The Pacto vs. The Anti-Pacto

In the article, Sofía Montenegro of the Nicaraguan Autonomous Women’s Movement, says:

The Church had always wanted to repeal that right [to theraputic abortion]. The appropriate conditions were created by the political opportunism of Ortega and his wife, Rosario Murillo. For electoral reasons, they aligned themselves more closely with the Church in order to neutralise its influence.

She very much points the picture that Ortega is "the boss" and Aleman is victim to his politics. That is a different read than El Pacto but with the same result. The fact, however, that all the political parties except the MRS voted for the all-out ban is true. The "reward" for the MRS' honesty was dropping in the polls right after the vote.

Thus, while women's rights groups may be for eliminating the ban, it is not clear there is really any political capital to be gained by turning this into an El Pacto/Anti-Pacto issue.

Most of the discussion has been about Ortega. That seems about as useful as responding to the issue of the "Bush empire" by talking about him rather than if Congress will decide to have Karl Rove arrested, go forward with the articles of impeachment, ...

Granted, a lot of people see Ortega as "the problem" but that seems like a very narrow focus. First, without El Pacto, Ortega would not have controlling power over the Assembly. If the Assembly forced the accountability issue, we would see where oil profits (as an example) are going.

If any party (and that includes the FSLN and the PLC) decided to stop facilitating Ortega (the same as the Democrats continue to facilitate Bush), accountability could actually happen. This is what the MRS is calling for. One other big player and it will happen.

Then, another level removed is the citizenry itself. If they moved from "we want cheaper transport" or whatever to "we want government accountability", things could quickly change.

That was the sort of analysis I was looking for in the post. Things such as cracks in El Pacto, cracks within the PLC and/or FSLN, ... And, we must not forget international pressure.

All that said, this is not intended to be an anti-Ortega (or pro-Ortega) post. I would not like to have Ortega's job (or the job of leader of any country right now) in this time of rising energy prices. Suggesting that inflation is Ortega's fault is not realistic. It is just a "what can an unhappy population do" question.

and not completely accurate. I was very involved in the PLC campaign and they had a very positive approach, in MY opinion. My point is you cannot generalize like that, it is not an accurate reflection of the campaign.

That is not a very unbiased opinion

here's a similar thread from 2005 back when Herty (and Miskito Alan) were alive.

...I miss them both-RIP.

the point back then was that if the anti-pacto groups actually were to gain control of the government, would that change the larger "pacto" which is about the role the U.S. plays in the country?

or, would the anti-pacto parties continue Ortega's attempts to ally itself with the only other competitor in the "hearts and minds" (and oil and power plants) campaign? This other entity is of course Tio Hugo (Chavez)

at this time, with the MRS and tiny Conservative Party both outlawed, beating the pacto appears to be nae impossible so those conversations are moot.

it might come down just waiting Ortega out and hoping for something better next time . . . sort of what the U.S. is doing with el arbusto, no?

Doors of hope fly open when doors of promise shut. -Thomas D'Arcy McGee

Where do you think things are headed?