On April 27th, 1983, Ronald Reagan professed to a nationwide audience that “violence has been Nicaragua's most important export to the world,”(1) in an attempt to bolster public support for what was effectively the first chapter in the American “war on terror.”(2)
During his inaugural address as president, Reagan had obliquely foreshadowed the war to come, by declaring that “those who practice terrorism,” - that is, what we define as terrorism - “and prey upon their neighbours” will soon be on the receiving end of American Justice. He was referring to the recent overthrow of the (US-backed) Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua by the Sandinista Liberation Front (FSLN), and their support of the left in the ongoing civil-war in El Salvador between the right-wing military leadership (also backed by the US) and the left-wing Farabundo Marti National Liberation Front (FMLN).
Before continuing, it’s important to define terrorism. The US Department of Defense defines it as follows:
“The calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.”(3)
By any standards, we should be able to agree upon this definition or a variation of it, so long as it adheres to international law. Unfortunately, the masters of the world don’t apply this definition to themselves. Instead, we call it “counter-terrorism,” or “counter-insurgency.” The definitions are essentially the same, the difference is a matter of perspective. The typical position in the West (particularly the US) is defensive, even when they’re the occupying force, as in the cases of the Iraq, Afghanistan and Vietnam, and so in this manipulation the West can never be wrong. To admit that we promote terrorism would be absurd.
Returning to Reagan’s denunciation of the Nicaraguan plight, the president explains that they “like to pretend that they are today being attacked by forces based in Honduras,” (this was later proven to be true) and asserts that “there is no thought of sending American combat troops to Central America. They are not needed.” (Though they did send CIA specialists to train what remained of Somoza’s supporters.)
Reagan concluded his speech by appealing to our “moral duty” and “solemn responsibility … to ourselves, our friends, and our posterity.” By the time the task was complete, the death toll in Nicaragua “in per capita terms was significantly higher than the number of US persons killed in the US Civil War and all the wars of the twentieth century combined,” and Nicaragua had gained “the unenviable status of being the poorest country in the Western hemisphere.”(4)
After enduring several years of conflict with the US-sponsored Honduran contras, economic sabotage, aerial bombardment and trade embargos, a case was presented to the International Court of Justice involving Nicaragua vs. The United States of America.(5) Of the numerous charges, the Nicaraguan government specifically cited that: US support for the contras was in violation of the UN Charter as well as the Charter of the Organization of American States, and that the US had violated Nicaraguan sovereignty. The court found that the US had breached international law on both counts. “Humanitarian aid” was also clearly defined in the proceedings, and the court found that aid to the contras was strictly military.
The US responded by refusing to participate, with claims that the ICJ had no jurisdiction to hear the case and eventually blocked enforcement by the UN Security Council, so Nicaraguan efforts for compliance remained unfulfilled. American terrorist operations in Nicaragua continued.
The United States was also requested to pay damages for their violations:
“… without prejudice to the foregoing request, the Court is requested to award to the Republic of Nicaragua the sum of 370,200,000 United States dollars, which sum constitutes the minimum valuation of the direct dollars, which sum constitutes the minimum valuation of the direct damages. With the exception of damages for killing nationals of Nicaragua …”
This request was effectively rejected in 1991 after “democratic” elections saw that the seemingly guaranteed victors (Sandinistas) were ousted. Subsequently a law was repealed by Nicaraguan National Congress which required that they seek indemnities. The suit was then withdrawn from the International Court.(6)
Interestingly, to date, Iraq has paid approximately $28 billion in war reparations to Kuwait, following the end of the first Gulf War,(7) coupling that with numerous economic sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council(8) and you begin to wonder how much of a “threat to world peace” Iraq actually posed, prior to the 2003 invasion.
The case of state-sponsored terrorism in Nicaragua is exceptional, but by no means is it entirely unique. It stands out because it is an uncontroversial example of the US flouting international law, as if it doesn’t apply to them. Similar cases that are all but buried include the state-sponsored terrorist activities in Cuba (codenamed Operation Mongoose); a program designed to undermine the Communist leadership through intensive propaganda, sabotage and psychological warfare. Operation Just Cause in Panama saw the “surgical operation” by American troops create a civilian death toll “that was at least four-and-a-half times higher than military causalities in the enemy, and twelve or thirteen times higher than the casualties suffered by U.S. troops”(9) according the Human Rights Watch. Of course it's out of the question that we in the West should abide by the same standard observation of human rights and international law which we expect of others.
The reverberations of these and other actions are still felt today, at this very moment. Aggressive foreign policy and the tendency towards abstaining from any sincere commitment to international law creates “a huge recruiting device” for would-be terrorists, to quote former US Deputy Secretary of Defense and current World Bank President Paul Wolfowitz. It seems that an excellent way to prevent global terrorism would be to stop participating in it.
--
References:
1. http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1983/42783d.htm
2. http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1981/12081a.htm
3. http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/dod_dictionary/
4. Thomas Walker, Nicaragua
5. http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/files/70/9619.pdf?PHPSESSID=1e1b228ef598fc0bc5698ecb471ab725
6. http://www.unhcr.org/refworld/publisher,HRW,,NIC,467fca491e,0.html
7. http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=31616&Cr=iraq&Cr1=kuwait
8. http://www.globalpolicy.org/iraq/previous-issues-and-debate-on-iraq/sanctions-against-iraq.html
9. http://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/1991/panama/
0 comments:
Post a Comment