RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT VERSUS BEING PRESIDENT

When he ran for president, Bill Clinton read the polling data and determined that the road to the White House was paved solely with domestic considerations. "Jobs, jobs, jobs;" "it's the economy, stupid;" "health care for all Americans" -- these were the guideposts along the path to victory. To be sure, at the refueling stops, he would throw out a foreign policy tid-bit here and there -- maybe some critical talk of President Bush's policies on Bosnia or Haiti -- but then quickly get back on the domestic road. Politically it was the right tactic.

A presidential candidate -- especially a challenger -- can pick and choose what he wants to discuss. Once elected, a sitting president is forced to address the full sweep of domestic and international events. Things that can be glossed over by a challenger during a campaign often cannot be passed over once in the oval office.

Last week, Clinton faced an avalanche of problems and controversies that prevented him from maintaining a singular focus on the central issue of his domestic program: health care.

There were the opening days of the congressional foray into Whitewater. With fits and starts, it seems that Whitewater will hover over the Clinton presidency perhaps to the eve of the 1996 primary season.

Foreign policy issues that were pit stops of the 1992 campaign loomed large last week. Some of them were gloriously upbeat. King Hussein and Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin had their signing ceremony appropriately blessed by Clinton. King Hussein supported Saddam Hussein in the Gulf War, but he has now been redeemed and is deemed to be everyone's "dependable" friend.

As always in the Middle East, our blessing of the Israel-Jordan agreement will be costly. Forty percent of our foreign aid already goes to the Middle East. Egypt and Israel continue to be rewarded for their 1979 peace treaties. The PLO and Jordan await their compensation. In his speech to Congress, the King cordially asked for his money. War is expensive; so too is peace.

After the grandeur of high-level peace-making, it was back to the heavy lifting in foreign policy. Bosnia has reignited. The North Korean clock continues to tick. The disposal of the spent fuel rods has to be resolved. More sooner than later, the United States has to determine if the bolt of statemanship that seemingly struck Kim Il Sung in the final days also affected Kim Jong Il. Wise old diplomats often argue that, like a good wine, you should never rush diplomacy. That's all well and good if you don't have hot fuel rods awaiting potential transformation into nuclear weapons.

Rwanda, when in a state of civil war, was of no national security concern to anyone. Rwanda, now in a state of catastrophe, is too horrific to comprehend. There is little to be availed by the Western world agonizing over its failure to do something sooner. Not a single nation with military means wanted to assume the risks in stepping between two tribes which for years have been hell bent to massacre each other. U.N. Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali talked about intervention, but found himself preaching to an empty hall.

Rwanda, previously not within our national security interest, now is obviously within our humanitarian interest. Coping with refugees displaced by war is not a new undertaking, but millions of people instantaneously displaced in remote areas is unprecedented. As with the North Korean fuel rods, the clock is ticking. Death never is on holiday when the Biblical four horsemen are on their ride.

Finally, there is Haiti. The United States is seeking United Nations Security Council approval to invade. Our Constitutional provisions on war-making, however, have not been subcontracted to the U.N. The Founding Fathers required the president to seek Congressional authorization when there is adequate time to do so before deploying armed forces where hostilities are predictable. That is exactly what President Bush did in the Gulf War.

When there is an emergency and time is of the essence, the president can respond unilaterally for a limited period of time before seeking Congressional approval. But if the president has time to consult with the U.N. Security Council and seek a vote of approval from foreign governments, he clearly has ample opportunity to consult with Congress and seek its vote of approval.

During the campaign, President Clinton acknowledged the shared responsibility of the president and the Congress when our armed forces are to be sent into harm's way. The Constitution mandates that he make good on that pledge.

Tom Eagleton, a former U.S. Senator from Missouri, now teaches at Washington University in St. Louis.