a) less efficient.

Second, the relevance of the efficiency rationale in foreign affairs is equally questionable. It is not at all clear that the geographic proximity of the government to the governed promotes efficiency or any other benefit in foreign relations. Phone, email, videoconferencing, and other technologies often provide ample effective channels for both formal and personal exchanges. It makes little apparent difference whether the relevant official on the computer or phone sits in Washington, DC, rather than Springfield, Albany, or Carson City. Furthermore, specialization and division of labor can promote efficiency. Specialists in foreign affairs generally work for the federal government. Washington has comparatively far greater resources and capacity than the states to undertake the many tasks required for the sound conduct of foreign affairs. The federal government includes, and this is by no means an exhaustive list, the Foreign Affairs, Armed Services, and Intelligence Committees of Congress; the Departments of State, Defense, Treasury, Justice, and Homeland Security; the Central Intelligence Agency, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and National Security Agency; and many other institutions and bodies devoted in whole or part to foreign affairs. Federal departments, institutions, and agencies of this sort house and benefit from centuries of institutional memory, terabytes of data, and thousands of employees armed with education and experience in virtually every aspect of foreign policy. That they often err does not suggest that states and cities would necessarily do better. The states possess more limited resources and expertise in most relevant respects. And the federal government’s remoteness from citizens in comparison to state governments may well be a virtue vis-a-vis foreign relations. Distance, both literally and figuratively, from the local concerns, interests, and at times parochial views and prejudices of particular state constituencies, cultivates greater detachment, balance, and providence—all of which tend to foster a more sensible, long-term foreign policy.