In this essay, I evaluate the Reagan Administrations involvement in Nicaragua to fight off communism during the Cold War. I argue that President Reagan, along with his administration, wanted to increase military ability in Nicaragua by supplying arms to the Contras in order to show that they would not tolerate Soviet influence in the Western world. I will also be discussing how the United States involvement in Nicaragua led to the Iran-Contra scandal that occurred during Reagan’s second term as president and how much controversy, criticism and counterarguments have come about due to the Iran-Contra scandal. Even though the United States involvement in Nicaragua was not a proxy war of the Cold War, their involvement was still significant because the Sandinistas were a Soviet-back regime and the U.S. wanted to get rid of the Soviet threat in the western hemisphere.
Introduction
Well before Ronald Reagan became president, Reagan claimed that the policies that were in place of containment and détente would not end the Cold War in a satisfying way for the United States. The policy of containment was to prevent communism from spreading to other territories that had not been ruled or dominated yet. However, the United States would not try to force the Soviets out of the regions that they had already controlled in the world in order to avoid war from breaking out.
During the 1970s, Presidents Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Jimmy Carter were in favor of the policy of détente. Détente was the reduction of tensions during the Cold War and achievement of peaceful coexistence with the Soviets. Ronald Reagan was strongly opposed to détente. During a news conference in 1981, he stated, “So far détente’s been a one-way street that the Soviet Union has used to purse its own aims. Their goal must be the promotion of world revolution and a one world communist or socialist state.” According to President Reagan, the Soviets viewed détente has a sign of the United States’ weakness and vulnerability. Reagan did not like the idea of the United States appearing weak. He wanted to show the Soviet Union that the U.S. was dominant. Instead of the policy of détente, Reagan wanted to create peace by bulking up the United States military power and economic power. Reagan wanted a defensive strategy. He wanted to protect the peace and in order to do this, he wanted to ensure that the United States opponents could never think they could beat the U.S.
My central question is what did President Ronald Reagan and his administrations do in Nicaragua in order to fight against the spread of communism during the Cold War? My central argument is that the Reagan administrations involvement in Nicaragua intensified action during the Cold War because the Reagan administration was aiding the Contras in order to fights the Sandinistas, who were inspired by Marxism and were backed by the Soviet Union. The Sandinista regime were also aligning themselves with Cuba at the time in order to support the communist revolutionary movements that were occurring in different Latin American countries. Even though the United States involvement in Nicaragua was not a proxy war of the Cold War, it was still significant during the Cold War era because the United States was determined to reduce the threat of communism from spreading to the western world, so they decided to side with the Contras.
Intensifying Action During the Cold War
From 1981-1989, the foreign policy of the United States was led by the Ronald Reagan administration. The main foreign goal of the Reagan administration was to win the Cold War and to rollback communism. This was achieved in Eastern Europe with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and in the ending of the Soviet Union in 1991, though there are many disagreements on whom to credit, and how much credit should be given. The foreign policy of the Reagan administration was characterized with the help of a strategy of “peace through strength” and an escalation of tensions between 1981 and 1984, which was then followed by a warming of relations with the USSR between 1981 and 1989.
From a protected position of economic and military power, President Reagan planned not simply to contain Soviet communism, but rather to reverse its gains and subdue it. He presumed the Soviet Union was not as strong as they were making themselves seem. He also anticipated the collapse of the Soviet Union if they were challenged by the United States. Reagan believed that the Soviet Union's economy which was controlled by the government could not contend effectively against the United States free-market economy. Reagan than began a quick, substantial increment in the quality and quantity of the United States’ military technology and weapons and challenged the Soviet Union to come up with the same. President Reagan anticipated that the command economy that the Soviet Union's had would ultimately fail because it would be trying to keep up with the free enterprise system that the United States had in an “arms race.” As the United States military continued to build up, Reagan set forward another policy in addition to the military buildup. With the help of the United States military and economic, the United States would advocate for freedom and democracy all over the world. President Reagan anticipated that if people were given a choice between a democracy and a totalitarian government, people would reject a totalitarian government, even within the Soviet Union.
This policy, which became known as the Reagan Doctrine, was introduced in 1982 by President Reagan during a speech in London to the British Parliament. Under Reagan’s doctrine, the United States supplied overt and covert aid to anti-communist guerillas and resistance movements in an effort to “roll back” communist governments that were found in Africa, Asia, and Latin America that were backed by the Soviet Union. The Reagan Doctrine was intended to reduce the amount of influence the Soviets had in these regions. It was a part of the administrations overall plan to end the Cold War.
U.S. Involvement in Nicaragua. Ronald Reagan supported many anti-communist regimes in Latin America. One of Reagans most significant involvements was in Nicaragua. In 1983, the Reagan administration backed the Contras. The Contras were an anti-communist paramilitary seeking to overthrow the Soviet-aligned Sandinista government in Nicaragua. The Reagan Administration sent logistical, financial, and military help to the Contras, who were based in neighboring Honduras in order to suppress the Sandinistas. The Contras pursued a guerrilla rebellion with an end goal of getting rid the Sandinista government of Nicaragua, which was headed by Daniel Ortega. This help was made possible through the CIA to the rebels, and proceeded directly through President Reagan's time in office. Many historians have condemned the Contras of the brutality of their scorched earth tactics when they were pursing the guerrilla rebellion.
In 1983, the CIA gathered a group called "Unilaterally Controlled Latino Assets" (UCLAs), whose assignment was to attack ports, refineries, boats and bridges to try to make it seem that the Contras were responsible for committing these acts. In January 1984, these UCLA's completed the operation for which they would be best known. These UCLA’s mined a few of Nicaraguan harbors, which ended up sinking few Nicaraguan boats and also damaged a few foreign vessels. This occurrence prompted the passing of the Boland Amendment by the US Congress and also caused a lot of international judgment towards the United States. With the help of the CIA, the Contras received training, arms, and funding.
A new law was passed that was called the "Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security" in response to the rebellion. The "Tribunales Populares Anti-Somozistas" allowed the holding of suspected counter-revolutionaries without trial under the “Law for the Maintenance of Order and Public Security.” The State of Emergency influenced rights and guarantees that are contained in the "Statute on Rights and Guarantees of Nicaraguans.” Many civil liberties were cut back or revoked. These civil liberties included the freedom to organize, the sanctity of the home, freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and the freedom to strike. According to the Boland Amendment, it made it unlawful under United States law to provide arms to those militants that were fighting for the Contras. However, the Reagan Administration kept on arming and funding the Contra through the Iran-Contra scandal, in accordance with which the United States subtly sold arms to Iran disregarding U.S. law in return for money utilized by the United States to supply weapons to the Contras, which was also in violation of the law. I will be discussing the Iran-Contra affair and the controversies that came along with it later on in this paper.
In the 1984 Nicaraguan elections, the Sandinista government became the victors of the election. The New York’s Human Rights Commission declared that Nicaragua’s election was “free, fair, and hotly contested.” A few opposition parties refused to partake in the election and there were still political prisoners being held as the election took place. Martin Kriele, a German constitutional law teacher, believed that the election of 1984 was done under the Sandinista Directorate. Kriele described the Sandinista Directorate as a body "no more subject to approval by vote than the Central Committee of the Communist Party is in countries of the East Bloc." Kriele contended that there ought to have been a secret ballot to maintain a strategic distance from government retaliation.
The Reagan Administration was rather disappointed with the results. The administration was very critical of the Nicaraguan elections because Arturo Cruz did not run for office. Arturo Cruz was nominated by the Coordinadora Democrática Nicaragüense, a Right-wing opposition alliance, but according to the United States, the U.S. encouraged Cruz to avoid running for office. In an article by the New York Times, a few senior Administration officials stated, “The Administration never contemplated letting Cruz stay in the race because then the Sandinistas could justifiably claim that the elections were legitimate, making it much harder for the United States to oppose the Nicaraguan Government.”
There have been many arguments made that there is a possibility that a key factor in keeping the elections of 1984 from creating a liberal democratic rule was the United States stance that it had toward the Nicaraguan election. At the beginning, the Reagan administration was divided between whether or not the opposition should participate. While hard-liners in the CIA and the NSC were in favor of a boycott by the opposition party in light of the fact that participation would help the Sandinistas be seen as legitimate, the moderate in the U.S. State Department believed the opposition party ought to consider participating in the election. Thus, as the hard-liners of the CIA were guiding the Coordinadora Democratica Nicaragüense to exhibit a set of requests and demands for its participation in the election, L. Craig Johnstone, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Central America, was doing all that he could to get Cruz into the elections of 1984 and supporting Cruz as much as he could.
A divided administration made the endeavors of the Coordinadora Democractica Nicaragüense to build up a coherent electoral strategy much more complicated. Two different, clashing perspectives emerged as the result: one favored abstention and the other favored cooperation. The individuals that were members of the Coordinadora who supported a boycott of the 1984 elections to gain the upper hander were being enabled by hard-liners in the Reagan administration. They were also being enabled due to public statements that President Reagan was making about the elections being absurd. Even though they shared the interest in discrediting the elections of 1984, the ultimate goals of Coordinadora hard-liners and the Reagan administration were very different. On one hand, the leaders of the Coordinadora wanted to reinforce their bargaining positions with the Sandinistas. On the other side, the officials of the Reagan administration wanted to help out the Contras by undermining the elections. The United States’ policy, in other words, was not inevitably planned to give opposition parties an advantage. Instead, U.S. policy was intended to advocate the Reagan administration’s military pressure against the Sandinista regime. After the elections, the eagerness that some of the opposition leaders had to take their cues from Washington caused a lot of controversy within the opposition.
In order to destabilize the regime of the Sandinistas, the Reagan administration stepped up its endeavors. In May 1985, a trade embargo was put into place by the United States. A month after the trade embargo was announced, Congress approved a $27 million in “non-lethal aid to the Contras. Between 1985 and 1986, this $27 million in “non-lethal” aid was then supplemented with $37 million in “lethal” aid that was raised covertly by the National Security Council. The strengthening of US military and economic animosity following the elections prompted a tightening of the political space that had opened up amid the electoral campaign. In October 1985, the State of Emergency that was started in 1982 was made worse: the Nicaraguan government ended up suspending many more civil rights.
The Sandinistas struggled to hold power as the U.S. continued to support the Contras’ rebellion. In 1990, the Sandinistas ended up losing power and held an election that all of the main opposition parties participated in. The Nicaragua’s Permanent Commission on Human Rights have accused the Sandinistas of killing thousands of its citizens. In addition to the Sandinistas, the Contras have also been blamed for carrying out war crimes, for example, arson, rape, and the killing of civilians.
People that have been supporters of Ronald Reagan’s administration have stated that United States have been the largest aid to Nicaragua. If the Sandinistas agreed to stop giving arms to communist insurgents in El Salvador, the U.S. have offered twice to continue giving aid to Nicaragua. Nicaragua's Permanent Commission on Human Rights criticized the Sandinista regime for their violation of many human rights. They recorded at least 2,000 murders in the first six months and 3,000 disappearances in the first view years. It has since been recorded that there were 14,000 instances of rape, kidnapping, torture, mutilation and murder.
Controversy with U.S. Involvement. President Reagan’s backing of the Contras ended up causing controversy in the United States. This controversy was known as the Iran-Contra Scandal. Many believe that it was not a good idea for the United States to secretly fund the Contras because they believe that this caused President Ronald Reagan to abuse his presidential powers. Some critics equate this scandal to the Watergate scandal that happened under the Nixon administration. The Tower Commission, which was created by Reagan, and the U.S. Congress were two entities that did investigations and criticized the Reagan administration for the secret mishandling of the funds.
The Iran-Contra Scandal was a political scandal that occurred in the United States during Ronald Reagan’s second term in office. Senior administration officials in President Reagan’s administration secretly aided the sales of arms to Iran, which was the subject of an arms embargo. These officials hoped that they would be able to fund the Contras in Nicaragua while simultaneously negotiating that several U.S. hostages should be released. Under the Boland Amendment, the United States’ Congress prohibited the continuation of funds being sent to the to the Contras.
The Iran-Contra affair was initiated as an operation to free seven American hostages that were being held in Lebanon by a paramilitary group with Iranian ties known as Hezbollah. Originally, the plan was for Israel to ship weapons to Iran, and then the United States would then turn around and supply Israel and receive payments from Israel as well. The Iranian recipients promised the United States that they would do everything they could in order to get the American hostages released. However, in 1985 Lieutenant Colonel Oliver North of the National Security Council made large modifications to the original plan. The new, modified plan was to divert a portion of the proceeds from the weapons sales to help fund the Contras in Nicaragua.
Even though President Reagan was a supporter of the Contra cause, the evidence, however, of whether or not he authorized the diversion of money raised by Iran to the Contras is disputed. In a handwritten note by the Defense Secretary that was written December of 1985, Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger explained how Reagan knew about the potential hostage transfers with Iran. Weinberger also explained that Reagan was also aware of the Hawk and TOW missiles sales to moderate elements within Iran. Weinberger wrote about how President Reagan was able to answer to the charges of illegality, but was hesitant to answer to the charges about how Reagan passed up the opportunity to free the hostages.
In November of 1986, President Reagan announced that a Special Review Board was created in order to looks into the matter. A following day after the announcement, President Reagan appointed former Senator John Tower, former Secretary of State Edmund Muskie, and former National Security Advisor Brent Scowcroft to serve as members on the Special Review Board. On December 1, 1986, the presidential commission took effect and became known as the Tower Commission. The Tower Commission was the first presidential commission of its kind to review and assess the National Security Council. The main objectives of the Tower Commission were to investigate "the circumstances surrounding the Iran-Contra matter, other case studies that might reveal strengths and weaknesses in the operation of the National Security Council system under stress, and the manner in which that system has served eight different presidents since its inception in 1947.” The Tower Commission came to the conclusion that President Reagan was not aware of the scope of the program and was especially not aware about the diversion of funds to the Contras. However, the Commission did argue that Reagan needed to have better control of his National Security Council Staff. It was also very critical of Reagan’s improper supervision of his staff and being unaware of their actions. The Tower Commission came to the conclusion that Reagan should have listened to his National Security Advisor more, which meant putting more power in the hands of that chair.
Also in November of 1986, the weapon sales were revealed. When this happened, President Reagan went on national television to explain that the weapon transfers did occur, but the United States had not done this for the hostages.
In January 1987, Congress made an announced that they were planning on opening an investigation into the Iran-Contra affair. It was now Congress’s turn to start an investigation into the matter. Depending upon an individual’s perspective on politics, there were different views on the investigation. One view was that the U.S. Congress investigation into the Iran-Contra affair was an attempt by the legislative arm to gain control over an out-of-control executive arm, a partisan "witch hunt" by the Democrats against a Republican administration. The other view was that the investigation was a weak, ineffective effort by Congress that did not do much to control the “imperial presidency” that was caused by many broken laws . During this time, Congress was controlled by the Democrats and they issued their own report in November of 1987. The Democrats states that the President Reagan should have known what his national security advisors were doing. The U.S. Congress wrote that the president is ultimately responsible for all the wrongdoings that were committed by his aides and that his administration showed deception and aversion for the law that was in place. According to Congress, the central questions was the role of President Reagan in the Iran- Contra Affair. The investigation ended up being blocked after a large number of documents that were related to the scandal were destroyed or withheld from investigators by officials in the Reagan administration.
In March of 1987, President Reagan went back on national television to address the nation that he takes full responsibility for what occurred. In his speech, he explained that "what began as a strategic opening to Iran deteriorated, in its implementation, into trading arms for hostages."
In the end, both the U.S. Congress and the Reagan-appointed Tower Commission participated in an investigation. However, neither of them found evidence that Reagan knew what the outcomes of the multiple programs would be. In the end, the sales of weapons to Iran was not found as a criminal offence. However, there were five individuals who had charges brought up against them for their support of the Contras. These charges against the five individuals were eventually dropped after the Reagan administration declined to declassify certain documents. Instead, the indicted conspirators faced other lesser charges. Fourteen officials of the Reagan administration, including then-Secretary of Defense Caspar Weinberger, ultimately were indicted. Of these fourteen that were indicted, eleven faced convictions, which some of them were vacated on appeal. The Iran-Contra Affair and the ensuing deception to protect senior officials of the Reagan Administration including President Reagan has been cast as an example of post-truth politics.
Conclusion: Why is This Significant?
In my opinion, I believe that Reagan administration’s involvement in Nicaragua was unsuccessful due to the Iran-Contra scandal. Yes, the administration was trying to prevent communism from spreading and was trying to show their dominance over the Soviet Union, but it ended up back firing on them after a handful of indicted and members of the administration were ultimately convicted of different violations. Even though Reagan was not aware of what the outcome could be, the secrecy ended up affecting his overall approval rating which ended up dropping after the Iran-Contra scandal. U.S. citizens became wary and skeptical of the Reagan administration. In the end, President Reagan ended up surviving the incident and even thrived after he apologized and took full responsibility.
The United States’ involvement in Nicaragua is significant because it showed Americans what their government could do if they did not get caught. This should teach American’s to question their government if they have their suspicions of questionable activities going on within the government.
We can use this incident to further prevent future instances. A perfect example of this would be President Trump and the issue of whether or not the Russians meddled in the 2016 presidential election. President Trump denies that the Russians meddled in the presidential elections. He ended up firing the FBI director James Comey during his investigation. Any accusations that Russia meddled in the election is immediately shot down by President Trump and he tells America that there is not much to examine. Whereas Trump is reluctant to talk about Russian meddling, Reagan allowed investigations of the Iran-Contra affair to occur and was very open about. He was so open about it that he went on national television twice to address his concerns and that he took full responsibility for the incident. It is up to President Donald Trump to decide if he wants to be as open, disciplined, and apologetic about it as President Ronald Reagan was with the Iran-Contra scandal.