Bernard Axelrad Scholarship Fund

It ain't easy trying to write a column with eyes riveted and the one good ear cocked to the unfolding Iran-contra hearings. The tour de force, tailor-made for TV, even stilled the demand of the aficionados of the daily soap operas who devoured the Ollie North Spectacular instead.

Shakespeare at his best never conjured up more drama than this larger-than-life extravaganza.

Square-jawed, resplendent in Marine uniform bedecked with six rows of ribbons and medals, faithful wife Betsy behind him, Lt. Col. Oliver North articulately and deftly beat back his inquisitors.

Douglas Fairbanks, Jr., did it with his sword; Ollie North, with his words.

Lost in that bravura exposition were the terrifying admissions mouthed by this sermonizing and unrepentant patriot. He had deliberately, premeditatedly and admittedly lied and deceived Congress and shredded evidence as the investigation focused on him (and then unabashedly pointed to those pieces of paper for exoneration).

He and Poindexter clandestinely forged their own foreign policy, by-passing Congress and allegedly keeping the President in the dark, too. No elected official had a voice in the matter.

Thus, while our President publicly exhorted our allies not to deal with terrorists, his underlings designed a secret deal to sell arms to Iran — yes, the same Iran at whose command 241 Marines were wantonly slaughtered in their barracks in Beirut. And, no, the relatives of those 241 slain do not thank thee, Ollie.

The net result was that Iran received weapons needed in its war against Iraq (whom we favored) while there were as many American hostages in captivity at the end of the transaction as when it all began. And more since.

The saga continues with the newest "American hero" conjuring up the "neat" idea of using the Ayatollah's money to fund the Nicaraguan contras. In secret, of course, because the law of the land prohibited such activities.

With Ollie, everything goes — even going private with American foreign policy. So, he enlisted dramatis personae worthy of the Bard himself as the implementers of his scheme.

For starters we have Gen. Richard Secord. This is the same Secord who retired from the military under heavy cloud because of his former association with the nefarious Edwin Wilson, renegade former CIA official who was convicted of illegally selling stolen American arms to Libya.

Then we have Albert Hakim, a shadowy arms merchant known for his ability to bribe Iranian officials, and Manucher Ghorbanifar, who is characterized even by North as an acknowledged liar not to be trusted.

With this unsavory cast, more of the Iranian arms money went into their pockets than to the contras.

Zealots like North and Poindexter, in power, are a greater threat to our democracy than Nicaragua! When they believe their cause is just, they lie and deceive without missing a beat.

I can't leave this tawdry tale of unchecked hubris without mention of what I deem its major unaddressed issue: The American people are entitled to a discourse in depth by BOTH sides on the wisdom of aid to the contras.

Ronald Reagan, Oliver North and John Poindexter are not among my favorites, but I do admire their ardent advocacy of the contra cause at every opportunity. Still, the American people have heard from only one side and their rhetoric is no substitute for fact. Labeling the contras as "freedom fighters" doesn't necessarily make them so.

The high moral grounds in terms of democracy and freedom staked out by the pro-contra faction should not go unchallenged. There is no evidence whatsoever that the contras stand for democracy or freedom in Nicaragua.

There must be somebody out there, as intensely convinced that U.S. military aid to the contras is not the answer in Nicaragua, to shout that:

• The contras are not so much "freedom fighters" as chips off the discredited Anastasio Somoza block. Earlier in this century our Marines helped install the tyrannical Somoza dynasty in Nicaragua against the wishes of a hapless people. After 50 years of oppression, the Sandinistas overthrew the despot in 1979 only because the people of Nicaragua were with them.
• Even with the massive private and public aid given to the contras thus far, they have barely stayed alive in their insurgency. If they have not won the hearts and minds of their fellow countrymen with their cause, should the U.S. attempt it by force of arms?
• The neighboring countries of Central America and most in Latin America do not agree with our policy of aid to the contras and came together in 1983 as the Contadora Group to seek a peaceful negotiated settlement of the conflict. We should heed their views for they are closely in touch with the reality of the situation.
• Unless the Nicaraguan people want the contras, no amount of military aid and money will be enough. Interfering actively in a foreign conflict carries a steep price. The lessons of Vietnam should not be forgotten.
• Whether we approve of the Nicaraguan regime is not the question. The sole issue is whether their government poses a legitimate threat to the U.S. Those who favor aid to the contras should convince the public of the danger.
• Russia poses as little realistic hazard to us in Nicaragua as we to her in Afghanistan. Cuba, only 90 miles away from our shores, has been under a communist regime for over two decades and has posed little threat to us. Why should a more distant and less powerful Nicaragua be such a frightening specter?

Col. North was quite correct at the hearing to take Congress to task for wavering back and forth on aid to the contras. Our elected representatives have acted cravenly on the matter, vacillating between Reagan's persistence and their better judgment.

The televised hearings have brought the question of aid to the contras into the living room as no other forum could. The issue is joined.

After due debate on the merits of the subject, the American people will determine our policy. Both our elected President and our elected Congress will pay heed — as they always do — to where the voters are.