jefff@cadovax.UUCP (Jeffery H. Fields) (04/26/85)
On Tuesday, April 24th The House of Representatives voted not to aid the
Contra rebels in Nicaragua. That means for one year no money will be spent
on supporting the rebels. The first vote was indecisive with as many
Republicans voting against it because it contained the Democratically authored
amendment limiting the scope of the proposed aid, as there were Democrats
voting for it because of the amendment. On the second vote, all the Democrats
who voted for it on the first call, voted against it. The total was 3 to 1
against adopting the proposal that would grant some 14 million dollars to the
Contras.
For at least a year, the atrocities committed by the Contras will be stymied.
This will give time to the Sandinistas (so called Marxist-Leninist) to enact
their social reforms with less fear of military reprisal. The social workers
will be less victimized and thus able to improve conditions in the Nicaraguan
industrial sector, while their brothers and sisters in the rural areas will be
able to breath easier and get on with much needed land reform.
Perhaps, the Reagan administration will learn from the house vote and moderate
its antipathy to the Sandinistas. This will most likely never happen but one
can hope, anyway.
--
Jeff Fields
{ucbvax,ihnp4,decvax}!trwrb!cadovax!jefff
One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.mjk@ttrdc.UUCP (Mike Kelly) (05/01/85)
>From: jefff@cadovax.UUCP (Jeffery H. Fields) >For at least a year, the atrocities committed by the Contras will be stymied. >This will give time to the Sandinistas (so called Marxist-Leninist) to enact >their social reforms with less fear of military reprisal. The social workers >will be less victimized and thus able to improve conditions in the Nicaraguan >industrial sector, while their brothers and sisters in the rural areas will be >able to breath easier and get on with much needed land reform. I wish this were so. Unfortunately, the House vote was mainly symbolic. It is important in that it represented the wishes of the American people to repudiate this portion of the Reagan foreign policy in Central America. But I doubt it will stop the contras. The CIA works in many strange and mysterious ways, and will undoubtedly continue to support the terrorists they have trained and organized. One tactic that will surely be pursued is to obtain "private" funding for the contras -- a clear violation of the Neutrality Act, but it seems the CIA has little respect for U.S. or international law. Money may also be funnelled through other receipients of U.S. military assistance, such as Honduras. A strong sentiment against this in Congress *could* really restrain Reagan. But given the sympathy expressed toward economic sanctions during the contra vote, it seems unlikely that Congress will really muzzle the President. Economic sanctions will seriously harm the Nicaraguan economy, and drive it even more into the Soviet bloc for aid. Strangely enough, I think the State Department understands this very well and that is exactly the outcome they are seeking. A stronger Nicaraguan-Soviet alliance would provide the pretext for more aggressive actions against Nicaragua. And if Nicaragua tries to avoid strong ties to the Soviets, the economic turmoil can be exploited as the CIA described in its training manual. The only hope is strong support from the Western European and South American governments that see the Reagan policy as completely wrong-headed. But these governments are afraid to cross the Reagan Administration because of possible reprisals against them. So what is Nicaragua to do? Well, pretty much what it's done for the last six years: stand firm. Be open to U.S. conciliation, but expect the worse. (As Antonio Gramsci put it, "Pessimism of the mind, optimism of the will.") Try to cultivate allies in Western Europe and among the non-aligned countries. Try to avoid dependence on the Soviets. Fight like hell against the contras. And hope you survive until 1989. Mike Kelly
myers@uwmacc.UUCP (Jeff Myers) (05/02/85)
> Strangely enough, I think the State Department understands this > very well and that is exactly the outcome they are seeking. A stronger > Nicaraguan-Soviet alliance would provide the pretext for more aggressive > actions against Nicaragua. And if Nicaragua tries to avoid strong ties > to the Soviets, the economic turmoil can be exploited as the CIA described > in its training manual. The only hope is strong support from the > Western European and South American governments that see the Reagan policy > as completely wrong-headed. But these governments are afraid to cross > the Reagan Administration because of possible reprisals against them. > > Mike Kelly This is exactly what Noam Chomsky, in a recent speech here, argues that the US attempts to do to all incipient ``third road'' nations. He believes (as do I) that US foreign policy toward the third world is oriented toward making sure that any countries experimenting with autonomy from the world capitalist system, any countries consciously trying to improve the lot of the common folk at the expense of international capital, must be stopped before the disease spreads. I.e., if the govt responsible for such heresy cannot be immediately overthrown, the economy must be strangled. Dr. Chomsky argues further that the US pulled a strategic foreign policy victory out of Vietnam by successfully devastating their economy. In Chile the govt of Salvador Allende was deposed thru economic sanctions and support for the military coup in 1973 (and for the aborted one in 1970). In Nicaragua, the strategy is economically similar, but since the military in Nicaragua is friendly to the revolution, the military pressure must come from outside the country. YAMOTICC ("Yet Another Member of the International Communist Conspiracy")