Three premises to define what is happening in Nicaragua

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePrint this pageShare on Tumblr

Source: Redvolucion / The Dawn News / June 5, 2018

(On April 18, protests erupted on the streets of Nicaragua after the announcement of a series of reforms to the social security system. The protests took a violent turn, 63 people died, 15 people have been disappeared and hundreds of people were injured. The Social Security Reform was repealed shortly after and Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega called for a dialogue with the different sectors of the opposition to confront the situation facing the country, yet the violent protests have continued. The Nicaraguan alternative media website Redvolution published the following commentary on the situation).

In this moment of the political process which Nicaragua has been subjected to, we define three premises which allow us to clearly define the situation in Nicaragua:

1. It is not a social problem, but a political problem.

It is important to make this fact very clear, because any analysis that is expected to be carried out on the events and possible repercussions of the same, should be built on the basis of concrete facts and not simple rash conclusions.

Why do we argue that the problem is political? Simple. The stated agenda items like the “Letter to Christ Child” (a traditional Christmas wish list/letter) presented publicly by the opposition sector to government on the dialogue table, does not have any social or economic elements, or any demands of this nature. This is evident when we see that the last name they adopted (they have already had around 12), is Civic Alliance for Justice and Democracy. They do not demand social security, employment, exemptions, subsidies, highways, funding, security, better education and better health care system, but have only brought up political demands.

Therefore, the movement and its agenda are political and not social.

2. It is a coup plan, not a demand to democratize the country.

The second premise is about whether it is coup or not: to suggest an exit of President Ortega outside the period and terms stipulated by the Political Constitution (the next elections will be in 2021), is an anti-democratic step, that essentially pursues a change in the country’s legal political structure by not legal means.

Obviously, a political movement that demands a change of government in circumstances outside the constitution is a coup movement; it cannot be called anything else.

The interesting thing about this case is that in any other country where something similar has happened, the movement is recognized as a coup. For instance, Miguel Mora, the owner of news channel “100% Noticias” (former-Sandinista) and Haroldo Montealegre, entrepreneur condemned for a scam (ex-liberal), published on their Twitter accounts a book of Gene Sharp as a document to study a step-by-step process towards what he called a ‘Peaceful Revolution’.

Unlike other countries, the movement of Nicaragua has already publicly confessed its coup intentions. Therefore, we should always identify this political association/movement as a coup and not anything else.

3. It is not a self-organized movement but a well-organized one.

Lastly, there is the question of whether the movement emerged spontaneously as a result of social strife or if it was a guided and organized movement.

They say Nicaragua is a “large village.” We all know each other here.

Therefore, when the spontaneous events that were labelled “self- organized” took place, stemming from the students’ protests against the social security reforms, we saw how they began to activate progressively the same longstanding political actors, defined in the time as the “anti-Sandinista” actors.

It is not about traditional parties, legally incorporated, but about secretive parties, about ghost parties. It is about a complex network of interrelated structures (civil society movements and pro-human rights and pro-democracy NGOs), fundamentally guided by old policies and old politicians of the country, mostly, the traitors of Sandinismo and liberalism.

The first, who came from Sandinismo, shared the direction of the government in the decade of 80 and after 1993, still in opposition, led by Sergio Ramirez, betrayed Daniel Ortega and FSLN (Sandinista National Liberation Front), forming what was once a political party: MRS (Sandinista Renovation Movement). This MRS lost its the legal status because it doesn’t meet the minimum structural requirements established by the Electoral Law.

This batch of traitors must be added to other similar group: the former PLC (Constitutionalist Liberal Party) of Arnold Alemán, led by Enrique Bolaños back in the year 2002. This group of liberals tried to enter electoral battle with ALN (Nicaragua Liberal Alliance) and later with PLI (Independent Liberal Party), displacing PLC as the second political power in the country. In 2016, they lost legal status because of internal disputes and remained outside of the electoral game.

These former members, unable to gather the masses and reach political power by legal means, unscrupulously decided to return to the dirty, cruel and bloody game of a secretive attempt of a coup d’etat.

Somehow, they formed a “de facto” political party, a political body of movements and organizations, which systematically played a campaign of wearing down the Sandinista government and participating in the national politics, in a secret and devious way. This party was in complete harmony and coordination with received financial support from external, already documented political actors, the USAID (United States Agency for International Development) and U.S. congressmen.

When we see the same treacherous politicians, supporting the “spontaneous” student movement in all places, to such an extent that they assume its representation before the dialogue table, only two possibilities remain:

  1. They took the advantage of these self-organized movements and stole the command, or
  2. The self-organized movements were never self-organized, but were part of the plan from the very beginning.

We are going to stay with the second scenario because of the evidence that we have of the previous scenarios that ended up similarly: protests against electoral fraud, anti-canal protests, campaign for voting abstention, lobbying of the NICA Act (Nicaraguan Investment Conditionality Act), protests against femicides and protests for Indian maize. In all these processes, we saw the same former members on their communication platforms. For the naïve eye, this could be a simple coincidence, but for the analytic eye, this is the evidence that supports the second scenario, i.e., everything was planned.

With these three established premises, we must then define without any doubt that the group today is known as Civic Alliance for Justice and Democracy is a political movement that attempts to carry out a smooth coup d’etat, with organization, funding and objectives defined 11 years ago, with the clear political support of U.S. agents. This is what is happening in Nicaragua.

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePrint this pageShare on Tumblr