Ortega’s Cynical Strategy
Daniel Ortega, the former Marxist-Leninist dictator who transformed Nicaragua into a Soviet client state during the 1980s, is not a true friend of either capitalism or democracy. But his grudging tolerance of the former is now enabling him to dismantle the latter.
After losing a much-publicized election to Violeta Chamorro in 1990, Ortega took advantage of a sinister political deal with the disgraced Arnoldo Alemán to reclaim the Nicaraguan presidency 16 years later. Before the Ortega-Alemán pact, a presidential candidate needed at least 40 percent of the vote to secure victory. After the pact, that threshold dropped to 35 percent. Thus, in November 2006, Ortega was able to win election with only 38 percent of the vote. (His two main conservative rivals, Eduardo Montealegre and José Rizo, won a combined total of more than 55 percent.)
He has since displayed a visceral contempt for democracy. For example: His Sandinista Party blatantly stole the 2008 Managua mayoral election, and Ortega used legal thuggery to gain the appearance of constitutional support for his reelection campaign. Indeed, under any objective reading of the Nicaraguan constitution, Ortega should be prohibited from seeking another term: The document explicitly limits presidents to two non-consecutive terms in office, and it explicitly bars incumbent presidents from seeking reelection. Ortega is currently finishing his second term (his first having occurred during the 1980s), so both of the aforementioned constitutional restrictions apply to him.
But the Nicaraguan Supreme Court has become a thoroughly corrupt body, and in November 2009 its Sandinista members conspired to remove the constitutional obstacles to Ortega’s reelection. The Sandinista justices held an unannounced meeting of the six-magistrate constitutional panel, at which they substituted three “replacement” judges for the three relevant opposition judges. This kangaroo court then proceeded to invalidate the term-limit provisions — despite the fact that, according to the text of the constitution, the only institution empowered to make such changes is the National Assembly.
It was a Sandinista power grab, pure and simple. It showed Ortega’s true colors. And it provided a stark warning that Nicaraguan democracy is in danger of being extinguished. The same leader who formed a Cuban-style police state during the Reagan years seems intent on resurrecting authoritarian rule and pursuing a belligerent foreign policy. His regime has harassed critical journalists and political opponents. During a border dispute in the fall of 2010, Nicaraguan troops invaded and occupied the sovereign territory of Costa Rica, an act of naked aggression against a country with no military.
Given this record, why isn’t the Nicaraguan business community actively campaigning for Ortega’s defeat? Simple: The Sandinista leader has embraced relatively pragmatic economic policies, and he has enjoyed a massive infusion of cash from Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chávez. Fueled by strong exports, tourism, and Venezuelan investment, the Nicaraguan economy experienced solid growth last year and has continued performing well in 2011. Nicaragua remains a very poor country (the second poorest in the Western Hemisphere, behind Haiti), but it has benefited from the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), which took effect in 2006. Ortega fiercely opposed CAFTA as a presidential candidate, but he has upheld the trade accord since taking office.
In short, where Chávez has waged war on private enterprise and scared away foreign investors, Ortega has (thus far) governed as an economic moderate. “To my surprise,” wrote Miami Herald columnist Andres Oppenheimer after a recent trip to Managua, “the business community seems relieved with Ortega, who unlike his benefactor Chávez, has not yet nationalized or confiscated major private companies. Many business people I talked to emphasized that, despite his fiery rhetoric against capitalism, the business community, independent media and the United States, Ortega has maintained a semi-independent Central Bank and accepts pro-market economic conditions set by the International Monetary Fund.”
The business lobby’s sense of relief is understandable. But what about the fate of Nicaraguan democracy, a cause for which the country fought a bloody civil war? Are business leaders willing to let Ortega create an autocracy in return for prudent economic management? Do they really want to live under an economically enlightened dictatorship? For that matter, isn’t there a big risk that Ortega will resort to Chávez-style economics once he finishes reestablishing one-party rule?
Lest we forget, Sandinista governance led to massive capital flight and hyperinflation during the 1980s. Nicaraguans are unwilling to go down that road again. Ortega realizes this. He also realizes that appeasing the business lobby is critical to his success. So he has cynically combined economic pragmatism with authoritarian politics. Ortega supports CAFTA but also steals elections. He encourages foreign investment but also manipulates the judicial system. He promotes a good business climate but also flouts the constitution.
Thus far, his formula appears to be working. Thanks to impressive economic growth and a weak, fractious opposition, Ortega seems poised to win reelection without much trouble. Another five years of Sandinista rule may suit the Nicaraguan business community just fine. But it will undoubtedly contribute to the further erosion of democracy, and it could possibly exacerbate regional instability (if Ortega pursues more foreign adventures like his 2010 invasion of Costa Rica). Is this really the future that Nicaraguans want?
Read this article in Spanish here.
Why is Daniel Ortega still alive? Why is he still walking above ground? Why hasn’t some covert operation taken out this petty communist dictator years ago? I’m sure the Nicaraguan people are fed up with this guy and you wouldn’t have to look hard for an ambitious young general to take his place. If the CIA can’t handle a petty dictator like Ortega, a guy who really could de-stabilize a lot of Central America, I don’t really know what use the CIA is these days. I’m sure Congress would go along with any coup attempt against Ortega (except the Socialist members), so the CIA could easily get permission to take this killer out. That Obama doesn’t want to lift a finger to get rid of this guy says a lot, and I mean a lot, about him and his love for communinsts.
Seems to me he stole the last election anyway. My recollection is that Doña Violeta, when drafting the new Constitution, made it impossible for him to be elected president again. SHE knew her country had had done with that monster. She knew him well, having initially been one of the nine-member ruling junta after Somoza was exiled. It took some hard work for her to escape that assignment. He did all he could to defeat all opposition in the ’90 election.. but the liberty-seeking candidates realised his ploy.. divide and conquer. He knew that if ten candidates stood against him, he’d get the largest portion of the votes… the remainder being divided ten ways. SO– his challengers also realising this, decided amongst themselves which ONE candidate to stand for office.. the others withdrawing. Even with stuffed ballot boxes, thousands of dead voters, thousands more paid multiple voters, he lost by a landslide.
Seems Nicaragua forgot his wretched strategy in ’08. If one of his opposition candidates had pulled out, the other would have won handily. No more Ortega. Greed and.or selfishness won out, Nicaragua lost. Now he’s concolidated power to the extent it will take another coup, or 150 grains of copper-clad lead, to remove him.
As to our own fearless (faux) leader’s support of, and the mainstream media’s deafening silence on Ortega and his ilk, it DOES show a strong suggestion of their priorities… they seem to fairly fawn over such skullduggery and corruption. Perhaps because it is their own game as well?
Skullduggery and corruption lets see now, you must be talking about Chicago or maybe the White House? Who cares about Nicaraguan corruption when we can’t clean our own house.
What about democracy?
Or a federal democratic republic to start the parsing.
Isn’t this the same question we have with Iraq and Afghanistan?
And certainly getting rid of the evil dictators is turning out so well in Egypt, Libya, and Syria.
Maybe democracy simply won’t work in Nicaragua, and a benevolent dictator is the best they can hope for.
Indeed, maybe this is the future Nicaraguans want.
If they have peace and economic stability, should we really be inciting another round of civil war there just because their current dictator is a revised Stalinist on his second turn?
Sometimes it really is just best to say no to more slapdash nation building.
Democracy WAS working in Nicaragua. Who says the Nicaraguan people “want” Ortega ad infinitum? When he is rigging elections and re-writing the constitution in his favour, that doesn’t suggest that Ortega is altogether confident that the Nicaraguan electorate would willingly give him a second term.
Shortly after the election of Ortega, the presidential palace in Managua was vacated, in favour of the sandinista party headquarters. This set alarm bells ringing on two counts: firstly, that it signalled that Ortage had no plans ever to surrender power; secondly, that the partition between party and government was completely dissolved.
With a vacant presidential palace, Ortega offered it to house the Central-American Parliament. The Parliament already had a home in Guatemala City, but three delegates from El Salvador, plus their Guatemalan driver, had recently been gunned down. Odd that Ortega (who, as it happens, knows a thing or two about shooting political opponents in foreign capitals) chose so cynically to exploit the murders,
Odd, too, that Obama provided no support for Honduras, when the former president there was correctly banned from standing for a consecutive term, in defiance of the constitution. No less odd that Obama has seen no reason to criticize Ortega’s abuse of the Nicaraguan constitution. Even odder: that unpersuasive comment from Obama, to the effect that he would be happy with just the two terms in the White House (as though he were anticipating being begged to stay on for more). Is he, perhaps, on the look-out for precedents?