The Paradox of President Reagan’s Leadership

Abstract

Ronald Reagan was a larger-than-life individual, a formidable politician, and an important president. But as in all presidents, his character was complex, resulting in a presidency of paradoxes, marked by some great successes and some unfortunate failures. We cannot celebrate his successes without recognizing his failures, and we cannot criticize his failures without recognizing his important contributions. His legacy is not as unblemished as his hagiographers claim nor can it be easily dismissed, as some of his detractors maintain. Both Reagan’s successes and failures stemmed from his character and style of political leadership. Reagan’s optimism, geniality, and gracious nature appealed to his opponents as well as his followers. The great strength of his optimism stemmed from his conviction that most governmental problems were simple and amenable to simple solutions. But as Elliot Richardson often observed, “we all have the defects of our virtues.” The paradox of President Reagan’s leadership was that his certainty about simple problems and faith in simple solutions was the source of his political strength as well as some of his failures. He projected simple certainty and exuded confidence, but his actions and policies, in important ways, belied his public image. Reagan’s broad vision and clear direction made his political ideals appealing. But paradoxically, what made is policy victories possible was his willingness, when faced with political reality, to make pragmatic compromises without seeming to abandon his ideals. He is remembered as a tax cutter, but he signed some of the largest tax increases in U.S. history. He is remembered as standing firm against terrorism, yet he withdrew Marines from Lebanon after a terrorist bombing, and he traded arms for hostages. He championed huge increases in defense spending, yet he almost bargained away the U.S. nuclear stockpile. He believed in law and order, but he allowed his White House to break the law by selling arms to Iran and funding the Contras in Nicaragua. He was a staunch foe of communism, yet he led the country to a new understanding of Russia. This paper will examine these paradoxes by analyzing the Reagan administration’s transition into office, the contrasting White House staffs of his two terms, and the high and low points of his national security policies.