Why Do Presidents Use Executive Agreements Far More Often than Treaties

In the realm of international relations, treaties have long been considered the gold standard of formalizing agreements between countries. However, in recent times, presidents have increasingly resorted to executive agreements to conduct foreign policy. In fact, according to the Congressional Research Service, between 1939 and 2014, presidents signed approximately 18,000 executive agreements, compared to only 1,100 treaties during the same period.

So why do presidents use executive agreements far more often than treaties? There are several reasons for this trend.

First, executive agreements do not require Senate approval. Under the U.S. Constitution, the president has the power to make treaties with the advice and consent of the Senate. However, getting a treaty approved by the Senate can be a time-consuming and politically fraught process. By contrast, executive agreements can be made solely at the discretion of the president and do not need to be ratified by Congress.

Second, executive agreements can be more flexible and responsive to changing circumstances. Because treaties are formal, permanent agreements, they can be difficult to amend or adjust if the situation on the ground changes. Executive agreements, on the other hand, can be tailored to specific situations and can be updated or revised as needed.

Third, executive agreements are often used for matters that are not considered to be of « treaty-level » importance. For example, executive agreements are commonly used to establish technical cooperation or information-sharing arrangements with foreign countries. These types of agreements may not require the formality and legal weight of a treaty.

Finally, executive agreements can be used to bypass potential opposition from interest groups or political opponents. For example, a president may use an executive agreement to achieve a foreign policy objective that would be unlikely to gain Senate approval due to opposition from certain lawmakers or interest groups.

In sum, presidents use executive agreements far more often than treaties because they offer flexibility, speed, and bypass potential opposition from Congress or interest groups. However, it is important to note that executive agreements do not carry the same legal weight as treaties and may be subject to legal challenges or changes in the political landscape.