Iran-Contra Affair

The so-called Iran-Contra Affair involved a decision to sell arms (contrary to United Nations sanctions and without approval from Congress) to Iran who were engaged in a bloody war with neighbours Iraq. There was also an implication that the arms deals acted as sweeteners to Iran's leaders to release their western hostages. The money was then diverted, via Colonel Oliver North, aide to the [U.S. National Security Adviser]? [John Poindexter]?, to provide arms for Contra? rebel groups fighting to overthrow the communist government of Nicaragua. The clandestine operation was discovered only after an airlift of the guns was downed over Nicaragua. Reagan claimed he had not been informed of the operation and a [Presidential Commission]?, which indicted North and Poindexter amongst others, could not determine the degree of his involvement.

There is also evidence that the CIA may have been involved with drug trafficking to raise money.

The Iran-Contra Affair is significant because it brought many constitutional questions into public view:

• Does the president have unconditional authority to conduct foreign policy? (Can the president approve selling arms to a foreign nation without congressional approval?)
• What information does the president have to provide to Congress and when should that information be supplied? (Does the president have to tell Congress about foreign policy initiatives?
• What authority, if any, does Congress have to oversee functions of the executive branch? (Does funding for foreign policy initiatives have to be approved by Congress? Who defines the entire spending budget and regulates it?)
• What role does the Supreme Court have in deciding conflicts between the legislative branch and executive branch?

Most, if not all, of the constitutional questions are still unresolved. On one view, it appears that if the legislative and executive branches do not wish to work together, there are no legal remedies. These are transient issues in that each of the executive and legislative branches change every few years.

''There's more to add here, particularly on the political impact of the scandal on Reagan's presidency. It won't do simply to say "it was damaging"; it's obviously more complicated than that.