Mr. Jensen's U.S. History Website
  • Home
  • College US
    • Coming Soon . . .
    • APHIST Video
    • NWU Dual Credit Info
  • US History 9
    • Coming Soon . . .
    • Online Reviews
    • US 9 Video
  • U.S. History Blog
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2020 - May 2021)
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2019 - May 2020)
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2018 - May 2019)
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2017 - May 2018)
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2016 - May 2017)
    • U.S. History Blog (May 2015 - May 2016)
    • U.S. History Blog (May, 2014 - May, 2015)
  • "Good News"
  • My WHS Google Site

President Carter & the Iranian Hostage Crisis, Part One

5/1/2019

0 Comments

 
      Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
    On 1 February 1979, Khomeini’s “Victory Flight” landed at an airport in Teheran. The general in charge of the military vowed to shoot down the plane only if he had US support, but the US government was silent. Very shortly after landing, Khomeini named a new prime minister, and a new constitution had already been drafted based on Islamic law . . . or to be more accurate, his version of it. The military eventually switched their alliance to Khomeini, but it didn’t occur overnight; the army melted like a snowball and were in Khomeini’s fold by 11 February 1979.
    Carter immediately established diplomatic relations with the Khomeini regime, and in the end, as with the Bolshevik Revolution in 1917, the most organized, ruthless, and radical forces prevailed in Iran, even though Khomeini’s forces were nowhere near a majority in February 1979. To the Carter administration, the idea of a popular revolution that would lead to a theocracy was ludicrous. The US and the world were shocked twice: first with the popular revolution in Iran, and then that a theocracy took control. Nothing like that had occurred since the Reformation, and secular observers like Carter just could not fathom the possibility.
   Carter and his top officials held out hope that the moderates in the transitional Khomeini government would survive, which therefore would result with Iran playing ball with the US; that proved to be fanciful thinking. The real battle in Iran was an ideological power struggle over the constitution which took well over half-a-year, but in essence the moderates had no chance, in that they brought bananas to a knife fight.

Picture
    It’s almost forgotten that on 14 February 1979, as photographers documented the event, young radicals took the US Embassy and American hostages, including the US Ambassador to Iran. The Iranian government at the time insisted that the radicals release the hostages, which happened, and the transitional government apologized to the US. While alarming, that incident actually reassured the Carter administration, in that it seemed that the Iranian government would be one with which the US could work.
    On 4 November 1979, what Khomeini called the 2nd Revolution started when the US Embassy was overrun by radicals, and 50+ Americans were taken hostage. The result of that hostage-taking was that Khomeini was able to solidify his hold on power in Iran The US Embassy in Teheran normally had over 1000 workers, but that number had been reduced to around 70. The US Embassy’s security was reinforced in terms of the building and the grounds, and food was stored for a prolonged siege. But even though additional Marines were brought in, the embassy was not an impenetrable fort, and it is the host nation that is the guarantor of security. Added to the mix was that the entirety of the US Embassy in Teheran was over 27 acres. Khomeini had isolated himself in the city of Qum, and was determined to never allow a US presence in Iran, which he found toxifying. And then there was the decision to allow the Shah of Iran into the US, where he and his highly-placed US supporters cannot escape blame.

Picture
    During December 1978 and in January 1979, as his regime was collapsing, Carter offered the Shah sanctuary in the US. But both times the Shah was indecisive, believing that it was a plan by Carter to encourage moderates to replace him in a bloodless coup. It was all set for the Shah to be in exile in an estate in Palm Springs CA, but the Shah decided to go to Egypt first and spend time with Anwar Sadat, and then he went to Morocco. The Shah may have believed that Khomeini’s hold on power was suspect, and perhaps the miracle of 1953 would again happen. Also, the Shah didn’t want to be seen as a total lackey of the US by going straight to America for his exile. Had the Shah taken up Carter’s offer of sanctuary in December 1978, the Iranian Hostage Crisis probably would not have occurred.
    Khomeini was initially very pleased that the Shah had left Iran, even if it was for the US. But on 22 February 1979, when the Shah told the US Ambassador to Morocco he was ready to head to the US at long last, the CIA station chief in Morocco was told to inform the Shah to delay his departure. By then, Carter had been directly advised that if the Shah came to the US, hostages would be taken at the US Embassy in Teheran again, and this time their release would be dependent on turning over the Shah to Khomeini. Carter was more than happy to let the Shah stay in Morocco, but of course, the Shah had worn out his welcome in Morocco, and he would not take no for an answer in terms of delaying his arrival to the US (which he had been doing for weeks anyway).

Picture
     The Shah’s contacts/friends in the US, among them Henry Kissinger and
David Rockefeller, put pressure on Carter, indignant that a decades-long ally of the US was treated in a disrespectful manner. Kissinger and Rockefeller arranged for the Shah’s temporary home in the Bahamas, and then to a resort just outside of Mexico City, and then to Panama. Finally, Sadat sent a plan to Panama to take the Shah back to Egypt. By then, the Shah had decided that it was Carter’s fault that he was no longer the ruler of Iran, and Kissinger fanned those flames.

    It was during that period that Iran warned Carter there would be trouble if either the Shah or his wife were allowed into the US. Carter was told by a highly-placed official in the US Embassy in Teheran, via a secret cable, that it would be foolhardy to allow the Shah into the US, as it would endanger Americans in Iran. That embassy official (Bruce Laingen) correctly forecast that in order to deflect receiving blame for the many problems facing Iran, Khomeini would find ways to make America the nation’s scapegoat. Further cables by that Laingen indicated that even though Khomeini’s loyalists were starting to take power in the government, it would take quite some time to settle who was in control of the nation. Laingen also stated that the Shah would have to officially renounce his throne, which was something the Shah absolutely refused to do.
    On 18 October 1979, David Rockefeller, believing that he was acting on humanitarian ground (but in actuality it was a very manipulative action) , told Carter that the Shah had cancer. The Shah had kept is illness secret since finding out in 1974 during a ski trip to Switzerland (he didn’t even tell his family). It was another staggering lapse in intelligence on the part of the CIA which lasted five years.

Picture
     While the Shah was in Mexico City, doctors determined that he had lymphoma as well as variety of other very serious illnesses, and that he needed medical care in America. Rockefeller’s disclosure had the effect he fully intended, and resistance to the Shah’ arrival in the US crumbled, with Carter being the last holdout. Carter feared another attack on the US Embassy in Teheran, and the President was the only one in his Circle of Trust that correctly predicted what Khomeini would do.
    In Iran, Khomeini and his flock were fearful that the US would re-install the Shah in power if he was admitted to America. On 21 October 1979, at Camp David, Carter decided to notify Iran that he was allowing  into the US for medical reasons only, but Khomeini et al had no way of knowing that the Shah was really ill. Carter had a monstrous dilemma on his hands, in that not allowing the Shah in the US meant there would not be any American hostages in Iran. However, once word got out that the Shah required entry and was very sick, Carter knew that he would be blamed for betraying an ally and also seen as being weak.
    Carter was not provided very good information by his circle of advisors in that the Shah could have been well-cared in Mexico City. The medical care that the Shah received in NYC was actually substandard for what should have occurred in terms of treatment, since the doctors didn’t want any negative publicity for using experimental drugs/procedures, so the Shah’s treatments were very conservative. The admission of the Shah to America was the spark that set off the 2nd Revolution in Iran and solidified Khomeini’s power base, since the 1953 US-backed coup that restored the Shah into power loomed large in the minds of millions of Iranians.

Picture
   Then in Algeria, Zbig, Carter’s emissary to celebrate 25 years of independence from France, was photographed shaking hands with a high-profile moderate in the Iranian government, and that was the last straw for Khomeini and the radicals. A clueless Zbig just shrugged the incident off as being “civilized”. Radical Islamic students wanted to show that they that they were more anti-American than the Communist students that took earlier took American hostages at the US Embassy. Those radicals asked Khomeini for permission to storm the US Embassy, and initially Khomeini refused. However, it was “hinted” to the radicals that they should storm the US Embassy and then present it as a fait accompli to the cleric.
    On 1 November 1979, protests around the US Embassy were the most intense so far, and to this day it is hard to comprehend why the 70+ Americans weren’t evacuated at that moment. On 4 November 1979, the radical students stormed the 27 acre complex that was the US Embassy; the Marines used tear gas to no avail. Khomeini didn’t order the attack, he but he most certainly didn’t try to stop it or end it.
    Khomeini concluded that it would be a poor political move to stay silent, so he publicly applauded the radicals, calling it a second revolution, and as a result, those radicals became instant national heroes. Khomeini had his finger on the pulse of the Iranian people, and he knew that the vast majority were anti-US. The storming of the US Embassy rallied Iranians to Khomeini’s fold, and he used the event to consolidate his power. The US hostages were never more than pawns in an internal power struggle in Iran.

Picture
    There were three American hostages in the Iranian foreign ministry, including Bruce Laingen, the high-level US official that warned Carter of the impending hostage crisis. Laingen was able to cable at least some of what he knew about what was happening to the American hostages in the US Embassy until the phone lines in the foreign ministry were cut in October 1980. Sixty-six Americans were initially taken hostage at the US Embassy, with Laingen (the highest-ranking diplomat taken hostage) and two other Americans held at the foreign ministry (they had to good fortune to be at that location when the attack occurred).
    Once Carter made it certain that he was unwilling to use military force to rescue the hostages, or even a show of force, he lost possible leverage with Iran. Carter was able to negotiate a peace between Egypt and Israel, but Khomeini so hated the US he refused to negotiate at all, which meant that Carter was powerless. The fact that the Carter administration had been outmaneuvered by a 76 year old Islamic radical cleric gave serious juice and momentum to Reagan’s Presidential campaign.
    Until Carter authorized the rescue mission in April 1980, he followed SecState Cyrus Vance’s advice of pursuing negotiations. The economic sanctions lacked bite since our traditional allies didn’t follow suit. Zbig wanted a blockade on Kharg Island, the nexus point for Iranian oil exports, the lifeblood of the nation’s economy. Zbig even suggested that the US heavily mine the harbor as well as the waters around Kharg Island.

          Addendum: The Media and the Iranian Hostage Crisis . . . 

0 Comments

President Carter and the Election of 1980, Part One

5/1/2019

0 Comments

 
Picture
   By the primaries in the Winter/Spring of 1980, Carter was no longer viewed as the Carter of 1976, but rather as an unlikable manipulative DC politician. Reagan’s optimistic nature was a huge obstacle for Carter to overcome with the electorate, so Carter decided to present a vision of the future that would draw a clear contrast to a Reagan Presidency. A major obstacle was that Reagan was a very formidable opponent, not just an optimist.
    Reagan didn’t wait long to place the “race card” in that Carter was a Southerner that was liberal on Civil Rights. The issue on which Reagan focused was forced (school) busing, which had become an incredibly contentious issue in cities such as Boston. Jordan warned Carter that his Southern base would become shaky when the average Southern voter realized that Carter was more liberal on social issues than he/she.
    Another flash point on which Reagan took advantage was affirmative action, which was a clash between overriding racial discrimination versus rewarding individual merit, which pitted two of Carter’s support groups against each other. African-American supporters of affirmative action were in opposition to white working class voters trying to move up the socioeconomic ladder. In essence what Reagan did was to draw Nixon’s “Silent Majority” into his fold in 1980 away from Carter, who had only partially drawn that huge voting bloc to his corner in 1976.

Picture
     Bakke v. California involved the Carter administration in that a brief had to be filed as a “friend of the Court”. Carter was in favor of affirmative action, but the proposed brief did not match Carter’s stance. That brief was written by a conservative holdover from the Nixon and Ford administrations and was a strong opponent of affirmative action. Of course the brief was leaked to the press, and of course all political hell broke loose. African-American pro-affirmative action groups told Carter that if the Supreme Court ruled against affirmative action it would be the equal of the Dred Scott Decision.
    A brief that Carter approved was submitted to the Court, arguing that race could be a factor in college admissions, but not the only factor. Carter also recommended that the case be sent back to the California courts. The
​8 - 1 Supreme Court decision in 1978 in favor of Bakke didn’t really settle the issue in that the eight justices in favor had different points-of-view and justifications; affirmative action to this day remains a political and legal conundrum.

    Carter was affected in that yet again nobody was happy with the President on the issue. Civil Rights activists wanted the government to promote opportunities for minorities, while the white middle class believed they were getting squeezed out by government actions that promoted minorities over them. All of that scurrilous hoo-haw undermined Carter’s white support nationwide as well as significant numbers of African-American voters.

Picture
     Reagan proclaimed fealty to states rights, which in 1980 was still the Southern code that justified the obstruction of Civil Rights. Added to the mix was the phrase created by the Reagan campaign of the fictitious “Welfare Queen”, which resonated with white voters nationwide. Reagan also used religion against Carter, which resulted in the huge evangelical voting bloc coming into his fold, away from the Southern Baptist Carter. Ironically, Reagan was not religious whereas Carter was extremely so.
    Complicating matters on the religious front for Carter was Roe v. Wade (1973) and the resulting “Pro-Life” movement which did not see any acceptable exceptions for abortion. Carter believed the issue was mostly a woman’s choice, but he opposed Medicaid spending for abortions; even so, Carter was directly in the crosshairs of the “Pro-Life” movement.
    By 1979, the Reverend Jerry Falwell had created a Political Action Committee (PAC) linked to the “Moral Majority” movement which served as a huge engine linking and mobilizing secular conservatives with conservative evangelicals in support of Reagan. The agenda of Falwell’s PAC even included building the B-1 bomber. Falwell wasn’t nationally-known until 1979, and it was during that year where he took to the airwaves (especially radio) and branded Carter as a traitor to the South, and that the President was no longer a Christian.
    Falwell often misquoted Carter in order to shape his agenda, and he only backed off when there was definitive proof (e.g. tapes) that showed Carter said nothing of the sort . . . but the political damage Falwell inflicted on Carter was severe. Reagan saw political opportunity and pounced, embracing the Moral Majority’s agenda. A month before Election Day 1980, Reagan spoke at Falwell’s college in Lynchburg, VA (Liberty University), which in essence cemented the evangelical voting bloc in Reagan’s corner.

Picture
     In addition to all the forces arrayed against Carter, his brother Billy  became an issue. Billy Carter actually decided to cozy up to the Libyan dictator Gadhafi, which became a political nightmare for Carter and a personal tragedy for Billy, who was thirteen years younger. Contrary to his hillbilly appearance, Billy was well-read and very smart, but he was very enabled by his mother (Miss Lilian), and the polar opposite of his very disciplined older brother. Complicating the relationship between the two, Billy never got over the decision that Carter would run the family business instead of him when their father died. After serving in the Marines (when Carter was governor of GA), Billy successfully ran the family business. Billy simply could not stand it that Carter was famous, but on the other hand he lavished in the attention that came his way since his older brother was the President of the United States.
    The media swarmed to Plains GA since Billy was great copy, and the spotlight became greater as did Billy’s consumption of alcohol. Billy loved his older brother even though he was jealous, and he campaigned for Carter in the South. However, Billy consistently became a liability to his brother when his efforts were not campaign-related, such as in 1978 when Billy made a highly-publicized trip to Libya with Georgia officials and business leaders eater to make deals with Ghadafi.
    To repay the hospitality of the Ghadafi, Billy hosted a delegation of Libyans in Atlanta, and when the media asked why he was doing so, Billy stated that there were far more Arabs than Jews, and that the Jewish media consistently “tore up” Arab nations. Billy also stated that compared to other dictators, at least Ghadafi admitted he sponsored terrorism. Hamilton Jordan was convinced that Billy had a perverse need to hurt his brother, in large part because the family business had been placed in a trust when Carter became President, which meant that Billy was out of a job.

Picture
     By March 1979, Billy was drinking even more and was admitted to an alcohol abuse center, and on his release he turned is attention back to the Libyans. Once the Iranian Hostage Crisis started, Carter was desperate for anyone of import to get through to Khomeini, which meant even Ghadafi was approached to be an intermediary. Rosalynn suggested that perhaps Billy’s Libyan connections could help, and Zbig agreed, which meant that Billy was going to be put in a situation far above his pay grade and abilities. Billy arranged for some Libyan officials to meet with Zbig at the White House for the first time since long before Carter was President (sidenote: Ghadafi temporarily seized the US Embassy in Tripoli earlier in 1980). The origin of what became known as “Billy-Gate”  occurred when the media discovered that Billy was paid $180,000 by Gadhafi. A month before the Election of 1980, Senate investigators cleared Carter and Billy of any wrongdoing, but the damage to Carter was done (Billy died of cancer in 1988 at the age of 51).
    The avalanche of disastrous news kept falling on Carter when the Mariel Boatlift Crisis with Fidel Castro occurred, and that human rights dilemma became a political nightmare for Carter in an election year. By the end of May 1980, 94,000 Cubans had landed in the US, mostly in Florida. As a result of the tens of thousands of Cuban refugees landing on US shores, the impression was that Carter had allowed into the US hordes of dangerous illegal immigrants. The Cuban-American community in Florida gave zero credit to Carter for doing the best he could in a no-win situation, and that bloc voted overwhelmingly for Reagan.

0 Comments

President Carter and the Iranian Hostage Crisis, Part Three

5/1/2019

0 Comments

 
       Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
     Despite all of the preparation and planning, everything that could go wrong went wrong at Desert One. One of the helicopters from the USS Nimitz had an engine warning light indicator activate, and the pilot went back to the Nimitz, which was procedure, but on a mission a pilot was expected to keep going. And, that specific helicopter had problems with its warning light before without any real engine problem occurring. As the first C-130 landed at Desert One, two separate sandstorms approached, which was bad news for the helicopters in that they could not be warned due to radio silence, and the pilots had to break out of formation to avoid colliding with each other.
    The first C-130 landed not on hard-packed desert, but on soft ankle-deep sand. Added to the misfortune was that a pickup truck was seen in the distance, and when it spotted the C-130, it reversed direction and sped away. Army Rangers gave chase, but they could not catch the pickup truck; it was assumed that they were smugglers, but the chance of losing the element of surprise was real. Then a bus loaded with Iranians on a pilgrimage headed towards the C-130, and as a result they were detained; the plan was to fly them out on a C-130, and when the mission was over, bring them back.


Picture
    Carter refused to authorize any military show-of-force (e.g. blowing up Iranian buildings because we could) other than Operation Eagle Claw. Carter asked the leader of the Delta Force contingent that was on mission how many helicopters were still active, and the total was down to six, the minimum required. SecState Vance commented that it was his experience that the military never said they could not do something, a lesson he learned as part of LBJ’s administration during the Vietnam War.
    Before the mission, helicopter pilots secretly practiced taking off, flying, and landing in deserts as early as December 1979. Delta One would ly helicopters to the desert location in Iran, where they would meet up with five C-130s with 50 Rangers and aviation fuel. The helicopters would refuel and hide under camouflage netting and the Rangers would secure site. The following day, Delta One would fly to a mountain hideaway, codenamed Desert Two, approximately fifty miles northeast of Teheran. The Green Berets were already at Deset Two with unmarked trucks from friendly Iranians. The Green Berets would use the trucks to head to the Foreign Ministry and rescue the three Americans held hostage, and the Deltas would rescue the 52 hostages at the US Embassy. Both groups would have Farsi-speaking operatives, a rarity in the CIA in 1980.

Picture
  A second helicopter experienced instrument failure in the sandstorm, which actually still left six helicopters active, and then another helicopter experienced partial hydraulic failure because a crew member placed his pack over the air blower coolant system vent. The problem was that the helicopter couldn’t be repaired because the spare parts were on the first helicopter that went back the USS Nimitz due to the engine warning indicator light. Now, officially, the mission was down to five helicopters. Carter was aware of the situation and he was prepared to take the blame . . . and then worse developments followed.
    While re-positioning a helicopter to permit another helicopter to top off its fuel tanks for the return flight, the pilot hovered about 15 feet above the desert floor, kicking up the fine sand in the air. A pilot in another helicopter that was picking up the crew from a disabled helicopter lowered his nose in the man-made sandstorm, and the rotors hit a wing of a C-130 on the ground. The helicopter lurched forward and crashed into the cockpit of the C-130; sparks from the collision started a horrific blaze that engulfed both aircraft. Eight US military men died, five were wounded as a result. The Iranian pilgrims were released and the remaining military men took the the bodies of those killed-in-action and those wounded-in-action and boarded the remaining C-130 and flew out of the area. With the time difference, the failed mission occurred at 10:30 am Washington, D.C. time, and Carter and the top members of the administration decided to keep following their normal schedules.

Picture
     At 4:30 pm in a campaign meeting in the Treaty Room, Carter took a call and was given the bad news of the aborted mission, and then shortly thereafter in another phone call he was notified of the 8 KIA. Carter faced another decision as to whether or not to send fighter planes to destroy the stranded helicopters in the desert in order to keep sensitive documents/information from being taken. Carter decided not to send in the fighter planes, mostly due to the Iranian pilgrims still being in the area, a decision based on humanitarian grounds on which critics pounced.
    All those in the Carter administration realized that whatever chances of victory the President had in the Election of 1980 were now over . Within hours after the aborted mission, the 52 hostages were blindfolded, separated, and then transported to various locations in Iran. The failed mission became the metaphor for all that was wrong with the Carter Presidency, with Carter getting no credit for the audacious effort.
    The real reason for the failure was, ironically, the lack of practice on the part of the military. Carter, a micromanaging detail man, left the details of the mission to the military planners, but there had never been this kind of coordination between Army Special Forces, Navy ships, Marines, Air Force helicopters, and C-130 cargo planes. There simply wasn’t enough, or perhaps any, practice involved with those separate military services.


Picture
    So the question was and is this: what went wrong with Operation Eagle Claw. Fear of leaks prevented joint military practice, and the chain of command was unclear. Security was valued over practice and execution, and the lack of inter-service cooperation was staggering. Some helicopter pilots were drunk or on drugs, and their overall skill-level, even with the ones that were sober, were not up to mission standards.
    On 25 April 1980 at 7 am, President Carter addressed the nation from the Oval Office about the failed rescue mission and the eight KIA. Carter stressed it was a humanitarian mission to rescue the 52 US hostages and he took full responsibility. On 30 April 1980, Carter announced that he was hitting the hustings (campaign trail) since the challenges of the nation were not “manageable enough”, which was a statement that didn’t resonate with millions of Americans.
    The one positive of the failed mission was the Goldwater-Nichols Act of 1986 which changed the way the separate military services interacted. The act created the Joint Special Operations Program (JSOP), which led to the coordinated mission to kill Osama bin Laden. The failed mission also helped convince Khomeini that he had squeezed as much use out of the hostages as he could, and he started to be at least somewhat amenable to negotiations for their release. It had also dawned on Khomeini that his government was viewed as a pariah state by most every nation around the world.


Picture
    During August 1980, “elections” were held in Iran, and the result was that Khomeini had complete control of the government, which meant the 52 US hostages no longer had any real value. Also by that time the US economic sanctions had actually started to be felt in Iran. The hostages, who had been scattered to various locations in Iran after the failed rescue attempt, were now brought back to Teheran and placed in a prison where they could hear Iranian prisoners screaming when tortured.
    Afraid that a resurgent Shiite Iran would undermine his Sunni political base in Iraq, Saddam Hussein ordered his army to invade Iran on 22 September 1980. HIs official reason was a territorial dispute with Iran on coastal land in the Persian Gulf. Had Iraq not invaded Iran, there was every reason to believe that the hostages would have been released before Election Day 1980. Due to the invasion, the hostages were no longer even remotely a priority to Khomeini, but he wrongly assumed that Carter was behind Iraq’s decision to invade, which eventually meant that Khomeini would not release the hostages as long as Carter remained in office.
    Carter decided to allow arms shipments to Iran that had been tabled, hoping doing so would lead to the release of the hostages, but the most-desired weapons that Iran wanted were not shipped (e.g. radar guided missiles). If Carter had less scruples than Reagan in terms of providing weapons to rogue nations, the hostages could have very well been released before Election Day. In the end, Khomeini refused to allow the hostages to leave Iranian airspace until Reagan was inaugurated on 20 January 1981 Rumors swirled of an “October Surprise” in that Reagan supposedly told Iran that he would ship all of the weapons that they were expecting. Adding credence to the conspiracy theory was the Republican Vice-Presidential candidate, George HW Bush, disappeared from the campaign and was in Paris; subsequent Congressional hearings found no malfeasance.
    Even after losing the Election of 1980, Carter and his administration worked hard to gain the release of the hostages on their watch. But Khomeini never forgave Carter for empowering and then enabling the Shah of Iran; the radical cleric wished Carter ill at every turn.


0 Comments

President Carter and the Election of 1980, Part Two

5/1/2019

0 Comments

 
       Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
     In the weeks before the election, the Democratic coalition had fractured and the Republicans had united under Reagan’s aggressive-yet-easy-to-understand brand of conservatism. Reagan’s economic program is remains Republican orthodoxy to this day. The theory is that deep tax cuts for the wealthy would lead to job growth, which would then lead to more consumption (consumer spending), and then to increased government revenue. A little-known economist named Arthur Laffer (of the Laffer Curve) offered the American people the theory that they could have their cake and eat it too, in that lower taxes would lead to economic growth. Republican candidate George H.W. Bush derided the theory as “Voodoo Economics” in the primaries, but soon enough it became the mantra of not only the Republican Party, but also of Wall Street and Main Street. In an election year, the Republican economic program seemed like an easy remedy for never-ending Stagflation.
    The year 1980 marked a reversal of party practices and traditions, in that traditionally Democrats were the party of programs/initiatives while the Republicans were the budget-balancers (w/ the exception of Nixon). Now Carter was the budget-balancer and Reagan was the one with the program. Carter was a New Democrat that was unable to articulate a framework that voters could appreciate and and understand during harsh economic times, while in comparison the Republicans had an easy time selling lower taxes and economic growth.
    Reagan was optimistic and kept talking about a great future for America while Carter preached sacrifice and limits, coming off as a “Public Scold” from the Bible Belt. Nevermind that the Republican program of lower taxes (“Supply Side Economics”, a.k.a. “Reaganomics”) led to insanely high deficits in the 1980s; in the 1980 campaign, Americans preferred Reagan’s optimism and remedies far more than Carter’s realism.

Picture
     In a normal election year Reagan probably wouldn’t have been nearly as popular, and perhaps one could even argue he may have been unelectable. However, Stagflation and the Iranian Hostage Crisis (among many other reasons) dramatically changed the political landscape. Reagan proved to not only be beyond-attractive to the vast majority of voters, but also very charismatic person and an adroit politician, and he had a message that resonated. Also, the nation as a whole since the mid-1960s had started to trend towards conservatism: Reagan’s conservative beliefs weren’t much different from Goldwater’s in 1964, but the nation had changed greatly in the intervening years, and Reagan was far more likeable as a candidate than Goldwater.
    The only real strategy employed against Reagan by the Carter campaign was to try and play the “fear card”, which meant the overall strategy of the Democrats was negative. Painting Reagan as a wild-eyed out-of-control conservative like Goldwater didn’t work; that same strategy was used by the Democrats in 2016 against President Trump, and again it failed miserably. Reagan enlisted an expert in Presidential campaigning, James Baker III, who had learned much from Ford’s loss to Carter in 1976 when he was Ford’s campaign manager. Baker kept the Reagan campaign focused on the economy and the so-called “Misery Index”.
    The 28 October 1980 Presidential debate between Carter and Reagan proved decisive, in part because Carter and his campaign staff were outsmarted by Baker in terms of the timing of the debate. As Baker well knew a week before the election, a Reagan landslide was not a foregone conclusion. The race was close until the debate put Reagan ahead for good, and still the polls swung back to Carter in that short period of time . . . until Carter’s reaction to a last-minute offer from Iran sealed his fate.

Picture
     The advice that Carter received in the Democratic primaries was to debate Senator Ted Kennedy, and then Reagan, anywhere and anytime using the strength of the Presidency to his advantage . . . but Carter refused to do so. On 21 September 1980, Reagan debated John Anderson (the independent Presidential candidate), and in essence taunted Carter for his absence. In terms of being on the political attack, Carter was never good at wielding a stiletto, and his attacks on Reagan were shrill and personal. During September/October 1980, Reagan insisted that any future Presidential debate should include Anderson, while Carter’s campaign insisted on excluding Anderson. Baker (as well as others in the campaign) felt that Reagan would not match up well to Carter’s overall knowledge, and might lose the debate with an embarrassing stumble on nationwide television. Reagan’s pollster had the race very close, and he told Reagan he needed to debate Carter. Baker, while worried, knew that Reagan was a master of television, and that he would come out ahead of Carter in the debate based on perception, image, and appeal.
    Carter was pushed into a dilemma once Anderson’s poll numbers fell, and Reagan accepted Carter’s terms, which meant that the debate would occur very close to the election, something that worried Caddell a great deal. As it turned out, Carter would be no match for Reagan in a televised Presidential debate. Reagan almost playfully swatted away Carter’s verbal jabs (“There you go again . . .”), and Reagan closed by asking Americans if they were better off now than they were four years ago. Reagan successfully dispelled the “fear factor” that the Carter campaign had trumpeted; Reagan’s optimistic and avuncular manner on television turned the campaign on a dime. A record 100 million Americans watched the debate. Going into the debate, Reagan held a narrow lead in the polls by 2 or 3 points, but after the debate, his lead rose to several points; usually debates don’t move the polls, but this debate certainly did. As a result, Carter’s strategy shifted to the “risk factor” if Reagan became President.

Picture
    Several years after the election, it was proven that the Reagan campaign had in its possession a stolen “Debate Book” from the Carter campaign, which was confirmed to Eizenstat by Baker. Even though Baker claimed the book didn’t help Reagan, Carter believed that it made a huge difference in the outcome of the debate. How Reagan gained the debate book illustrated how his campaign operated, but Ted Kennedy was involved as well, desperately wanting Carter to lose.
    William Casey (a future Director of the CIA), literally dropped the debate book on Baker’s desk and told Baker that he didn’t want to know where it came from. The story leaked in 1983, and resulted in a ten month Congressional investigation, where Casey denied ever giving the book to Baker, while Baker testified that he had seen the debate book. The investigation never determined who actually stole the debate book from the Carter campaign. Almost thirty years came the truth, and what made the theft possible were rogue elements within the Kennedy campaign that truly hated Carter. While never proven beyond a doubt, it seems that there were Kennedy people in the Carter administration that made the theft possible.

Picture
     Nevertheless, Carter made a comeback in the polls in the days leading up to the election, but one more misstep by the President led to electoral disaster. In the early morning of the Sunday before the election, Iran made another offer: their parliament had voted to release the hostages but only if certain conditions were met. Carter publicly suspended his campaign to go back to DC, which was the worst thing the President could have done that close to the election. Even the First Lady told Carter to stay on the campaign trail, but Carter refused to follow that sage advice.
    As far as the media (and the public) was concerned, Carter had cried wolf before on the potential release of the hostages, and not it appeared he might be doing so to garner votes, which wasn’t true at all. In effect, Khomeini was interfering with the election, and Carter totally enabled Khomeini without wanting to do so. Iran wanted a yes-or-no answer to their offer by Monday, the day before the election, and to Carter’s credit he refused to play ball, knowing it was nothing more than a political trap. Carter told the media that the offer was a step forward but it wasn’t close to an acceptable agreement, which was a statement that he could have made from the campaign trail.
    Carter had one last chance on that Sunday when he returned to Chicago to campaign. Carter was advised to give a very angry public reply to Iran, but Carter was worried that Iran’s response would be taken out on the hostages. Carter appeared on television, interrupting a Redskins game, to make a mild statement on the Iranian offer that featured no anger at all. Carter’s decisions to go back to DC and make a tepid television appearance reminded voters of the humiliation of the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and those voters figuratively threw up their hands and gave up on Carter.

Picture
    On Election Day, Caddell let Carter et al know that as of the previous Saturday the polls had been very close, but after Sunday, the polls once again had Reagan in the lead by a significant margin. One voter told Caddell “that little son-of-a-bitch can’t handle a two-bit ayatollah, I’ll take my chances with Reagan”. Americans didn’t blame Carter for the hostages being taken but for the disgrace and humiliation for not being able to resolve the crisis.
    Carter didn’t even wait for the polls to close in the western states before he called Reagan to concede, and then he informed the media of his concession. Speaker of the House Tip O’Neill fumed from his home in Cambridge (MA), telling a pro-Carter Democrat in the House that the “Carter Bunch” came in like a bunch of jerks and went out the same way. It was a landslide for Reagan in virtually every electoral measure, with Reagan receiving 489 Electoral Votes (and 44 states) to Carter’s 49 (6 states + DC). However, Reagan only had .507 of the popular vote, but he had a margin of 8.5+ million votes over Carter.
    O’Neill, over his Election Night hissy fit, told Carter that history would treat him well. Carter exercised the full powers of the Presidency until the moment he could do so no longer. When the hostages were allowed to leave Iranian air space on Inauguration Day 1981, Reagan graciously offered Carter the use of Air Force One to go to West Germany to greet the hostages. Among those with Carter was Mondale, and at Rhein-Main Air Force Base in West Germany, some of the hostages tearfully embraced Carter while others, angry at their long captivity, refused to interact with the former President.

0 Comments

President Carter and the Iranian Hostage Crisis, Part Two

5/1/2019

0 Comments

 
        Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
    With the military option(s) tabled, Carter surprised Khomeini by issuing a Presidential directive that banned all crude oil imports from Iran. Ten days after the hostages were taken, Iran announced its intention to withdraw all it financial deposits out of US banks, but Carter was ready, and he signed an Executive Order freezing $10 billion in Iranian deposits in US banks; Carter extended the order to cover Iran’s dollar deposits in branches and subsidiaries of US banks abroad. There were howls of protests inside the US that Carter went too far, but freezing Iran’s financial assets clearly hurt Khomeini.
    The problem after that was there were very few viable options that would get Khomeini’s attention other than military options. Grasping at straws, on 28 November 1979 Carter suggested that Muhammad Ali go to Teheran to negotiate, since he was a world-famous figure and a Muslim. Ali went to Teheran, but nothing came of his high-profile visit to Iran. Using dormant back channels, the CIA communicated with Yasser Arafat (leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the PLO), who saw an opportunity to ingratiate himself with the US. Arafat communicated with Khomeini, and thirteen US hostages were released in the next few weeks. Iran announced the release and pointed out that all were African-Americans, released because they lived under tyranny in America.
    Carter then tried to find another home for the Shah, figuring that if bringing in the Shah to the US caused the Iranian Hostage Crisis, then getting the Shah out of the US would mean their release. The only positive response in terms of agreeing to allow the Shah to enter their nation was Egypt’s Anwar Sadat. The Shah eventually returned to Egypt, and he died in that nation with 52 US hostages still in captivity in Iran.

Picture
    As the weeks passed in Iran, the hostages became more of a burden than a boon, and government officials started negotiations with the Carter administration (e.g. Hamilton Jordan), but Khomeini wouldn’t budge. Jordan had to travel in disguise supplied by the CIA so his presence in Iran wasn’t noticed by especially the media. During March and April 1980, Jordan appeared to come close to a negotiated release, but again to no avail; as always, the obstacle to any success with negotiations was Khomeini.
  With that failure, Carter decided that diplomacy was no longer the lead option in that it finally became obvious to the President that whomever the US talked to did not actually represent Khomeini. Jordan realized that the only resolution was to occur when Khomeini viewed the hostages as more of a cost than a benefit. The Iran-Iraq War began in September 1980, and that was when it became clear to Khomeini that he needed to release the hostages soon in order to stop the US sanctions that limited Iran’s ability to secure spare parts for the US aircraft that was already in their possession.
    After the head of the Council of Jewish Federations, a US citizen, was executed by Khomeini in Teheran after trying to negotiate the release of the hostages, Carter, on 27 November 1979, issued Executive Order #12172 which expelled all non-resident Iranians from the US. That Executive Order also suspended visas for new arrivals, which affected thousands of Iranian students that had fled Khomeini’s reign of terror as well as Iranians that were Jews. All of those Iranians were at risk to be deported back to Iran.

Picture
   Carter wanted exceptions based on humanitarian grounds, which was quickly announce publicly, but was also very vague. Complicating matters was that it was very difficult for US officials to distinguish between non-threatening Iranian Jews and Iranian radicals. The US government was not yet ready to declare the targeted Iranian population in America refugees, still hoping at that point for a diplomatic resolution to the hostage crisis.
    Complications seemed endless in that 56,000 Iranian students were in the US, with 7000 of them in violation of their visas, and many others with invalid passports. Some had already been deported, and for those about to be deported, the only acceptable exceptions were if there was family in the US, a legitimate medical reason, or seeking asylum. There was also the reality that their families were still in Iran, and the problem of how to get them out of that nation. Eizenstat, among others, tried to come up with creative solutions so innocent Iranian Jews (and others) weren’t sent back to Iran under Carter’s Executive Order.
​   To Eizenstat, seeking asylum was the key, but he wondered how long the bureaucratic red tape would take with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS). Eizenstat had the idea that Iranian asylum applicants remain in bureaucratic limbo until the situation in Iran became more stable. The Director of the INS said that under those circumstances, the status of those seeking asylum would be static, in that their paperwork would be “accidentally” lost in the bureaucratic process, which meant they could legally remain in America.

Picture
   However that solution did not solve the problem of those that had left Iran and wanted to enter the US. The Director of the INS said that the same principles applied to them in terms of asylum. Colleges and universities were notified that Iranian students that were a member of a minority religious group in Iran (e.g. Jews) were exempt from Carter’s order, and an exemption was also made for those that had recently graduated. All of this had to be conducted under the radar by the US government and the involved institutions, which meant that Carter’s administration didn’t receive any public credit for literally saving the lives of tens of thousands of innocent people, most of them Jews. When Carter ran for re-election in 1980, he received the lowest-ever voter support from Jewish votes of any Democratic candidate for President in US History.
    When Reagan took office on 20 January 1981, his administration soon noticed the unprocessed INS applications and denied a significant number. Eizenstat, back in the private sector, knew a person in Reagan’s Circle of Trust, and clued him in as to what was really going on, and the bureaucratic delays continued. By the early months of 1980, it had become obvious that diplomatic efforts, international pressure, and economic sanctions were having no effect, and Carter started to work on a very different kind of solution to end the hostage crisis. Zbig, from the day the hostages were taken, started a secret military committee which met often, and their task was to plan a rescue operation.


Picture
     Under the plan that came to pass, a small Cessna would be flown over isolated Iranian territory to find a remote location from where to launch a rescue mission. The desert ground had to be firm for C-130 cargo planes that would carry people (including the hostages) as well as fuel and equipment for helicopters. Another Cessna landed in locations to make sure that the heavy H-53 US helicopters could land and take-off in the desert (Desert Two) with 50+ hostages as well as fuel for the helicopters so they could reach the aircraft carrier and safety (after dropping off the hostages at Desert One).
    Carter was apprised of a specific acceptable location that was designated Desert One, and the mission was codenamed Operation Eagle Claw. It was a daunting mission in that the US Embassy was totally surrounded by the city of Teheran, and further lengthening the odds against success was that the Pentagon had zero plans and soldiers trained for a mission such as this, even though other nations (most famously Israel with Operation Entebbe), had such forces.
    In 1975, Delta Force was created, designed to be a top secret US Army covert strike force, which had at its disposal about 100 planes and helicopters. The Israeli architects of the raid on Entebbe were asked for their advice, and they stated that the location of the US Embassy made rescue impossible. One of the few factors that were in Carter’s favor was the target date of 24 April 1980, in that by then the captors had become prisoners of monotony and they were the farthest thing from trained crack troops. So, a quick surprise raid from Delta Force, it was surmised, could penetrate the embassy grounds and overwhelm the captors, and the hostages could be rescued.

Picture
     Due to intelligence from a former Pakistani cook from the embassy, Delta Force could blast a hole in a specific location of the building in which the hostages were held and call in the helicopters already in route from Desert Two. Those helicopters would land in the embassy parking lot and a nearby soccer field, and after the hostages were on board, head to Desert One, destroy the helicopters on the ground, and the hostages and the military personnel would board the C-130s.
    The problem, contrary to the criticism afterwards, was that there were not too few helicopters, since Carter had authorized a total of eight, using six and keeping two in tow just in case. Eight helicopters were the maximum that could be on the deck of an aircraft carrier and not be detected by the USSR. To Zbig, the major problem was there were no plans for ancillary strikes to distract and misdirect the Iranian government and military; also, there was no plan to address the humiliation Carter would face if the mission failed.

Picture
     Carter had it set up that if the mission succeeded, the military would be lauded, and if it failed, he would take responsibility, which impressed the military organizers/leaders to no end. The rescue mission was seen as the last resort by the Carter administration, which in part explained why eight helicopters took off from the USS Nimitz, two more than the original plan. However, there were too many moving parts, and nobody in the planning meetings asked the questions of what should be done if the mission failed. SecState Vance believed that the mission would fail, and would lead to even worse relations with Iran; he resigned due to the rescue operation being authorized and carried out.
    On 24 April 1980 after over six months of planning, Operation Eagle Claw commenced. It took two weeks to get all the parts and personnel in place for the two night mission, including 132 Deltas, 13 Green Berets, 6 C-130s, 2 C-141 Starlifter strategic airlift planes, 8 RH-3 helicopters, and a secretly created airstrip at Desert One with landing lights . . .

0 Comments

President Carter and Iran, Part Two

4/27/2019

0 Comments

 
      Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
     Carter didn’t help the Shah of Iran when the President made a New Year’s Eve visit to Teheran in 1977. During the state dinner that night, Carter went off-script during his remarks, calling the Shah an “Island of Stability” in a “turbulent corner of the world”. At the time, Carter believed the whole event was a great gala in that he was the 7th President to have successfully dealt w/ the Shah, and there were many other dignitaries in attendance such as King Hussein of Jordan and    Walter Cronkite of CBS News. With 20-20 hindsight, Carter’s remarks were viewed as remarkably naive, and those words intensified the fires of revolution in Iran.
    As early as 7 January 1978, protests started against the Shah in Iran that gained in momentum and intensity as the weeks passed, with Khomeini pulling many of the strings from exile. To the CIA, the protests were a result of the Shah’s modernization, not his close ties with the US. So, the question for Carter was how best to respond to events in Iran that called into question four decades of unwavering support for the Shah, and a large part of that answer was that Carter approved most of the Shah’s military requests. The forces loyal to Khomeini sensed weakness in the Shah, and it would be the Islamic radicals, not the secular opposition, that would seize power after the Shah left Iran. On 5 September 1978, thousands of protesters filled Jaleh Square in Teheran, and the Iranian army killed hundreds.

Picture
   On 10 October 1978, the Shah met with the US Ambassador to Iran, and openly wondered if he should allow Khomeini back in the nation as well as wondering if his military was still loyal. Then inexplicably, the Shah asked Saddam Hussein to relocate Khomeini; the Iraqi dictator was only more than happy to get rid of the cleric. Khomeini was advised by an Iranian nationalist that was with him at the time to go to France instead of a Muslim nation such as Algeria, knowing that Khomeini would have a world stage and that a media circus would ensue. When Khomeini asked France for permission to enter, France agreed as long as the Shah did as well, and the Shah did just than, sealing his fate.
    Ironically, Khomeini would take full advantage of the freedom of the press in France which was something he would not allow once he established an Islamic State in Iran. Khomeini located himself just outside Paris on property owned by an Iranian activist, and Khomeini erected a tent on the grounds for prayers, sermons, and especially for media events. Every day Khomeini’s entourage updated the cleric on what had been done and said by the Shah and President Carter.

Picture
    It was about at that time that (what would become) the Revolutionary Guard was created around Khomeini, which would defend the Islamic Revolution from internal enemies. The CIA didn’t know about the brewing revolution in Iran, the Shah’s illness, or Khomeini’s activities in France, even though the cleric’s speeches were in the public record and all over the media. Just like Adolf Hitler and Mein Kampf and the Weimar Republic, there wasn’t any understanding by the US government of Khomeini’s end game. Many of those around Khomeini regarded him as only a figurehead that would inspire revolution, not someone that would actually take the reins of power afterwards.
   After the Watergate Scandal, the CIA no longer used assassination as a tool, so other eans had to be used to contain Khomeini. US diplomats could have pressured the French government to refuse Khomeini’s request to return to Iran, and the CIA could have spied on Khomeini and gathered quality intelligence. Carter was preoccupied with among other things finalizing the treaty between Egypt and Israel, and Carter hadn’t yet held a specific meeting regarding the Shah and the situation in Iran, in large part because he wasn’t properly apprised of the increasingly revolutionary atmosphere in Iran.

Picture
     On 5 November 1978, events in Iran took a turn for the worse when the army fired on students at Teheran University, and soon afterward attacks on Western hotels/businesses were encouraged by the mullahs. The British Embassy was burned and overrun while the US Embassy in Teheran was threatened, yet the Shah did not crack down on the violence. Instead, the Shah turned over the government to his generals, which showed even more weakness. The demonstrations resumed in late-November 1978 which included oil field strikes which led to the 2nd Oil Shock of the 1970s in the US. Carter was very irate on 9 November 1978 when a cable from the US Ambassador in Iran made its way to the White House which stated that events had reached a boiling point in Iran, and that the US should abandon the Shah. The reason why Carter was upset was that the cable was the first instance in which he found out what was really occurring in Iran. Whether or not he realized it,  Carter had stayed in the Shah’s corner far too long, constantly expressing public confidence on his behalf.
    Carter asked Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd (D; WVA), who was already in the Middle East, to travel to Teheran, as was SecTreas Blumenthal, and both separately reported dire news. Added to the mix was another unscripted blunder by Carter. On 7 December 1978, Carter was asked by a reporter if the Shah could survive the revolution, and Carter in effect disavowed the Shah, saying that the situation was in the hands of the Iranian people. Whether or not Carter knew it, that statement meant that he had in effect endorsed the revolution in Iran.

Picture
    In the end, both the Shah and the US government were outmaneuvered by Khomeini, who masterfully manipulated the extremists in the revolution, the same faction that would overrun the US Embassy. Khomeini, following wise advice, did not declare a holy war in Iran, which almost certainly would have led to the revolution losing momentum and credibility, since non-radical Muslims and secular Iranians opposed to the Shah would have been locked out of the revolution, and eventually targeted. Instead, Khomeini ordered a far more passive-aggressive strategy that involved encouraging Iranians to stop paying for their utilities and to not show up for work, especially government jobs. Also, Khomeini wanted Iranians to ask soldiers why they were killing fellow citizens in an effort to divide/distract the army; that strategy paid of handsomely, giving far more Iranians than otherwise a chance to be directly part of the revolution. Strikes broke out across Iran and tens of thousands demonstrated in the streets; the revolution spread unchecked.
    As the Shah’s regime crumbled, on 27 December 1978 he appointed a new prime minister, but at that point the Shah only had two choices: leave the nation or crack down hard with the military. At the same time, Khomeini was trumpeting to the world’s media that he would allow free elections in his Islamic State as well as other freedoms (e.g. freedom of the press). On 16 January 1979, the Shah left Iran, and also on that day Carter admitted to Congressional leaders that there was nothing the US could do and that he didn’t know how events would play out in Iran.
    When the Shah left the throne after 37 years in power (technically, he didn’t actually renounce his throne), he blamed everyone but himself, and by that point, he was well past the point of being willing-and-able to shed oceans of blood to hang on to power. Carter was accused of “losing” Iran, which simply wasn’t true, just as Truman never “lost” China in 1949. The Shah lost his own nation, and there were limits to what a President could do to change or maintain a regime, as was seen in the early-1960s with Fidel Castro in Cuba. But the Carter administration didn’t exactly cover themselves with glory, with the lack of quality intelligence concerning Iran  the most glaring example.

0 Comments

President Carter and Iran, Part One

4/19/2019

0 Comments

 
      Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
    Except for the fall of the Soviet Union, the Iranian Revolution in 1979 was the most significant geopolitical event after World War II. Almost overnight Iran went from a key US ally in the Middle East to a sworn enemy. For Westerners, it is important to remember that Iran’s Persian history and culture are totally different from Arab history and culture. When Persia abandoned Zoroastrianism for Islam, the choice was the Shia sect by the powers-that-be. The Shia (Shiite) sect was a fierce antagonist to secular authority and foreign influences, whether Christian or Sunni Muslims.
    British colonialism in  Iran meant that by 1925 a ruling family, the Pahlavi Dynasty, had been endorsed by the Crown. The Shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, took the Peacock Throne under the 1906 constitution. The Shah modernized Iran and repressed powerful religious leaders/groups. In 1941, the son, Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (age 21) took the throne as the
Shah of Iran, and for the next decade, Iran was at least nominally a constitutional monarchy in the image of Great Britain.

Picture
    Since the Pahlavi Dynasty had been installed by a foreign power, the legitimacy of the ruling family was questioned by many Iranians. The Shah tried to improve his power base by negotiating better terms for Iranian oil with the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, with the support of the US who did not want the USSR to become a major player in the region. Britain offered Iran a 50 - 50 split on the oil profits which was refused, and days later the Shah’s prime minister was assassinated after he refused to nationalize the oil company.
    Mohammed Mossadegh then became prime minister, who from the beginning had been opposed to the Pahlavi Dynasty. Mossadegh became a serious threat not only to the Shah but also to the strategic interests of Britain and the US. Winston Churchill (back as British PM in 1951) and the Eisenhower administration launched a non-violent coup in 1953 that returned the Shah to power in Iran; the US role in bringing back the Shah was embedded in the fabric of Iran’s national consciousness. As early as 1953, the US had started to become the “Great Satan” to Iran’s Muslim clerics.

Picture
      The Shah became increasingly autocratic, and loaded with money from Iran’s oil sales, he modernized Iran (including women’s rights) while at the same time using his secret police in a reign of terror to repress any opposition. By the mid-1970s, the Shah’s base of support in Iran was disappearing at a rapid rate. One opposing voice stood out from the rest that called for an Islamic Republic, the cleric Ruhollah Khomeini, who had great influence as a grand ayatollah. The disparate groups that were arrayed against the Shah rallied around Khomeini, and in 1964 the Shah had Khomeini arrested and sent into exile after the secret police eliminated key opposition leaders.
    Khomeini was exiled in the Iraqi city of Najaf, a city holy to Shiites. Khomeini kept speaking out against the Shah’s corruption and ties to Israel and the US, and he further developed the idea of an Islamic State, which was revolutionary even  by conservative Islamic standards. While Khomeini was in eile and “above” politics, like-minded clerics in Iran started to politically organize, which meant that there was a ready stable of disciples on hand if Khomeini returned.
    When Carter was inaugurated on 20 January 1977, there wasn’t a blip on the US radar that indicated that the Shah of Iran was in trouble, but the warning signs were there to be read. As the Cold War intensified, the Shah became the darling of US Presidents due to the vast amounts of oil exported from Iran as well as Iran being a barrier against the USSR in the Middle East. President Carter inherited that relationship and situation concerning Iran from previous Presidents.

Picture
     The Shah made a state visit to the US in November 1977, and the Shah was received with great fanfare, but there were demonstrations against the Shah in Lafayette Park across from the White House, even before the Shah arrived. The demonstrations turned into riots, where tear gas had to be used, and the wind blew the tear gas towards Carter and the Shah during their press conference, where everyone in attendance felt the effects. The events of that day foreshadowed trouble. Carter knew that the Shah was a crucial ally and that Iran supplied half of Israel’s oil, so it was only in private where Carter brought up to the Shah his concerns about human rights . . . the Shah resented the inference and interference.
    Carter believed that the Shah was so isolated that he had no idea what was happening under his nose in his own nation, believing that the opposition to his rule was from very small and insignificant minority. By the Fall of 1978, Zbig had started to realize that he wasn’t getting all of what he needed to know from US intelligence regarding developments in Iran.

Picture
     At that point one could fill an ocean with what the US government didn’t know about what was going on in Iran, which resulted in one of the greatest intelligence failures in US History. Even the Director of the CIA at the time admitted later that the CIA had miserably failed President Carter. For decades, the Shah’s rule had been so absolute and stable that the CIA simply didn’t see the need for agents in Iran, which meant that the US government knew nothing about the internal politics in play or what was happening on the ground in Iran; after all, the Shah had his secret police for to deal with those things. The CIA’s assets in Iran were focused across the border with the USSR.
    In short, the CIA and the US government simply believed the Shah when he said he had everything under control in Iran, but the Shah was indecisive, ill, vain, and isolated, and by the time all that became apparent to Carter, it was too late. The Shah’s failing health played a huge role in his downfall, since nobody in Iran, or even in his family, knew that he had cancer.

0 Comments

President Carter & the USSR Invasion of Afghanistan

4/14/2019

0 Comments

 
       Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
  The Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan began during Christmas time in 1979 when USSR special forces parachuted into Kabul, assassinated the Afghani prime minister, and installed a Soviet puppet. The USSR invasion of Afghanistan occurred just weeks after dozens of Americans were taken hostage in Teheran, Iran. Afghanistan, far from a stable nation-state, is really a collection of tribes in constant conflict, and therefore has often been a black hole for aspiring/expanding empires.
  By 1973 Afghanistan had been unofficially partitioned, with the USSR running the show in every region except the eastern part of the nation. By 1978 Afghanistan had in essence two rival governments, and the USSR favored the side that spoke their Communist language. During February 1979, the US Ambassador to Afghanistan was kidnapped and then killed in the crossfire of a rescue attempt by the Afghan government backed by USSR advisors, which deteriorated US/USSR relations even further. It was at that time that Leonid Brezhnev, the Soviet premier, warned Afghanistan to get their house in order to avoid civil war or the USSR might be drawn in even further.
    By the Spring of 1979, Zbig had started to press Carter to provide financial assistance for the mujahideen (the self-described “Holy Warriors” of Islam, which soon enough included Osama bin Laden) and six months before the USSR’s invasion, the mujahideen had started to receive US money/aid. By September 1979 the USSR had become paranoid that the current Afghan government was seeking alliances with Pakistan, China, and even the US.

Picture
     On 14 September 1979, the CIA sent out an alert warning that the USSR was seriously considering an invasion in order to “stabilize” the Afghan government. On 3 November 1979, Brezhnev briefed Carter that Soviet advisors had been sent to Afghanistan in infused/embedded in the nation’s defense department and military leadership. On 19 December 1979, the CIA reported USSR mobilization on the Afghan forder, and on 22 December 1979 the National Security Agency reported their conclusion that the USSR would cross the border within 72 hours; two days later the NSA gave a 15 hour warning concerning the invasion that proved to be accurate.
    The USSR invasion of Afghanistan began on 25 December 1979, with Soviet propaganda falsely stating that the existing government had “invited” them. To President Carter, the invasion represented an actual threat to US national security, in that to Carter it looked like the USSR was moving on the
Persian Gulf. Carter, on the Red Phone, made it clear to Brezhnev that any move on the Persian Gulf would be considered an attack by the USSR on the US. Zbig drew a straight line from Afghanistan to the Strait of Hormuz, and Carter fully agreed.

    Carter wanted punitive action(s) that would be broadly supported against the USSR, with the US in the lead but followed/supported by many other nations, and those proposed actions fell into political, economic, and military categories.  Direct military intervention was out of the question, so the plan was to deny the USSR the Persian Gulf and Iran. Carter increased and expanded the US Navy’s presence in the Indian Ocean and the Persian Gulf while increasing military support to Pakistan.

Picture
     Carter authorized the creation of the Rapid Deployment Force (RDF) to be quickly sent to areas where the US didn’t have any military bases in a friendly nation. Another military decision was to continue to support the mujahideen against the USSR-backed Afghan forces. The entire process had to remain covert so as not to provoke the USSR. The US secretly sent Soviet-made weapons to the mujahideen mostly through Pakistan, which eventually included Stinger missiles.
    Of all the actions taken by the Carter administration against the USSR, the most controversial and contentious were the grain embargo, the boycott of the 1980 Summer Olympics in Moscow, and draft registration. The embargo on grain sales to the USSR proved to be very difficult to make a reality, in part because the American agricultural sector felt that it had been forced to unfairly sacrifice. It wasn’t politically helpful that during his campaign in 1976, Carter made clear his opposition to grain embargoes. As someone that had been part of the world of agriculture in Georgia, Carter knew that farmers would be hit very hard. America had been the #1 grain supplier to the USSR since the early-1970s, and with the Iowa caucus coming up very soon, Carter had to decide whether or not to allow currently approved shipments of grain to the USSR before playing hardball.
    Carter wanted to stop shipments of grain immediately, but could he do so with a stroke of his pen? Could Carter void an agreement in place from the Ford administration which meant that grain still due to the USSR had to be shipped; so far only about half of that agreed-upon amount of grain had been transported.  And who should make the decision concerning the ports where the grain was ready to be shipped: the President or the dockworkers union (e.g. in CA), and how would Brezhnev regard either group. And finally, what was the legal position of the White House in terms of canceling existing contracts with the USSR concerning grain.

Picture
     Vice-President Walter Mondale and many others in the government interpreted the existing agreement in a way in which the US didn’t have to lift a finger to export more than the already-agreed-upon eight tons. However, if the US didn’t finish transporting what was already in motion, the US would be far more negatively affected than the USSR. So, how could the government help farmers who would lose their future market to the USSR without increasing surpluses and driving down prices. Carter was willing to use taxpayer money to buy US grain and store it, but was Carter willing to use food as a weapon even though he was a champion of human rights, and how would other nations view the US as a result.
    Carter wanted an operational grain embargo by 3 January 1980, and was basically not interested in the finer details of making it work; arguments that the US was shooting itself in the foot did not register with the President. Carter acted quickly and decisively, but without vetting and coordinating with the necessary key government departments. Carter justified the embargo by stating that the US access to oil was potentially at risk. Carter went further, saying that unchecked Soviet aggression would become a contagious disease
    Carter, in an election year, was trying to balance the legal limits of economic sanctions versus national security interests, and there were countervailing arguments to every option that was examined. But Argentina wouldn’t play ball with the US since the Argentine military government decided that it would be a good time to make more money by selling grain to the USSR and to pay back Carter for meddling in their nation’s internal affairs in promoting human rights. Argentina had nine million tons of grain and were ready to sell all of it to the USSR.


Picture
     The Carter administration simply did not think that Argentina had the possible capacity to have that much grain  ready to ship to the USSR; such it was when decision-making was done so fast that the relevant details were not accounted for. At an earlier summit in Brussels, Canada, Australia, and Argentina had promised that they wouldn’t sell grain to the USSR< but now Argentina was reneging on that agreement. Just a few days later, USSR negotiators went to Argentina, as did US negotiators to keep the shipment of grain from occurring; the Argentine government ignored the US representatives. In the end, the USSR was only able to purchase seven million tons from Argentina. Carter was seen in the US as penalizing farmers far more than the USSR, but the prices of grain remained stable and overall grain sales actually increased during the embargo. What hurt the USSR in terms of the embargo was that mean production decreased in Russia and that much higher prices were paid for alternative sources of grain.
    Carter saw American participation in the Moscow Olympics in the Summer of 1980 as immoral, and as early as January 1980 Carter publicly floated the possibility of a US boycott. In February 1980, Carter told staffers that the US would not go to Moscow if Soviet troops remained in Afghanistan. The American public was surprisingly in favor of the boycott, but a whole host of complicating factors arose. Should Coca-Cola still be a sponsor even if the US government had no authority to say the corporation could not. Should there be an alternative competition for American athletes; the Berlin Olympics in 1936 were on Carter’s mind, in that US participation helped Nazi Germany gain global credibility. 55% of Americans polled supported the boycott, but Carter knew the numbers would fall if the US stood alone, which would also make the US look pitiful; boycotting the Moscow Olympics with the US were China, Japan, and West Germany. While the US boycott was a blow to sports-mad America and the dedicated athletes who were denied the chance to compete, the blow to Soviet prestige was greater, and the
1980 Moscow Olympics  turned out to be largely a Soviet Eastern Bloc event.

Picture
      Carter strengthened his stance against the USSR by reinstating registration for the military draft. Like the embargo, Carter acted very quickly, but many in the administration viewed the move as unnecessary. What Carter really wanted was to save six months instead of starting from scratch if the US had to get directly involved. Mondale was among those in the administration that put up a de facto rebellion against the draft registration, but Carter was undeterred. The fact was that at that point Carter was riding a high in that he felt his bold actions against the USSR had re-energized his Presidency.
   Already by January 1980, the USSR had started to figure out that Afghanistan was no cake-walk. On 23 January 1980, Carter delivered what turned out to be his last State of the Union Address, with the level of tension and attention in the House Chamber was high due to Afghanistan and the Iranian Hostage Crisis. In his address, Carter issued his “Carter Doctrine”, which focused on freedom of the seas in the Persian Gulf by military means if necessary. Carter was at his highest point in his Presidency, and it was impossible for for the President and his administration to know that his fall would be so sudden, and that Reagan’s attacks on Carter that he was weak on national security would resonate (a charge that is historically false).
    It could be argued that Carter’s actions against the USSR after it invaded Afghanistan were a main reason why the Soviet Union didn’t send troops into Poland in 1981 when Lech Walesa
and Solidarity reached critical mass. Every President from Truman to Bush the Elder played a significant role in the defeat of the USSR in the Cold War, but Carter’s efforts have been the most underappreciated . . . part of the reason was that Brezhnev and the Politburo pushed too far-and-fast with the invasion of Afghanistan, and Carter was the President that drew the short straw and had to respond.

0 Comments

President Carter and the "Crisis of Confidence" Speech, Part One

4/6/2019

0 Comments

 
     Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
    In a space of only about ten weeks in 1979, from July 1979 through mid-September, the Carter administration started to unravel due to events that were basically unprecedented during peacetime: the Iranian Hostage Crisis, and skyrocketing gas prices and shortages that led to long lines of consumers waiting to gas up their cars. The gasoline situation in particular led Carter to cancel a TV address on energy, and he retreated to Camp David to reassess and “reset” his Presidency. Carter opened himself up to a new level of criticism when he invited prominent and average Americans to Camp David to pick their brains in order to get all the information he needed to solve the biggest problem of them all: what’s wrong with America? 
    The result was his most successful and controversial speech, his “Crisis of Confidence” speech, or as the media called it, the “Malaise Speech”. Ironically, the word malaise never appeared in Carter’s address to the nation; for quite some time, it remained a mystery how a negative word became associated with an upbeat speech. In a memo to Pat Caddell, the President’s pollster, Carter used the word malaise as almost an afterthought, and Caddell passed the memo to Elizabeth Drew of The New Yorker, and she used the word in print for the first time in describing Carter’s speech. The word malaise went viral in the media, and that word is still associated with Carter.

Picture
    After the televised address, Carter politically shot himself in the foot by firing his Cabinet and then bringing most of them back, which confused the public he wanted to rally behind him. Carter faced a near-mutiny from VP Mondale, who kept his vehement point-of-view private, even from Carter. Ironically, it was during this phase of his Presidency that Carter made his smartest move, appointing Paul Volcker as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board. When the ten week period was over on 14 September 1979, Carter’s poll numbers were the lowest of any President in the last thirty years, and Senator Ted Kennedy (D; MA) believed that he had the opening he had been waiting for to pursue to Democratic nomination in 1980.
    So much of what happened involved involved Pat Caddell, who technically wasn’t part of the Carter administration. In 1972, Caddell worked as a pollster for George McGovern’s campaign, and when McGovern came through Georgia to campaign, Governor Carter and Caddell first talked politics together, and it wasn’t long before Carter wanted Caddell in his campaign. Caddell believed that there was a profound sense of alienation towards the government in the American public, a mixed message of despair and hope; Caddell believed that Carter was the right politician at the right time to be elected President (by 2016, Caddell had moved into the orbit of Donald Trump, and was one of the few pollsters to predict a Trump victory, largely because he believed, as in the late-1970s, that a critical mass of Americans still hated/distrusted DC).

Picture
    When Carter became President, Caddell kept running his own firm (Cambridge Survey Research) and served as a consultant to the administration. Caddell on average spent several days a month at the White House, and he kept his ey on his visionary concepts that he had gleaned from his polling. So while Caddell wasn’t in Carter’s Circle of Trust, it would turn out that he could alter the landscape for Carter, in that it was Caddell’s interpretation of the polling data that mattered more than actually serving the President. While Carter was trying to solve major problems on behalf of the nation, Caddell kept making end-runs around Carter and the top officials in the administration in order to advance his agenda (especially talking to the First Lady, Rosalynn Carter). And, as it turned out, Carter would often enough follow Caddell’s advice.
   Caddell was puzzled over Carter’s diminishing support/popularity despite significant achievements on multiple fronts, and he concluded  that Carter had become a hostage of Washington, D.C., Polls as early as December 1977 indicated that Americans liked Carter, but had increasingly negative attitudes about his performance as President. By April 1978, Caddell was convinced that Carter needed to return to his 1976 “thematic” campaign style as President, and stated so in a memo.

Picture
     In response to Caddell’s memo, Carter convened his administration and Cabinet at Camp David on 16 and 17 April 1978 for a “stocktaking”.  The main topic was how to improve the administration’s political performance, and among other blunt observations by Carter, he stated that he and everyone else needed to be more clear on their priorities/themes, in particular when presenting them to the media and Congress. A significant result of the meeting was that Carter ended his experiment of “Cabinet Government” (a la European nations), but Carter still refused to have a Chief of Staff.
    Another result of the results of the meeting was that a colleague of Caddell was invited into to serve within the administration, but Caddell had not been invited to do so. So Caddell had, for the time-being at least, an axe to grind with Carter, thinking that the President didn’t truly appreciate his talents, insights, and expertise. Caddell’s polling data picked up an alarming decline in not only Carter’s performance but also a decrease in confidence in the US, both politically and in terms of the nation’s future, which had never been seen in polls going back to the 1940s. Caddell concluded that there were more pessimists than optimists in the US, and he wondered why that was the case . . . it was, according to Caddell, that people were being more selfish, hostile, greedy, thinking only in the short-term. For Carter, who was groping and grasping for a new theme in which to rebuild the foundation of his Presidency, restoring confidence and trust in the government and political process became a new focus.

Picture
     On 22 January 1979, Caddell’s “restoring confidence” via a firm thematic foundation memo circulated within the administration, which was a contributing factor why Caddell was in Carter’s “dog house” until Spring 1979 after the formal signing of the treaty between Israel and Egypt (Caddell must have been out of the “dog house”, since Carter introduced Caddell to Anwar Sadat).  But even when he was back in Carter’s good graces, Caddell still kept working around Carter by going to Rosalynn. Finally, on 28 April 1979, Carter agreed to give Caddell his day in court in the Oval Office, and Carter fell under Caddell’s spell that day.
    Vice-President Walter Mondale thought that Caddell was selling a bunch of nonsense, since he believed the pollster lived in the Ivory Tower instead of the Real World, but most those in Carter’s administration at that point had bought into Caddell’s thematic vision. Additional polls by Caddell (and others) had Carter at 30% approval, lower than Nixon’s rating during the nadir of the Watergate Scandal. On 12 June 1979, Carter decided to include Caddell in his Circle of Trust. Carter was all-in on Caddell’s vision, and the President agreed to hear out expert scholars that Caddell had lined up, including the author of The Culture of Narcissism, which depicted Americans as a self-indulgent society . . . but Carter had already come to the same conclusion before he listened to the scholar.

Picture
    It was at that point that Caddell went for broke trying to get Carter and his top advisers to be the Carter et al of 1976 instead of the Carter et al of 1977 - 1979. By then gas prices had risen 50% in a year, and Caddell basically told the President to come back from his vacation in Hawaii or don’t come back at all. Even Stuart Eizenstat 
​(a top Carter adviser and the author of the book listed above) demanded that Carter return in order to give a nationwide speech on the energy crisis. Caddell believed, however, that another speech on energy would fall on deaf ears, and he made yet another end-run to Rosalynn, trying to get Carter to see that the crisis of confidence needed to be addressed instead; by then some of Carter’s top men also agreed with Caddell (e.g. Hamilton Jordan).

    On 23 April 1979, Caddell wrote a memo titled “Of Crises and Opportunities” where he outlined that the crisis of confidence in America had led to a dwindling of faith in the future, and people were struggling to define and understand the malaise which they felt. Caddell in no way blamed Carter for that malaise; rather, he argued that over twenty years of historical forces had not come home to roost on the President’s doorstep. It was a conclusion that Carter wholeheartedly believed, even though the stance was at least partially psychobabble from the academic Ivory Tower that argued for “transformative leadership” to greater levels of motivation and morality. To Caddell, Carter had an opportunity that should not be wasted to create a historical imprint like Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and John Kennedy.

0 Comments

President Carter and the "Crisis of Confidence" Speech, Part Two

4/5/2019

0 Comments

 
      Source: Stuart Eizenstat. President Carter - The White House Years (2018)
Picture
    To Hamilton Jordan, Caddell’s memo contained far too much goofy stuff, such as President Carter should drop in on average families without telling the Secret Service, and he believed that the memo would be ignored. But by then Caddell had in essence become Carter’s Rasputin, and he was there to stay for better and for worse. The Carter administration was so compartmentalized that few were aware that Caddell had sent a draft of his own proposed speech on the crisis of confidence and an updated 107 page memo; nor did Caddell have any idea that Carter would cancel his energy speech and follow the pollster’s lead.
    Caddell wanted to foment a sort of revolution, and he was in despair after sending Carter the drafted speech and updated memo, not knowing that Carter had read both on 4 July 1979 and had taken them with him to Camp David. Caddell also had no idea (yet) that Carter thought his arguments and observations were brilliant. Carter in short order let it be known that he was not going to give another energy speech, but rather focus on Caddell’s draft/memo, even though his energy speech had been scheduled on the networks for the next day. Carter told his staff to cancel the speech, but didn’t give anyone a reason why. Carter had decided to gamble his Presidency on Caddell’s totally unproven thesis that the US was going through a crisis of confidence and his grandiose solution of transformative leadership.

Picture
     Carter and Rosalynn decided to bring to Camp David experts from all walks of life to advise him on how to improve his standing among the American people. Then, after those many meetings, Carter decided that he would give a speech afterwards, a very different speech in which Carter already felt re-energized and more confident. Carter instructed Caddell to distribute his draft and memo to the senior staff, and amazingly it was the first time any of the administration’s top officials had seen the draft/memo. All were stunned that Caddell had gone around them and that Carter was acting unilaterally based on Caddell’s advice . . . if Caddell wanted to create an air of mystery, he succeeded.
    While Carter et al were at Camp David, the dollar dropped like a rock, gold was being purchased at record rates by regular citizens driving up the price per ounce; Carter was unreachable when he needed to be available to calm financial markets. Carter’s approval rating had plummeted to 26% a week after he canceled his energy speech. Finally, it dawned on the 29 year old Caddell that his advice was being followed by the President, and it terrified him to know that he might be at least partially responsible for some not-very-nice developments as a result. VP Mondale wondered out loud how a 29 year old wunderkind from the Ivory Tower could get Carter to drink his Kool Aid. Mondale referred to Carter as a domestic recluse, and that as President he needed to get out and actually interact and talk to the American people.

Picture
    Caddell seemingly lived in a fantasy world where the President didn’t actually have to govern, didn’t have to dive into the political muck that was DC and special interests and foreign policy and compromise. Mondale was to the point that if Carter gave the speech and blamed the American people as had Caddell in his draft/memo instead of his administration, it would mean the end of any chance Carter had to be taken seriously as President, much less win re-election in 1980. On 5 July 1979, Carter summoned Mondale, Caddell, and other top administration officials to Camp David for a summit; it would be the most ferocious and politically violent meeting of Carter’s Presidency within his administration. Most everyone at the meeting was in agreement with Caddell except Mondale and Eizenstat. Carter stated that he wanted to remain at Camp David to analyze where the administration was, and then ask for opinions.
    Some accused Carter of becoming a DC insider, which was not true in any stretch of the imagination since Carter went out of his way to have as little contact with the DC Elites as possible. Caddell had his turn, and eyes ablaze like Rasputin in a seance, he rehashed all his arguments for why Carter should do what he suggested. Mondale turned on Caddell, and even the President, telling them to their faces that it was a bad move to blame the people for what’s going on when the people wanted answers. Mondale was very specific with Carter, mentioning the President’s political shortcomings, and Mondale was even more merciless with Caddell, telling him that his polling/research were seriously flawed and influenced far too much by the world of academia, not reality.

Picture
     Carter told those at the meeting that he was going with Caddell’s prescription 100%, and that he was going to spend at least a week at Camp David to meet with as many relevant people as possible to find solutions to America’s domestic problems. Carter believed that the US was not poorly-off in terms of its standard of living, but the nation was struggling in moral and spiritual terms. Carter shrugged off comments that Caddell’s drafted speech was too negative concerning ordinary Americans. Eizenstat fashioned a compromise that was accepted in that Caddell’s rhetoric needed to be toned down so Carter wasn’t blaming the people, but instead take responsibility as President. Also, Eizenstat convinced Carter to end his speech focusing on the energy crisis. Even so, Mondale was inconsolable, and by then almost those in the senior staff of the administration had definitely had enough of Caddell.
    So the question was now who to invite to Camp David, and what was called a Domestic Summit became a political circus. Friday was reserved for Democratic Governors, and Saturday was for the “Wise Men”, such as Clark Clifford. Sunday was for energy experts, and on Monday economists were scheduled in the morning and human rights activists in the afternoon/evening. On Tuesday were to be Congressional leaders and on Wednesday Labor leaders, and then to close, mayors and county officials. On Saturday, Carter wanted to work on finalizing the speech that he would give to the nation on Sunday.

Picture
     Carter got more than he bargained for when he invited outsiders to unload on him, often hearing that his “Georgia Mafia’ was far too inexperienced for the job and that a real Washington, D.C. insider needed to be brought on board . . . Carter ignored that advice. Among the governors was Bill Clinton, the 32 year old first term governor of Arkansas, who was by far more upbeat than any other governor at Camp David. Ironically, Carter met with ordinary Americans at Camp David per Caddell’s advice, and those citizens echoed exactly what Mondale had stated, speaking about how hard it was to cope and forge ahead during Stagflation.
    On Sunday, Carter flawlessly delivered his “Crisis of Confidence" speech from the Oval Office. Soon enough in the speech, Carter arrived at Caddell’s references of a crisis of confidence combined with his own views on self-indulgence and consumption as well as the rise of pessimism. Carter stated that the cure was to restore faith in each other, faith in the ability of those to govern, faith in the future, as well as a rediscovery of traditional values. Carter closed by stating that solving the energy crisis would be the bridge to cross to show that increased faith and confidence. Carter also identified an enemy of the US towards the end of his speech: OPEC (the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries).

Picture
      Carter and Caddell proved right about the impact of the speech, at least in the immediate aftermath, and it seemed that Carter had swung the public back into his fold. Carter’s approval rating increased 17% in one night, which was unprecedented for a peacetime President. On the whole, Carter’s speech was positive far more so than Caddell’s draft. Carter offered a diagnosis of what ailed the nation in a mostly optimistic manner, and Carter touched on his own failings, something that resonated with most Americans. Also, most Americans still liked Carter and wanted him to succeed as President.
    Carter went on a follow-up tour starting the next day on 16 July 1979, and after speaking in Kansas City, MO, Carter spoke in front of labor groups in Detroit, featuring some of Caddell’s points that he didn’t use during his televised speech. Caddell had recognized something in Carter that most around the President had missed, and at least in the short-run, Carter had re-established a connection with Americans as he had in 1976. It was at that point that Hamilton Jordan agreed to be Chief of Staff, and that changes in the Cabinet would be the litmus test of leading the nation instead of managing the government. It would be how Carter handled the “reshuffling” of his Cabinet where he would quickly lose the support of the nation that he had regained from his “Crisis of Confidence” speech.

0 Comments
<<Previous

    Archives

    May 2019
    April 2019
    March 2019
    February 2019
    January 2019
    December 2018
    November 2018
    October 2018
    September 2018
    August 2018
    July 2018
    June 2018
    May 2018

    Categories

    All
    19th Century
    20th Century
    Biography
    History

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.