Condemned To Repetition: The United States and Nicaragua
A good blow-by-blow account of policymaking toward Nicaragua during the Carter Administration, in which the author served as chief Latin Americanist on the National Security Council staff. Painful but salutary to read, this balanced, even detached examination of what went wrong is motivated by the desire to offer advice on how to avoid another such failure. The author underscores the United States' propensity to repeat errors by drawing many parallels between "losing Cuba" and "losing Nicaragua." But most interesting here are the particulars of the latter debacle: the attachment of President Carter (and some top advisers) to nonintervention despite the pleas of moderate Nicaraguans and Latin American leaders for early action to remove Somoza; the Administration's inattention at a crucial late phase (Iran, China and the Soviet Union were formidable competitors for attention); and finally, the U.S. officials who wanted firmer action earlier but lost the internal policy debate despite the fact that they were, in retrospect, right. As Pastor writes, regarding the decision not to press Somoza: "The lack of enthusiasm on the part of the two key people implementing U.S. policy [Vaky and Bowdler] should have served as a warning signal. . . ."
Related
Gives details of both US and regional (Arias) initiatives for peace in Nicaragua, with a pessimistic view of the contras' ability to win either the war or an election. Considers US material support for contras to be 'virtually finished', and thus advocates a 'second-best solution' of containment of Sandinistas, by providing a non-intervention guarantee, and seeking democratization of Nicaragua. A slightly misleading title, since almost all the article is taken up with the war in Nicaragua and US involvement, with only a brief reference to El Salvador.
Uses the example of Nicaragua to argue for selective containment of Soviet expansion and influence under the 'Reagan doctrine'. The Contras should be supported.
The USA maintains that its aim is for a peaceful settlement in Nicaragua in a regional context that advances the prospects for democracy, protects the interests of the Contras and preserves US strategic interests. These goals involve a potentially long and difficult process. The accord concluded by the Central American Presidents in Aug 1987 by no means ensures peace. The practical question facing the USA is how to preserve its commitment to the Contras while still influencing the negotiating process.
