By Susan Frisbie
WCCN Development and Marketing Director
On Tuesday, November 7th millions of voters across the United States sat in their living rooms watching the television while waiting to hear the latest mid-term Congressional election results arriving from the polls. The night did not end well for the Fox News faithful who may have found further news to sulk about if they watched the news ticker at the bottom of the screen, as a familiar name they hadn’t seen in quite some time scrolled by. That name was Daniel Ortega. Though the Nicaraguan elections were held on Sunday, November 5th, it wasn’t until Tuesday evening with 91 percent of the ballots counted that Eduardo Montealegre, the U.S. government-favored right-wing candidate conceded the Nicaraguan presidential election to Ortega.
The elections were overseen by a slew of observation groups including those from the Organization of American States and the Carter Center. Though noting minor problems such as some late poll openings, former President Carter reported that the Nicaraguan election was a “much more careful and meticulous process and much more uniform throughout the country than anything we’ve every seen in the United States.”1 With all ballots tallied, Ortega, with nearly 38% of the vote, was the clear presidential victor with right-wing ALN-PC candidate Eduardo Montealegre coming in a distant second with 28 percent, Jose Rizo of the right-wing PLC receiving 27 percent, and Edmundo Jarquin of the MRS, a dissident Sandinista party, with 6 percent.
So far Washington’s response to the election results has been relatively quiet in comparison to pre-election, anti-Ortega rhetoric that grabbed media headlines across Nicaragua. To date, the pre-election pleas of Republican Congressmen Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce, and Pete Hoekstra who had asked Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff to cut off remittances sent by Nicaraguans living in the U.S. should Ortega win, have gone unanswered. Similar threats of an interruption in aid and trade programs to Nicaragua should so-called “anti-democratic forces” take the presidency were also made by Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez and Adolfo Franco, the second highest ranking official with USAID.
However, Carter, who spoke with Secretary Rice upon the certification of the results, relayed that Rice assured him that “the White House and State Deparment would accept the results of the election graciously and would respond positively to similar attitudes by the Sandinista government.”2 Meanwhile, national security spokesman Gordon Johndroe said, “The United States is committed to the Nicaraguan people. We will work with their leaders based on their commitment to and actions in support of Nicaragua’s democratic future.”3
One could argue that the U.S. government’s idea of a country committed to a “democratic future” is one in the same as a country that shares U.S. economic interests. If that is the case, then much to the dismay of left-wing Sandinista ideologues, the 2006 reincarnation of Daniel Ortega may leave Washington with little to fear. Throughout his campaign, Ortega dressed in a white shirt, often with the Nicaraguan flag draped carefully on his shoulders, preached of reconciliation, faith, and the free market.
His theme of reconciliation is best exemplified through his alliance with the man occupying the vice-presidential slot on the presidential ticket, Jaime Morales Carazo. The old saying says politics can make strange bedfellows, and nowhere is that better expressed than with Nicaragua’s president and vice-president elect. Morales is a former Contra-leader whose mansion was confiscated following the revolution, after which Ortega himself made Morales’s home his own. However, looking at the relationship through a critical lens it does not seem as odd as first presented. Much of Ortega’s criticism has lied in the iron grip he maintains over the FSLN and his role in the power-sharing pact established in 2000, which has left Nicaragua’s democratic institutions at the mercy of it’s two strongest political parties—the FSLN led by Ortega and the PLC led by ex-president and convicted felon Arnoldo Alemán. Morales had served as a political advisor in the previous two elections for the PLC and helped broker the deal, which institutionalized the pact.
Ortega has also found an ally in the Catholic Church. The former church foe now regularly attends Catholic mass and was married to his long time companion Rosario Murillo by his former enemy Cardinal Miguel Obando y Bravo in 2005. Whether Ortega truly had a spiritual awakening or if his newfound faith is simply a political maneuver is widely contested, but one thing is for sure—the church now plays a key role in Ortega’s policy making. In the month leading up to the election a highly controversial constitutional amendment banning therapeutic abortions was passed by Nicaragua’s National Assembly, making abortion illegal even when the mother’s life is at risk and in cases of rape and incest. Ortega was one of the amendment’s leading proponents.
Additionally, despite his socialist past, Ortega has gone out of his way to reassure business interests in Nicaragua that he embraces the free market, encourages foreign investment, and respects private property. In fact, the macroeconomic model that Ortega and his former-banker vice-president Morales support is not unlike that of previous administrations and their election opponents. Still, Ortega has continuously quoted Pope John Paul II’s critique of “savage capitalism”, promising that his government will offer a more just capitalism.
The political situation Ortega faces now is not to be envied. He will have to perform an incredible balancing act—ensuring foreign and business interests that economically speaking he is a changed man while enacting much needed social reforms at home. Though the outgoing President Enrique Bolaños, a sweetheart of Washington, has boasted of the success of his administration in spurring economic growth, he forgets to mention in his triumphant discourse the extreme inequality that still plagues Nicaragua, not to mention the abysmal level of education and healthcare public spending for which his administration is responsible. In Nicaragua the wealthiest 20 percent of the population maintains 60 percent of the national income with the poorest 20 percent comprising a dismal three percent.4 Inheriting these problems is Ortega who not only must try to keep campaign promises to his supporters that come from starkly different backgrounds from wealthy conservative right-wingers to the loyal Sandinista poor, but must also bear the weight of Washington’s eyes on his every move.
Ortega today, though still sporting his trademark mustache, bears little resemblance to the military fatigue-wearing socialist of the 80’s. Why then has Washington tried so vigorously to prevent his election, even going as far as offering, to no avail, to fund primaries to unite the right against him?
The rhetorical battering that Ortega has endured from Washington is perhaps indicative of the dogmatic foreign policy of the Cold War conservative ideologues that have found new political life in the Bush White House. The political reemergence of Ortega is undoubtedly a slap in the face and a constant reminder of failed foreign policy. Additionally, the mere mention of the names Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez sparks fear and paranoia in this political breed. Despite his message of reconciliation with the right, Ortega has been unwavering in his support of Castro, and Chavez’s promises of low-priced oil certainly helped Ortega’s campaign across Nicaragua, where power outages have been rampant and unpredictable. Instead of working to find an alternative to Chavez’s offer, Washington has relied on what has worked in the past—scare tactics. Though successful in the past, these tactics have lost steam. With 53% of the Nicaraguan population now under the age of 18, threats of war and economic strangulation do not run deep. Poverty is all this new generation has known and that poverty has grown under pro-Washington administrations.
It is perhaps too early to speculate as to whether the second-coming of Ortega will reap the economic as well as social gains he has promised. During the campaign, U.S. Ambassador to Nicaragua, Paul Trivelli, referred to Ortega as a “tiger that has not changed his stripes,” when clearly, at least rhetorically, he has. Time will tell if policy follows rhetoric. Time will also tell if the stripes of Washington policymakers have changed.
References
1 Elliott, Debbie (2006) “Carter Helps Monitor Nicaragua Presidential Elections,” All Things Considered, NPR, November 5.
2 Carter, Jimmy (2006) “Nicaraguan Elections: Trip Report by Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter,” The Carter Center.
3 Reuters (2006) ”Supporting Ortega Hinges on Democracy, says U.S.” November 7.
4 Nitlapán-Envío Team (2006) “Are We Ready to Leap Out of Poverty in a Single Bound?” Envío, September.
