Background
The Iran-Contra affair is the name given to an elaborate
scheme operating during the Reagan Administration
through which military aid was given to a Nicaraguan
political faction, despite a legislative prohibition
against military aid "for the purpose of overthrowing
the government of Nicaragua" during that time
period. An independent counsel investigation focused
on potential criminal activity ranging from violations
of that statute, known as the Boland Amendment,
to conspiracy to violate tax laws.
Early
in 1984, national security adviser Robert McFarlane,
with the support of CIA Director William Casey,
proposed encouraging other countries to contribute
to the "Contras" as the Nicaraguan group
was known, and Lt. Col. Oliver North, then a member
of the National Security Council (NSC) staff,
was directed to establish a covert bank account
to facilitate this. Later that year, when the
idea of third-party contributions was discussed
with President Reagan, Vice-President Bush, and
Secretary of State Shultz, among others, Shultz
warned that approaching a third country could
be viewed as an "impeachable offense".
McFarlane did not divulge the existence of the
covert bank account, or that Saudi Arabia was
already contributing at that time.
Late
in 1984 Congress passed tougher restrictions on
contra aid, explicitly stating that no government
agency could pledge or spend funds that would
support paramilitary operations in Nicaragua.
The administration's response to this was simply
to shift the source of funds from the CIA to the
NSC. Oliver North enlisted the help of retired
U.S. Air Force Major General Secord, who became
an arms broker for the contras.
By
1985 the press had caught wind of North's efforts
to assist the contras, and Congress began to inquire.
McFarlane and North determined that they would
not provide Congress with certain "problem
documents" -- primarily memoranda by North
that documented his providing tactical assistance
and funds to the contras. Instead McFarlane lied
about North's activities in a series of letters
to Congress
North's
activities were discussed at a meeting May 16,
1986 that included President Reagan, Vice President
Bush, Secretary of State Shultz, Secretary of
Defense Weinberger, and others. This was just
after North's operation, dubbed "the Enterprise"
had received $15 million from an arms sale to
Iran.
In
June of 1986 the House Intelligence and Foreign
Affairs committee requested reassurances from
the President that the Boland amendment was being
complied with. Newly appointed National Security
Adviser John Poindexter knowingly repeated earlier
false statements that the NSC staff "were
in compliance with both the spirit and letter"
of the Boland Amendments. The committee then asked
to meet with North, who denied providing military
advice or funding to the contras.
On
October 5, 1986, a military transport plane operated
by the "Enterprise" was shot down by
Nicaraguan government troops. The lone survivor,
Eugene Hasenfus, said while in custody that he
worked for the CIA. With Congress about to approve
the Administration's aid package for the contras,
CIA officials truthfully stated that Hasenfus
did not work for the CIA. They denied knowing
other facts, or whether the U.S. Government was
involved, however. The false statements had the
desired effect, and Congress approved the contra
aid package on October 17.
The
second part of the Iran-Contra scheme involved
the sale of U.S. arms to Iran, both indirectly
through Israel, and directly after President Reagan
signed an intelligence "Finding." Despite
Reagan's public statement on June 1985 that "America
will never make concessions to terrorists,"
internally the administration justified the arms
sales as a way of trying to obtain the return
of U.S. hostages kidnapped in Lebanon and elsewhere,
and also limiting Soviet influence in the Middle
East.
Defense
Secretary Caspar Weinberger raised concerns that
sale of weapons to Iran violated the Arms
Export Control Act. Further law required that
Congress be notified of any shipment of TOW missiles
to Israel exceeding $14 million, or any resale
by Israel. In the face of these complications,
on January 17 President Reagan approved a Finding
that authorized the sale through third parties.
Attorney General Edwin Meese approved the transaction
under the National Security Act, without notice
to Congress.
On
February 27, 1986 1000 TOW missiles were delivered
to Iran, but no hostages were released. The Iranians
subsequently admitted that they could not arrange
the release of all the Beirut hostages, but could
possibly facilitate the release of two. Nonetheless,
North had structured the deal so that funds would
pass through an "Enterprise" account
before payment was made to the CIA. The details
of this plan were outlined in a a memorandum of
April 1986, titled "Release of the American
Hostages in Beirut"
Despite
squabbling over price of spare parts, possibly
because North had inflated the prices he passed
along to the Iranians, one of the Beirut hostages,
Father Lawrence Jenco was released on July 24,
1986. The Iranians threatened to kill an American
hostage and two Iranians who had helped broker
the deal, if spare parts were not delivered.
Vice
President Bush met on July 29 in the King David
Hotel in Jerusalem with Israeli counter-terrorism
expert Amiram Nir, who provided them with a status
report on the Iran arms deal. Bush would later
describe the meeting as a counter terrorism discussion
and review of hostage-rescue proposals.
Al-Shiraa,
a Lebanese publication, reported on November 3,
1986 that former national security adviser Robert
McFarlane had met with Iranian Speaker of Parliament
Rafsanjani. Quickly the arms sales became the
day's leading news story. Senior White House advisers
met a week later to try to head off the policy
disaster, but could only agree to say nothing.
CIA
director William Casey, and national security
adviser Poindexter briefed members of Congress
on November 21st. In those briefings both men
lied about U.S. involvement in the shipment of
HAWK missiles to Iran in 1985. Casey also misrepresented
other aspects of the arms sales including the
extent of presidential approval, and who was running
the operation.
Attorney
General Meese advised President Reagan that it
would be necessary to develop a consistent summary
of the entire matter. Meese then called Poindexter's
office asking that all relevant documents be compiled.
Poindexter and North then began to destroy documents,
including the only known copy of the "Finding"
from December 1985 that identified the arms sales
as an arms-for-hostages deal. Investigators also
found a copy of North's "Release of the American
Hostages in Beirut" detailing the diversion
of funds for support of the contras in Nicaragua.
Four
days later after briefing senior White House advisers
including Vice President Bush, chief of staff
Donald Regan, Secretary of State Shultz, Secretary
of Defense Weinberger, and others, Attorney General
Meese announced the diversion of funds at a press
conference, and that Poindexter had resigned and
North reassigned.
Bush
Involvement
On Christmas Eve, 1992, having succeeded Ronald
Reagan in 1989, then President George Bush committed
what is probably his most memorable act in connection
with the Iran-Contra affair: he pardoned former
Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger and five
other Iran-Contra defendants, charging that the
Independent Counsel was attempting "criminalization
of policy differences." His action represented
the first time a President had pardoned someone
in whose trial he might have been called as a witness.
Unfortunately,
the criminal investigation of Bush himself was
not complete. The Office of the Independent Counsel
had been preoccupied with the investigation and
trials of Oliver North and John Poindexter, and
by the time the investigation had broadened to
the point where questioning Bush would have been
indicated, he had been elected President. Bush
had acknowledged in December of 1986 and January
of 1988 that he was regularly briefed concerning
the Iran arms sales. This conflicted with his
public assertion that he was "out of the
loop," unaware of Secretary of State Shultz's
strong opposition to the deal, unaware of the
diversion of proceeds to support the contras,
or of North's operation resupplying the contras.
The
Independent Counsel was made aware of the existence
of Bush's diary in 1992, and this triggered a
special investigation as to why it had not been
produced earlier. Subsequent examination of the
diary showed that it should have been provided
in response to at least two requests for documents
dating back to 1987. Following disclosure of the
diary, Bush retained private counsel, and reported
through counsel that he did not recall the document
request. Substantial evidence exists that Bush
was, in fact, aware of the request, and that it
had been communicated to him by C. Boyden Gray.
An
excerpt from the diaries themselves demonstrates
Bush's attitude toward providing personal documents
to investigators:
Howard Baker in the presence of the President,
told me today that George Shultz had kept 700
pages of personal notes, dictated to his staff
. . . Notes on personal meetings he had with the
President. I found this almost inconceivable.
Not only that he kept the notes, but that he'd
turned them all over to Congress . . . I would
never do it. I would never surrender such documents
and I wouldn't keep such detailed notes. Bush
Diary, 7/20/87.
In
the summer of 1992 the Independent Counsel's office
informed the White House that new questions for
President Bush had arisen since his last interview
in 1988. The White House did not respond to this
information. Bush's public posture was that he was
cooperating with the Independent Counsel, but inside
the White House there were discussions about not
allowing an interview. The Independent Counsel decided
against seeking a Grand Jury subpoena for Bush because
it viewed criminal prosecution unlikely, and did
not want to present an appearance of retaliating
for the Weinberger pardon.
Among
other issues, Bush would have been questioned
concerning:
- Knowledge
of or involvement in any arrangements with Central
American or other countries in exchange for
support of the contras
- The
following diary entry:
On the news at this time is the question of
the hostages. . . . [[D]iscussion of Bud McFarlane
having been held prisoner in Iran. . . . I'm
one of the few people that know fully the
details, and there is a lot of flack and misinformation
out there. It is not a subject we can talk
about. Bush Diary, 11/5/86
- Whether
Administration officials had tried to create
a false account of the Iran arms sales to avoid
appearances of illegality or confrontation with
Congress. Specifically Bush was present at a
meeting with senior White House Advisers and
a meeting with congressional leaders at which
Poindexter described the Iran deal as having
begun in 1986 (whereas it actually began in
1985).
- Whether
or not President Reagan had been informed of
the 1985 illegal shipments
None
of these questions would be answered, however,
since after pardoning the six conspirators, Bush
refused to be interviewed concerning any aspect
of the Iran-Contra matter other than his failure
to provide his diary.
Reference:
Final
Report of the Independent Counsel for Iran/Contra
Matters, Vol I. Chapter 28. Lawrence E. Walsh,
August 4, 1993

Fair
Use Notice: This site contains copyrighted material
the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding
of environmental, political, economic, democratic, domestic and international
issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted
material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance
with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own
that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
|