory Strategies Beyond the Individualism/Holism Debate // Rethinking the IndividualismHolism Debate. Ed. by Zahle J., Collin F. Springer International Publishing Cham, 2014. Pp. 153-175.Van Bouwel J. Explanatory Strategies Beyond the Individualism/Holism Debate // Rethinking the IndividualismHolism Debate. Ed. by Zahle J., Collin F. Springer International Publishing Cham, 2014. Pp. 153-175.Brazeal G. Bureaucracy and the US Response to Mass Atrocity // National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review. 2011. No. 57. Pp. 57-71.Brazeal G. Bureaucracy and the US Response to Mass Atrocity // National Security & Armed Conflict Law Review. 2011. No. 57. Pp. 57-71.Caddel J. Domestic Political Institutions in US Foreign Policy Decision (Doctoral Dissertation). St. Louis: Washington University, 2013. 138 p.Caddel J. Domestic Political Institutions in US Foreign Policy Decision (Doctoral Dissertation). St. Louis: Washington University, 2013. 138 p.Canes-Wrone B. Who leads whom?: Presidents, Policy, and the Public (Studies in Communication, Media, and Public Opinion). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2006. 192 p.Canes-Wrone B. Who leads whom?: Presidents, Policy, and the Public (Studies in Communication, Media, and Public Opinion). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2006. 192 p.Cardaras M. Fear, Power, and Politics: The Recipe for War in Iraq after 9/11. Lexington Books, 2013. 270 p.Cardaras M. Fear, Power, and Politics: The Recipe for War in Iraq after 9/11. Lexington Books, 2013. 270 p.Carson M.D. Beyond the Solid South: Southern Members of Congress and the Vietnam War (Doctoral Dissertation). M.A.:University of New Orleans, 2003. 493 p.Carson M.D. Beyond the Solid South: Southern Members of Congress and the Vietnam War (Doctoral Dissertation). M.A.:University of New Orleans, 2003. 493 p.Carter J.J. Interbranch Conflict and the Early Evolution of Covert Action as a Presidential Tool of Foreign Policy // Southeastern Political Review. 2000. No. 28. Iss. 4. Pp. 599-629. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1747-1346.2000.tb00792.xCarter J.J. Interbranch Conflict and the Early Evolution of Covert Action as a Presidential Tool of Foreign Policy // Southeastern Political Review. 2000. No. 28. Iss. 4. Pp. 599-629. DOI: 10.1111/ j.1747-1346.2000.tb00792.xCarter R.G. Congressional Foreign Policy Behavior: Persistent Patterns of the Postwar Period // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 1986. Vol. 16. No. 2. Pp. 329- 359.Carter R.G. Congressional Foreign Policy Behavior: Persistent Patterns of the Postwar Period // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 1986. Vol. 16. No. 2. Pp. 329- 359.Carter R.G. Congress and the Post-Cold War U.S. Foreign Policy // After the end: making U.S. foreign policy in the postcold war world / Ed. by J. M. Scott. London: Duke University Press, 1998. Pp. 108-137.Carter R.G. Congress and the Post-Cold War U.S. Foreign Policy // After the end: making U.S. foreign policy in the postcold war world / Ed. by J. M. Scott. London: Duke University Press, 1998. Pp. 108-137.Caulfield G.W. Player Two Has Entered the Game: The Role of Congress in the Formation of American Foreign Policy during the Presidency of George W. Bush. State University of New York, 2010. 64 p.Caulfield G.W. Player Two Has Entered the Game: The Role of Congress in the Formation of American Foreign Policy during the Presidency of George W. Bush. State University of New York, 2010. 64 p.Cheney D. Congressional overreaching in foreign policy, 1989 // Foreign policy and the Constitution / Ed. by R.A. Goldwin and R.A. Licht. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1990. Pp. 119-120.Cheney D. Congressional overreaching in foreign policy, 1989 // Foreign policy and the Constitution / Ed. by R.A. Goldwin and R.A. Licht. Washington, D.C.: AEI Press, 1990. Pp. 119-120.Chittick W.O. & Freyberg-Inan A. Chiefly for fear, next for honour, and lastly for profit: an analysis of foreign policy motivation in the Peloponnesian War // Review of International Studies. 2001. Vol. 27. Iss. 1. Pp. 69-90. DOI: 10.1017/S0260210500010706PubChittick W.O. & Freyberg-Inan A. Chiefly for fear, next for honour, and lastly for profit: an analysis of foreign policy motivation in the Peloponnesian War // Review of International Studies. 2001. Vol. 27. Iss. 1. Pp. 69-90. DOI: 10.1017/S0260210500010706PubClapp P., Halperin M. & Kanter A. Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2006. 400 p.Clapp P., Halperin M. & Kanter A. Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy. Washington: Brookings Institution Press, 2006. 400 p.Clementi M. & Pisciotta B. Introduction: US Foreign Policy in Front of Global Uncertainty and Regional Fragmentation // US Foreign Policy in a Challenging World. Cham: Springer, 2018. Pp. 1-14.Clementi M. & Pisciotta B. Introduction: US Foreign Policy in Front of Global Uncertainty and Regional Fragmentation // US Foreign Policy in a Challenging World. Cham: Springer, 2018. Pp. 1-14.Cohen B.J. International debt and linkage strategies: some foreign-policy implications for the United States // International Organization. 1985. Vol. 39. No. 4. Pp. 699-727.Cohen B.J. International debt and linkage strategies: some foreign-policy implications for the United States // International Organization. 1985. Vol. 39. No. 4. Pp. 699-727.Cunningham K. A Critical Theory of the” Rationality” of US Foreign Policy: The Case of the American War in Vietnam // New Political Science. 2002. Vol. 24. Iss. 4. Pp. 509-523.Cunningham K. A Critical Theory of the” Rationality” of US Foreign Policy: The Case of the American War in Vietnam // New Political Science. 2002. Vol. 24. Iss. 4. Pp. 509-523.Dahl R.A. Congress and American Foreign Policy. New York: W.W. Norton, 1964. 305 p.Dahl R.A. Congress and American Foreign Policy. New York: W.W. Norton, 1964. 305 p.Day C.L. US Foreign Policy Issue-Areas: Presidential-Congressional Interaction: Master Thesis. New Orleans: University of New Orleans, 1980.Day C.L. US Foreign Policy Issue-Areas: Presidential-Congressional Interaction: Master Thesis. New Orleans: University of New Orleans, 1980.Destler I.M. Presidents, bureaucrats and foreign policy: The politics of organizational reform. Princeton University Press, 1974. 367 p.Destler I.M. Presidents, bureaucrats and foreign policy: The politics of organizational reform. Princeton University Press, 1974. 367 p.Dobson A. & Marsh S. US foreign policy since 1945. Routledge, 2007. 158 p.Dobson A. & Marsh S. US foreign policy since 1945. Routledge, 2007. 158 p.Dodd L.C. Congress and the Quest for Power // Congress Reconsidered. Ed. by L. C. Dodd & B. I. Oppenheimer. New York: Praeger, 1977. Pp. 269-307.Dodd L.C. Congress and the Quest for Power // Congress Reconsidered. Ed. by L. C. Dodd & B. I. Oppenheimer. New York: Praeger, 1977. Pp. 269-307.Drezner D.W. Ideas, bureaucratic politics, and the crafting of foreign policy // American Journal of Political Science. 2000. Vol. 44. No. 4. Pp. 733-749.Drezner D.W. Ideas, bureaucratic politics, and the crafting of foreign policy // American Journal of Political Science. 2000. Vol. 44. No. 4. Pp. 733-749.Epstein D. & O’Halloran S. Delegating powers: A transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. Cambridge University Press, 1999. 340 p.Epstein D. & O’Halloran S. Delegating powers: A transaction cost politics approach to policy making under separate powers. Cambridge University Press, 1999. 340 p.Evans A. Organizing for British national strategy // International Affairs. 2014. Vol. 90. Iss. 3. Pp. 509-524. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2346.12124Evans A. Organizing for British national strategy // International Affairs. 2014. Vol. 90. Iss. 3. Pp. 509-524. DOI: 10.1111/1468-2346.12124Fisher L. Foreign Policy Powers of the President and Congress // The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 1988. Vol. 499. Pp. 148- 159.Fisher L. Foreign Policy Powers of the President and Congress // The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 1988. Vol. 499. Pp. 148- 159.Fisher L. The Law: Scholarly Support for Presidential Wars // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 35. Iss. 3. Pp. 590- 607.Fisher L. The Law: Scholarly Support for Presidential Wars // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2005. Vol. 35. Iss. 3. Pp. 590- 607.Fleisher R. & Bond J.R. Are there two presidencies? Yes, but only for Republicans // The Journal of Politics. 1988. Vol. 50. No. 3. Pp. 747-767.Fleisher R. & Bond J.R. Are there two presidencies? Yes, but only for Republicans // The Journal of Politics. 1988. Vol. 50. No. 3. Pp. 747-767.Foyle D.C. Counting the public in: Presidents, public opinion, and foreign policy. Columbia University Press. 1999. 379 p.Foyle D.C. Counting the public in: Presidents, public opinion, and foreign policy. Columbia University Press. 1999. 379 p.Fulbright J.W. American Foreign Policy in the 20th Century Under an 18th-Century Constitution // Cornell Law Quarterly. 1961. Vol. 47. Iss. 1. Pp. 1-13.Fulbright J.W. American Foreign Policy in the 20th Century Under an 18th-Century Constitution // Cornell Law Quarterly. 1961. Vol. 47. Iss. 1. Pp. 1-13.Gibbings T., Hurley D. & Moore S. Interagency Operations Centers: An Opportunity We Can’t Ignore // Parameters. 1999. Vol. 28. No. 4. Pp. 99-112.Gibbings T., Hurley D. & Moore S. Interagency Operations Centers: An Opportunity We Can’t Ignore // Parameters. 1999. Vol. 28. No. 4. Pp. 99-112.Gibbs D.N. Secrecy and international relations // Journal of Peace Research. 1995. Vol. 32. Iss. 2. Pp. 213-228. DOI: 10.1177/0022343395032002007Gibbs D.N. Secrecy and international relations // Journal of Peace Research. 1995. Vol. 32. Iss. 2. Pp. 213-228. DOI: 10.1177/0022343395032002007Hamilton L.H. Congress and the Presidency in American Foreign Policy // Presidential Studies Quarterly, 1988. No. 18. Pp. 507-511.Hamilton L.H. Congress and the Presidency in American Foreign Policy // Presidential Studies Quarterly, 1988. No. 18. Pp. 507-511.Hilsman R. Congressional-Executive Relations and the Foreign Policy Consensus // American Political Science Review. 1958. No. 52. Pp. 725-744.Hilsman R. Congressional-Executive Relations and the Foreign Policy Consensus // American Political Science Review. 1958. No. 52. Pp. 725-744.Hinckley B. Less than meets the eye: Foreign policy making and the myth of the assertive Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. 259 p.Hinckley B. Less than meets the eye: Foreign policy making and the myth of the assertive Congress. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1994. 259 p.Hudson V.M. Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor‐Specific Theory and the Ground of International Relations // Foreign Policy Analysis. 2005. Vol. 1. Iss. 1. Pp. 1-30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-8594.2005.00001.xHudson V.M. Foreign Policy Analysis: Actor‐Specific Theory and the Ground of International Relations // Foreign Policy Analysis. 2005. Vol. 1. Iss. 1. Pp. 1-30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743-8594.2005.00001.xHudson V.M. & Vore C.S. Foreign policy analysis yesterday, today, and tomorrow // Mershon International Studies Review. 1995. Vol. 39. No. 2. Pp. 209-238.Hudson V.M. & Vore C.S. Foreign policy analysis yesterday, today, and tomorrow // Mershon International Studies Review. 1995. Vol. 39. No. 2. Pp. 209-238.Huntington S. The common defense: Strategic programs in national politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961. 512 p.Huntington S. The common defense: Strategic programs in national politics. New York: Columbia University Press, 1961. 512 p.Javadi Arjmand M. The Role of Congress in US Foreign Policy toward Iran: Analysis of Congressional Sanctions // Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs. 2014. Vol. 5. No. 2. Pp. 29-57.Javadi Arjmand M. The Role of Congress in US Foreign Policy toward Iran: Analysis of Congressional Sanctions // Iranian Review of Foreign Affairs. 2014. Vol. 5. No. 2. Pp. 29-57.Kaplan M. System and Process in International Politics. New York: Wiley, 1957. 258 p.Kaplan M. System and Process in International Politics. New York: Wiley, 1957. 258 p.Kaplan M. Variants on Six Models of the International System // International Politics and Foreign Policy. Ed. by J. N. Rosenau. Glencoe: Free Press, 1972. Pp. 291–303.Kaplan M. Variants on Six Models of the International System // International Politics and Foreign Policy. Ed. by J. N. Rosenau. Glencoe: Free Press, 1972. Pp. 291–303.Keynes E. Undeclared war: twilight zone of constitutional power. Penn State Press. 2010. 260 p.Keynes E. Undeclared war: twilight zone of constitutional power. Penn State Press. 2010. 260 p.Khan Z.A. & Sabir M. President Vs Congress in US Foreign Policy: Cooperation or Confrontation // Journal of Political Studies. 2013. Vol. 20. No. 1. Pp. 143- 158.Khan Z.A. & Sabir M. President Vs Congress in US Foreign Policy: Cooperation or Confrontation // Journal of Political Studies. 2013. Vol. 20. No. 1. Pp. 143- 158.Kristol I. The inexorable rise of the executive // Wall Street Journal. 1974. P. 12.Kristol I. The inexorable rise of the executive // Wall Street Journal. 1974. P. 12.Larson D.L. The Constitution and U.S. Foreign Policy: The President, the Congress, and the People. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 2008. Pp. 143-159.Larson D.L. The Constitution and U.S. Foreign Policy: The President, the Congress, and the People. Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, 2008. Pp. 143-159.Levitsky S. & Ziblatt D. How democracies die. New York: Crown, 2018. 320 p.Levitsky S. & Ziblatt D. How democracies die. New York: Crown, 2018. 320 p.Lindsay J.M. Congress and foreign policy: Why the Hill matters // Political Science Quarterly. 1992. Vol. 107. No. 4. Pp. 607-628.Lindsay J.M. Congress and foreign policy: Why the Hill matters // Political Science Quarterly. 1992. Vol. 107. No. 4. Pp. 607-628.Lindsay J.M. Congress and the Politics of U.S. Foreign Policy. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1994. 280 p.Lindsay J.M. Congress and the Politics of U.S. Foreign Policy. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press, 1994. 280 p.Lindsay J.M. Congress, foreign policy, and the new institutionalism // International Studies Quarterly. 1994. Vol. 38, No. 2. Pp. 281-304.Lindsay J.M. Congress, foreign policy, and the new institutionalism // International Studies Quarterly. 1994. Vol. 38, No. 2. Pp. 281-304.Luzi S. Driving forces and patterns of water policy making in Egypt // Water Policy. 2010. Vol. 12. Iss. 1. Pp. 92-113. DOI: 10.2166/wp.2009.052Luzi S. Driving forces and patterns of water policy making in Egypt // Water Policy. 2010. Vol. 12. Iss. 1. Pp. 92-113. DOI: 10.2166/wp.2009.052Meagher T.M. Defining U.S. Strategic Resourcing Culture // Financing Armed Conflict. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Pp. 1-48.Meagher T.M. Defining U.S. Strategic Resourcing Culture // Financing Armed Conflict. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017. Pp. 1-48.Meiers F.-J. The Return of the Imperial Presidency? The President, Congress, and US Foreign Policy after 11 September 2001 // American Studies. 2010. Vol. 55. No. 2. Pp. 249-286.Meiers F.-J. The Return of the Imperial Presidency? The President, Congress, and US Foreign Policy after 11 September 2001 // American Studies. 2010. Vol. 55. No. 2. Pp. 249-286.Mitchell D. Centralizing Advisory Systems: Presidential Influence and the US Foreign Policy Decision‐Making Process // Foreign Policy Analysis. 2005. Vol. 1. Iss. 2. Pp. 181-206. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743- 8594.2005.00009.xMitchell D. Centralizing Advisory Systems: Presidential Influence and the US Foreign Policy Decision‐Making Process // Foreign Policy Analysis. 2005. Vol. 1. Iss. 2. Pp. 181-206. DOI: 10.1111/j.1743- 8594.2005.00009.xMorin J.-F. & Paquin J. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox. Springer, 2018. 359 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-61003-0Morin J.-F. & Paquin J. Foreign Policy Analysis: A Toolbox. Springer, 2018. 359 p. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-61003-0Nesson C. R. Aspects of the Executive’s Power over National Security Matters: Secrecy Classification and Foreign Intelligence Wiretaps // Indiana Law Journal. 1973. Vol. 49. Iss. 3. Pp. 399-421.Nesson C. R. Aspects of the Executive’s Power over National Security Matters: Secrecy Classification and Foreign Intelligence Wiretaps // Indiana Law Journal. 1973. Vol. 49. Iss. 3. Pp. 399-421.Neureiter M. How did the powers of the US President and the US Congress, as well as their relation, change during the Vietnam War? Essay. Munich, GRIN Verlag, 2010. 4 p.Neureiter M. How did the powers of the US President and the US Congress, as well as their relation, change during the Vietnam War? Essay. Munich, GRIN Verlag, 2010. 4 p.Noorbaloochi S. The Limits of Executive Authority to Preempt Contrary State Laws in Foreign Affairs after Medellín v. Texas // American University Law Review. 2015. Vol. 64. Iss. 3. Pp. 687-687.Noorbaloochi S. The Limits of Executive Authority to Preempt Contrary State Laws in Foreign Affairs after Medellín v. Texas // American University Law Review. 2015. Vol. 64. Iss. 3. Pp. 687-687.Oueslati S. US foreign policy and the complex factors in the decision-making process // Society. 2014. Vol. 51. Iss. 5. Pp. 472-481.Oueslati S. US foreign policy and the complex factors in the decision-making process // Society. 2014. Vol. 51. Iss. 5. Pp. 472-481.Petras J. & Morley M. Empire or republic?: American global power and domestic decay. Routledge. 2012. 224 p.Petras J. & Morley M. Empire or republic?: American global power and domestic decay. Routledge. 2012. 224 p.Pevehouse J. Congress, the Presidency, and US Foreign Policy // Congress & the Presidency: A Journal of Capital Studies. 2001. Vol. 28. Iss. 1. Pp. 94-100.Pevehouse J. Congress, the Presidency, and US Foreign Policy // Congress & the Presidency: A Journal of Capital Studies. 2001. Vol. 28. Iss. 1. Pp. 94-100.Porter G. Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam. University of California Press, 2005. 421 p.Porter G. Perils of Dominance: Imbalance of Power and the Road to War in Vietnam. University of California Press, 2005. 421 p.Prins B.C. & Marshall B.W. Congressional support of the president: A comparison of foreign, defense, and domestic policy decision making during and after the Cold War // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2001. Vol. 31. No. 4. Pp. 660- 678.Prins B.C. & Marshall B.W. Congressional support of the president: A comparison of foreign, defense, and domestic policy decision making during and after the Cold War // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 2001. Vol. 31. No. 4. Pp. 660- 678.Ransom H.H. Secret Intelligence Agencies and Congress // Society. 1975. No. 5. Pp. 33-38.Ransom H.H. Secret Intelligence Agencies and Congress // Society. 1975. No. 5. Pp. 33-38.Reagan R. Address to the Nation on the Iran Arms and Contra Aid Controversy and Administration Goals. 12.08.1987Reagan R. Address to the Nation on the Iran Arms and Contra Aid Controversy and Administration Goals. 12.08.1987Redd S.B. & Mintz A. Policy Perspectives on National Security and Foreign Policy Decision Making // Policy Studies Journal. 2013. Vol. 41. Iss. 51. Pp. S11- S37. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12010Redd S.B. & Mintz A. Policy Perspectives on National Security and Foreign Policy Decision Making // Policy Studies Journal. 2013. Vol. 41. Iss. 51. Pp. S11- S37. DOI: 10.1111/psj.12010Ripley R.B. & Lindsay J.M. Foreign and defense policy in congress: An overview and preview // Congress Resurgent: Foreign and Defense Policy on Capitol Hill. Ed. by R. B. Ripley & J. M. Lindsay. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1993. Pp. 3-14.Ripley R.B. & Lindsay J.M. Foreign and defense policy in congress: An overview and preview // Congress Resurgent: Foreign and Defense Policy on Capitol Hill. Ed. by R. B. Ripley & J. M. Lindsay. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1993. Pp. 3-14.Rockman B.A. Presidents, Opinion, and Institutional Leadership // The New Politics of American Foreign Policy. Ed. by D. A. Deese. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Pp. 59-74.Rockman B.A. Presidents, Opinion, and Institutional Leadership // The New Politics of American Foreign Policy. Ed. by D. A. Deese. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1994. Pp. 59-74.Rosati J. & Twing S. The Presidency and U.S. Foreign Policy after the Cold War // After the End: Making U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World. Ed. by J. M. Scott. London: Duke University Press, 1998. Pp. 29-56.Rosati J. & Twing S. The Presidency and U.S. Foreign Policy after the Cold War // After the End: Making U.S. Foreign Policy in the Post-Cold War World. Ed. by J. M. Scott. London: Duke University Press, 1998. Pp. 29-56.Rosner J.D. The new tug-of-war: Congress, the executive branch, and national security. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1995. 120 p.Rosner J.D. The new tug-of-war: Congress, the executive branch, and national security. Washington: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, 1995. 120 p.Rourke J.T. Congress and the Cold War // World Affairs. 1977. No. 7. Pp. 259- 277.Rourke J.T. Congress and the Cold War // World Affairs. 1977. No. 7. Pp. 259- 277.Schlesinger A.M. The Imperial Presidency. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004. 624 p.Schlesinger A.M. The Imperial Presidency. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004. 624 p.Schraufnagel S. & Shellman S.M. The Two Presidencies, 1984‐98: A Replication and Extension // Presidential Studies Quarterly, 2001. Vol. 31. Iss. 4. |Pp. 699-707. DOI: 10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00194.xSchraufnagel S. & Shellman S.M. The Two Presidencies, 1984‐98: A Replication and Extension // Presidential Studies Quarterly, 2001. Vol. 31. Iss. 4. |Pp. 699-707. DOI: 10.1111/j.0000-0000.2001.00194.xSchubert L., Dye T. & Zeigler H. The Irony of Democracy: An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning, 2015. 432 p.Schubert L., Dye T. & Zeigler H. The Irony of Democracy: An Uncommon Introduction to American Politics. Wadsworth: Cengage Learning, 2015. 432 p.Scott J.M. & Carter R.G. Acting on the Hill: Congressional Assertiveness in U.S. Foreign Policy // Congress & the Presidency. 2002. Vol. 29. Iss. 2. Pp. 151-169. DOI: 10.1080/07343460209507732Scott J.M. & Carter R.G. Acting on the Hill: Congressional Assertiveness in U.S. Foreign Policy // Congress & the Presidency. 2002. Vol. 29. Iss. 2. Pp. 151-169. DOI: 10.1080/07343460209507732Shugart M.S. The inverse relationship between party strength and executive strength: a theory of politicians’ constitutional choices. British Journal of Political Science. 1998. Vol. 28. No. 1. Pp. 1-29.Shugart M.S. The inverse relationship between party strength and executive strength: a theory of politicians’ constitutional choices. British Journal of Political Science. 1998. Vol. 28. No. 1. Pp. 1-29.Sigelman L. A Reassessment of the Two Presidencies Thesis // The Journal of Politics. 1979. Vol. 41, No. 4. Pp. 1195- 1205.Sigelman L. A Reassessment of the Two Presidencies Thesis // The Journal of Politics. 1979. Vol. 41, No. 4. Pp. 1195- 1205.Simon H.A. A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice // Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1955. Vol. 69. No. 1. Pp. 99- 118.Simon H.A. A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice // Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1955. Vol. 69. No. 1. Pp. 99- 118.Slaughter A.-M. International law in a world of liberal states // European Journal of International Law. 1995. No. 6. Pp. 503-538.Slaughter A.-M. International law in a world of liberal states // European Journal of International Law. 1995. No. 6. Pp. 503-538.Congress, the Presidency and American Foreign Policy. Ed. by Spanier J. & Nogee J. New York: Pergamon, 1981. 244 p. DOI: 10.1016/C2013-0-03348-8Congress, the Presidency and American Foreign Policy. Ed. by Spanier J. & Nogee J. New York: Pergamon, 1981. 244 p. DOI: 10.1016/C2013-0-03348-8Stockton P. Beyond Micromanagement: Congressional Budgeting for a PostCold War Military. Political Science Quarterly. 1995. Vol. 110. No. 2. Pp. 233- 259. DOI: 10.2307/2152361Stockton P. Beyond Micromanagement: Congressional Budgeting for a PostCold War Military. Political Science Quarterly. 1995. Vol. 110. No. 2. Pp. 233- 259. DOI: 10.2307/2152361Sylvan D. & Majeski S. Ideology and Intervention // 49th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, 26-29.03.2008. 15 p.Sylvan D. & Majeski S. Ideology and Intervention // 49th Annual Convention of the International Studies Association, San Francisco, 26-29.03.2008. 15 p.Tower J.G. Congress Versus the President: The Formulation and Implementation of American Foreign Policy // Foreign Affairs. 1981. Vol. 60. No. 2. Pp. 229-246. DOI: 10.2307/20041078.Tower J.G. Congress Versus the President: The Formulation and Implementation of American Foreign Policy // Foreign Affairs. 1981. Vol. 60. No. 2. Pp. 229-246. DOI: 10.2307/20041078.Van Alstyne W. Congress, the President, and the Power to Declare War: A Requiem for Vietnam // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1972. Vol. 121. No. 1. Pp. 1-28.Van Alstyne W. Congress, the President, and the Power to Declare War: A Requiem for Vietnam // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1972. Vol. 121. No. 1. Pp. 1-28.Weissman S.R. A culture of deference: Congress’s failure of leadership in foreign policy. New York: Basic Books, 1995. 272 p.Weissman S.R. A culture of deference: Congress’s failure of leadership in foreign policy. New York: Basic Books, 1995. 272 p.Wildavsky A. The Two Presidencies: Presidential power is greatest when directing military and foreign policy // Society. 1966. No. 6. Pp. 7-14.Wildavsky A. The Two Presidencies: Presidential power is greatest when directing military and foreign policy // Society. 1966. No. 6. Pp. 7-14.Wilga M. & Karolewski I.P. New Approaches to EU Foreign Policy. New York: Routledge. 2014. 282 p.Wilga M. & Karolewski I.P. New Approaches to EU Foreign Policy. New York: Routledge. 2014. 282 p.Wittkopf E.R. & McCormick J.M. Congress, the President, and the End of the Cold War Has Anything Changed? // Journal of Conflict Resolution. 1998. Vol. 42. No. 4. Pp. 440-466.Wittkopf E.R. & McCormick J.M. Congress, the President, and the End of the Cold War Has Anything Changed? // Journal of Conflict Resolution. 1998. Vol. 42. No. 4. Pp. 440-466.Zeidenstein H.G. The Two Presidencies Thesis Is Alive and Well and Has Been Living in the U.S. Senate since 1973 // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 1981. Vol. 11. No. 4. Pp. 511-525.Zeidenstein H.G. The Two Presidencies Thesis Is Alive and Well and Has Been Living in the U.S. Senate since 1973 // Presidential Studies Quarterly. 1981. Vol. 11. No. 4. Pp. 511-525.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.