Ann Arbor-Juigalpa Sister City Election Observations

Ann Arbor-Juigalpa Sister City Election Observations

by Kurt Berggren

The nine-member Ann Arbor Sister City Election Observation delegation was in Nicaragua from Feb. 16 to March 1, mainly in our sister city of Juigalpa, which is the principal city in Chontales, or Region V.

The delegation also spent time attending meetings, interviews and political rallies in Masaya, Managua and Santo Tomas. We observed the electoral process and interviewed voters, representatives of the political parties, candidates, election officials and other election observers. We were officially certified by the Supreme Electoral Council (CSE), thus allowing us complete access to all aspecls of the electoral process.

Ann Arbor was one of 40 U.S. sister cities that formed a coalition to send delegations to their Nicaraguan sister cities as election observers. The coalition of sister cities agreed to act cooperatively and issue a joint report; and the conclusions in the Coalition of U.S. Sister Cities report are similar to the conclusions reached in the report prepared by the Ann Arbor delegation.

Our conclusions are as follows:

1. The Nicaraguan people were provided with a free and honest election process that was a model of efficiency and fairness; and they embraced this chance at participatory democracy as though it were a religious ceremony.

2. While the elections were technically free, fair and honest, they were not fair in a very real sense because of U.S. intervention through a strategy of low-intensity warfare.

3. Nicaraguans voted lo relieve the pressures that had been applied by U.S. interventionist policy - the war and the economic crisis. Consequently, the U.S. controlled the agenda and the issues and effectively denied the people their freedom of choice.

4. The FSLN and the Supreme Electoral Council conducted themselves admirably in ensuring that participatory democracy worked and that the electoral process was free, fair. open and honest.

5. The voter registration process worked flawlessly.

6. Although there were some incidents of violence and abuses of electoral laws during the campaign period, the 80-day campaign period was relatively fair and free from serious intimidation and the people were able to particípate and express politica] beliefs.

7.The high degree of participation - over 95% registration and over 90% voting - indicates an eagerness of the people to embrace and participate in the democratic process.

8. Despite its defeat, the FSLN remains the strongest and best organized political party in Nicaragua. The FSLN will remain a powerful political opposition force in the new government.

9. There was no vote splitting evident; and the UNO victory encompassed the National Assembly and municipal elections as well as the presidential election, all with virtually the same percentage.

10. Although there were allegations of improper use of U.S. money to buy votes, there was no way to determine how the massive influx of U.S. money for UNO was utilized in the absence of any accounting or record-keeping system.

11 . The numerous international election observer teams, including those of the sister cities, were somewhat intrusive on one level, but on another and more important level, were helpful in legitimizing the electoral process and the outcome.

12. The FSLN, much slandered in the U.S. as being dictatorial. Marxist, authoritarian and the like, exhibited a real commitment to democratic principles before, during and after the elections.

13. The sister city relationships will be encouraged to continue despite the possibility that the new local governments may be less receptive to the sister city concept. The sister city relationships are more important than ever in this time of monumental change in Nicaragua. We will continue to work for the same goals we have always supported - friendship, peace, social justice and mutual respect and understanding.

Whether the election was "democratic" essentially turns on one's definition of democracy. It certainly wasn't democratic in the sense of the Nicaraguan people having a free and fair choice. The United States manipulated and controlled, through its program of low-intensity warfare, the key issues - the war, the draft and the economy - so that the Nicaraguans, for all practical purposes, had no choice but to vote against the incumbent party. Since the party that the U.S. government officially backed, both economically and militarily, won the election, it was a "democratic" election in the U. S. government's eyes.

The difficulties that lie ahead for Nicaragua must now be solved by a ruling coalition "party" made up of 14 different political parties with no policies and no agreement among themselves. They face the seemingly impossible task of "integrating" into society contra soldiers who for almost 10 years have had no other occupation than killing.

However, there are also some hopeful signs. The Sandinistas, with over 40% of the vote, are still the largest and most organized force in the country and have the potential to control the National Assembly and keep UNO from acting to dismantle positive programs. The embargo has been lifted and the economy might very well improve with the influx of U.S. money. The danger lies in a more aggressive role by the U.S., which could lead to a destruction of the gains of the revolution, a return of the dreadcd National Guard and dcath squads and ultimately a full-scale civil war if those in power become vindictive and attempt to crash the former ruling party. Those of us who have gone to Nicaragua to help, to support programs that aid the poorest people, and to report truthfully on what was going on there will continue to go and care.