The Sandinistas As a member of NACLA's edi- torial board, I wish to express in the most explicit way my deep disappointment with the publica- tion of Roger Burbach's "Nica- ragua: The Pot Boils Over" [Janu- ary/February 1994]. I will not argue with Burbach's piece, since he does not offer any evidence to back up his insinuations. I will argue, instead, with the editors' decision to publish it in NACLA Report on the Americas. Burbach is perfectly free to write and pub- lish whatever he wants, thinks, likes or hates; if he wishes, he may also self-destroy his credentials as an attentive observer of Central American affairs. But NACLA is not forced to publish articles lack- ing a minimum level of objectivity as well as basic journalistic and academic standards. Neither is NACLA forced to publish pieces which consist of a set of ambigui- ties, "might be's," half truths-- consequently, half lies-and state- ments more akin to police reports than to political analysis. In short, NACLA is not forced to undo its own prestigious 27-year history as an independent, critical, progres- sively oriented, far-reaching maga- zine. Not only does Burbach not pro- vide any evidence to support his serious accusations against the Sandinistas, but he also silences versions of events that point to the internal struggles of the former Contras as the explanation for the killings of both Contra leader Enrique Bermiidez and Arges Sequeira, the head of the Associa- tion of Confiscated Property Own- ers. Of course, these versions are just as unsubstantiated, but they are as convincing or unconvincing as the ones that Burbach presents as definitive truths. If NACLA is going to publish a piece based on rumor and speculation, the author should-for the sake of fairness-- have considered these other hypotheses. Burbach ends up mix- ing the verified involvement of Humberto Ortega's bodyguards in the apparently unintentional killing of young J.P. Genie with rumors and gossip about Sandinista involvement in the cases of Bermfidez and Sequeira. NACLA should also have asked for addi- tional, more authoritative evidence with regard to Burbach's allega- tion of Sandinista complicity in the FMLN arms cache that exploded in Managua last May. NACLA's publication of this piece does not advance our under- standing of the Nicaraguan conun- drum. On the contrary, this article makes it significantly more diffi- cult to understand. Carlos M. Vilas Mexico City, Mexico Roger Burbach's "Nicaragua: The Pot Boils Over" consti- tutes the most perfect collage of truths, half truths, unsubstantiated evidence, and the arrogance of a know-it-all. The end result is a propaganda piece that fits perfectly into the agenda of the enemies of the Sandinista revolution. NACLA's decision to publish this piece shows unprecedented lack of seriousness. Burbach unfairly characterizes Humberto Ortega as Machiavellian and more interested in amassing personal power than in social-jus- tice issues. Granted, Ortega is one Continued on page 42 Erratum Two copy-editing errors occurred in the Venezuela issue [March/April, 1994]. The last paragraph of Daniel Hellinger's arti- cle should begin: "Proven reserves are at historic highs." On p. 22, the size of Venezuela's fiscal deficit should read "about US$33 billion." of the most controversial figures in Nicaraguan politics today. Some love him, some hate him, and some fear him. But these are the facts: Humberto Ortega was the chief strategist for the defeat of Somoza's National Guard and the chief architect of the Sandinista Popular Army; and the Sandinista army he heads was born during a liberation struggle and not in the School of the Americas. The painful events of Esteli hurt all Sandinistas. Some of us saw our compafieros dead without understanding why they had to die. Others had to follow orders that they did not understand. Humberto probably suffered the deepest pain of all. If he had not obeyed the president's orders, he would have violated the same Constitution he helped to write, and in so doing, he would have blindly fallen into the hands of our enemies. If he obeyed the orders, as he did, he ran the risk of being condemned, as he was. Burbach has fallen into the trap of repeating Jesse Helms' bombast without understanding the implica- tions. Humberto Ortega is a sym- bol of the history of the Sandinista army. If Humberto goes, the nature of the army would no doubt change. Humberto is the lightning rod, but the real issue is the United States' quota of power within the Nicaraguan army. Many are upset because Humberto has been able to hang in there and plans to retire with all the honors he deserves. Burbach also dwells upon the divisions within the FSLN between those who support grass- roots mobilization and confronta- tional strategies, and those who have chosen to collaborate with the Chamorro government. This divi- sion within the national leadership of the FSLN must be understood in light of the fact that we do not have primaries in Nicaragua. Therefore, party candidates do not have "official" campaign periods. NACLA REPORT ON THE AMERICAS When I think about the negative campaigning that took place in the United States during the last elec- tions, I fail to understand what the big deal is around the public debate that has preceded this com- ing May's Extraordinary Congress, where the party will elect new leadership and agree upon a new political platform. The FSLN is not perfect. It never pretended to be. It is not our fault that we were romanticized by many. The FSLN is, however, the only real alternative that we Nicaraguans have to ensure lasting social change with social justice. Those who know Nicaragua's political history understand that it is precisely that which makes the FSLN a "party of a new type." Magda Enriquez Callejas-Beitler U.S. Representative of the FSLN Chicago, Illinois W hy did NACLA Report on the Americas choose to squan- der its fine reputation by printing Roger Burbach's cynical indict- ment of Sandinismo? At least NACLA could have labeled as opinion Burbach's bizarre charges and innuendoes. Burbach's standards of evidence are matched only by those of Sena- tor Jesse Helms. Let's see now, according to Burbach, the FSLN assassinated Somoza, Bermdidez and Sequeira, failed in an attempt on the life of Ed6n Pastora, and were actively involved in an arms cache that exploded in Managua. And Humberto Ortega, Burbach claims, tried to cover up the "acci- dental" slaying of young Jean-Paul Genie. Not a single one of these claims are facts, and some of them have been disproved. It would be fine with me if the FSLN had a role in Somoza's assassination, but Bur- bach's saying so doesn't make it true. The army's role in Bermtidez' assassination is contra- dicted by Scotland Yard's investi- gation in February which revealed that the FBI had interviewed, and then kept secret, a participant who accused a former Bermddez body- guard of the killing. Any covert Sandinista role in the creation of the Punitive Army of the Left and the killing of Arges Sequeira is pure speculation. The new infor- mation supposedly revealed about the La Penca attempt on Ed6n Pas- tora's life was a mess, and certain- ly not convincing to me. And final- ly, Jean-Paul Genie's death was not accidental. It's sad to say, but the kid signed his own death war- rant when he chose to try to pass, at a high rate of speed, a military convoy, possibly carrying a high- ranking officer or member of gov- ernment. I'm not one of those people who believes we should never voice our criticisms of the Sandinistas because that would strengthen their enemies. I'm disappointed that the FSLN has been unable to disci- pline those few of its militants who enriched themselves during the change in government. I'm also disappointed that the FSLN has not come up with the long-promised alternative to neoliberal econom- ics. But then, neither has the Left anywhere else in the world. I'm also upset that at times the army and police have strayed from that very narrow path they must walk between their constitutional responsibility to establish peace and order, and their revolutionary responsibility to protect the inter- ests of the poor majority. But neither Burbach nor I has ever been called upon to put his life on the line to overthrow a dic- tator, build a new society, and keep on working for justice after being rejected at the polls. I think those who have made that sacrifice and commitment deserve our respect and assistance. Chuck Kaufman National Coordinator Nicaragua Network Roger Burbach responds: U nderlying the responses of Carlos Vilas, Magda Enriquez and Chuck Kaufman is the ques- tion of what role we as leftists and solidarity activists should play in the 1990s in relation to Third World liberation move- ments. I for one would argue that the end of the Cold War, combined with the general crisis of socialism and the national liberation move- ments, compels us to take a more critical approach than we have in the past. Certainly the U.S. government has not abandoned its efforts to undermine or even destroy the lib- eration movements, including the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. But to carry on an effective battle against U.S. imperialism today, we have to be more sophisticated. We can- not maintain our legitimacy and help develop a new democratic movement if we do not openly dis- cuss Third World movements and try to learn from their mistakes as well as their advances. It is in this context that I wrote the update article for NACLA. Many of us were confused and even demoralized by the tumul- tuous events in Nicaragua in mid and late 1993. These events com- bined with new evidence of San- dinista involvement in the La Penca bombing enabled the detrac- tors of Sandinismo in Washington and elsewhere to have a field day. We on the Left appeared to have little to say, and seemingly stood discredited for having been "duped" by the Sandinistas. Thus when NACLA's editors and others asked me to write an article describing what was happening in Nicaragua, I agreed to do so. The assertion that NACLA should not run such articles is, of course, nonsense. Enriquez and Kaufman can dispute my interpre- tation of events, but I take issue with their attempt to shut off dis- cussion. Their charges that I engage in "innuendoes and "half truths" center on my interpretation of the assassinations or assassina- tion attempts that I discussed in my article. I stand by my interpre- tations of these events. Neither Enriquez nor Kaufman has brought forward any information that I was unaware of. Reporting on assassinations is always a tricky business, and I only reluc- tantly brought up these events when the NACLA editors said that it was necessary to do so because they had caused such a stir in the press and in Washington. They correctly asserted that we could not ignore these incidents and write an article that would have any legitimacy. My interpretations of the assas- sinations are based on the reports of Martha Honey and Tony Avir- gan, my experiences in Nicaragua over the years, and on conversa- tions with a wide array of Sandin- istas who held different political and governmental posts. I have no intention of getting into an open- ended debate in which we trade sources or reveal names. Readers will have to weigh what I write against the counter-claims of Enriquez and Kaufman, and arrive at their own conclusions. Regarding Vilas' letter, I also turn to the readers to evaluate his absurd charge that my article is "more akin to police reports than to political analysis," as well as his assertion that it is so lacking in "objectivity" that the NACLA edi- tors should have quashed it. Finally, I completely agree with Magda Enriquez' concluding remarks that "the FSLN is not per- fect. It never pretended to be. It is not our fault that we were romanti- cized by many." I believe that this is the context within which we should continue our discussion of Sandinismo and its critical contri- bution to contemporary revolution- ary history.
