The White House advisor who led America’s tampering in Nicaragua in the 1980’s recently visited the site of his nefarious schemes in order to offer “political advice”. Oliver North never spent a night in jail for any of the frauds he perpetrated or for his lying to Congress.
The “wisdom” he dispensed sounded very similar to Sec. Rumsfeld’s advice, given to military leaders last fall. The message? Essentially don’t elect Ortega or else there will be some U.S. instigated trouble. North warned Nicaraguans from returning to a past of war and foreign intervention.
"My hope is that the people of Nicaragua are not going to return to that. That's not good for your country. That's not good for my country," he said, adding: "My hope is that the election here is a coalition of people who believe in democracy."
As the ruling party has been found guilty of corruption, why would people "who believe in democracy" keep corrupt rulers in power? Wouldn’t democracy encourage a change in such situations?
Actually Ollie wrote a newspaper column recommending the opposite, even criticizing State Department officials for weighing in on the corruption. He wants the party in power to stay in power, corrupt or not.
Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld visited last fall warning of the dire threat to Nicaragua’s democracy as he met with military leaders. That threat? Elections! Can we expect a Thailand like military coup if Daniel Ortega wins the popular vote based on Rumsfeld’s mentoring?
What does this portend for America’s democracy where the public is fed up with corrupt leaders who buy and sell influence? Will a regime change here be met by a military coup? We likely have until ’08 to find out, but Nicaragua’s elections are right around the corner. If Ortega wins will North’s prediction of “war and foreign intervention” return? If so, will it be U.S. led or backed?