A HANDSHAKE IS NOT A FOREIGN POLICY. KEEP YOUR WORD.

JUSTICE · POLITICAL JUSTICE

Published by Langhorne P. Breedlove

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2026 · 1:12 AM ET

Tags: International Law · Diplomacy · Treaties · Alliances · Congressional Oversight

Dear fellow American proletariat: America has spent generations insisting that its promises mean something. Then a new administration arrives, a camera turns on, and suddenly an agreement negotiated over years is discussed like an unwanted gym membership. International relations may be complicated, but the basic question is recognizable even to a child: if you give your word, what happens when keeping it becomes inconvenient?

American Proletariat proposes a disciplined foreign-policy framework that identifies binding obligations, honors lawful commitments, demands reciprocal performance, and subjects national-security and diplomatic decisions to constitutional checks. No nation has to agree with the United States on everything. Nor is a treaty a blank check or an alliance a subscription that can be canceled without consequences.

THE MANDATE

Publish a comprehensive, accurate inventory of U.S. treaties, binding executive agreements, and material nonbinding diplomatic commitments, with their legal status, reservations, implementation duties, reporting deadlines, funding requirements, and responsible agencies. Establish a recurring congressional review of performance and proposed changes. Make reciprocal expectations explicit while recognizing that compliance cannot always be judged by whether another government adopts America's preferred domestic policies.

Preserve lawful collective defense, peaceful dispute resolution, respect for sovereignty, humanitarian obligations, and public accountability. Proposals to join, amend, withdraw from, or negotiate an agreement must identify the domestic legal mechanism and the likely effects on allied governments, businesses, service members, and civilians. Transparency is the default; legitimate security protections require a specific justification, not a stamp that reads ‘none of your business.’

ROOTS & HISTORY

The Constitution divides foreign-affairs powers. Article II authorizes the President to negotiate treaties with the advice and consent of two-thirds of senators present; Congress holds other powers over commerce, appropriations, and war. The Senate approves resolutions of ratification; the President completes ratification. In modern practice many international commitments are made as executive agreements rather than Article II treaties. They are not all interchangeable under U.S. law. (Sources 01, 02)

The United Nations Charter, signed in 1945, commits members to peaceful settlement of disputes and generally prohibits threats or uses of force against other states' territorial integrity or political independence, subject to the Charter framework, including self-defense. Article 51 recognizes individual and collective self-defense following an armed attack. A country cannot credibly invoke rules against aggression only when its adversaries are the ones accused of breaking them. (Source 03)

The North Atlantic Treaty was signed in 1949. Article 4 provides for consultation when an ally considers its security threatened; Article 5 concerns collective defense after an armed attack within the treaty's terms. Members undertake to assist by actions they deem necessary, potentially including armed force. It is inaccurate to say Article 5 automatically orders every member's military into an identical war. (Sources 04, 05)

TODAY · THE PROBLEM

The State Department's Office of Treaty Affairs maintains U.S. treaty records, including the Treaties in Force publication and Treaties and Other International Acts Series. These repositories provide starting points for reviewing obligations, but treaties may depend on reservations, later amendments, implementation laws, and interpretive disputes. Counting agreements is not the same thing as measuring whether obligations were performed. (Source 06)

The Congressional Research Service explains that a binding international agreement does not always create a directly enforceable right in a domestic court. Some provisions are self-executing; others require legislation. Congress and the President have different roles depending on whether the instrument is an Article II treaty, a congressional-executive agreement, a sole executive agreement, or a nonbinding political commitment. Those distinctions are not lawyerly decorations. They determine what government can lawfully promise and deliver. (Sources 02, 07)

Trade agreements raise their own questions. Congress has constitutional authority over foreign commerce and tariffs, while Presidents negotiate with other governments. Many trade arrangements have been approved through congressional-executive agreements. A reciprocal alliance agenda must therefore treat market access, labor standards, supply chains, and economic development with the same precision used for defense treaties, rather than assuming the White House owns every lever. (Source 08)

THE LEGAL PATH

An Article II treaty generally requires Senate advice and consent by a two-thirds vote of senators present before ratification. Statutory authorizations and congressional-executive agreements use other procedures. Congress may condition appropriations, require reporting, implement international obligations through legislation, and exercise oversight. The President has important diplomatic authority, but cannot enact a domestic statute merely by signing an international instrument. (Sources 01, 02, 07)

Questions of withdrawal, termination, succession, enforcement, and domestic judicial remedies must be analyzed instrument by instrument. Some are legally contested. International tribunals do not possess unlimited compulsory jurisdiction over the United States merely because international law exists. An honest platform distinguishes legal obligations, accepted jurisdiction, voluntary dispute resolution, and political commitments.

THE PLAN

01 · INVENTORY THE PROMISES

Create a publicly searchable legal register of material agreements, treaty reservations, ratification status, amendments, withdrawal provisions, congressional implementation, agency ownership, and performance reports. Protect classified annexes appropriately while explaining why information is withheld. Reconcile the register with State Department records and congressional reporting rather than inventing a parallel catalogue with conflicting dates.

02 · DEFINE RECIPROCITY WITHOUT BULLYING

Identify each party's stated obligations and lawful response mechanisms when obligations are breached. Reciprocity does not mean every country must make identical contributions: obligations can differ by population, wealth, capabilities, or treaty design. Publish disputes, negotiated cures, and independent evidence before threatening sanctions or withdrawal.

03 · REBUILD CONGRESSIONAL ACCOUNTABILITY

Require a clear legal memorandum and cost analysis for major new commitments or proposed withdrawals. Hold regular public hearings on implementation, security outcomes, costs, humanitarian implications, and partner compliance. Provide appropriate confidential briefings while avoiding indefinite secrecy for ordinary policy choices. A senator should not have to learn the operative terms of an agreement from a television chyron.

04 · HONOR ALLIES AND INTERNATIONAL PARTNERS

Evaluate defense cooperation, maritime safety, disaster response, public health, scientific information sharing, climate adaptation, and trade on their documented merits. Respect the sovereignty of Tribal nations within U.S. jurisdiction and of foreign states within international law, recognizing these relationships operate under different legal systems. Negotiate policy changes openly rather than treating partner populations as collateral in an argument between leaders.

05 · MAKE PEACEFUL SETTLEMENT THE FIRST INSTRUMENT

Invest in professional diplomacy, mediation, monitoring, crisis communications, and international legal expertise. Describe the conditions under which sanctions, collective defense, or force may be lawful and effective, and distinguish those issues from whether Congress has authorized a particular U.S. action. The United Nations Charter is not a magic shield, but neither is it a decorative brochure. (Source 03)

06 · VERIFY IMPLEMENTATION

Assign agencies measurable milestones for each commitment, publish compliance assessments with sources and limitations, evaluate complaints from affected communities, and commission independent reviews. Avoid using alliance contributions as a crude scoreboard that rewards spending without testing results.

THE TEN-YEAR LEDGER

YEAR ONE · ESTIMATE PENDING. Compare enacted appropriations and contractual obligations with the proposed changes. Identify incremental spending for State Department treaty and legal expertise, the public register, congressional support, diplomatic capacity, inspections, and compliance reporting. Account for any transition expenses from renegotiated agreements or revised defense commitments without assuming that all foreign assistance is a new cost or that cuts yield instant cash.

YEARS TWO THROUGH TEN · ESTIMATE PENDING. Present annual nominal and inflation-adjusted forecasts for diplomacy, treaty administration, security cooperation, humanitarian commitments, compliance monitoring, information systems, legal disputes, and implementation assistance. Separate federal outlays, partner contributions, and nonbudget economic effects. Report low, central, and high scenarios; show contractual and statutory constraints; do not count another government's promised contribution as U.S. Treasury revenue.

An illustrative $50 million annual increase in international-law staffing, inspections, and reporting would total $500 million across ten years before inflation, timing, and financing effects. This is arithmetic, not an adopted appropriation or a verified estimate. Actual costs depend on the agreements selected, the administrative model, and which programs already exist. Savings from avoided conflict are plausible benefits to investigate, not guaranteed fiscal offsets.

WHAT COULD GO WRONG?

Overly rigid reciprocity can transform differences in capacity into accusations of bad faith. Overly broad disclosures can reveal sensitive intelligence or expose people working in dangerous places. Conversely, secrecy can conceal unlawful practices and prevent democratic oversight. Each exception should have a reason, a reviewing authority, and an expiration or reassessment process.

Alliances can deter aggression and permit collective action, but they also entail risks of entanglement, unequal burdens, escalation, and strategic disagreement. Critics may favor narrower commitments or stronger congressional limits; supporters may emphasize predictability and the cost of abandonment. Those disputes deserve evidence about actual treaty terms, deterrence, trade, and the humanitarian effects of policy choices—not a loyalty test.

Some international rules are contested, some institutions cannot compel compliance, and some agreements need implementing laws Congress may refuse to pass. The responsible response is to disclose the gap and negotiate or legislate where possible, not to promise that a signing ceremony has changed domestic law overnight.

MEASURING SUCCESS

Report the share of agreements with verified public legal status, timely implementation reports, fulfilled U.S. commitments, partner compliance, resolved disputes, transparent congressional review, measurable diplomatic outcomes, civilian protection, and administrative costs. Review outcomes against credible benchmarks and record failures alongside successes. A summit photo is not a performance indicator.

THE POINT

The United States needs partnerships that can survive changes of administration without being immune to democratic examination. The public deserves to know what was promised, what the law requires, who pays, who benefits, and what happens if either side fails to perform.

International law is neither a substitute for American constitutional government nor a permission slip for abandoning it. Reciprocal alliances should be built through lawful commitments, responsible negotiation, honest accounting, and the recognition that other nations have people, governments, and legitimate interests of their own. Keeping a promise is not weakness. Neither is scrutinizing it.

E pluribus unum, bitches.

SOURCES & FURTHER READING

01 · United States Senate — About Treaties: constitutional procedure, ratification, and executive agreements. https://www.senate.gov/about/powers-procedures/treaties.htm

02 · Congressional Research Service — International Agreements (Part I): Overview and Agreement-Making Process, September 29, 2023. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/LSB11048.html

03 · United Nations — Charter of the United Nations, Articles 2 and 51 (1945). https://www.un.org/en/about-us/un-charter/full-text

04 · NATO — The North Atlantic Treaty, signed April 4, 1949, Articles 4 and 5. https://nato.int/en/about-us/official-texts-and-resources/official-texts/1949/04/04/the-north-atlantic-treaty

05 · NATO — Collective Defence and Article 5, updated November 12, 2025. https://www.nato.int/en/what-we-do/introduction-to-nato/collective-defence-and-article-5

06 · United States Department of State — Office of Treaty Affairs: treaties, agreements, and Treaties in Force. https://2021-2025.state.gov/bureaus-offices/treaty-affairs/

07 · Congressional Research Service — International Law and Agreements: Their Effect upon U.S. Law, July 13, 2023. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/RL32528.html

08 · Congressional Research Service — Congressional and Executive Authority over Foreign Trade Agreements, September 25, 2025. https://www.everycrsreport.com/reports/R47679.html

10 RECOMMENDED ARTICLES, ESSAYS & POLICIES

→ Explore Foreign Policy & International Legal Accountability

→ Explore International Treaties, Democratic Alliances & Reciprocal Cooperation

→ Explore Honor Freely Associated Pacific Agreements

→ Explore The $28 Federal Minimum Wage

→ Explore National Contaminated-Site Cleanup

→ Explore Federalists

→ Explore Libertarians

→ Explore Reformers, Abolitionists & Civil Rights

→ Explore Monarchy, Empire & Historical Powers

→ Explore English Plus a Second Language

WE ARE ONE.  ·  E PLURIBUS UNUM.