The Iran-Contra Affair was a scandal that took place in the early 1980’s during the reign of President Ronald Reagan. It was a clandestine agreement to give funds to the Nicaraguan contra insurgents from money gained by selling armaments to Iran. The situation was perpetuated by two plans. This comprised of an accord to support the contras in overthrowing the Sandinista government of Nicaragua. Secondly, the Iran-contra affair acted as a strategy of a cold war that would later overturn socialists and communist regimes by promoting coups d'état or by providing paramilitary forces with support to fight those governments (Lawrence, 1999).

This approach raised constitutional issues about the president's power in creating wars. The matter originated from the two top secret operations of the United States government that happened during the early years of Reagan’s administration. These secretive operations involved the retailing and shipment of weapons by the United States to Iran. The purpose of selling the arms was to develop relations with high-ranking officials within the Iranian government as well as to get their support in ensuring that several U.S. hostages held Lebanon were released. The next operation involved the support provided by the U.S. government to Contras, who were against the left wing Sandinista government in Nicaragua. All these different operations became connected in early 1985 when some members of staff in the National Security Council devised a plan that used the excess funds generated through the sales of weapons to Iran to sustain the Contras.

However, neither the support given to contras nor the sale of weaponry to Iran was consistent with the United States official foreign policy and law. Following the 1979 Iranian insurgency, the United States had placed arms' embargo against the Islamist regime in Iran. The U.S also sought for global support to ensure military seclusion of Iran during its war with Iraq. Furthermore, during his term in office, President Reagan openly disclaimed any plan that concerned trading hostages with firearms, contending that having such a compromise with terrorists would only promote more hostage-taking.

The support from the public for any efforts by the United States to overthrow the Sandinista government changed, and Congress reacted by limiting assistance to the Contras. This led to the ratification of the Boland Amendment 1984, which banned the use of appropriated U.S. funds to sustain any paramilitary acts in Nicaragua. However, proponents of the amendment did not get enough votes to forbid the use of un-appropriated money, a loophole that facilitated the operation.

A Joint House-Senate Select commission on clandestine military aid to Iran and the Nicaraguan resistance was instituted to hear evidence on events that led to the Iran-Contra Affair. Following several weeks of public hearings and testimony, together with questioning and testimony of North, McFarlane, Poindexter as well as other key officials implicated in these operations, the commission substantiated much of what took place during this period. However, the committee was not capable in establishing the role that was played by President Reagan in approving the behavior of his staff and advisors. This is because roles were largely obscured by a practice well-known as reasonable deniability, which implied that agents working within the intelligence communities, and the National Security Council were required to deny the president’s involvement any covert operations.

Consequently, it is still uncertain what President Reagan's position was in approving these actions and therefore, the particular disposition of his accountability for a disgrace in which, in the expressions of the statement of the Congressional commissions looking into the Iran-Contra issue, elemental procedures of administration were overlooked and the decree of law was undermined. The Iran-Contra event was a huge intimidation to the Reagan government and to the president's reputation.

According to Lawrence (1999), following the acknowledgement of the contra-affair by the general public, the Nicaraguan administration prosecuted the United States in the International Court of Justice, which in the lawsuit, “The Republic of Nicaragua v. The United States of America” judged in support of Nicaragua authorizing the compensation payment, which the United States declined to carry out. Fulfillment of the court order was ineffective since the United States; a stable associate of the Security Council obstructed any implementation system put forward by Nicaragua. Globally, the harm was more rigorous. Magnus Ranstorp explains in his writings that the U.S. compliance to participate in special considerations with the Hezbollah and Iran not only indicated to its enemy that captive-taking was an exceedingly helpful device in extorting political and economic indulgence for the West but also damaged any reliability of U.S. appreciation of other nations' divergence from the values of no-compromise and no indulgence to terrorists and their requirements.

In the year 1987, Mehdi Hashemi, the leaker was killed in Iran, supposedly for actions unconnected to the indignity. Although Mehdi made a complete videotape declaration to various severe allegations, some witnesses find the concurrence of his revelation and the ensuing trial extremely apprehensive. The Iran-Contra issue, similar to the CIA-prearranged attack in Cuba of the Bay of Pigs in 1961, generated a universal threat to American integrity. Representatives at the uppermost rank had been discovered arranging global terror campaign, specifically, the Contras, infringing the U.S. regulation, and being deceitful even after taking oath. Nevertheless, akin to that of the Bay of Pigs prior to it, the durable effect of the Iran-Contra event on U.S. political affairs and alien strategies were minor and the essential figures in the disagreement soon after benefited from sophisticated professions in both the public and private areas (Walsh and Hunter, 1987).

Several unlawful assurances came up, together with those of Poindexter, McFarlane, and the North, but Poindexter's and North's were evacuated on petition owing to invulnerability accords with the governing body regarding their evidence. In 1991, previous State Department and CIA administrators were found guilty of preserving information concerning the contra support from parliament, and Caspar Weinberger, validation secretary working for Reagan, was accused in 1992 with a similar crime. In that same year, President Bush, then president, exonerated Weinberger and other representatives who had been prosecuted or imprisoned for putting into custody facts on or hindering investigation of the event. The Iran-contra issue created severe problems regarding the nature and extent of the congressional mistakes of overseas dealings and the restrictions of the decision-making branch.

Order now

Related essays