National Security Act of 1947

2046 Words5 Pages

The advent of the interagency process coincided with the passage of the National Security Act of 1947. This landmark legislation dramatically altered the landscape of the federal government at the dawn of the Cold War. Although various presidential administrations adjusted their foreign policy methods to meet their own requirements, this act established the basic framework of coordination necessary for America’s position as a global superpower.

Why have the national security advisor and the NSC staff become so prominent in the formulation of foreign policy?

The 65-year evolution of the National Security Advisor (NSA) and the National Security Council (NSC) staff into an influential shaper of US foreign policy reflects an acceptance by successive iterations of national leadership that America’s place in the world necessitates a small, yet decisive body capable of producing viable options to deal with a complex world. Although its prominence has ebbed and flowed from administration to administration (and even within individual terms of office), the overall assessment remains that the NSC staff, and by extent the NSA, stand as “attractive tool[s]” for presidential political and policy maneuverings. Their importance is also rooted in historical reasons as well.

The major rise of American foreign influence, and thus the need for cohesive foreign policy, materialized just prior to WWII, and prompted the powerful Secretary of State, Cordell Hull, to advocate interdepartmental coordination between the State, War, and Navy entities. The subsequent global (and total) victories by the Allies in WWII heavily influenced the main crafters of foreign policy by demonstrating that military power and international obligations held muc...

... middle of paper ...

... of the government to meet an evolving terror threat actually ends up masking the far more important government responsibility for overall national preparedness, not just guarding against terrorism. The billions of dollars and staggering amount of effort spent on crafting the mushrooming homeland defense/homeland security enterprise certainly helped plug some existing holes, but the rampant inefficiency continues to be a point of contention today. The overly broad notions of counter-terrorism and homeland defense means “any expense can be justified” as proven by the decade long rise in DHS budgets and numerous instances of wasteful spending. The headfirst plunge into the world of homeland security was a uniquely American undertaking. No other nation possessed the fiscal means to enact such drastic measures on so many levels, and in such a short amount of time.

Open Document