BACK-DOOR DIPLOMACY: WHERE DOES IT LEAD?

A Colombian police commander has caused a tempest in a teapot with a
tornado's potential, by going straight to House Speaker Dennis Hastert to
get more money for his part of the war on drugs.

The tempest arises from bruised feelings in the State Department and the
Office of Management and Budget, who were left out of the loop. The tornado
could arise if this gets to be a habit.

The larger issue is relations between members of Congress and officials of
foreign governments: These aren't supposed to exist in the traditional view
of US foreign policymaking.

Listen to the Supreme Court in 1936: "Into the field of negotiation, the
Senate cannot intrude." The Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 1816:
"...the interference of the Senate in the direction of foreign negotiations
{is} calculated ... to impair the best security for the national safety."
The Supreme Court again in 1936: {The president}, not Congress, has the
better opportunity of knowing the conditions which prevail in foreign
countries."

These views have been overtaken by events. In the period between the two
world wars, it was often thought that the League of Nations was lost by
President Wilson's failure to take senators to the Versailles peace
conference. President Roosevelt therefore included senators in the talks
that led to the United Nations.

Thus was planted a seed that grew apace as Congress became more assertive
during the Vietnam War and later. Members of Congress and their staffs
travelled the world, holding meetings with presidents, prime ministers,
foreign ministers, intelligence officials, military officers, and members of
parliament. The American participants got used to hearing pleas for more
foreign aid or more trade concessions, along with predictions of communist
takeovers if these benefits were not forthcoming. Sometimes the Americans
tried to fulfill the requests after they got home; more often they did not.

Foreigners began coming to Washington, too, and soon learned that visits to
Capitol Hill could be worthwhile.

Sometimes these visits yielded legislative benefits in the form of dollars
and cents, sometimes in terms of congressional pressure on the State
Department, Pentagon, or White House. The Israelis, powerfully aided by the
American Jewish community, have been especially adept at this. So have
refugees and opposition groups from sundry countries.

Members of Congress and their staff regularly attend international
conferences as part of the US delegation. They have occasionally turned up
at conferences from which the State Department stayed home. One of Mr.
Hastert's recent predecessors, Jim Wright (D) of Texas, actively engaged in
negotiations seeking peace between warring factions in Central America. The
negotiations failed, in part because the Reagan administration refused to
take part.

Purists cling to the rigid line of separation observed in an earlier day,
but gradually the State Department has become more pragmatic: If Congress
intervenes on its side, that's OK.

This larger congressional role has added another player in the game of
making foreign policy: foreigners themselves, either officials or interest
groups.

All of these people want something that may or may not coincide with US
interests. When they can't get what they want out of the State Department,
they beat a path to Capitol Hill, as did the Colombian police general to
Hastert's office. The two already had a rapport, formed when Hastert was
chairman of a subcommittee interested in drugs.

Given Hastert's influence in the House, the general has a good chance of
getting what he wants, and antidrug policy in Colombia may take a direction
different from what the Clinton administration wants. This is unlikely to be
disastrous.

Similar incidents are going to recur. The potential for escalating from a
tempest to a tornado lies in how much self-restraint is exercised in
Congress. Except for some hurt feelings in the State Department, the current
affair doesn't amount to much.

But suppose the Taiwan Chinese get to an influential member of Congress for
some high-performance aircraft?

*Pat M. Holt is a Washington writer on foreign affairs. He is the coauthor

of 'Invitation to Struggle: Congress, the President and Foreign Policy'
(Congressional Quarterly Press, 1992)