• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

By Root 2923 0

Time, Newsweek, and CBS News all put great stress on the trials and tribulations of La Prensa,106 although during the Salvadoran election none of them had even mentioned the destruction by physical violence and murder of La Crónica and El Independiente, or the toll of murdered journalists. Mob violence allegedly organized by the government, and the threat of the neighborhood defense committees, were featured by Time in Nicaragua, whereas ORDEN and the death squads in El Salvador and Guatemala it had never mentioned as pertinent to election quality. Basic conditions of a free election were not only back on the media agenda, but there were strong suggestions that Nicaragua was failing to meet these conditions. These suggestions were based almost entirely on quotes from U.S. officials and Cruz and his allies in Nicaragua. The media never gave evidence of having actually looked into these matters for themselves or tapped independent sources of evidence.

Richard Wagner, on CBS News (Nov. 3, 1984), citing as usual Arturo Cruz as the “strongest opposition,” also mobilizes a single Nicaraguan citizen (no doubt selected at random) who says: “How can this be free elections [sic] when we don’t have freedom of speech, freedom of the press?” Wagner says that “In addition to censorship” there were food shortages, a deteriorated transportation system, an unpopular draft, and church opposition, so that “it becomes apparent why a free and open election is not in the cards.” The cynicism in failing to raise the question of why there are food shortages and a deteriorated transportation system in Nicaragua is remarkable. Wagner also misses another distinction between Nicaragua and El Salvador; the former has an “unpopular draft,” whereas in the terror state of El Salvador there is no draft—instead there is press-ganging of young men into the army from the slums, refugee camps, and rural areas, while the young sons of the wealthy live the high life in San Salvador and Miami (much the same is true in Guatemala and Honduras). Wagner’s double standard is also remarkable. In El Salvador in 1982 and 1984 there was far more severe censorship (including outright murder), food shortages, a deteriorating transport system, and church opposition—and more pertinent, a complete exclusion of the “main opposition” and massive state terror—but these didn’t make it apparent to CBS News that a free and open election was not in the cards in that U.S.-sponsored election.107

The Irish delegation and LASA, especially the latter, addressed these issues, gave evidence of having examined them seriously, and came up with conclusions sharply at odds with the U.S. government-media portrayals. LASA provided an extensive discussion of the Sandinista defense committees and the scope of the turba violence and interference with freedom of assembly, concluding that the total number of disruptive incidents reported was “quite small,” and that the most serious occurred before the official campaign began. “In spite of Daniel Ortega’s unfortunate statement on these disruptions, there is no evidence that the FSLN had a coherent strategy of stimulating or orchestrating them” (p. 24). As regards the defense committees, LASA concluded that they did not seem to be functioning as a spying network and that there was no serious evidence that they were a force making for intimidation (p. 27). LASA makes two additional points ignored by the free press. One is that the electoral commission “placed paid advertisements in the press urging citizens to respect the rights of all political parties to hold rallies without interference” (p. 24). The second is that the Cruz rallies that were disrupted were held in violation of the electoral law, which requires permits for campaign rallies and promises police protection. “In other words, given their decision not to register, Cruz and the Coordinadora were deliberately campaigning outside of the legal framework of protections which had been created by the electoral law” (p. 25). LASA also compares the violence in the Nicaraguan election with that elsewhere