Financial Times Editorial - Dealing with Ortega

Financial Times Editorial - Dealing with Ortega
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2006
Published: November 8 2006 02:00 | Last updated: November 8 2006 02:00

For more than a decade the counter-revolutionary war in 1980s Nicaragua was a cause celebre in US conservative circles. So it is hardly surprising that the election on Sunday of Daniel Ortega, the left-wing Sandinista leader, has raised hackles in Washington.

The 60-year old, who was president of the revolutionary government of the nine comandantes in the 1980s, is a firm ally of Cuba's Fidel Castro and Venezuela's Hugo Chavez. His victory - if confirmed as expected - will strengthen the radically anti-US Latin bloc formed this year by these two governments with President Evo Morales of Bolivia.

To that extent the election amounts to a setback for US influence in the region. But it would be a mistake to exaggerate the strategic significance of what is, after all, a tiny and impoverished country.

That is not to say that Nicaraguans have made a wise choice. Mr Ortega's election victory on Sunday may have been fair but his commitment to a fully open and democratic society has been questionable. An authoritarian Marxist in office, Mr Ortega has proved to be a cynical party boss in opposition, happy to make alliances with his bitterest enemies in pursuit of power. An alliance with the corrupt leader of the right-wing Liberal party has damaged Nicaragua's institutions and compromised the independence of its courts.

The alliance with Venezuela and Cuba may bring short-term benefits in the shape of cheap oil and medical care, but that hardly represents a basis for sustainable long-term economic progress. In particular, Sandinista anti-Americanism and state-centred economics will do little to help a country heavily dependent on remittances from migrant workers and sales of textile exports to the US market.

US officials, though, should keep matters in perspective. The Central American revolutionary wars are long over. Nicaragua's adhesion to the Cuba-Venezuela bloc will give it no more influence in Latin America. Recent elections in Mexico, Brazil, Colombia, Chile and Peru - much more significant countries than Nicaragua - have been won by moderate, centre-right and centre-left presidents who value an alliance with Washington. The same is likely to happen later this month in Ecuador.

In all these countries, moreover, US diplomats kept a low profile during campaigning. Their mistake in Nicaragua was to pick sides. By explicitly advising Nicaraguans not to vote for Mr Ortega, the US may well have nourished nationalist sentiment, persuading many Nicaraguans to vote for him.

A hard line now is likely to prove similarly counter-productive. Rather than suspend economic aid the US should use its leverage to persuade the new government to maintain democratic freedoms and an open economy.

The US may never learn to like Mr Ortega but it has much to gain from quiet engagement.