ABSTRACT
The Northern Ireland case study offers several conclusions about how United States foreign policy is made — and several prescriptions concerning how it should be made. British ‘overreaction’ to the Adams visa merely served to alienate White House staff who cared little for Northern Ireland prior to the National Security Council (NSC)-State turf war over the new policy. Interventionists within the executive branch could claim the political support of prominent congressmen and other policy-relevant figures. The affiliations the NSC staff position engendered were unmatched on the State Department side. Bill Clinton’s NSC staff said that complexity was no reason for American non-engagement. The Northern Ireland case study illustrates that division may be a necessary consequence of the pursuit of genuinely innovative policy. The rise to policy influence of the Irish-American lobby suggests that the institutions mattered where once national governments had held sway.
