30th Anniversary of Nicaraguan Revolution
July 19, 2009, marked the
30th anniversary of Nicaragua’s Sandinista anti-imperialist democratic
revolution which brought the Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSNL) to
power in Nicaragua.
What this revolution overthrew was a classic
neo-colonial regime that facilitated the submission of Nicaragua’s economy to the interests of US imperialism, and the unconscionable looting of Nicaragua’s wealth by US imperialism’s financial institutions and multinational corporations. This
left Nicaragua, a beautiful country brimming with natural resources, in a state
of utter destitution.
The neo-colonial regime, that for decades
had been headed by the brutal and kleptocratic Somoza family, was opposed not
only by the vast masses of peasants and workers kept in dire ignorance and
suffering the most excruciating oppression, but also by the national
bourgeoisie and urban petty bourgeoisie whose aspirations were stifled by the
comprador oligarchy that ran the country, at great profit to themselves, for
the benefit of US imperialism.
It was these nationalist elements who initiated the
organised resistance to imperialism, whose most famous leader and
representative spokesman was Augusto Sandino, who led a guerrilla struggle
against the regime in the late 1920’s and early 1930’s that, with the support
of the oppressed Nicaraguan masses, liberated large areas of Nicaraguan
territory, making a point of especially targeting US-owned properties. As a
result of his military successes against the reactionary government forces
(fortified by large contingents of US marines), he was able to negotiate a
peace deal with the Nicaraguan government that encompassed an undertaking to
safeguard Nicaragua from foreign interference in its affairs, and the setting
up of an administrative zone in the northern part of the country to be
controlled by the Sandinistas where Sandino hoped to encourage the development
of cooperatives that would greatly improve the lives of the peasantry.
However, after the peace deal was concluded, Sandino was murdered on 21
February 1934 by the National Guard (a “constabulary” set up and trained as
from 1927 under US auspices and was in essence a force of local Nicaraguans
paid to fight for US interests) on the orders of a Lieutenant Anastasio Somoza,
the newly-appointed chief of the National Guard, who was in turn acting on
instructions from Washington. Two years later Somoza used his control of the
National Guard to seize power for himself.
Throughout the years of Somoza family control of
the Nicaraguan comprador government, resistance to the regime continued,
although it was largely driven underground by the fierce fascistic repression
meted out by the government forces. Anastasio Somoza was shot down and killed
by the poet and typesetter Rigoberto López Pérez – an action which Daniel
Ortega’s brother Humberto considered to be one of the first attempts at the
reintegration of the revolutionary Sandinista movement.[1]
However, Somoza’s eldest son, Luís Somoza Debayle, then chief of the National
Guard, immediately stepped into his father’s shoes, setting himself up to be
‘elected’ as president in elections to be held in February 1957, which thanks
to heavy US financial backing added to the intimidation of any opposition, he
could be confident of ‘winning’. Between 1956 and 1960 there were no fewer
than 60 armed actions by various opponents of the regime in different parts of
the country.
The success of the Cuban
revolution in 1959 gave a further impetus to the organisation of armed
struggle, and the FSLN was formed as a result of the coming together of various
groups supporting the armed struggle against the regime. Throughout the 1960s
the FSLN worked among the working class and peasantry to secure support for the
armed struggle and in 1969 presented its ‘Historic Programme’. This
programme promised to give political, civic, economic and social rights to the
people, including rights for “small and medium-sized owners”. It
undertook to effect a programme of major agrarian reform through land
redistribution on a mass scale, encouraging the formation of co-operatives. It
promised labour legislation to protect workers and to set up programmes of
social assistance. It also stood for racial and sexual equality. In foreign relations,
the FSLN undertook to support liberation struggles throughout the world, as
well as struggles for authentic democracy and equal rights (especially for
black people in the US).
In the 1970’s, the prices for most of Nicaragua’s
exports fell drastically, causing tremendous hardship to the Nicaraguan
population – bearing in mind that Nicaragua’s economy is heavily dependent on
agricultural exports. In addition to this bitter blow, an earthquake hit Managua on 23 December 1972, causing 20,000 deaths and leaving three quarters of the
capital’s population homeless. Although some $60m was received in
international disaster relief funds, most of this was expropriated by the
National Guard. All of this angered the masses and strengthened the revolutionary
movement, while at the same time causing dissension among the various sections
of the ruling class and disaffection among the urban petty-bourgeoisie which
found it more difficult to justify its collaboration with the Somoza regime.
The FSLN was able to focus around itself broad sections of the anti-Somoza
opposition, as it led a series of spectacular mass assaults on the regime. On
31 May 1979, Radio Sandino called for the final insurrection and a general
strike, leading to three months of heroic battles fought in the streets by
ordinary people, at the cost of heavy loss of life. On 16 June the FSLN
declared a provisional government in León, a city which it then controlled. On
10 July, the FSLN took control of Matagalpa. On 16 July it captured the National
Guard barracks at Estelí. And on 19 July, FSLN guerrilla columns from different
parts of the country converged on Managua and finally deposed the Somoza regime
whose personnel fled the country.
The FSLN in government
The FSLN set about building what it termed a
socialist society – i.e., a society that would deliver social justice to the
broad masses of the people. However, it was committed to political pluralism,
which meant in effect that people of all classes would be able to have parties
representing their class interests participating in the political life of the
country – the exploiters as well as the exploited. It did not set itself the
task of overthrowing capitalism but stood for a ‘mixed’ economy, where
state-owned industries, peasant co-operatives and privately owned enterprises
would operate side by side. However, by removing the imperialist stranglehold
on the economy, it was expected that all patriotic classes would be able to
benefit. It sought to offer the masses participatory rather than merely
representative democracy by means of encouraging the setting up of mass
organisations (e.g., of youth, of women, trade unions, etc) through which
members could directly influence political decision-making.
Furthermore, in order to make such participation
more meaningful, the FSLN sought to raise the cultural level of the masses. In
1980 the National Literacy Crusade was launched, which within 6 months taught
the best part of 500,000 Nicaraguans to read and write – reducing the rate of
illiteracy from over 50% to just 13%. It was envisaged that this would help
people to be better informed when making their political choices.
Agrarian reform was implemented as promised.
However, the only land distributed to the peasants was land confiscated from
members of the Somoza regime, and land which was under-utilised. Usury was
abolished. Credit, marketing assistance and technical assistance was made
available to small farmers. Social facilities were created in the
countryside. Some 2,000 co-operatives were formed by the end of 1980,
encouraged by favourable credit terms and facilities. Agricultural workers were
encouraged to participate in the Association of Rural Workers in order to
advance their separate interests.
The result of these reforms is that malnutrition,
that had been rife, was eliminated, and infant mortality, thanks also to the
provision of access to health care and mass vaccination programmes, fell from
12.2% in 1978 to 6.2% from 1985-90. Life expectancy rose from 52.9 years in
1979 to 63.26 years from 1985-1990. This was achieved despite the civil war
being waged by the Contras which especially targeted health and education
workers, and it was achieved because of the FSLN’s commitment to improving
access to health care and improving its quality, as well as its ability to
mobilise mass organisations to assist in the process.
Massive priority was given to education. In 1987,
983,803 students of all ages – almost a quarter of the population – were
attending classes of one sort or another. The number of children in school
almost doubled. At the same time, the revolution embraced teaching methods
which allowed a student to “participate in his or her own education… we’re
not interested in creating young men or women who only know a lot of facts …
but in order to become someone who can promote his or her critical
participation in society … we believe that an interaction is necessary… The
teacher doesn’t have to be the one who knows everything, that considers the
student down there as ignorant, who must just open their mouths and swallow
everything that the teacher says”. The idea was to encourage students to
become adept at problem solving, for in the words of Father Fernando Cardenal,
who was FSLN minister of education, “like all developing countries we are
lacking many things – there is something we have never lacked … that is the
problems … and we are becoming experts at working with those problems and
advancing despite those problems.”[2]
Armed struggle against the
revolutionary regime
US imperialism was quite unable to accept the fact
that the Nicaraguan masses had reclaimed Nicaragua’s sovereignty. It set out
to deploy its economic might for the destruction of the Nicaraguan revolution.
Its tactics were many and various, but all of them vicious. The main thrust of
US imperialist sabotage was through (a) economic sanctions, (b) slander and
calumny, (c) mobilising disgruntled elements and (d) financing and arming
reactionary elements to cause massive economic damage to Nicaragua, with a view to undermining the revolution’s ability to carry out its programme
of reforms and thus destroying popular support for the revolution.
When the FSLN took over, it inherited major
economic problems. Having been systematically looted by imperialism, it was
chronically underdeveloped. In addition to that it had suffered losses as a
result of the two years of insurrection amounting to some $500m at least –
equal in value to its entire export earnings for two or three years, and
leaving the country extremely short of food and export crops. Somoza had fled
the country bearing with him $3m of the country’s reserves. The foreign debt
stood at the eye-watering figure of $1.6bn.
In these conditions, where Nicaragua desperately needed access to foreign loans, the US blocked all international loans,
forcing Nicaragua, for instance, to cut back on its plans to provide housing
for workers. It also blocked Nicaragua’s trade with its traditional trade
partners, although Nicaragua was very quickly able to establish trading
relations with other countries, especially the USSR. However, much of Nicaragua’s farm machinery, for instance, had been imported from the US, and it became impossible to
obtain spare parts.[3]
The greatest damage was done, however, by the US’s mobilisation, arming and financing of the Contras. At the core of the Contra movement were the
ex-National Guard. They set up their bases in Honduras from where they
conducted raids into Nicaragua, targeting civilians and attempting to destroy the
rural economic infrastructure, particularly the cooperative farms. The Contras
also targeted health care facilities, destroying no fewer than 45 in the years
from 1981-5, and deliberately setting out to murder health personnel, such as
those conducting vaccination campaigns in rural areas.
In just one year, 1986, the losses caused by these
incursions amounted to $864.6m, equivalent to three times the country’s export
earnings for the year. In fact total direct and indirect economic damage caused
by the war up to 1988 has been estimated at $18bn. Given that the population
of Nicaragua was then around 3 million, the losses amounted to $6,000 for every
man, woman and child – a huge sum in a country where incomes are very low at
the best of times.
The cost to the US of all this destruction was more
or less equivalent to the destruction itself. Daniel Ortega pointed out at a
speech commemorating the eighth anniversary of the Revolution in July 1987
that:
“The United States has spent … US$9.7
billion on military installations in the area; given US$1.2 billion in military
assistance to Nicaragua’s neighbours, and another US$2.8 billion to ensure
their support for US military policy. Billions have been spent on espionage
flights over Nicaragua, on the maintenance of military installations, and on
manoeuvres. Altogether we calculate that the United States has invested
US$15.6 billion in trying to destroy the Revolution.”[4]
Why would US imperialism consider it imperative to
disburse such vast sums to destroy a tiny country like Nicaragua which was hardly in any position to cause it any harm? However, as Hazel Smith, [5]
correctly points out:
“If the Sandinista social and political
system which tried to respond to the ‘logic of the majority’ could be made to
work in a small and underdeveloped Third World country like Nicaragua, it could perhaps work elsewhere. The US interest was to prevent the success of
the Sandinista experiment of promoting economic growth, redistributing wealth
and implementing pluralist democracy. If other states adopted the Sandinista
example, which would necessarily challenge the rights of the US to control
economically or politically their social, economic and political systems, this
would indeed be a threat to the ‘national security’ of the United States, which
relies for that security on a worldwide interlocking system of formally
independent but informally dependent Third World nation states.
“These states provide raw materials for
US business and the military, and bases for US armed forces. They provide
markets and cheap labour. They provide investment havens and tax breaks. They
provide the source of billions of dollars’ worth of repatriated debt payments
and profits. In short, they are indispensable, as long of course as they do
not start to follow independent political policies, which would no longer
permit their dependent integration into the US-dominated Western world”.
Loss of the 1989 election
These were the circumstances in which, completely
unexpectedly, the FSLN lost the elections held in Nicaragua in 1989. They lost
in spite of the fact that the Contra had been effectively defeated, and they
lost despite the fact that in elections held on 4 November 1984, in which 74.41
of the electorate voted, the FSLN secured 63% of the votes cast. And they lost
primarily because the Nicaraguan people were tired of war; tired of the fact
that because of it, the FSLN could not fulfil all its promises; sick of the
deaths and injuries that it was causing.
The manifold strands of the bourgeois opposition –
no less than 14 political parties – had succeeded in uniting behind Violeta
Chamorro, whose election campaign was funded by the US to the tune of $1
million. Because, however, winning the election did not give Chamorro and her
supporters control of the Sandinista army, the FSLN continued to be a powerful
force in Nicaraguan politics. A neo-liberal in economics, she nonetheless in
politics promoted a policy of national reconciliation, allowing the
Sandinista’s land redistributions to be maintained, for instance, and granting
unconditional amnesties to FSLN supporters for what might otherwise have been
considered political crimes. She did reduce the military as much as was
possible and organised a weapons-buying campaign to disarm the masses
peacefully.
Although the disbanding of the Contras and the
lifting of economic sanctions that succeeded her election victory somewhat
alleviated Nicaragua’s dire economic position, supplemented by the less than
princely $300 million in aid provided by the US in 1990 and $241 million the
year after – very trivial sums as compared to the losses that had been caused
by the Contra war, the naked capitalist logic of neo-liberalism quickly led to
a rise in unemployment and under-employment and a severe reduction in social
spending. As the years wore on, and Chamorro was replaced in elections by
other candidates acceptable to US imperialism, being first Aleman, and then
Bolaños, identical neo-liberal policies further aggravated the situation of the
masses, until finally in 2006, with the right-wing parties quarrelling among
themselves, the FSLN’s Daniel Ortega was once again elected president.
Although he is everywhere accused of having ‘moderated his Marxist ideology’,
and of having undertaken to implement the economic policies of his opponents,
the fact remains that since his election, the FSLN has been able to implement
a series of programmes to reduce the appalling levels of poverty. “Zero
Usury” has assisted small business start-ups in the towns, whilst “Zero
Hunger” supports low-income families in the countryside. “Streets
for the People” is patching up neglected urban areas, whilst “Houses for
the People” is providing affordable accommodation for the urban poor.
All of these popular programmes, along with medical and literacy programmes,
are being helped by Venezuela and Cuba. With aid from Venezuela, electricity supplies have been regularised, so that the country no longer
suffers incessant power cuts, and miles of roads are being laid in order to
facilitate transport of commodities. Progress may be rather slow, but it is
steady and it is tangible. Under FSLN government, Nicaragua has also joined
ALBA, the growing community of Latin American nations determined to support
each other in developing their economies free from imperialist economic or
political control.
The future
Although the US has not yet intervened militarily
to stifle ALBA, no doubt because it is militarily committed to the limit in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is certainly anxious to undermine ALBA as thoroughly as possible. The
recent kidnap and deposition of the President of Honduras shows that it is
necessary for all independence loving countries in the region to be on their
guard. As far as Nicaragua is concerned, Daniel Ortega is being subjected to a
campaign of vilification suggesting not only that he has ceased to embrace the
political ideals for which he once stood, but worse that he profited personally
from land redistributions, to say nothing of making lewd allegations about his sex
life, criticising his religious conversion as well as his ability to turn
former foes into allies. Added to this, of course, are the inevitable
accusations of electoral improprieties and ballot rigging.
The people of Nicaragua and the people of progressive
Latin American countries in general must be on the alert with regard to this
vilification campaign. Experience has shown that electoral alternatives to the
FSLN in Nicaragua exacerbate the hardships faced by the masses of the people.
Whoever wins elections in Nicaragua will be unable overnight to cure Nicaragua’s chronic impoverishment. The FSLN, however, has shown that it is prepared to
work hard to improve the lives of the masses and that its programmes are
extremely effective, particularly when considered in the light of the country’s
very limited resources. Experience has also shown that such campaigns of
vilification are invariably linked with attempts to bring about regime change
with a view to promoting the interests of imperialism in general, and US imperialism in particular. There can be no doubt that the people of Latin America continue to
face a tough struggle ahead.
NOTES
[1.] See Humberto Ortega Saavedra, 50 años de lucha Sandinista,
Ministry of the Interior, Managua, 1979-80.
[2.] These quotations from Father Fernando Cardenal are from an interview
he gave Hazel Smith, and are cited in her book Nicaragua –
self-determination and survival, Pluto Press, London, 1993.
[3.] See EVK Fitzgerald, ‘An evaluation of the economic costs to Nicaragua
of US aggression 1980-1984’, in Rose J Spalding (ed), The political economy
of revolutionary Nicaragua, pp.195-213. Allen & Unwin, London, 1987.
[4.] Barricada Internacional, Managua, 30 July 1987.
[5.] Op. cit., see note [2.], p.249-250.