December 2006.
Ortega elected President of Nicaragua.
This article was published in Central America Report (CAR), the magazine we produce with other Central American solidarity organisations twice a year (see photo)

“The Nicaraguan people were able to exercise their democratic rights in an electoral process that was free, fair and peaceful. It is regrettable that levels of outside interference necessitated an army of international observers to bear witness to this.”
George Grime of south London, member of a 10-person election observer delegation organised by Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group (NSCAG)

Presidential election result
Daniel Ortega (FSLN alliance, Nicaragua Triumphs): 37.99%
Eduardo Montealegre (Nicaragua Liberal Alliance – ALN): 28.31%
Jose Rizo (Constitutional Liberal Party – PLC): 27.11%
Edmundo Jarquin (Sandinista Renewal Movement – MRS): 6.29%
Eden Pastora (Alternative for Change): 0.29%

On November 7, the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE) declared FSLN candidate Daniel Ortega president-elect of Nicaragua. Jubilant Sandinista supporters filled the streets of Managua, waving red and black flags and celebrating the party’s return to power after 16 years of US-backed neoliberal governments. Ortega gained 38 percent of the vote in the first round, with Nicaragua Liberal Alliance (ALN) candidate, Eduardo Montealegre in second place with 28 percent. Ortega won because the gap between him and the runner-up was more than five percentage points. Voter turnout was 70 percent. Montealegre immediately congratulated his opponent, promising that his party would form a “constructive, intelligent, honest and democratic opposition”.

Ortega called Montealegre’s action “both dignified and valiant”, and said it would send a signal of stability to the world: “We have all of us to work together for our one Nicaragua.” He went on to stress his campaign themes of reconciliation and peace, and set out the challenges for his presidential term, due to begin in January.

“The great task is to lift our people out of poverty. The transparency of the elections should reassure all those who have invested and seek to invest in Nicaragua. We thank God and the Nicaraguan people for having given us this chance to govern Nicaragua once again, this time in peace. We believe that the conditions in Nicaragua are right for the practice of a new political culture. By that I mean a way of working together, with all our diversity and whatever our differences, with a constructive spirit, always putting Nicaragua, the people, the poor, in first place.”

Gordon Johndroe, US government spokesperson for national security, said: “The United States is committed to the Nicaraguan people. We will work with their leaders on the basis of their commitment to, and their actions to promote, Nicaragua’s democratic future.” Meanwhile, US Ambassador Paul Trivelli, whose ham-handed efforts to unite the right and prevent Ortega's election backfired amid universal condemnation, grumbled about trivial "anomalies" such as late poll openings and long queues. Trivelli’s failure and the crude way he threatened Nicaraguans are likely to have helped Ortega and ended his prospects of promotion in the US diplomatic corps.

National assembly results and ‘the pact’

The National Assembly is elected by proportional representation with candidates running on national and departmental slates. According to final provisional results, the FSLN won 38 seats, Nicaragua Liberal Alliance (ALN) 25, Constitutional Liberal Party (PLC) 22 and Sandinista Renewal Movement (MRS) 5. Eduardo Montealegre, as presidential runner-up, and Enrique Bolaños, as outgoing president, automatically gain seats, giving the ALN a total of 24.

The FSLN will lack the majority needed to pass legislation, providing a strong incentive for the new government to continue the “pact” with the PLC and its disgraced leader, former President Arnoldo Alemán. How this plays out will have a strong influence on the question of Alemán's freedom or incarceration, as well as on a number of constitutional amendments shifting power from the presidency to the legislature, which have been put on hold until the new government comes into power.
The main goal of the "pact" between Ortega and Alemán was to turn Nicaragua into a two-party state in which the FSLN and PLC shared government institutions regardless of who held the presidency. US interference - by enabling Montealegre to split the Liberal party in two - may have served to strengthen this arrangement.

The rift between Montealegre’s ALN and Rizo’s PLC seems unbridgeable for the foreseeable future. At the same time, the FSLN is itself an alliance of unlikely bedfellows, including former sworn enemies. Ortega's vice-president was the chief civilian negotiator for the Contras and a handful of FSLN legislators were Contra leaders.
It remains unclear whether this alliance can endure. Yet as one commentator remarked, “Given that so many of the present electorate weren’t even alive during the revolutionary years, reference to ‘the long night of the Sandinistas’ can finally give way to ‘the 16-year nightmare of the neo-liberals’. That in itself gives us the possibility of a new start.”
Regardless of what happens over the next five years, the FSLN victory in the presidential elections is a blow to US imperialism in its backyard, and another brick in the wall towards an integrated Latin America as a counterweight to US domination of the region.
Extracted from Nicaragua Network Hotline: www.nicanet.org

Dec 2006
 

November 2006.
UK election observers find that Britain has a lot to learn from the Nicaraguan elections.

This photo shows NSC observers taking part in an IPADE press conference. For a further report with photographs click here >>

A ten-strong delegation organised by NSCAG, just back from observing the national elections in Nicaragua on 5 November, found that the process of voting and vote counting on election day was scrupulously fair. Not only did they find that it was extremely carefully organised to minimise the risk of fraud, but the arrangements were often superior to those in Britain.

The delegation operated under the auspices of a local NGO, IPADE (the Institute for Development and Democracy) who sent over a thousand of national and international observers to the 11,000 polling stations. The Foreign and Commonwealth office advised NSCAG that the group was the only British delegation in Nicaragua.

The NSCAG delegation spent time at a number of polling stations in and around the capital Managua, and in the northern provincial centre of Esteli. They witnessed the opening and closing of the polling stations, the voting process and the counting of the votes – the final task for the polling station staff who began the day at 5.30am and started the count when the polls close at 6pm.

The group found the process to be clear, efficient and fair, without significant incidents. The levels of community involvement with the elections were particularly striking, especially the significant involvement of young people, women and people with few resources.

June Plymen of Macclesfield, a County Councillor for 8 years, said: “In the polling stations that I visited the majority of people running the polling stations were young women. To see this level of empowerment of young women in a country accused of machismo was terrific!”

Social Housing Director, George Grime of south London said: “The Nicaraguan people were able to exercise their democratic rights in an electoral process that was free, fair and peaceful. It is regrettable that levels of outside interference necessitated an army of international observers to bear witness to this.”

Election Briefing Three: November 9th 2006
Daniel Ortega is President-Elect of Nicaragua
(extracted from Nicaragua Network Hotline 8 November 2006
www.nicanet.org )

All photos of election banners and posters taken by members of the NSC
Election Observer Delegation.

     On left: FSLN banner with image of Sandino.

                                     
   On right: MRS banner with Sandino's hat
  
   (For information about Sandino go to >>)

   PLC poster

On 7 November, the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE) declared FSLN candidate Daniel Ortega President-Elect of Nicaragua. Jubilant Sandinista supporters filled the streets of Managua waving red and black flags and celebrating the return to government after 16 years of US-supported right wing neo-liberal governments.

With over 91% of the votes counted, the results were: FSLN (Daniel Ortega): 38.07%; National Liberal Alliance (Eduardo Montealegre): 29%; Constitutional Liberal Party (José Rizo): 26.21%; Sandinista Renovation Movement (Edmundo Jarquín): 6.44%; Alternative for Change (Eden Pastora): 0.27%. CSE president Roberto Rivas declared Daniel Ortega president – elect on the grounds that there was no possibility of any other candidate catching him up. Voter turnout was 70%. ALN candidate, Eduardo Montealegre, immediately congratulated his opponent, promising his party would form a “constructive, intelligent, honest and democratic opposition.” Ortega called his action “both dignified and valiant.” He went on to stress his campaign themes of reconciliation and peace, emphasising that Montealegre’s action and words would send a sign of stability to the world. “We have all of us to work together for our one Nicaragua,” he said. “The great task is to lift our people out of poverty. The transparency of the elections should reassure all those who have invested and seek to invest in Nicaragua. We thank God and the Nicaraguan people for having given us this chance to govern Nicaragua once again, this time in peace. We believe that the conditions in Nicaragua are right for the practice of a new political culture. By that I mean a way of working together, with all our diversity and whatever our differences, with a constructive spirit, always putting Nicaragua, the people, the poor, in first place.”

Bowing to the inevitable, Gordon Johndroe, US government spokesperson for national security, announced: “The United States is committed to the Nicaraguan people. We will work with their leaders on the basis of their commitment to, and their actions to promote, Nicaragua’s democratic future.” Meanwhile, US Ambassador Paul Trivelli, whose ham handed efforts to unite the right and prevent Ortega's election backfired amid universal condemnation, grumbled about trivial "anomalies" such as late poll openings and long queues. Trivelli's failure and the crude way he threatened Nicaraguans probably helped Ortega and have likely put paid to Trivelli's promotion in the US diplomatic corps.

National Assembly Results and "the Pact."

The National Assembly is elected by proportional representation with candidates running on national and departmental slates. As of 7 November, projected seats are: FSLN 37, (one less than in the current Assembly), ALN 26, PLC 22, and MRS 6.
This means that the FSLN does not have the majority necessary to pass legislation. This provides a strong incentive for the new government to continue the so-called pact with the PLC and its disgraced leader, former President Arnoldo Alemán. How this plays out will have a strong influence on the issue of Aleman's freedom or incarceration and on a number of constitutional amendments shifting power from the presidency to the legislature that were put on hold until the new government came into power. The main goal of the "pact" between Ortega and Alemán was to turn Nicaragua into a two-party state in which the FSLN and PLC share government institutions regardless of who holds the presidency. US interference, by enabling Montealegre to split the Liberal party in two, may have actually strengthened the pact rather than destroyed it.

The rift between Montealegre’s ALN and Rizo’s PLC seems unbridgeable, for at least the foreseeable future. At the same time, what is now called the FSLN is itself an alliance of unlikely bedfellows, including former sworn enemies. Ortega's vice-president was the chief civilian negotiator for the contras and a handful of FSLN legislators were contra leaders. How fragile or enduring that alliance may be only time and political storms will tell. At least, as one commentator remarked, “Given that so many of the present electorate weren’t even alive during the revolutionary years, reference to ‘the long night of the Sandinistas’ can finally give way to ‘the 16-year nightmare of the neo-liberals. That in itself gives us the possibility of a new start.”
Regardless of what may happen over the next five years, the FSLN victory in the presidential elections is a blow to US imperialism in Latin America and another brick in the wall towards an integrated Latin America as a counterweight to US century’s old domination of the region.
8/11/06

Pre-Election Briefing No 2 September 2006

On 5th November around 3.4 million Nicaraguan voters will choose a president, vice president, 90 deputies for the National Assembly and 20 representatives for the Central American Parliament from four main coalitions:

* the Constitutional Liberal Party (PLC) led by José Rizo
* the Nicaraguan Liberal Alliance (ALN) led by the banker and ex-housing Minister Eduardo Montealegre
* the FSLN alliance, Nicaragua Triumphs led by ex-president Daniel Ortega
* and the Movement to Renew Sandinismo (MRS), now led by Edmundo Jarquín (following the death of Herty Lewites)

Presidential race heats up as official campaigning begins
With promises of social well being, employment creation and poverty reduction the candidates of the four alliances officially began their election campaigning on August 19th. Recent polls indicate that Daniel Ortega is currently leading the Presidential race with 31% of the vote, followed by Montealegre, with 29%. If these predictions are accurate elections will go to a second round, in which case Montealegre is likely to win.


Policies and promises: where the parties stand
For the FSLN Alliance the priority has been to reassure the Nicaraguan public that it would be able to unify the country. The inclusion of both Yatama (a Miskitu party) and ex-contras in the alliance may have gone some way towards this, but counteracting the blatant attempts by the US to prevent an FSLN victory is a major challenge. Ortega aligns himself with both Castro in Cuba and Chávez in Venezuela and would place an FSLN government firmly within the context of the Latin America Left. However the FSLN may be further removed from this ‘new’ left than appearance may suggest.

The FSLN have committed to restructuring the debts of owners of farms and small industries; a comprehensive literacy programme, better public healthcare, grants to poorer students and a return to the principle of investing 6% of GDP in higher education. Because of resources from Cuba and Venezuela the FSLN may be best placed to deliver on some of its promises.

The MRS is running on an anti-corruption platform, distancing itself from the FSLN-PLC pact, which attempted to create and institutionalise a two party system. Politically it describes itself as social democratic, similar to the Lula government in Brazil. The MRS has committed to constructing and renovating 50,000 houses per year in order to address the current housing deficit. The MRS has signed agreements with the Autonomous Women’s Movement and also with Víctor Espinales, a representative of one part of the former banana workers affected by Nemagon poisoning, committing to provide medical assistance, clean water and a reforestation plan.


The PLC remains a traditional party with roots in the Nicaraguan ruling class. It defines itself as promoting ‘social liberalism’ as opposed to the ‘neo-liberalism’ of the ALN but in reality the difference between the two is minimal. In fact the presence of two right wing alliances has more to do with the splits in the PLC between those loyal to Alemán and those closer to current president Bolaños. Although the ALN is keen to represent itself as a new, untarnished and modernising force, recent murmurings about Montealegre’s involvement in the collapse of Nicaraguan banks in the 1990s may undermine this image. The PLC has promised to privatise the Las Mercedes Industrial Free Trade Zone in Managua, in order to use the US$60 million it expects to raise to finance small and medium-scale farmers and owners of small businesses.
 

NSCAG CAMPAIGN AGAINST US INTERFERENCE IN THE ELECTIONS: UPDATE SEPTEMBER 2006

US delegation finds cross party opposition to US interference

In June the US based Nicaragua Network (Nicanet) organised a delegation to Nicaragua to investigate the extent of US interference. With the exception of US Ambassador Paul Trivelli, all of the 30 individuals interviewed felt that the US had gone beyond what was appropriate in its involvement in the electoral process. Even the spokesperson for ALN, which is openly supported by the US, admitted that Trivelli’s statements had probably hurt their candidate.
The delegation found that the US is investing between $10 and $13 million, split between the International Republican Institute (IRI - see below), the National Democratic Institute (IDI), IFES, (a technical body providing support to the Supreme Electoral Council) and the Organisation of American States election observer mission. However, it is unclear exactly where the money is being spent and a significant amount of funds is unaccounted for; there are suspicions that some funds are being used covertly to support the ALN campaign. US Embassy spokeswoman Pretti Shah denied that her government was giving financial support to any of the presidential candidates. “We are financing efforts to increase voter turnout and to make sure that each voter who wishes to vote is able to do so. We are financing several programs along this line, including the issuing of voter ID cards and training of election observers.”

Uniting the right, isolating the FSLN

Attempts to discredit the FSLN and PLC candidates continue unabated. Thomas Shannon, the US Assistant Secretary of State for the Western Hemisphere, visited Nicaragua at the end of June and met with Eduardo Montealegre and Herty Lewites (now deceased). At a press conference Shannon described Montealegre and Lewites as representing the “future” of the country. Shannon claimed regret at not meeting with the PLC candidate, although it seems likely the decision to leave Rizo out of the picture was meant to undermine the PLC.
The US has also been accused of being behind a number of high profile defections from the PLC to the ALN. In July four PLC mayors defected to the ALN, blaming PLC pressure and oppression for their decision. PLC Vice President Wilfredo Navarro said “we cannot deny that there is US pressure on our mayors and on all structures of our party to change to the ALN” as part of an “interventionist” attempt to “weaken the PLC.” Over the past months the US has used a variety of tactics to pressure PLC members, including the revoking of US visas from a number of high profile members.

Meanwhile, the Washington Post, whose editorials consistently reflect US policy on Nicaragua, published a new attack on Daniel Ortega under the headline ‘Nicaragua’s Leading Loser.’ Accusing Ortega of political corruption and attempting to interfere with the election process, it claimed ‘if Nicaragua remains a true democracy Ortega will lose.’ During a radio interview in August, Paul Trivelli again threatened Nicaraguan voters stating that US trade, aid, investment and remittances from Nicaraguans living in the US could be affected should they elect a ‘non democratic force’.
 

Election interference: does it matter?

Civil society groups from across the spectrum told the Nicanet delegation of the potential harm outside interference can do. María López Vigil from the political journal Envío said “you know [about the history of US interference] but we feel it. Many people have internalised it….Because so many efforts in Nicaragua…have failed many said let’s not fight with them [US].” Gonzalo Salgado of the Consumer Defence Network said “US officials’ statements have a great effect on peoples’ thinking about who they should vote for. The message they receive is that anyone in favour of the US will have its blessing. They believe that to be in opposition to the US hurts their country, to be in favour helps its development.”
However, the delegation commented that the Nicaraguan people they met analyzed and explained their political situation in a sophisticated and informed manner, had a strong commitment to national sovereignty and a desire to be left alone to resolve their own affairs. With polls still suggesting a close race and a likely second round, it remains to be seen who will claim victory – the US may find they have a more difficult job in convincing the Nicaraguan population to vote pro-US in 2006.
Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign
13/09/06

Pre-Election Briefing One: July 2006. No US Interference in the Nicaraguan Elections!  

Nicaraguans go to the polls on 5 November to elect a new president and members of the National Assembly. As in every election in Nicaraguan history the US is undermining the right of Nicaraguans to elect the government of their choice by interfering in order to ensure victory for their favoured candidate Eduardo Montealegre.
In the past few years tens of millions of Latin Americans have rejected governments that toe the US ‘free’ market line and have voted in left and centre-left governments committed to redressing deepening poverty and inequalities. In this context elections for the presidency and National Assembly take place in Nicaragua on November 5th. The political scene is complex: four coalitions are standing reflecting the splits in both the Sandinistas and the Liberals. This makes the result very difficult to predict. The coalitions and candidates are:

     Constitutional Liberal Party (PLC): José Rizo
     Liberal Alliance for Nicaragua (ALN): Eduardo Montealegre
     Nicaragua Triumphs / FSLN alliance: Daniel Ortega
     Movement to Rescue Sandinismo (MRS): Presidential candidate Herty Lewites died of a heart attack on July 2nd.   The vice-presidential candidate, Edmundo Jarquin, will now become the presidential candidate and singer/songwriter Carlos Meijia Godoy will be the vice presidential candidate

US policy: Unite the right and defeat the FSLN

In the well-trodden path of US manipulation and interference in Nicaraguan internal affairs, US Ambassador to Nicaragua, Paul Trivelli, has stated many times that the US “will establish cordial relations with any government that is elected democratically …that has a reasonable economic policy and is ready to cooperate with us.” In other words the US will accept the outcome of Nicaraguan elections as long as voters elect a government that supports ‘free’ trade policies including DR-CAFTA (the Dominican Republic Central America Free Trade Agreement, opposed by small farmers, unions and civil society groups across the region), responds positively to US requests for support in the war on terror and distances itself as far as possible from Cuba and Venezuela.

Examples of US interference in the past

* US ‘democratic’ credentials in Nicaragua over the past 150 years consist of eleven military interventions (including a 25 year occupation by US marines); years of support for the Somoza dictatorship; political, economic and indirect military intervention in the 1980s in an attempt to overthrow the democratically elected Sandinista government (this resulted in the deaths of 30,000 people); and support for right-wing parties and coalitions in the 1990, 1996 and 2001 elections in order to defeat the FSLN whilst doing all they could to discredit the left.
Noam Chomsky recently described how Robert Pastor, President Carter's national security adviser for Latin America put it. “He (Pastor) explained why the administration had to support the murderous and corrupt Somoza regime in Nicaragua, and…to maintain the US-trained National Guard even as it was massacring the population ‘with a brutality a nation usually reserves for its enemy’, killing some 40,000 people. The reason was the familiar one: ‘ The United States wanted Nicaraguans to act independently, except when doing so would affect US interests adversely.’ “

Interference in 2006

* In the run up to the 31 May deadline for registering parties and candidates, US Ambassador Paul Trivelli went into shameless and desperate overdrive offering financial and technical support to right-wing parties to choose a presidential candidate to defeat Daniel Ortega. Divisions on the right, however, proved too deep and bitter for even the carrot of US support and dollars to overcome. The right wing remains split and two alliances are registered with the Supreme Electoral Council: the Nicaragua Liberal Alliance (ALN) under Eduardo Montealegre and the Constitutionalist Liberal Party (PLC) led by José Rizo.

* During the same period Trivelli made veiled threats in the Nicaraguan press reminding voters of their dependence on remittances from the US and the reliance of Nicaragua on US aid, implying that a vote for the ‘wrong’ party would have negative consequences for both.

* On February 28th the notorious John Negroponte, US Director of National Intelligence, former US Ambassador to Honduras and supporter of death squads during the Nicaragua contra war, told the US Senate Armed Forces Committee that US intelligence services are ‘ closely observing the presidential elections processes in Peru and Nicaragua.’

* A delegation from the US 17 – 24 June made up of academics and members of civil society organization reported that: ‘With the exception of Ambassador Trivelli, all persons interviewed (this included representatives of all major parties) believed that the US government had gone beyond what was appropriate and correct in its involvement in the electoral process to the degree that its involvement is seen and felt as unacceptable intervention.’ They went on to report that a staff member of the International Republican Institute stated: ‘The relationship between Nicaragua and the United States is like that of a son and a father and children do not argue with their parents.’

One certainty in this complex panorama is that the US will continue to polarise the situation by meddling in Nicaragua’s political affairs. There will be more threatening statements by the US ambassador and the State department, more funding for bodies promoting the US vision of ‘democracy’, more slurs and attacks on the FSLN and further blackmailing of the Nicaragua electorate to vote the ‘right’ way.

Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign
13/07/06