The Iran Contra Affair Case

The Hostage Crisis in the late 1970s was considered one of Carter’s biggest failures. More than 60 members of the United States Embassy were taken hostage in Tehran. Their capturers were mere Iranian Students who were able to keep them captive for 444 days ("Jimmy Carter", 2016). This event portrayed President Carter as inept (“Jimmy Carter”, 2009). He did not negotiate their release and the rescue attempt the government tried failed. A group of student had held American citizens for over a year and nothing much was done about it. This was one of the most undermining events of Carter’s Presidential career and an embarrassment to America (Fink, 2002). Carter’s private negotiations with Panama about the canal led to more mistrust of the American citizens. They thought he was going to simply give it away without thinking about the consequences for America. Once again he lost more respect and distrust from his country (“Jimmy Carter”,

The American public was so captivated by the Iran Hostage Crisis because they were blindsided by this radical action and their knowledge of America’s involvement in Iran was limited. The media played a major role in influencing their emotions and they already had trouble trusting the American government. This unknown involvement began in 1943 when President Roosevelt, Prime Minister Winston Churchill and Joseph Stalin met in Tehran to discuss how to remove the British and Soviet military forces from Iran because Iran wanted to be its own nation. The United States aided the young Shah, the ruler of Iran, and his government with military weapons and loans. Over time, Prime Minister Mossadegh, of Iran, gained more and more power until he was the true ruler of Iran and the Shah was just a figurehead. The United States, fearing the spread of communism, devised a secret plan for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), to over throw Prime Minister Mossadegh.

Looking back to 1953, the nation was at a much different place. However, the decisions that were made in 1953 greatly impacted the nation’s involvement in terrorism today. Stephen Kinzer, author of All The Shah’s Men, addresses how the United States’ role in the 1953 CIA coup in Iran leads up to modern terrorism that can be seen in society currently. Additionally, Kinzer is a very credible source considering he has worked in more than fifty countries and is an award-winning foreign journalist. Furthermore, Kinzer has been the New York Times bureau chief in multiple different countries; some being Berlin, Managua, Nicaragua, and Istanbul. With that being said, Kinzer has a vast amount of knowledge regarding the nation’s role in foreign affairs. According to Kinzer, the 1953 CIA coup in Iran politically destabilized the nation, led to the rise of modern terrorism, and immensely affected the CIA’s reputation. This paper examines Kinzer’s arguments with the assessment that the nation involving itself in foreign affairs undeniably leads to unintended consequences.

On David Farber 's book Taken Hostage, Farber informs us about the Iran Hostage Crisis and America 's First Encounter with Radical Islam. This book tells us how the United States and Iran got into conflict, leading to the Iranians holding American Embassy members hostage as revenge for them feeling betrayed by the United States. It also informs us about other events that occurred in a decade that caused the United States many problems. Farber talked about all the events that lead to the Iranian Hostage Crisis. November 4, 1979, seizure of the United States embassy in Tehran and the hostage of four hundred and forty four days following, were the first steps leading up to the perpetual War on Terror. Farber believes the failure from American policymakers and more specifically from President Carter, to identify the severity of the crisis made for the prolonged crisis. The sheer ineptitude of Carter administration was the cost of the US to lose it’s way economically, culturally, politically and even military. Carter struggled to respond to the impulses of Islamic fundamentalism within the prevailing Cold War paradigm. They saw the real battle as against secular modernism and they recognized that the US was the major force spreading this cultural and political belief throughout the world. The media misrepresentations of the struggle and mass media manipulation of Americans played on the peoples emotions. Although Carter was popular at the beginning of his presidency, this began

The Iran Contra affair is historically defined as the “Reagan administration scandal that involved the sale of arms to Iran in exchange for its efforts to secure the release of hostages in Lebanon and the redirection of the proceeds of those sales to the Nicaraguan Contras.” As the Nicaraguan counterrevolutionaries, known as the Contras, began their efforts to retaliate against the Socialist Sandinista Regime, American government forces stepped in to support the Contra cause in a hope to support the world-wide elimination of Communism. To understand the entire history of the scandal, many individuals, groups, policies, and deals must be researched and put together to tell the complete history of the Iran Contra affair.

In a time of political chaos, numerous approaches to contending with the USSR were offered by various politicians, yet “the man who got things right from the start was, at first glance, an unlikely statesman… Through a combination of vision, tenacity, patience, and improvisational skill, he produced what Henry Kissinger terms ‘the most stunning diplomatic feat of the modern era…’ As Margaret Thatcher put it, ‘Ronald Reagan won the Cold War without firing a shot’” (D’Souza). Henry Kissinger was an “old nemesis” of Reagan, yet even he “observed that while it was Bush who presided over the final disintegration of the Soviet empire, ‘it was Ronald Reagan's Presidency which marked the turning point.’ [Additionally,] Cardinal Casaroli, the Vatican secretary of state, remarked publicly that the Reagan military buildup, which he had opposed at the time, had led to the collapse of Communism” (D’Souza). The great quantity of figures who have acknowledged the intelligence Reagan’s actions validates these actions as such. Many democratic opponents argued that “the West should ingratiate itself with the Soviet Union by pursuing ‘the stuffed-goose option—that is, providing them with all the grain and consumer goods they need.’ If Reagan had taken this advice when it was offered in 1982, the Soviet empire

"I think everyone knew we were walking a very thin line."(Owen) Not many Americans know the truth that lies behind the Iran-Contra scandals. Most would be surprised to know about the deception of our leaders. Still today, some truth of Iran-Contra lies hidden in the conscience of the people who organized it, aided it, and went through with it. It started with good intentions, but soon was corrupted. Some may argue that we must do what we can to smother the flame of communism, but I believe that deception, abuse of power and bloodshed is no way to go about it.

The United States history during 1977 to 1989 went through two presidencies and whirlwind of events happened. When President Jimmy Carter became president he wanted to lower the inflation rates to make life easier for the people of the United States. While that was his goal it got completely derailed. Near the end of Jimmy Carters presidency, a group of Iranian students took over the U.S Embassy in Tehran and took people hostage. Over the course of the 444 days the hostages where held captive while the people of the United States voted for a new president to help lead them into a new direction. The people voted for Ronald Reagan. While he was president things didn’t go as he planned as well. The issues with Iran did not calm down and escalated to something bigger. After the Iran hostage crisis, the US had another issues with Iran and it was the Iran- Contra affair. During this essay I will be talking about the book called “Taken Hostage” by David Farber and the information in the book. The book is about the time frame of Jimmy Carter’s presidency and the issues with Iran and the hostage crisis. The second half of my essay is towards President Ronald Reagan’s and the issues about the Iran- Contra affair and the lasting issues between Iran and the United states.

The XYZ affair, that began in 1797, forced the United States to become the middle man of Great Britain and France. The U.S. and Britain signed Jay’s Treaty in hopes of preventing Britain from attacking U.S. ships. However, what did France think about this treaty? The answer came quickly when they began seizing American ships. France hoped the U.S. would continue to fight with Britain and eventually leading to a war.

The Iranian hostage crisis was one of the most dramatic events in a series of problems that took place during President Jimmy Carter’s term. The crisis, beginning in November of 1979, received the most coverage of any major event since World War II. It was one of many problems faced in light of the United State’s complex relationship with Iran. The effects on both the US and Iran were astronomical, especially politically as well as economically and socially. It took a heavy toll on American relations with the Middle East and changed the way we engage in foreign affairs. In light of this crisis, Iran started an international war that we are still fighting thirty-two years later.

The Iran-contra scandal of the 1980’s, first brought to light in November 1986, is a complicated mess of scandal, arms dealings, hostage deals, and illegal acts (“Iran-Contra Affair” Infoplease.com). The original purpose of the arms sales was to improve United States-Iran relations (Sanders SNU.edu). However, when American hostages were taken throughout the 1980’s, members of President Reagan’s staff negotiated implicit deals with Iranian groups, which resulted in the U.S. selling arms in return for the release of hostages (Wolf PBS.org). Later, the deal was modified so that the U.S. sold arms directly to Iran at a high markup, with no guarantee of hostages being released, and the markup funding the contras in Nicaragua (“The

However, at that time to the American people the crisis invoked a feeling of national inferiority; for one of the first times, the US had been manipulated by a foreign country and could do nothing about it. However, the Iranian Hostage Crisis proved to be more than just an embarrassment for the country. It’s evident 33 years later that the Iranian Hostage Crisis had other significant effects on the political environment of the United States, including the negative influence on the 1980 presidential election, complete destruction of diplomatic US- Iran relations, and the establishment of a precedent for foreign, anti-American terrorism as an effective strategy against the US.

In class, we discussed the Iran-Contra Affair involving Ronald Reagan. However, we did not go in depth about public opinion, George H.W. Bush’s involvement, or how people feel about it today. This paper will seek to continue this topic. For example, the Iran-Contra polls showed that most Americans did not believe Regan’s cover stories, yet there was never a push for him to pay the political price, which would ultimately have been impeachment. Thus this paper will further attempt to understand the mindset of people that allowed these events to occur with little penalty.

A solution to the Nicaraguan problem seemed more difficult to solve, Reagan wanted desperately to help the “contras” but was mandated by congress to stay out of the affair. His advisors secretly proposed a way to kill two birds with one stone, a decision that came to be referred to as Ronald Reagan’s black mark on his almost spotless record on foreign policy. The U.S would sale weapons to Iran in return for hostages taken by Muslim Jihadist in Lebanon, and with the money Iran paid those weapons with the U.S would direct that money to the contras fighting the Sandinistas. While the reasons for the trade were honorable and the president was following the American policy of communist containment at the time, it was still nonetheless illegal and badly battered Reagan’s reputation.

The USSR had recently funded a communications site on Nicaraguan soil to help them communicate with other socialist nations. With a rising fear of the USSR and other socialist nations, the US immediately accused it of being a spy base. Not shortly afterwards the US began to take action against Nicaragua by issuing an economic blockade. Because the Nicaraguan economy relied so heavily on imports, this had a profound effect and contributed to the collapse of the Nicaraguan economy. “It was impossible to spend even a day in Nicaragua without becoming aware of the huge and unrelenting pressure being exerted on the country by the giant standing on the northern front” (p.24).