DOCSLIB.ORG

Understanding Populism and Political Participation: the Case of Nicaragua

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Understanding Populism and Political Participation: the Case of Nicaragua WOODROW WILSON CENTER UPDATE ON THE AMERICAS No. 4 JUNE 2009 Understanding Populism and ew Left’ Political Participation: N The Case of Nicaragua By Carlos F. Chamorro, Edmundo Jarquín and Alejandro Bendaña Edited by Cynthia J. Arnson and Adam T. Stubits INTRODUCT I ON Adam T. Stubits Last year, the Latin American Program’s proj- in Ecuador. As a result, Ortega is forced into tak- ect on “Democratic Governance and the ‘New ing a pragmatic stance when it comes to relations Left’ in Latin America” convened the semi- with the United States or other international nar “Understanding Populism and Political financial institutions. Moreover, Chamorro ques- Participation.” The purpose was to examine new tions that the system of direct democracy estab- forms of political participation and state-civil lished by Ortega—the Citizen Power Committees society interaction in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, (CPCs), established by Presidential decree and led and Venezuela. In recent years, public opinion by regional Sandinista party officials distribute polls throughout Latin America have identified a the benefits of the government’s social policies as great deal of popular dissatisfaction with the insti- well transmit the president’s policies directly to tutions of democratic governance and with exist- the people. Because they are fundamentally secre- ing channels of political representation. This con- tive and non-transparent they run contradictory ference sought to understand the extent to which to the basic tenants of democracy. the governments in Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Edmundo Jarquín examines the similarities and Venezuela had responded to these ‘deficits’ and differences that exist between Nicaragua and with new or innovative programs and what the its neighbors, Bolivia, Venezuela and Ecuador, resulting consequence for liberal democracy has emphasizing the great contradiction of a political been. This bulletin contains the observations of minority, albeit a significant minority, promot- three distinguished analysts of Nicaraguan poli- ing a “refoundational” and “rupturist” agenda. tics: Carlos F. Chamorro is the editor of the weekly Ortega’s objective, Jarquín argues, has been to paper Confidencial; economist Edmundo Jarquín, consolidate his political hegemony through a dual Democratic Governance and the ‘ who was the Sandinista Renovation Movement system of authoritarian populism and authori- (MRS) candidate in the 2006 presidential elec- tarian corporatism, although he questions the tions; and Alejandro Bendaña is president of the viability of Ortega’s authoritarianism in light of Center for International Studies. Nicaragua’s worsening socioeconomic situation. Carlos Chamorro argues that the difference Alejandro Bendaña addresses the importance between Nicaragua and the other “new left” coun- of distinguishing between political content and tries in Latin America is that Daniel Ortega did personality when it comes to analyzing the “new not win the presidential elections of 2006 with a left” governments of Latin America, arguing that LATIN AMERICAN PROGRAM majority, and thus did not have the same over- instead, we must focus on the real ideological whelming mandate for change as did President content promulgated by these new governments, Evo Morales in Bolivia or President Rafael Correa and whether it reflects the mounting demand for WOODROW WILSON CENTER UPDATE ON THE AMERICAS the deepening of democracy and social and economic the Americas (ALBA). Unlike Hugo Chávez, Evo justice. According to Bendaña, the current govern- Morales, and Rafael Correa, each of whom won their ment led by Ortega has not attempted to revamp elections with over 50 percent of the popular vote and social and educational priorities and it differs from promises of profound changes in the existing politi- other “new left” governments in that there has been cal system, Ortega was elected with only 38 percent no questioning of free trade with the United States, of the vote, an important minority for sure, but a economic programs with the IMF, collaboration with minority nonetheless and one that correlates closely the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency, the Millennium with the paramilitary forces. Indeed, the Sandinista Challenge Cooperation and with the Pentagon in the National Liberation Front (FSLN) won 38 of the 92 form of Nicaraguan army training in the old School delegates in the National Assembly, or 41 percent. of the Americas. Ortega’s victory was made possible by a 2000 consti- tutional reform agreed to by former president Arnoldo Ortega’s “Citizens’ Power” in Alemán and his Constitutionalist Liberal Party that Nicaragua: Democratic Participation lowered the threshold necessary to win a presidential 2 or Authoritarian Populism? election in the first round from 45 percent to 35 per- Carlos F. Chamorro cent when the candidate in first place had at least a 5 Confidencial percent lead over the second-place candidate. As such, Ortega’s victory is not evidence of a general leftist turn Before analyzing the types of changes President Daniel among Nicaragua’s electorate; rather, a new electoral Ortega’s so-called “Democratic Directive” has intro- rule combined with the schism of the right-wing anti- duced in Nicaragua, it is first necessary to understand Sandinista bloc—the Nicaraguan Liberal Alliance the nature of the Sandinista government that returned (ALN), which won 28.3 percent of the vote, and the to power in January 2007 after sixteen years as the Constitutionalist Liberal Party (PLC), which won 27.1 opposition. percent of the vote. In fact, the FSLN won the presi- Although Ortega has defined his government as dency with a lower percentage of the electorate than “a continuation” of the 1979 Sandinista People’s it garnered in its last three electoral defeats: 1990 (41 Revolution, there are substantial differences between percent), 1996 (38 percent), and 2001 (42 percent). this process and those of other governments that con- Unlike Evo Morales’ party, Movement Towards form to the Bolivarian Alternative for the People of Socialism (MAS, which in Spanish means “more”), THE LATIN AMERICAN PROGRAM and its institutes on Mexico and Brazil serve as a bridge between the United States and Latin America, providing a nonpartisan forum for experts from throughout the region and the world to discuss the most critical issues facing the Hemisphere. The Program sponsors research, conferences, and publications aimed at deepening the understanding of Latin American and Caribbean politics, history, economics, culture, and U.S.-Latin American relations. By bringing pressing regional concerns to the attention of opinion leaders and policymakers, the Program contributes to more informed policy choices in Washington, D.C., and throughout the Hemisphere. The Latin American Program’s work on democratic governance focuses on questions of democratic quality. Current research seeks to explain the rise of leftist and populist governments in Latin America and to explore the impact of specific public policies to reduce poverty and inequality and enhance citizen participation and human rights. The pro- ject builds on three decades of prior work on democratic governance at the Wilson Center, including path-breaking studies of the breakdown of democratic regimes, transitions from authoritarianism, challenges to the consolidation of democratic rule, decentralization, citizenship, and the relationship between democratization and internal armed conflict. We are grateful to The Ford Foundation and the Open Society Institute for its generous support of this initiative. WOODROW WIlsON INTERNATIONAL CENTER FOR SCHOLARS One Woodrow Wilson Plaza, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20004-3027 tel. (202) 691-4000, fax (202) 691-4001 www.wilsoncenter.org/lap UnderstandinG POPULISM AND POLITICAL Participation Nicaragua’s resurgent FSLN did not come from a egy of national development? The answer is largely coalition of growing social movements, but rather unknown—or, at the very least, difficult to identi- from an electoral machine that maintains a privileged fy—given Ortega’s tendency to jump between prag- relationship with its constituent social groups and, matism and revolutionary rhetoric, his increasingly thanks to the beneficial pact made with the PLC, has traditional leadership style and lack of a long-term significant influence on state powers including the development strategy. Supreme Electoral Council, Supreme Court of Justice, Ortega’s plan is unique, however, in that it includes and Inspector General. Ultimately, Ortega’s victory a short term strategy for accumulating personal power cannot be attributed to a mass endorsement of his based on three principles: 1) the growing, iron-clad stance against the neoliberal policies of his predeces- control the executive holds over the powers of the sors, as the majority of poor voters in Nicaragua—six state; 2) a social assistance policy supported by the dis- out of every ten—voted against Ortega.1 cretionary use of economic resources stemming from Venezuelan cooperation; and 3) an advantageous, What is the electoral mandate given to Ortega? blackmail-based relationship with Arnoldo Alemán’s 3 Ortega’s electoral mandate reflects the Nicaraguan PLC–which allows him to manipulate, divide, and co- population’s dual desires: on the one hand, a desire opt the opposition, effectively permitting the FSLN to to fight poverty and fortify social policies, and on the function as a majority party, even though it is techni- other, demands for institutional
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Ortega for President: the Religious Rebirth of Sandinismo in Nicaragua
    European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 89, October 2010 | 47-63 Ortega for President: The Religious Rebirth of Sandinismo in Nicaragua Henri Gooren Abstract: This article analyses various connections between Daniel Ortega’s surprising victory in the presidential elections of 5 November 2006, his control of the Frente Sandinista de la Liberación Nacio- nal (FSLN) party, and the changing religious context in Nicaragua, where Pentecostal churches now claim almost one quarter of the population. To achieve this, I draw from my fieldwork in Nicaragua in 2005 and 2006, which analysed competition for members between various religious groups in Managua: charismatic Catholics, the Assemblies of God, the neo-Pentecostal mega-church Hosanna, and the Mormon Church. How did Ortega manage to win the votes from so many religious people (evangelical Protestants and Roman Catholics alike)? And how does this case compare to similar cases of populist leaders in Latin America courting evangelicals, like Chávez in Venezuela and earlier Fujimori in Peru? Keywords: Nicaragua, religion, elections, FSLN, Daniel Ortega. Populist leadership and evangelical support in Latin America At first look, the case of Ortega’s surprise election victory seems to fit an estab- lished pattern in Latin America: the populist leader who comes to power in part by courting – and winning – the evangelical vote. Alberto Fujimori in Peru was the first to achieve this in the early 1990s, followed by Venezuelan lieutenant-colonel Hugo Chávez in the late 1990s and more recently Rafael Correa in Ecuador (Op- penheimer 2006). These three populist leaders came to power thanks to the break- down of an old party system, which gradually became stagnant and corrupted.
    [Show full text]
  • The Carter Center News Spring 1990
    THE CARTER CENTER NEWS SPRING 1990 Carter, Council Monitor Nicaraguan Elections Peaceful Transition of Power First in Country's History On April 25, the Nicaraguan people inaugurated a new president in the first peaceful transfer of power to an elected opposition in the country's history. of Nicaragua chose their new president in a free and fair election," said President Carter, who led an international delegation to monitor the February 25 elections. The delegation was formed under the auspices of the Council of Freely-Elected Heads of Government, chaired by President Carter and based at The Carter Center of Emory University (CCEU). The Council joined delegations from the United Nations and the Organization of American States (OAS) in monitoring the elections. Following the transfer of power from the Sandinista (FSLN) government of Daniel Ortega to the coalition government (UNO) of Violeta Chamorro, President Carter said, "Both Daniel Ortega and Violeta Chamorro deserve the world's respect and admiration for the way they handled the transition. Former President Ortega has set his country on the road to democracy. President Chamorro has been entrusted by the people of Nicaragua with the difficult task of healing the division in that nation and nurturing the newly-born democratic spirit. It is my sincerest hope that peace and democracy will flourish in Nicaragua." The Invitation In the summer of 1989, President Carter and the Council were invited to observe the elections by thenPresident Daniel Ortega, the Union of National Opposition (UNO), and the Supreme Electoral Council. The Nicaraguan election project was directed by Robert Pastor and Jennie Lincoln, director and associate director respectively of CCEU's Latin American and Caribbean Studies program.
    [Show full text]
  • The November 2011 Elections in Nicaragua: a Study Mission Report of the Carter Center
    The November 2011 Elections in Nicaragua Study Mission Report Waging Peace. Fighting Disease. Building Hope. The November 2011 Elections in Nicaragua: A Study Mission Report of the Carter Center THE NOVEMBER 2011 ELECTIONS IN NICARAGUA: A STUDY MISSION REPORT OF THE CARTER CENTER OVERVIEW On November 6, 2011 Nicaragua held general elections for president and vice president, national and departmental deputies to the National Assembly, and members of the Central American Parliament. Fraudulent local elections in 2008, a questionable Supreme Court decision in October 2009 to permit the candidacy of incumbent President Daniel Ortega, and a presidential decree in January 2010 extending the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE) magistrates in office after their terms expired provided the context for a deeply flawed election process. Partisan election preparations were followed by a non-transparent election day and count. The conditions for international and domestic election observation, and for party oversight, were insufficient to permit verification of compliance with election procedures and Nicaraguan electoral law, and numerous anomalies cast doubt on the quality of the process and honesty of the vote count. The most important opposition party rejected the election as fraudulent but took its seats in the legislature. Nicaragua’s Supreme Electoral Council dismissed opposition complaints and announced that President Daniel Ortega had been re-elected to a third term. In addition, the official results showed that Ortega’s Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) party had won enough legislative seats both to reform articles of the constitution (requires a 60% majority) and to call a constituent assembly to write a new constitution (requires 66%).
    [Show full text]
  • Spotlight on Nicaragua
    February 16, 2021 CLOSING OF POLITICAL AND CIVIC SPACES: SPOTLIGHT ON NICARAGUA TABLE OF CONTENTS February 16 Agenda ................................................................................................................ 2 Part I: Nicaraguan Spring: The Rise & Repression of a Protest Movement ............. 5 State-Sponsored Violence & the Closing of Political Space Part II: How Did We Get Here? Background on the Current Political Landscape ... 7 State-Sponsored Violence & the Closing of Political Space El Pacto: Leftist on Paper but Not in Practice Questionable Reelections Reforms Favor Authoritarianism An Economy in Ruins Impacts of COVID-19 and Hurricanes Eta & Iota The 2021 Election Part III: Recent Laws Limiting Civic Space .......................................................................... 15 Law of Regulation of Foreign Agents Special Law of Cybercrimes Law of Life Sentence Law of Defense of the Rights of the People to Independence, Sovereignty, Self-determination for the Peace Penal Code Reform A Diverse and Divided Opposition Civic Alliance for Justice & Democracy White & Blue Unity Great National Coalition Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Sexual and Reproductive Health and Rights U.S. Policy and the Biden Administration’s Challenges Speaker Biographies ................................................................................................................ 24 1 February 16, 2021 AGENDA AGENDA Welcome & Introduction Introduction to Topics for Meeting Understanding the Current Context of Nicaragua • Current Political
    [Show full text]
  • Reputación Y Resultados
    CHALLENGE: CITIZENSHIP Non venal edition Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) Developing Ideas from LLORENTE & CUENCA, January, 2018 Lagasca, 88 - 3rd floor 28001 Madrid (Spain) Edition: Anatomía de Red Design: Joaquín Gallego Content INTRODUCTION A challenged and anxious society José Antonio Zarzalejos 13 CHALLENGE: CITIZENSHIP The Ethical Challenge of the New Citizenship José Antonio Llorente 19 GLOBAL CITIES Latin America challenged by smart cities Javier Rosado & Raimundo Diaz 25 Citizen Engagement versus Tourism-phobia: The Role of Citizens in a Country’s Brand Juan Arteaga & Anel Hernandez, 31 Mexico City: Keys and Challenges to Building a Smart City for Citizens Alejandro Romero & Arie Ellstein 45 Improving ourselves as citizens Daniel Silberfaden 53 The Major Challenges Facing Cities Jordi Serra del Pino 57 TERRITORIES AND COMMUNITIES The dawn of the phygital consumer David G. Natal & Julio Alonso 63 Inbound Marketing: User-based Communications Iván Pino & Diego Romero 71 Grassroots: The Power of Organized Communities Joan Navarro & Laura Martínez 77 Liquid Democracy and Exponential Technology for Transforming the World Ana Lorenzo 83 PUBLIC AFFAIRS The Doria Effect: The Impact of Communication on the Management of a City Juan Carlos Gozzer & Thyago Mathias 91 Latin America’s New Wave of Populism—a Movement More Alive Than Ever Before Luisa García & Claudio Vallejo 101 The Impossible Politics of Walls José Antonio Zarzalejos 127 Does Every Trump Have a Silver Lining? Cecilia Soto 133 REPUTATION & SUSTAINABILITY The case of
    [Show full text]
  • Chávez, Daniel. Nicaragua and the Politics of Utopia. Development and Culture in the Modern State. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2015
    Chávez, Daniel. Nicaragua and the Politics of Utopia. Development and Culture in the Modern State. Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press, 2015. Print. 363 pp. ________________________________________________ JOSÉ MARÍA MANTERO XAVIER UNIVERSITY The recent work Nicaragua and the Politics of Utopia. Development and Culture in the Modern State by Daniel Chávez offers a timely study of recent Nicaraguan history and the distinct cultural and political manifestations of national utopian projects. As ambitious, grounded, and well-documented as the study is, the work would have benefited from a more Central and Latin American contextualization of utopia, the central theme and theory of the analysis. Essays and poems by Simón Bolívar, José Martí, Pedro Henríquez Ureña, Enrique Rodó, José Carlos Mariátegui, and works such as La raza cósmica (1925) by José Vasconcelos and the poem “Salutación del optimista” from Cantos de vida y esperanza (1905) by Rubén Darío, for example, call for a defense of Latin American identity and for the construction of an America where no one nation was subjugated by another and the influence of the United States in national and international affairs was offset by the strength of a continental consciousness. In all, Nicaragua and the Politics of Utopia. Development and Culture in the Modern State is a valuable contribution to the field of Nicaraguan and Latin American studies that combines the study of lesser-known documents (the inauguration speeches of the Anastasio Somoza García and Violeta Chamorro, for example)
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua: Revolution and Restoration
    THE NEW GEOPOLITICS NOVEMBER 2018 LATIN AMERICA NICARAGUA: REVOLUTION AND RESTORATION RICHARD E. FEINBERG NICARAGUA: REVOLUTION AND RESTORATION RICHARD E. FEINBERG EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since independence, Nicaragua has suffered periodic internecine warfare, deep distrust between contending factions dominated by powerful caudillos (strongmen), and interventions by foreign powers. While the United States was frequently a party to these conflicts, local Nicaraguan actors often outmaneuvered U.S. diplomats. At the end of the Cold War, internationally supervised elections yielded an interlude of relatively liberal democracy and alternation of power (1990-2006). To the consternation of the United States, Sandinista Party leader Daniel Ortega regained the presidency in 2007, and orchestrated a successful strategy of coalition-building with the organized private sector and the Catholic Church. Supported by the international financial institutions and the Venezuelan Chavista government, Nicaragua achieved strong economic performance with moderately inclusive growth. President Ortega used those economic resources to gradually capture or suppress—one by one—many of the nation’s political institutions, eroding institutional checks and balances. Ortega’s strategy of co-opting all centers of power extended to the military and national police. The restoration of traditional caudillo politics and the fusion of family-state-party-security forces were all too reminiscent of the Somoza family dynasty (1934-1979). Frustrated by Ortega’s narrowing of democratic
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua's President Ortega
    No. 2097 January 11, 2008 Nicaragua’s President Ortega: The Balancing Act After One Year James M. Roberts Marketing himself as a completely redesigned the vegetarian and carnivorous socialist camps. The 2007 model, with sleek new lines and reassuring former Comandante is walking a tightrope, appear- sound bites, Sandinista leader Daniel Ortega per- ing to support capitalism and the U.S.–Central suaded 38 percent of Nicaraguan voters to elect him America–Dominican Republic Free Trade Agree- president in November 2006 on his third try since ment (CAFTA–DR) and maintaining relations with leaving office in 1990. Ortega, now 62, assumed the the U.S. while seeking close relations with and cash presidency for the second time in January 2007. As from world troublemakers such as Iranian Presi- he approaches the first anniversary of his inaugura- dent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Chávez, and Colo- tion, however, many design flaws in the clunky nel Muammar Qadhafi of Libya. 1979 model Ortega are beginning to manifest them- What the U.S. Should Do. The U.S. should selves again. carefully monitor the situation in Nicaragua and Across South America, a number of countries are give Ortega every encouragement to continue down backsliding into a variety of long-discredited social- the path of democratic governance and neoliberal ist models. In some cases, countries are being ruled market reform. If he chooses to follow the Chavista by despotic hard-leftist and populist caudillos path instead, the U.S. should take every opportu- (strongmen). The leaders of this resurgent Latin left- nity to counter Ortega’s influence and steer Nicara- ist wave generally fall into two camps: “vegetarian” gua back onto the right track.
    [Show full text]
  • Nicaragua Building Ties with Iran
    Nicaragua Building Ties With Iran http://www.newsmax.com/scripts/printer_friendly.pl?page=http://www.... Reprinted from NewsMax.com Nicaragua Building Ties With Iran By Joachim Bamrud Wednesday, Aug. 15, 2007 Nicaragua's new left-wing president has begun building a strategic alliance with Iran, calling America a "terrorist nation." The president, Daniel Ortega, is no stranger to Americans. Back in the 1970s and 1980s he headed the Sandinista junta that ruled Nicaragua with the support of Castro's Cuba and the Soviet Union. Ortega and the Sandinistas were ousted from power — though they kept control of the state police — after a plebiscite in 1990 gave pro-democracy forces control of the nation's parliament. But the Sandinistas have re-emerged with the election of Ortega last November, giving him control of the strategically located Nicaragua, the poorest country in Central America and the second poorest in the Western Hemisphere. Dangerous Alliance Though Ortega had campaigned to keep Nicaragua democratic and open to free enterprise, there are worrisome signs he is increasingly joining ranks with Hugo Chavez's neighboring Venezuela to oppose U.S. interests in the region. And now he is seeking to establish ties with Iran. Iran is set to pump nearly $500 million into Nicaragua to build a new hydroelectric project, invest in a new port and build 10,000 new houses, Ortega announced in early August after hosting an Iranian government delegation that included Iran's deputy energy minister, Hamid Chitchian. That visit came after Ortega flew to Tehran in June and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad visited Nicaragua in January, shortly after Ortega assumed office.
    [Show full text]
  • UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Rosas Sin Pan: The
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Santa Barbara Rosas Sin Pan: The Cultural Strategies of the Sandinista Devolution A Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Arts in Sociology by Cristina Awadalla Committee in charge: Professor Denise Segura Chair Professor Jon Cruz Professor Kum-Kum Bhavnani June 2019 The thesis of Cristina Awadalla is approved. ___________________________________________________________ Kum-Kum Bhavnani ___________________________________________________________ Jon Cruz ___________________________________________________________ Denise Segura, Committee Chair April 2019 Acknowledgements Para mi mama, que me enseñó desde que era pequeña a amar, luchar, y alzar mi voz. A mi hermano mayor que ha estado a mi lado a lo largo de este viaje, alentándome incondicionalmente a confiar en mi trabajo. Para todas las valientes feministas Nicaragüenses, las que me brindaron su tiempo, historias y análisis profundos, las que siguen luchando y que siguen imaginando y creando nuevos mundos a pesar de toda la repression física y idiologica. Sin ellas, este proyecto no se podriá realizar. To my parents who came from different lands, whose endless hours at work have allowed me to dream and go places none of us could have imagined. To all my friends and family who support, motivate, and inspire me—thank you for letting me talk your ears off, engaging me and showing interest in my work. I would also like to thank the department of Sociology at UC, Santa Barbara, for the training and support provided to me that has helped me realize this work. Thank you to Denise Segura who has shown me what it is to be a bold woman of color in academia, who was the first here to show me my potential, giving me the support to cultivate it, and has provided endless feedback on an ever-evolving project.
    [Show full text]
  • Iran in Latin America Threat Or ‘Axis of Annoyance’?
    IRAN Wilson Center Reports on the Americas • # 23 Woodrow I N LA TI N A IRAN IN LATIN AMERICA M E R Threat or ‘Axis of Annoyance’? I C A Threat or ‘ A xis of A nnoyance’? EDITED BY Cynthia Arnson Haleh Esfandiari and Adam Stubits Latin American Program Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars 1300 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20004 Tel. (202) 691-4030 Fax (202) 691-4076 www.wilsoncenter.org/lap Latin American Program Middle East Program IRAN IN LATIN AMERICA: THREAt or ‘AXIS OF ANNOYance’? Latin American Program Middle East Program IRAN IN LATIN AMERICA: THREAt or ‘AXIS OF ANNOYance’? Edited by Cynthia Arnson, Haleh Esfandiari and Adam Stubits Woodrow Wilson Center Reports on the Americas # 23 The Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars is the national, living memorial honoring President Woodrow Wilson. In providing an essential link between the worlds of ideas and public policy, the Center addresses current and emerging challenges confront- ing the United States and the world. The Center promotes policy-rele- vant research and dialogue to increase understanding and enhance the capabilities and knowledge of leaders, citizens, and institutions world- wide. Created by an Act of Congress in 1968, the Center is a nonpartisan institution headquartered in Washington, D.C., and supported by both public and private funds. Lee H. Hamilton, President and Director Available from the Latin American Program Board of Trustees Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars Joseph B. Gildenhorn, Chair One Woodrow Wilson Plaza Sander R. Gerber, Vice Chair 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, DC 20004-3027 Public members: James H.
    [Show full text]
  • Background- Nicaragua1 Nicaragua Is a Small Central American
    Background- Nicaragua1 Nicaragua is a small Central American country (pop. 6 million, 2017 est.) that has experienced repeated U.S. military intervention and the decades-long dictatorship of the Somoza family. In 1980, leftist Sandinista guerillas overthrew the Somozas and the U.S. responded by funding the violent Contra guerilla counter-insurgency. Despite the violence, Nicaragua successfully transitioned to democracy but continues to struggle with sporadic government violence, lack of respect for indigenous political and land rights, and authoritarianism. Its current president, Sandinista Daniel Ortega, has retained power for over a decade through increasingly dubious elections. Nicaragua’s early years were marked by internal conflict and external intervention. Before the arrival of the Spanish, Nicaragua was inhabited by diverse communities of farmers and hunter- gatherers, whose total population may have been as much as a million. After the arrival of the Spanish in the 1500s, European diseases and enslavement decimated the population, reducing it to tens of thousands. Nicaragua became a neglected backwater of the Spanish empire and the British allied with the Miskito people to gain control of much of Nicaragua’s Caribbean coast. In the early 1800s, Nicaragua joined other Central American countries in achieving independence. However, independence inflamed centuries-old rivalries between Nicaragua’s two principal cities: the middle class and Liberal León and the aristocratic and Conservative Granada. The two sides sought foreign backing in their fight for control, with the Conservatives generally obtaining support from Britain and the Liberals generally obtaining support from the United States. In 1855, the Liberals invited American adventurer William Walker to assist them in defeating the Conservatives.
    [Show full text]