Et Tu, Daniel?

The Betrayal of the Sandinista Revolution

http://www.counterpunch.org/burbach02272009.html

By ROGER BURBACH
February 27 - March 1, 2009

Upon his inauguration as Nicaraguan president in January 2007, Daniel 
Ortega asserted that his government would represent "the second stage 
of the Sandinista Revolution." His election was full of symbolic 
resonance, coming after 16 years of electoral failures for Ortega and 
the party he led, the Sandinista Front for National Liberation 
(FSLN). The Sandinistas' road to power was paved with a series of 
previously unthinkable pacts with the old somocista and Contra 
opposition. The FSLN's pact making began in earnest in 2001, when, in 
the run-up to that year's presidential election, Ortega forged an 
alliance with Arnoldo Alemán, an official during the Somoza regime 
who had been elected president in 1997.

But even with Alemán's backing, Ortega was unable to win the 
presidency. So, before the 2006 election, he publicly reconciled with 
his old nemesis, Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo, a potent symbol of 
the counterrevolutionary movement in the 1980s. Ortega and his 
longtime companion, Rosario Murillo, announced their conversion to 
Catholicism and were married by the cardinal. Just before his 
election Ortega supported a comprehensive ban on abortion, including 
in cases in which the mother's life is endangered, a measure ratified 
by the legislature with the crucial votes of Sandinista deputies. To 
round out his pre-election wheeling and dealing, Ortega selected 
Jaime Morales, a former Contra leader, as his vice presidential candidate.

Even with these concessions to the right, Ortega won the presidency 
with just 37.9% of the votes. Once in power, he announced a series of 
policies and programs that seemed to hark back to the Sandinista 
years. Educational matriculation fees were abolished, an illiteracy 
program was launched with Cuban assistance, and an innovative Zero 
Hunger program established, financed from the public budget and 
Venezuelan aid, that distributed one cow, one pig, 10 hens, and a 
rooster, along with seeds, to 15,000 families during the first year. 
Internationally, Nicaragua joined the Bolivarian Alternative for the 
Americas (ALBA), a trade and economic cooperation pact that includes 
Cuba, Bolivia, and Venezuela.

But the Ortega government's clientelistic and sectarian nature soon 
became evident when Ortega, by presidential decree, established 
Councils of Citizen Power under the control of the Sandinista party 
to administer and distribute much of the social spending. Even more 
importantly, under the rubric of ALBA, Ortega signed an accord with 
Venezuela that provides an estimated $300 million to $500 million in 
funds personally administered by Ortega with no public accountability.

As Mónica Baltodano, the leader of Resacte, a dissident Sandinista 
organization, argued in a recent article, Ortega's fiscal and 
economic policies are, in fact, continuous with those of the previous 
governments, despite his anti-imperialist rhetoric and denunciations 
of neoliberalism.1 The government has signed new accords with the 
International Monetary Fund that do not modify the neoliberal 
paradigm, while the salaries of government workers remain frozen and 
those of teachers and health workers are the lowest in Central 
America. According to the Central Bank of Nicaragua, the average 
salary has dropped the last two years, retrogressing to 2001 levels.2

Moreover, the government and the Sandinista party are harassing and 
repressing their opponents. During an interview in January, Baltodano 
told me the right to assembly has been systematically violated during 
the past year, as opposition demonstrations are put down with goon 
squads. "Ortega is establishing an authoritarian regime, sectarian, 
corrupt, and repressive, to maintain his grip on power, betraying the 
legacy of the Sandinista revolution," she said.
***

The core of this legacy was the revolution's commitment to popular 
democracy. Seizing power in 1979 from the dictator Anastasio Somoza, 
the Sandinista movement comprised Nicaragua's urban masses, peasants, 
artisans, workers, Christian base communities, intellectuals, and the 
muchachos­the youth who spearheaded the armed uprisings. The 
revolution transformed social relations and values, holding up a new 
vision of society based on social and economic justice that included 
the poor and dispossessed. The revolution was muticlass, multiethnic, 
multidoctrinal, and politically pluralistic.

While socialism was part of the public discourse, it was never 
proclaimed to be an objective of the revolution. It was officially 
designated "a popular, democratic, and anti-imperialist revolution." 
Radicalized social democrats, priests, and political independents as 
well as Marxists and Marxist-Leninists served as cabinet ministers of 
the Sandinista government. Images of Sandino, Marx, Christ, Lenin, 
Bolívar, and Carlos Fonseca, the martyred founder of the Sandinista 
movement, often hung side by side in the cities and towns of Nicaragua.

A central attribute of the revolution that has made its legacy so 
powerful is that it was a revolución compartida, a revolution shared 
with the rest of the world.3 As Nicaragua, a country with fewer than 
3 million inhabitants, defied the wrath of the U.S. imperium, people 
from around the world rallied to the revolution's support. In a 
manner reminiscent of the Spanish civil war half a century earlier, 
the Sandinista revolution came to be seen as a new political utopia, 
rupturing national frontiers. It marked a generation of activists 
around the globe who found in the revolution a reason to hope and believe.

With the deepening of the U.S.-backed counterrevolutionary war from 
military bases in Honduras, activists from the United States came to 
be the largest contingent to support the Sandinista revolution. An 
estimated 100,000 people from the United States visited Nicaragua in 
the 1980s, many as simple political tourists. Some came as part of 
delegations, but most of them arrived on their own. It was an 
experience totally different from that of Cuba, where the prohibition 
of U.S. travel to the island meant that only organized delegations 
arrived via Mexico or Canada with assigned accommodations and 
structured tours. But it was not just the travel arrangements that 
were different. Those going to Nicaragua found an "open door" 
society: They could talk with anyone, travel to the countryside, and 
stay where they pleased with no interference from the government.

The Sandinista revolution's commitment to democracy led it down a new 
political path. This was not a revolutionary government conducted, in 
the classical sense, by a dictatorship of the proletariat. While the 
National Directorate of the FSLN oversaw the revolutionary process, 
it was not dictated by a single strongman but by nine people who 
reached consensus decisions with input from popular organizations. 
The Nicaraguan Revolution thus responded to internal and external 
challenges by deepening its democratic and participatory content, 
rather than by declaring a dictatorship.

In October 1983, when a U.S. assault appeared imminent in the 
aftermath of the invasion of Grenada, the National Directorate 
adopted the slogan "All Arms to the People" and distributed more than 
200,000 weapons to the militias and popular organizations. I was 
there as U.S. aircraft flew over Managua, breaking the sound barrier, 
trying to "shock and awe" the populace. Bomb shelters and defensive 
trenches were hastily built as the country mobilized for war.

We may never know whether the threatened invasion was a ruse or if 
the popular mobilization forestalled a U.S. attack. But it did 
reaffirm the revolution's commitment to democracy. In 1984, in the 
midst a deteriorating economy and the escalating Contra war, the 
country held an election in which seven candidates vied for the 
presidency. The election was monitored by "at least 460 accredited 
observers from 24 countries," who unanimously described it as fair.4 
A reported 83% of the electorate participated, and Ortega won with 
almost 67% of the votes.5 The election demonstrated that a 
revolutionary government can solidify its hold on power in the midst 
of conflict, not by adopting increasingly dictatorial powers but by 
building mass democratic support.

The adoption of a new constitution in 1986 marked yet another step 
forward in the democratic process. The constitution, which 
established separation of powers, directly incorporated human rights 
declarations, and abolished the death penalty, among other measures, 
was drafted by constituent assembly members elected in 1984 and 
submitted to the country for discussion.6 To facilitate these 
debates, 73 cabildos abiertos, or town meetings, were attended by an 
estimated 100,000 Nicaraguans around the country. At these meetings, 
about 2,500 Nicaraguans made suggestions for changes in the constitution.

But this bold Sandinista experiment in revolutionary democracy was 
not destined to persevere. As occurred in the Spanish civil war, the 
tide of history ran against the heroic people of Nicaragua, sapping 
their will in the late 1980s as the Contra war waged on and the 
economy unraveled. Often as I departed from the San Francisco airport 
on yet another flight to the Central American isthmus, I would look 
down on the Bay Area, with its population roughly the same size as 
Nicaragua's and an economy many times larger, and wonder how the 
Sandinista revolution could possibly survive a war with the most 
powerful nation on earth.

Perhaps the die was cast in neighboring El Salvador with the failure 
of the guerrillas there to seize power as the United States mounted a 
counterinsurgency war. The inability to advance the revolution in 
Central America seemed to confirm Leon Trotsky's belief that a 
revolution cannot survive and mature in just one nation­especially in 
small countries like Nicaragua with porous borders, which, unlike 
island Cuba, lend themselves to infiltration and repeated forays from 
well-provisioned military bases.

To end the debilitating war, the Sandinista leaders turned to peace 
negotiations. Placing their faith in democracy, they signed an accord 
that called for a ceasefire and elections to be held in February 
1990, in which the Contras as well as the internal opposition would 
be allowed to participate. Once again the popular organizations 
mobilized for the campaign, and virtually all the polls indicated 
that Ortega would win a second term as president, defeating the 
Contra-backed candidate, Violeta Chamorro, whose campaign received 
generous funding from the United States.

Nicaraguans and much of the world were shocked when Chamorro defeated 
Ortega with 55% of the vote. Even people who were sympathetic to the 
Sandinistas voted for the opposition because they wanted the war to 
end, as the threat of more U.S.-backed violence remained looming. The 
day after the election, a woman vendor passed me by sobbing. I asked 
her what was wrong, and she said, "Daniel will no longer be my 
president." After exchanging a few more words, I asked whom she had 
voted for. "Violeta," she said, "because I want my son in the 
Sandinista army to come home alive."
***

During the next 16 years, three Nicaraguan presidents backed by the 
United States implemented a series of neoliberal policies, gutting 
the social and economic policies of the Sandinista era and 
impoverishing the country. Ortega ran in every election, drifting 
increasingly to the right, while exerting an iron hand to stifle all 
challengers and dissenters in the Sandinista party. Surprisingly, 
Orlando Nuñez, with whom I wrote a book with on the revolution's 
democratic thrust, remained loyal to Ortega while most of the 
middle-level cadre and the National Directorate abandoned the party.7 
Many of these split off to form the Sandinista Renovation Movement 
(MRS), the largest dissident Sandinista party, founded in 1995.

When I asked Nuñez about his stance, he argued that only the 
Sandinista party has a mass base. "Dissident Sandinistas and their 
organizations," he said, "cannot recruit the poor, the peasants, the 
workers, nor mount a significant electoral challenge." Nuñez, who 
works as an adviser on social affairs to the president's office, went 
on to argue that Ortega allied with Alemán not out of political 
cynicism, but for the sake of building an anti-oligarchic front. 
According to this theory, Alemán and the somocistas represent an 
emergent capitalist class that took on the old oligarchy, which had 
dominated Nicaraguan politics and the economy since the 19th 
century.8 A major thrust of Ortega's rhetoric is bent on attacking 
the oligarchy, which is clustered in the opposition Conservative Party.

But it is also true that some of the most famous Sandinistas, many of 
whom are in the dissident camp today­like Ernesto Cardenal, Gioconda 
Belli, Carlos Fernando Chamorro, and others­are descendents of 
oligarchic families. Accordingly, Ortega and Murillo have accused 
them of being in league with conservatives in an effort to reimpose 
the old order on Nicaragua. While the dissident Sandinistas have yet 
to mount a significant electoral challenge, the Ortega administration 
has nonetheless gone after them with a particular vehemence. Case in 
point: Chamorro, the onetime director of the Sandinista party 
newspaper, Barricada. In June 2007, Chamorro aired an investigative 
report on Esta Semana, the popular news show he hosts. According to 
the report, which included tape-recorded conversations, FSLN 
functionaries tried to extort $4 million from Armel González, a 
partner in a tourist development project called Arenas Bay, in 
exchange for a swift end to the project's legal woes, which included 
challenges from campesino cooperatives over land disputes.

The government's response to the bad publicity was swift and 
ruthless. While the district attorney buried the case, González was 
charged and convicted of slander. National Assembly deputy Alejandro 
Bolaños, who backed the denunciation, was arbitrarily removed from 
his legislative seat. And Chamorro was denounced in the 
Sandinista-controlled media as a "delinquent," a "narco-trafficker," 
and a "robber of peasant lands."

The harassment of Chamorro and other government critics continued 
during the run-up to Nicaragua's November 2008 municipal elections, 
which were widely viewed as a referendum on the Ortega 
administration. The Ministry of Government launched a probe into NGOs 
operating in the country, accusing the Center for Communications 
Research (Cinco), which is headed by Chamorro, of "diverting and 
laundering money" through its agreement with the Autonomous Women's 
Movement (MAM), which opposes the Ortega-endorsed law banning 
abortion. This agreement, financed by eight European governments and 
administered by Oxfam, aims to promote "the full citizenship of 
women." First lady Murillo called it "Satan's fund" and "the money of evil."

Cinco's board of directors were interrogated, and a prosecutor 
accompanied by the police raided the Cinco offices with a search 
warrant. Warned in advance of the visit, some 200 people gathered in 
the building in solidarity, refusing the police entry. Then as night 
fell, the police established a cordon around the building and, in the 
early morning, police broke down the door. After kicking out the 
protesters, the police stayed in the office for 15 hours, with 
supporters and onlookers gathered outside, shutting down traffic for 
blocks around. The police rummaged through offices, carting off files 
and computers. Since then, no formal charges have been filed, but 
Chamorro remains under official investigation.

Along with MAM, the broader women's movement in Nicaragua, which 
firmly opposes the Ortega government, was among the first to 
experience its repressive blows. In 2007 the government opened a case 
against nine women leaders, accusing them of conspiring "to cover up 
the crime of rape in the case of a 9-year-old rape victim known as 
'Rosita,' who obtained an abortion in Nicaragua in 2003."9 In August, 
Ortega was unable to attend the inauguration of Paraguayan president 
Fernando Lugo because of protests by the country's feminist 
organizations; from then on, women's mobilizations have occurred in 
other countries Ortega has visited, including Honduras, El Salvador, 
Costa Rica, and Peru.10

Charges were levied against other former Sandinistas who dared to 
speak out against the Ortega government, including 84-year-old 
Catholic priest Ernesto Cardenal, the renowned poet who once served 
as minister of culture. In August, after Cardenal criticized Ortega 
at Lugo's inauguration, a judge revived an old, previously dismissed 
case involving a German citizen who sued Cardenal in 2005 for insulting him.11

In addition to harassing critics, the Ortega government also 
displayed its penchant for electoral fraud during the run-up to the 
November municipal balloting. Protests erupted in June, after the 
Ortega-stacked Supreme Electoral Council disqualified the MRS and the 
Conservative Party from participation. Dora Maria Tellez, a leader of 
the renovation movement, began a public hunger strike that led to 
daily demonstrations of support, often shutting down traffic in 
downtown Managua.

Meanwhile, bands of young Sandinista-linked thugs, claiming to be the 
"owners of the streets," attacked demonstrators while the police 
stood idly by. Then, to prevent more demonstrations, Ortega 
supporters set up plantones, permanent occupation posts at the 
rotundas on the main thoroughfare running through Managua. Those who 
camped out there were known as rezadores, or people praying to God 
that Ortega be protected and his opponents punished.

Besides the FSLN, two major political parties remained on the ballot, 
the Liberal Constitutionalist Party and the Nicaraguan Liberal 
Alliance. While independent surveys indicated that the opposition 
candidates would win the majority of the seats, the Supreme Electoral 
Council, which had prohibited international observers, ruled that the 
Sandinista candidates won control of 105 municipalities, the Liberal 
Constitutionalist Party won 37, and the Alliance won the remaining 
six. An independent Nicaraguan group, Ethics and Transparency, 
organized tens of thousands of observers but was denied 
accreditation, forcing them to observe the election from outside 
polling stations. But the group estimates that irregularities took 
place at a third of the polling places. Their complaints were echoed 
by Nicaraguan Catholic bishops, including Managua's archbishop, who 
said, "People feel defrauded."12

After the election, militant demonstrations erupted in Nicaragua's 
two largest cities, Managua and León, and were quickly put down with 
violence. The European Economic Community and the U.S. government 
suspended funding for Nicaragua over the fraudulent elections. On 
January 14, before the election results were even officially 
published by the electoral council, Ortega swore in the new mayors at 
Managua's Plaza de la Revolución. He declared: "This is the time to 
strengthen our institutions," later adding, "We cannot go back to the 
road of war, to confrontation, to violence." Along with the regular 
police, Ortega stood flanked by camisas rosadas, or redshirts, 
members of his personal security force. A huge banner hung over the 
plaza depicting Ortega with an up-stretched arm and the slogan, "To 
Be With the People Is to Be With God."

"This despotic regime is bent on destroying all that is left of the 
Sandinista revolution's democratic legacy," Chamorro told me in 
January. "Standing in the way of a new dictatorship," he continued, 
"are civil society organizations, the independent media, trade 
unions, opposition political parties, women's organizations, civic 
leaders and others­many of whom can trace their roots back to the 
resistance against Somoza."

As the Nobel-winning novelist José Saramago put it: "Once more a 
revolution has been betrayed from within." Nicaragua's revolution has 
indeed been betrayed, perhaps not as dramatically as Trotsky depicted 
Stalin's desecration of what was best in the Bolshevik revolution. 
But Ortega's betrayal is a fundamental political tragedy for everyone 
around the world who came to believe in a popular, participatory 
democracy in Nicaragua.
--

Roger Burbach directs the Center for the Study of the Americas 
(CENSA), based in Berkeley, California (globalalternatives.org). He 
was a "fellow traveler" during the Sandinista revolutionary years, 
collaborating with the FSLN Directorate of International Relations in 
analyzing U.S. political and military strategies.
--

Notes.

1. Mónica Baltodano, "El 'nuevo sandinismo' es de la izquierda? 
Democracia pactada en Nicaragua," Le Monde diplomatique, Southern 
Cone edition (December 2008): 16­17.

2. Ibid.

3. The concept of revolución compartida is developed in Sergio 
Ramírez, Adios muchachos: una memoría de la revolución sandinista 
(Mexico City: Aguilar, 1999).

4. Rosa Marina Zelaya, "International Election Observers: Nicaragua 
Under a Microscope," Envío 103 (February 1990), envio.org.ni/articulo/2582.

5. BBC, "1984: Sandinistas Claim Election Victory," available at 
news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday.

6. Harry E. Vanden and Gary Prevost, Democracy and Socialism in 
Sandinista Nicaragua (Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1996), 84­85.

7. Roger Burbach and Orlando Nuñez, Fire in the Americas, Forging a 
Revolutionary Agenda (Verso, 1987).

8. Nuñez develops this argument in his book La Oligarquia en 
Nicaragua (Managua: Talleres de Grafitex, 2006). See also Nuñez, "La 
Agonía política de la oligarquia," El 19 no. 14, November 27­December 
3, 2008, available at sepres.gob.ni.

9. Human Rights Watch, "Nicaragua: Protect Rights Advocates from 
Harassment and Intimidation," October 28, 2008, available at hrw.org.

10. Baltodano, "El 'nuevo sandinismo' es de la izquierda?"

11. CBC News, "Latin American Artists Protest Persecution of 
Nicaraguan Poet," September 6, 2008, available at cbc.ca.

12. "How to Steal an Election," The Economist, November 13, 2008.

*This article appears in the NACLA Report on the Americas, 
"Revolutionary Legacies in the 21st Century," March/April, 2009. See 
the full Report for additional articles on Cuba, Mexico, Venezuela, 
Bolivia and Haiti. http://nacla.org/currentissue

.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Sixties-L" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/sixties-l?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to