Podcasts about Anastasio Somoza

La trayectoria de la gataparda que ha visitado 'El Faro' avala el seudónimo que ha escogido. Mara Torres le ha pedido a Gioconda Belli (Managua, 1948) empezar la charla radiofónica bajo un apodo y ella ha pensado en 'Larga carrera', un sobrenombre que engloba a una poeta, a una novelista, a una guerrillera que luchó contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza, a una feminista y a una apátrida forzosa. En 2023, el Gobierno de Daniel Ortega decidió retirarle la nacionalidad acusada de "traición a la patria". Belli, que cuenta con pasaporte español desde el año pasado, ha hablado en 'El Faro' de lo que supuso para ella el destierro político: "Yo siento que yo voy a ser nicaragüense hasta el día que me muera. Cuando ellos hayan terminado -su régimen-, mis libros seguirán diciendo: 'Gioconda Belli, nicaragüense".

La trayectoria de la gataparda que ha visitado 'El Faro' avala el seudónimo que ha escogido. Mara Torres le ha pedido a Gioconda Belli (Managua, 1948) empezar la charla radiofónica bajo un apodo y ella ha pensado en 'Larga carrera', un sobrenombre que engloba a una poeta, a una novelista, a una guerrillera que luchó contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza, a una feminista y a una apátrida forzosa. En 2023, el Gobierno de Daniel Ortega decidió retirarle la nacionalidad acusada de "traición a la patria". Belli, que cuenta con pasaporte español desde el año pasado, ha hablado en 'El Faro' de lo que supuso para ella el destierro político: "Yo siento que yo voy a ser nicaragüense hasta el día que me muera. Cuando ellos hayan terminado -su régimen-, mis libros seguirán diciendo: 'Gioconda Belli, nicaragüense".

The 1979 Nicaraguan revolution that overthrew a brutal U.S.-backed dictator ushered in a wave of hope in the Central American country. The new Sandinista government launched literacy and healthcare campaigns, carried out land reform and promised to improving the lives of all.But the United States, under president Ronald Reagan, feared the dominos would fall across Central America, and they unleashed assault on the country: paramilitary war, CIA attacks, economic blockade, and much more.In this episode, host Michael Fox, walks by into the 1980s, to the overthrow of dictator Anastasio Somoza and the beginning of both the Sandinista government and the U.S. response.This is Part 1, of episode 10.Under the Shadow is an investigative narrative podcast series that walks back in time, telling the story of the past by visiting momentous places in the present.In each episode, host Michael Fox takes us to a location where something historic happened — a landmark of revolutionary struggle or foreign intervention. Today, it might look like a random street corner, a church, a mall, a monument, or a museum. But every place he takes us was once the site of history-making events that shook countries, impacted lives, and left deep marks on the world.Hosted by Latin America-based journalist Michael Fox.This podcast is produced in partnership between The Real News Network and NACLA.Guests:Alex AviñaWilliam RobinsonMarvin Ortega RodriguezEline Van OmmenPeter KornbluhEdited by Heather Gies.Sound design by Gustavo Türck.Theme music by Monte Perdidoand Michael FoxOther music from Blue Dot Sessions.Follow and support journalist Michael Fox or Under the Shadow at https://www.patreon.com/mfoxYou can also see pictures and listen to full clips of Michael Fox's music for this episode.For Declassified documents on the U.S. contra war on Nicaragua, and Iran Contra, you can visit Peter Kornbluh's National Security Archives here and here.Eline van Ommen's book, Nicaragua Must Survive: Sandinista Revolutionary Diplomacy in the Global Cold War (University of California Press, 2023), is available here.For the 2007 documentary American Sandinista, you can visit the website of director Jason Blalock. https://jasonblalock.com/Here are links to the 1980 documentaries about Nicaragua's literacy campaign that I mention in this episode: La Salida & La LlegadaThe Real News NetworkDonate: therealnews.com/uts-pod-donateSign up for our newsletter: https://therealnews.com/uts-pod-subscribeLike us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/therealnewsFollow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/therealnewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-real-news-podcast--2952221/support.

The 1979 Nicaraguan revolution that overthrew a brutal U.S.-backed dictator ushered in a wave of hope in the Central American country. The new Sandinista government launched literacy and healthcare campaigns, carried out land reform and promised to improve the lives of all. But the United States, under President Ronald Reagan, feared the dominos would fall across Central America, and they unleashed assault on the country: paramilitary war, CIA attacks, economic blockade, and much more.In this episode, host Michael Fox walks back into the 1980s, to the overthrow of dictator Anastasio Somoza and the beginning of both the Sandinista government and the U.S. response. This is Part 1 of Episode 10. Under the Shadow is an investigative narrative podcast series that walks back in time, telling the story of the past by visiting momentous places in the present. In each episode, host Michael Fox takes us to a location where something historic happened—a landmark of revolutionary struggle or foreign intervention. Today, it might look like a random street corner, a church, a mall, a monument, or a museum. But every place he takes us was once the site of history-making events that shook countries, impacted lives, and left deep marks on the world.Hosted by Latin America-based journalist Michael Fox.This podcast is produced in partnership between The Real News Network and NACLA.Guests: Alex AviñaWilliam Robinson Marvin Ortega RodriguezEline Van OmmenPeter KornbluhEdited by Heather Gies.Sound design by Gustavo Türck.Theme music by Monte Perdido and Michael Fox Other music from Blue Dot Sessions.Follow and support journalist Michael Fox or Under the Shadow at https://www.patreon.com/mfoxYou can also see pictures and listen to full clips of Michael Fox's music for this episode.For declassified documents on the U.S. Contra war on Nicaragua and the Iran Contra affair, you can visit Peter Kornbluh's National Security Archives here and here.Eline van Ommen's book, Nicaragua Must Survive: Sandinista Revolutionary Diplomacy in the Global Cold War (University of California Press, 2023), is available here.For the 2007 documentary American Sandinista, you can visit the website of director Jason Blalock. jasonblalock.comHere are links to the 1980 documentaries about Nicaragua's literacy campaign that I mention in this episode: La Salida and La Llegada.Read NACLA: nacla.orgSupport NACLA: nacla.org/donateFollow NACLA on X: https://twitter.com/NACLA

The 1979 Nicaraguan revolution that overthrew a brutal U.S.-backed dictator ushered in a wave of hope in the Central American country. The new Sandinista government launched literacy and healthcare campaigns, carried out land reform and promised to improving the lives of all.But the United States, under president Ronald Reagan, feared the dominos would fall across Central America, and they unleashed assault on the country: paramilitary war, CIA attacks, economic blockade, and much more.In this episode, host Michael Fox, walks by into the 1980s, to the overthrow of dictator Anastasio Somoza and the beginning of both the Sandinista government and the U.S. response.This is Part 1, of episode 10.Under the Shadow is an investigative narrative podcast series that walks back in time, telling the story of the past by visiting momentous places in the present.In each episode, host Michael Fox takes us to a location where something historic happened — a landmark of revolutionary struggle or foreign intervention. Today, it might look like a random street corner, a church, a mall, a monument, or a museum. But every place he takes us was once the site of history-making events that shook countries, impacted lives, and left deep marks on the world.Hosted by Latin America-based journalist Michael Fox.This podcast is produced in partnership between The Real News Network and NACLA.Guests:Alex AviñaWilliam RobinsonMarvin Ortega RodriguezEline Van OmmenPeter KornbluhEdited by Heather Gies.Sound design by Gustavo Türck.Theme music by Monte Perdidoand Michael FoxOther music from Blue Dot Sessions.Follow and support journalist Michael Fox or Under the Shadow at https://www.patreon.com/mfoxYou can also see pictures and listen to full clips of Michael Fox's music for this episode.For Declassified documents on the U.S. contra war on Nicaragua, and Iran Contra, you can visit Peter Kornbluh's National Security Archives here and here.Eline van Ommen's book, Nicaragua Must Survive: Sandinista Revolutionary Diplomacy in the Global Cold War (University of California Press, 2023), is available here.For the 2007 documentary American Sandinista, you can visit the website of director Jason Blalock. https://jasonblalock.com/Here are links to the 1980 documentaries about Nicaragua's literacy campaign that I mention in this episode: La Salida & La LlegadaThe Real News NetworkDonate: therealnews.com/uts-pod-donateSign up for our newsletter: https://therealnews.com/uts-pod-subscribeLike us on Facebook: https://facebook.com/therealnewsFollow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/therealnewsBecome a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/under-the-shadow--5958129/support.

Anastasio Somoza fue un político, militar, empresario y terrateniente nicaragüense, conocido por el nombre familiar Tacho. Tuvo la fortuna más grande de toda América, en los años 40, cerca de 250 millones.

La irrupción policial de Ecuador en la embajada mexicana en Quito removió a la diplomacia de todo el continente. Ayer, la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA) aprobó ayer una resolución que condena “enérgicamente” lo sucedido, además de y llama al diálogo para resolver la crisis. Recordemos que México rompió relaciones con Ecuador, después de que el exvicepresidente Jorge Glas fuera detenido dentro de la embajada mexicana, donde buscaba refugio. Sobre Glas pesan dos sentencias por asociación ilícita y cohecho, y una orden de captura por peculado. En su conferencia de prensa diaria, el presidente mexicano, Andrés Manuel López Obrador, mostró un video de las cámaras de seguridad de la embajada en Quito, en donde puede verse cómo fue el operativo, en particular la fuerza utilizada contra personal diplomático que intentó evitar la detención de Glas. López Obrador dijo además que le envió esas imágenes al presidente estadounidense Joe Biden, y que eso influyó en un cambio de postura de ese país, luego de una primera reacción que definió como “tibia”. "Salió ayer el asesor de asuntos de seguridad con una postura ya más definida, más clara de condena a estos hechos. Estamos esperando lo mismo en el caso de Canadá". Uno de esos funcionarios es Roberto Canseco, jefe de Cancillería y Asuntos Políticos de la embajada en Quito, quien fue empujado al suelo en dos oportunidades por los policías y también apuntado con un arma. El secretario general de la OEA, Luis Almagro, elogió ayer el "arrojo y profesionalismo" de Canseco, de quien dijo que “revela la alta dignidad de la diplomacia”. López Obrador informó ayer que faltaban algunos detalles, pero que la intención era presentar hoy ante la Corte Internacional de Justicia una demanda contra Ecuador. Un dato más: México no rompía relaciones con otro país desde 1979, cuando cortó el vínculo con el gobierno dictatorial de Anastasio Somoza en Nicaragua. Días atrás, comentamos este episodio desde el punto de vista ecuatoriano, en diálogo con el politólogo Pablo Medina. Ahora, les proponemos una visión desde México. Conversamos En Perspectiva con Rafael Velázquez, doctor en Estudios Internacionales, docente e investigador en la Universidad Autónoma de Baja California, en Tijuana.

Hoy hablaremos de la desconocida vida del primer influencer con estudios, el doctor Bartolomé Beltrán Pons, que ya inventó lo de las consultas telefónicas y que no te cogieran el teléfono antes del COVID. El pequeño Bartolomé nació en Mallorca el 30 de noviembre de 1949. Lo llamaron así porque ya nació con las onditas en el pelo de un señor de 55 años. Era hijo de un alto alto altísimo mando de la Guardia Civil, de 2’10 por lo menos, y por eso pudo mandar a estudiar a su hijo a la universidad cuando la mayoría de los españoles sacaban a los suyos del colegio para trabajar en cuánto sabían escribir su nombre para no firmar el DNI con un X. La madre sabía que su pequeño tenía nombre para no tener amigos ni en Balay, pero también sabía que tenía un grandísimo talento porque un día le hizo un pollo y el niño en vez de coger 🎶E HINCARLE EL DIEEEENTE, LE HISO DÓ OPERASIONE Y ARA ANDA ER POLLO PERFECTAMENTE🎶 Nuestro pequeño amigo era más listo que la voz en off de Saber y Ganar y tenía más carisma que Meryl Streep, que los profesores empezaron llamándolo Bartolo y lo acabaron llamando Don Bartolomé. En 1968, cuando terminó el Bachillerato a los 18 años se fue a Valladolid a estudiar Medicina donde aprendió a escribir tan bien su nombre que no se sabía si ponía Bartolomé Beltrán, Bromazempam 1 gr o Paracetamol y mucha agua. Al terminar en 1973 decidió especializarse en TOCOGINECOLOGÍA, porque el Dr. Beltrán era un auténtico BATMAN: muy reservado con su vida privada, vestía siempre de oscuro y hacía guardía por las noches. Recién terminaita la carrera en 1978 fue jefe del equipo quirúrgico de la Seguridad Social en Ginecología, que pa que te pongan de jefe saliendo por la puerta de la facultad o eres muy bueno o en España había 4 ginecólogos y uno que le quedaba el último de Anatomía de Grey. En 1980 fue enviado durante el gobierno de Adolfo Suárez a Nicaragua para instalar un Hospital de Campaña tras el derrocamiento del dictador Anastasio Somoza, que no que el hombre fuera malo, es que tú piensas la que le han tenido que dar tó su vida llamándose Anastasio y normal que eso saliera por algún sitio. Por lo visto Anastasio había dejao la sanidad como Ayuso las residencias de ancianos en la pandemia. Fue en 1982 cuando dio el salto a los medios de comunicación con el programa de radio “La salud es lo que importa”, porque Bartolomé tenía una boquita que lo mismo te recetaba Vicks Vaporub, que te vendía un maletín de primeros auxilios con tiritas que parecen que llevan loctite o unos pedales de bicicleta para hagas deporte sentaito en el sofá por la teletienda. Bartolomé tenía más negocios que el dueño de UNILEVER. Fue miembro de todas las sociedades médicas españolas que os podáis imaginar y asesor del Ministerio de Sanidad y consumo, coordinaba publicaciones de revistas científicas, escribía en periódicos, publicaba libros, era director de prevención de servicios médicos de A3media, era como tu suegro, se metía en tó. Ya en esta época tenía había aprendido a peinarse las onditas del pelo y le dio una tortícolis que el pobre no se curó nunca, que salía en todas las fotos como si le estuvieran hablando y no se enterara. En 1995, la empresa de su propiedad, VITAPLAN S.L. se hizo con el 84% del Real Club Deportivo Mallorca, convirtiéndose en su presidente hasta 1998. Beltrán era el Florentino de antes. El Mallorca subió a primera, al año siguiente quedó quinto y llegó a la final de la Copa del Rey. Luego Antonio Asencio, el dueño de Antena 3 se lo compró y Bartolomé siguió con sus cositas de médicos. Estuvo casado y tuvo al menos 2 hijos, porque uno en un tuit, que se ve que lo conocía, le da las condolencias a su esposa y a sus hijos, así, en plural. Hay una foto por ahí que sale Bartolomé con dos más y por lo visto 1 es su hijo, que con esa cara que tiene, no me extraña que lo haya escondío. Desgraciadamente, el 17 de febrero de 2024 el riñón le filtró menos que la jarra de agua Britta y el Dr. Beltrán nos dejaba a los 74 años de edad, aunque ustedes siempre podrán recordarlo cada vez que su suegro se metá en tó o vean a un pollo andar perfectamente.

Mónica Baltodano y Julio López, dos figuras del Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN) que lideraron la lucha contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza en los años setenta, ahora se enfrentan a un desafío aún mayor: organizar la resistencia contra el Gobierno de Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo, quienes han convertido al país centroamericano en un lugar "asfixiante que hace que la gente se quiera ir".  Ellos son los invitados en esta edición de Escala en París.

Mónica Baltodano y Julio López, dos figuras del FSLN que condujeron la lucha contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza en los años setenta enfrentan ahora otro desafío mayor, organizar la resistencia al gobierno de Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo que han hecho del país centroamericano un lugar "asfixiante que hace que la gente se quiera ir".  Ellos son los invitados de Escala en París. Mónica Baltodano, tras la victoria del FSLN de 1979 fue viceministra de la presidencia de Nicaragua entre 1982 y 1990. Decidió abandonar Nicaragua en 2021 ante el hostigamiento del régimen de Daniel Ortega. Julio López participó en la llamada “ofensiva final” de 1979 contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza, fue director de relaciones internacionales del FSLN. Ambos efectúan una gira por varios países de Europa para dar a conocer la situación de su país y la política represiva que Daniel Ortega impone para acallar toda oposición a su gobierno.Cuando preguntamos a Mónica Baltoidano, ex comandante guerrillera, una de las tres mujeres que condijo la ofensiva contra Anastasio Somoza, cómo define la situación que vive Nicaragua, no duda en responder "vivimos bajo una dictadura absolutista que  controla totalmente todos los poderes del Estado y ha suspendido de manera absoluta todos los derechos de los nicaragüenses, de información, de prensa, de organización, de movilización, de asociación e incluso ha llegado hasta prohibir actividades religiosas. Así que el régimen que se ha implantado en Nicaragua es una dictadura atroz. De alguna manera sus rasgos son peores que los de la dictadura de Somoza, a la que combatimos en los años 70";Un dato puede ayudar a comprender qué significa ese autoritarismo: Daniel Ortega ha cerrado más de 3 500 asociaciones civiles desde las protestas del 2018. "Una situación absolutamente inédita en América Latina", señala Julio López, "Nicaragua desafortunadamente se ha convertido en un país en donde la ciudadanía existe sólo si sos fiel a Daniel Ortega, no existe ninguna posibilidad de existencia política del ciudadano al margen del poder de Daniel y Rosario. Todos los derechos, todas las posibilidades de existencia civil, social, política, nada de eso existe fuera del ámbito de control de Daniel y Rosario", denuncia el ex dirigente que tuvo a su cargo las relaciones internacionales del FSLN.Una encuesta publicada recientemente señala que 80% de los nicaragüenses tienen miedo de expresar su punto de vista y que más del 50% de la población quisiera salir de Nicaragua. Después de las movilizaciones y la represión del 2018 más de 750 mil nicaragüenses abandonaron el país. "El ambiente asfixiante que se vive en Nicaragua hace que la gente desee salir del país. En Nicaragua hay miles de nicaragüenses que no se atreven a ir al aeropuerto porque les pueden retener su pasaporte, pero también hay miles que, sin haber sido desnacionalizados, como es nuestro caso, no pueden ingresar al país", subraya Mónica Baltodano.Daniel Ortega está ininterrumpidamente en el poder desde el 2007. En 2021 se reeligió en medio de una abstención récord cercana al 80% y con siete candidatos a la presidencia en prisión. Una de las medidas de represión a las que ha recurrido el gobierno nicaragüense es privar de nacionalidad a muchos ciudadanos, a gente de la oposición. El año pasado 316 personas fueron despojadas de su nacionalidad."Hay un proceso de reorganización con una parte de esos desterrados con los que ya estábamos en condición de exilio desde esos tiempos. Pero también hay una claridad de que, para poder reorganizar la resistencia cívica y pacífica, esta vez estamos apostando a una lucha no violenta, tenemos que ser capaces de construir vínculos y rehacer el tejido social que ha sido pulverizado por todas las medidas represivas de régimen dentro del país, porque, aunque hay figuras fuera de Nicaragua de la oposición, la verdadera y masiva oposición está sigue estando dentro del país", anota la ex guerrillera."En la base de sustentación actual de Daniel Ortega, en el ejército, en la policía, en las estructuras del Estado, es importante que él esté claro y que estén también claros en Europa y en otras partes, que somos miles los sandinistas no orteguistas, y ya llegará el momento en que tanto del ejército, de la policía y de las estructuras estatales estas voces se harán sentir", apunta por su parte Julio López.

Mónica Baltodano y Julio López, dos figuras del FSLN que condujeron la lucha contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza en los años setenta enfrentan ahora otro desafío mayor, organizar la resistencia al gobierno de Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo que han hecho del país centroamericano un lugar "asfixiante que hace que la gente se quiera ir".  Ellos son los invitados de Escala en París. Mónica Baltodano, tras la victoria del FSLN de 1979 fue viceministra de la presidencia de Nicaragua entre 1982 y 1990. Decidió abandonar Nicaragua en 2021 ante el hostigamiento del régimen de Daniel Ortega. Julio López participó en la llamada “ofensiva final” de 1979 contra la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza, fue director de relaciones internacionales del FSLN. Ambos efectúan una gira por varios países de Europa para dar a conocer la situación de su país y la política represiva que Daniel Ortega impone para acallar toda oposición a su gobierno.Cuando preguntamos a Mónica Baltoidano, ex comandante guerrillera, una de las tres mujeres que condijo la ofensiva contra Anastasio Somoza, cómo define la situación que vive Nicaragua, no duda en responder "vivimos bajo una dictadura absolutista que  controla totalmente todos los poderes del Estado y ha suspendido de manera absoluta todos los derechos de los nicaragüenses, de información, de prensa, de organización, de movilización, de asociación e incluso ha llegado hasta prohibir actividades religiosas. Así que el régimen que se ha implantado en Nicaragua es una dictadura atroz. De alguna manera sus rasgos son peores que los de la dictadura de Somoza, a la que combatimos en los años 70";Un dato puede ayudar a comprender qué significa ese autoritarismo: Daniel Ortega ha cerrado más de 3 500 asociaciones civiles desde las protestas del 2018. "Una situación absolutamente inédita en América Latina", señala Julio López, "Nicaragua desafortunadamente se ha convertido en un país en donde la ciudadanía existe sólo si sos fiel a Daniel Ortega, no existe ninguna posibilidad de existencia política del ciudadano al margen del poder de Daniel y Rosario. Todos los derechos, todas las posibilidades de existencia civil, social, política, nada de eso existe fuera del ámbito de control de Daniel y Rosario", denuncia el ex dirigente que tuvo a su cargo las relaciones internacionales del FSLN.Una encuesta publicada recientemente señala que 80% de los nicaragüenses tienen miedo de expresar su punto de vista y que más del 50% de la población quisiera salir de Nicaragua. Después de las movilizaciones y la represión del 2018 más de 750 mil nicaragüenses abandonaron el país. "El ambiente asfixiante que se vive en Nicaragua hace que la gente desee salir del país. En Nicaragua hay miles de nicaragüenses que no se atreven a ir al aeropuerto porque les pueden retener su pasaporte, pero también hay miles que, sin haber sido desnacionalizados, como es nuestro caso, no pueden ingresar al país", subraya Mónica Baltodano.Daniel Ortega está ininterrumpidamente en el poder desde el 2007. En 2021 se reeligió en medio de una abstención récord cercana al 80% y con siete candidatos a la presidencia en prisión. Una de las medidas de represión a las que ha recurrido el gobierno nicaragüense es privar de nacionalidad a muchos ciudadanos, a gente de la oposición. El año pasado 316 personas fueron despojadas de su nacionalidad."Hay un proceso de reorganización con una parte de esos desterrados con los que ya estábamos en condición de exilio desde esos tiempos. Pero también hay una claridad de que, para poder reorganizar la resistencia cívica y pacífica, esta vez estamos apostando a una lucha no violenta, tenemos que ser capaces de construir vínculos y rehacer el tejido social que ha sido pulverizado por todas las medidas represivas de régimen dentro del país, porque, aunque hay figuras fuera de Nicaragua de la oposición, la verdadera y masiva oposición está sigue estando dentro del país", anota la ex guerrillera."En la base de sustentación actual de Daniel Ortega, en el ejército, en la policía, en las estructuras del Estado, es importante que él esté claro y que estén también claros en Europa y en otras partes, que somos miles los sandinistas no orteguistas, y ya llegará el momento en que tanto del ejército, de la policía y de las estructuras estatales estas voces se harán sentir", apunta por su parte Julio López.

We kick off #FebWARary with 1983's Last Plane Out, a semi-fictionalized account of the events that took place days before the Sandinista's removed Anastasio Somoza from power in Nicaragua. It stars Jan-Michael Vincent (Airwolf), Julie Carmen (In the Mouth of Madness) and Mary Crosby whose character shot JR in TV's Dallas. Sounds exciting, right?  Wrong. But, what is exciting is the announcement of our new airline, Air Erica.  It's exactly what NWPPVIP's have been asking for.  Air Erica is putting the "f" back into flying".  And by "f" we mean "fun".  That is unless you brought a chess board because we all know what that leads to. Looking for onboard entertainment?  Each flight features its own DJ (DJ Emergency Exit) spinning beats from takeoff to landing.  The plane doesn't land until the DJ Emergency Exit says so.  What about movies?  Air Erica has you covered.  You can choose from "Ice Pirates" or "Waterworld".  Staying hydrated is important on Air Erica. Not convinced?  Well, bring your cigarettes because on Air Erica every section is a smoking section.  We look forward to seeing you on the next Air Erica flight.  

Perhaps no country has been subjected to the whims of US imperialism as much as Nicaragua. In the 1800s, it was seen a new breeding ground for the Monroe Doctrine, and sent mercenaries over there to fight wars. In the early 1900s, during the quest for colonies, the US marines invaded again, and through the efforts of Agosto Sandino, they were pushed out, not before establishing a foothold in the form of Anastasio Somoza and his sons who ruled the country with an iron fist. Somoza and his allies grew wealthy while most of the peasants starved and impoverished. Somoza, even took blood from the Nicaraguans and sold it to the US. However, the Sandinistas began their resistance in 1961 to the Somoza dictatorship. It was a David vs Goliath fight. Somoza had bombers from the US, while Sandinistas merely had their guns. Through their determination, the successfully defeated the Somoza dictatorship not before Somoza absconded with over $3 billion of aid. However, even victory was bittersweet as the US decided to train one of the most horrific militias known to man: the Contras. No action was deemed off-limits for the Contras. They beheaded children, they gouged out eyes of peasants. As one activist puts it, “The contras don't win the hearts and minds of the people. They take the arms and limbs”However, the Sandinista Revolution improved the lives of the Nicaraguan people in unprecedented ways. Within just 5 short months, the literacy rate rose up from the 50s to the 80s. But, they were fighting a brutal civil war with the Contras for the next decade, while under US sanctions.Being under the axe of imperial sanctions, and tired from the constant civil war, and under the pressure from the US, the Nicaraguan people voted out the Sandinistas for a US-backed leader: Violeta Chamorro. Once again, the gains from the revolution were rolled back. Literacy went down, many essential services were privatized. But, the Sandinistas did not give up. They continued to organize for the next 16 years and finally, their efforts paid off. Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas came back to power in 2006. However, they Sandinistas have been under attack by the US through organizations like the NED that fund the violent opposition including the coup attempt in 2018 where 100s of innocent civilians in Nicaragua were killed. The US put Nicaragua under economic sanctions. The Sandinistas and Ortega skillfully navigated through this minefield using caution. For example, they did not immediately recognize the one-china policy because of all the factories Taiwan had put in. Only when the opportunity came forward did they do that. Finally, we walk about Ben and Dan's experience in the latest Nicaraguan elections and compare it with the US elections. We also discuss the US propaganda campaign against Nicaragua. In the end, Dan says “ God Bless the Sandinistas”Follow Ben on TwitterFollow Dan on TwitterOther Episodes with Dan Kovalik This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.historicly.net/subscribe

Análisis Con Alexis Ortiz. Eps #41 En diciembre de 1974, El exguerrillero y brigadier retirado, Hugo Torres ayudó a liderar un escuadrón de guerrilleros nicaragüenses en una dramática toma de rehenes que logró la liberación de un miembro clave del Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional que había sido encarcelado por la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza. El 11 de Febrero Torres falleció a los 73 años, como preso político de la nueva dictadura de Nicaragua. En una de las horribles simetrías que caracterizan a la historia de este país centroamericano, el sandinista a quien Torres ayudó a liberar en 1974 terminó convirtiéndose en el dictador bajo cuya custodia murió: Daniel Ortega. Tras haber estado previamente alineado con Ortega, Torres estaba siendo castigado por concluir que el régimen actual es —como dijo en su última declaración pública antes de ser arrestado en junio de 2021— “más brutal, más inescrupuloso, más irracional y más autocrático” que el de Somoza. El régimen de Ortega está estrechamente alineado con la Rusia de Vladimir Putin, la cual ayuda a las fuerzas militares de Nicaragua. Debe haber una investigación independiente sobre este caso. Establecer la verdad no sería un ejercicio académico, ya que existe una posibilidad real de que ocurran tragedias similares: varios de los 46 líderes políticos que el régimen de Ortega encarceló en 2021 son, al igual que Torres, personas de 60 ó 70 años, como Francisco Aguirre Sacasa, un excanciller nicaragüense de 77 años quien fue declarado culpable de cargos falsos de conspiración, en un proceso judicial a puerta cerrada. Aguirre podría enfrentarse a ocho años de prisión. En una situación similar se encuentran el académico Arturo Cruz Sequeira, de 68 años, y Pedro Joaquín Chamorro Barrios, de 71 años. En total, el régimen de Ortega tiene detenidos a aproximadamente 190 presos políticos. Una fuente en condición de anonimato reveló que los presos políticos que están cumpliendo su condena de cárcel tienen prohibidas las llamadas telefónicas, no pueden tener el servicio de televisión por cable y tienen vigilancia hasta para ir al baño. Recording, Mix & Mastering Engineer: Jesús Carreño. Voice Over: Jessika C. #nicaragua #danielortega #tiranianicaraguense Podcast recorded at: Nmmiami Studio. nmmiami.com @nmmiamiradio Para más información: anexostudio@gmail.com / nmmiamiradioonline@gmail.com Doral, FL 33166

Este 19 de julio se conmemora en Nicaragua el 43 aniversario de la Revolución sandinista, que forzó el derrocamiento de la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza, y eventualmente llevó al poder al presidente Daniel Ortega.Para conocer sobre cómo CNN protege la privacidad de su audiencia, visite CNN.com/privacidad

Patrick Dennis Duddy, director of the Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies and senior visiting scholar at Duke University, leads a conversation on democracy in Latin America. This meeting is part of the Diamonstein-Spielvogel Project on the Future of Democracy. FASKIANOS: Welcome to today's session of the Winter/Spring 2022 CFR Academic Webinar Series. I'm Irina Faskianos, vice president of the National Program and Outreach at CFR. Today's discussion is on the record, and the video and transcript will be available on our website, CFR.org/academic. As always, CFR takes no institutional positions on matters of policy. We're delighted to have Patrick Dennis Duddy with us today to talk about democracy in Latin America. Ambassador Patrick Duddy is the director of Duke University's Center for Latin American and Caribbean Studies and teaches in both Duke's Fuqua School of Business and Sanford School of Public Policy. From 2007 to 2010, he served as the U.S. ambassador to Venezuela under both the Bush and Obama administrations. Prior to his assignment to Venezuela, Ambassador Duddy served as deputy assistant secretary of state for the Western Hemisphere, and he's also held positions at embassies in Brazil, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay, the Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, and Panama, and has worked closely with Haiti. So it is my pleasure to have him with us today. He has served nearly three decades in the Foreign Service. He's taught at the National War College, lectured at the State Department's Foreign Service Institute, and is a member of CFR. So, Ambassador Duddy, you bring all of your experience to this conversation to talk about this very small question of the state of democracy in Latin America and what U.S. policy should be. It's a broad topic, but I'm going to turn it over to you to give us your insight and analysis. DUDDY: Well, good afternoon, or morning, to all of those who have tuned in, and, Irina, thank you to you and the other folks at the Council for giving me this opportunity. I thought I would begin with a brief introduction, partially rooted in my own experience in the region, and then leave as much time as possible for questions. To start with, let us remember that President Biden held a Democracy Summit in early December, and in opening that summit he emphasized that for the current American administration, in particular, the defense of democracy is, I believe he said, a defining challenge, going ahead. Now, I, certainly, subscribe to that assertion, and I'd also like to start by reminding folks how far the region has come in recent decades. I flew down to Chile during the Pinochet regime to join the embassy in the very early 1980s, and I recall that the Braniff Airlines flight that took me to Santiago, essentially, stopped in every burg and dorf with an airport from Miami to Santiago. It used to be called the milk run. And in virtually every country in which we landed there was a military dictatorship and human rights were honored more in the breach than in fact. Things have really changed quite substantially since then, and during much of the '80s we saw a pretty constant move in the direction of democracy and somewhat later in the '80s also, in many parts of Latin America, an embrace of a market-oriented economic policy. There was some slippage even in the early part of the new millennium. But, nevertheless, the millennium opened on 9-11-2001 with the signature in Lima, Peru, of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Secretary Powell was, in fact, in Lima for the signing of that agreement, which was endorsed by every country in the region except Cuba. This was a major step forward for a region that had been synonymous with strongman politics, military government, and repression. The slippage since then has been significant and, indeed, as recently as a year or two ago during the pandemic the Institute for Democracy and Electoral Management or Electoral Administration—I believe it's called IDEA—noted that across much of the region, publics were losing faith in democracy as the preferred form of government. I would say, rather more pointedly, of real significance in recent years has been the deterioration of democracy in a series of countries and the inability of the rest of the hemisphere to do anything about it, notwithstanding the fact that the hemisphere as a whole had indicated that full participation in the inter-American system required democratic governance and respect for human rights. Venezuela now is pretty unapologetically an authoritarian government. So is Nicaragua, and there has been real slippage in a number of other countries in the region as well. I think it would be appropriate to ask, given the progress made from, say, the early '80s through the year 2000, what accounts for this, and I would say there are a number of key factors. By and large, I would note, the factors are internal. That is to say they derive from circumstances within the region and are not necessarily a consequence of external subversion. Poverty, inequality, crony capitalism in some cases, criminality, drug trafficking—these things continue to bedevil a range of countries within the region. Endemic corruption is something that individual countries have struggled with and, by and large, been unsuccessful in significantly reducing. In effect, governability, as a general heading, probably explains or is the heading under which we should investigate just why it is that some publics have lost faith in democracy. You know, we've had several really interesting elections lately. Let's set aside just for the moment the reality that, particularly since 2013, Venezuela has deteriorated dramatically in virtually every respect—politically, economically—in terms of, you know, quality of life indicators, et cetera, as has Nicaragua, and look, for instance, at Peru. Peru has held a free, fair—recently held a free, fair election, one that brought a significant change to the government in that the new president, a teacher, is a figure on the left. Now, I don't think we, collectively or hemisphere, there's, certainly, no problem with that. But what accounts for the fact that a place like Peru has seen wild swings between figures of the left and of the right, and has most recently, notwithstanding a decade of mostly sustained significant macroeconomic growth, why have they embraced a figure who so—at least in his campaign so profoundly challenged the existing system? I would argue it's because macroeconomic growth was not accompanied by microeconomic change—that, basically, the poor remained poor and the gap between rich and poor was, largely, undiminished. Arguably, much the same thing has happened recently in Chile, the country which was for decades the yardstick by which the quality of democracy everywhere else in the hemisphere was frequently judged. The new president or the president—I guess he's just taken office here—president-elect in Chile is a young political activist of the left who has, in the past, articulated an enthusiasm for figures like Hugo Chavez or even Fidel Castro, and now, as the elected president, has begun to use a more moderate rhetoric. But, again, the country which, arguably, has had the greatest success in reducing poverty has, nevertheless, seen a dramatic swing away from a more conventional political figure to someone who is advocating radical change and the country is on the verge of—and in the process of revising its constitution. How do we explain that? I think in both cases it has to do with frustration of the electorate with the ability of the conventional systemic parties, we might say, to deliver significant improvement to the quality of life and a significant reduction of both poverty and income inequality, and I note that income inequality persists even when at times poverty has been reduced and is a particularly difficult problem to resolve. Now, we've also seen, just to cite a third example, just recently this past weekend an election in Costa Rica, which was well administered and the results of which have been accepted unquestionably by virtually all of the political figures, and I point to Costa Rica, in part, because I've spent a good deal of time there. I've witnessed elections on the ground. But what is the reality? The reality is over decades, indeed, certainly, beginning in the late '40s during the administration of the first “Pepe” Figueres, the country has been successful in delivering quality services to the public. As a result, though, notwithstanding the fact that there have been changes, there's been no serious deterioration in the country's embrace of democracy or its enthusiasm for its own political institutions. This makes it not entirely unique but very closely unique in the Central American context. A number of other things that I'd like to just leave with you or suggest that we should consider today. So we—throughout much of Latin America we're seeing sort of plausibly well-administered elections but we are seeing often sort of dramatic challenges, sometimes to political institutions but often to economic policy, and those challenges have resulted in tremendous pendulum swings in terms of public policy from one administration to the next, which, at times, has undermined stability and limited the attractiveness of the region for foreign direct investment. Beyond that, though, we're also seeing a kind of fracturing of the region. In 2001, when the Inter-American Democratic Charter was embraced—was signed in Lima—an event that would have, perhaps, attracted a good deal more attention had other things not happened on that very same day—much of the region, I think, we would understand, was, largely, on the same page politically and even to some degree economically, and much of the region embraced the idea of—I'm sorry, I'm losing my signal here—much of the region embraced a deeper and productive relationship with the United States. The situation in Venezuela, which has generated over—right around 6 million refugees—it's the largest refugee problem in the world after Syria—has, to some degree, highlighted some of the changes with respect to democracy. The first—and I'm going to end very shortly, Irina, and give folks an opportunity to ask questions—the first is the frustration and the inability of the region to enforce, you know, its own mandates, its own requirement that democracy be—and democratic governance and respect for human rights be a condition for participation in the inter-American system. And further to that, what we've seen is a breakup of the one larger group of countries in the region which had been attempting to encourage the return to democracy in Venezuela, known as the Lima Group. So what we've seen is that the commitment to democracy as a hemispheric reality has, to some degree, eroded. At the same time, we are increasingly seeing the region as a theater for big power competition. You know, it was only within the last few days that President Fernández, for instance, of Argentina traveled to meet with both the Russian leadership and the Chinese. This is not inherently problematical but it probably does underscore the degree to which the United States is not the only major power active in the region. We may still have the largest investment stock in the region, but China is now the largest trading partner for Brazil, for Chile, for Peru, the largest creditor for Venezuela. I haven't yet touched on Central America and that's a particularly difficult set of problems. But what I would note is while we, in the United States, are wrestling with a range of issues, from refugees to drug trafficking, we are also simultaneously trying to deepen our trade relationships with the region, relationships which are already very important to the United States. And, unfortunately, our political influence in the region, I believe, has become diluted over time by inattention at certain moments and because of the rise or the introduction of new and different players, players who are frequently not particularly interested in local political systems much less democracy, per se. So, if I may, I'll stop there. As Irina has pointed out, I served extensively around the region for thirty years and I'd be happy to try and answer questions on virtually any of the countries, certainly, those in which I have served. FASKIANOS: So I'm going to go first to Babak Salimitari. If you could unmute yourself and give us your affiliation, Babak. Q: Good morning, Ambassador. My name is Babak. I am a third-year student at UCI and my question—you mentioned the far-left leaders who have gained a lot of traction and power in different parts of Latin America. Another guy that comes to mind is the socialist in Honduras. But, simultaneously, you've also seen a drift to the far right with presidents like President AMLO—you have President Bolsonaro—all who are, basically, the opposite of the people in Honduras and, I'd say, Chile. So what is—these are countries that—I know they're very different from one another, but the problems that they face like poverty, income inequality, I guess, drug trafficking, they exist there and they also exist there. Why have these two different sort of polarities—political polarities arose—arisen, arose— DUDDY: Risen. (Laughs.) Q: —in these countries? DUDDY: That's a great question. I would note, first of all, I don't see President Lόpez Obrador of Mexico as a leader of the right. He is, certainly—he, largely, comes from the left, in many respects, and is, essentially, a populist, and I would say populism rather than sort of a right/left orientation is often a key consideration. Returning to my earlier comment in that what I see is popular frustration with governments around the region, often, President Bolsonaro was elected in the—in a period in which public support for government institutions in Brazil, particularly, the traditional political parties, was at an especially low level, right. There had been a number of major corruption scandals and his candidacy appeared to be—to some, at least—to offer a kind of tonic to the problems which had beset the earlier governments from the Workers' Party. He, clearly, is a figure of the right but I think the key thing is he represented change. I think, you know, my own experience is that while some leaders in Latin America draw their policy prescriptions from a particular ideology, the voters, essentially, are looking at very practical considerations. Has the government in power been able to deliver on its promises? Has life gotten better or worse? President Piñera in Chile was a figure of the right, widely viewed as a conservative pro-market figure. The PT in Brazil—the Workers' Party—came from the left. Both were succeeded by figures from the other end of the political spectrum and I think it was more a matter of frustration than ideology. I hope that answers your question. FASKIANOS: I'm going to take the next written question from Terron Adlam, who's an undergraduate student at Delaware State University. Essentially, can you discuss the relationship between climate change and the future of democracy in Latin America? DUDDY: Well, that's just a small matter but it's an important one, actually. The fact is that especially in certain places climate change appears to be spurring migration and poverty, and there are people here at Duke—some of my colleagues—and elsewhere around the country looking very specifically at the links between, especially, drought and other forms of climate change, the, you know, recovery from hurricanes, et cetera, and instability, unemployment, decline in the quality of services. Overburdened countries, for instance, in Central America have sometimes not recovered from one hurricane before another one hits, and this has effects internally but it has also tended to complicate and possibly accelerate the movement of populations from affected areas to other areas. Sometimes that migration is internal and sometimes it's cross-border. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to a raised hand, Arnold Vela. If you—there you go. Q: Good afternoon, Ambassador Duddy. DUDDY: Good afternoon. Q: I'm Arnold Vela. I served in the Foreign Service for a couple of years and I'm now retired teaching government at Northwest Vista College. I think you put your finger on a very important point, which is that of the economic inequality and poverty that exists in Latin America, and, you know, with that being the case, I think Shannon O'Neil makes a good case about focusing on economic policy. And I was wondering what your thoughts were on ways in which we could do that in terms of, for example, foreign development investment, which may be decreasing because of a tendency to look inward for economic development in the United States. But are there other mechanisms, such as through the U.S. Treasury Department, financial ways to cut corruption? And also what about the Inter-American Development Bank? Should it be expanded in its role for not just infrastructure development but for such things as microeconomic development that you mentioned? Thank you. DUDDY: You know, as deputy assistant secretary, I, actually had the economic portfolio for the Western Hemisphere for a couple of years within the State Department. Clearly, trade is important. Foreign direct investment is, I think, critical. One of the things that we need to remember when we talk about foreign direct investment is that, typically, it's private money, right—it's private money—and that means governments and communities need to understand that in order to attract private money they need to establish conditions in which investors can see a reasonable return and in which they can enjoy a reasonable measure of security. That can be very, very difficult in the—Arnold, as you probably will recall, in much of Latin America, for instance, in the energy sector—and Latin America has immense energy resources—but the energy resources are frequently subject to a kind of resource nationalism. And so my experience is that in some parts of Latin America it's difficult to attract the kind of investment that could make a very substantial difference in part because local politics, largely, preclude extending either ownership or profit participation in the development of some resources. The fact that those things were not initially permitted in Mexico led to a constitutional change in order to permit both profit sharing and foreign ownership to some degree of certain resources. Investors need a certain measure of security and that involves, among other things, making sure that there is a reasonable expectation of equal treatment under the law, right. So legal provisions as well as a determination to attract foreign investment. Places like—little places, if you will, like Costa Rica have been very, very successful at attracting foreign investment, in part because they've worked hard to create the conditions necessary to attract private money. I would note—let me just add one further thought, and that is part of the problem in—I think, in some places has been something that we in the United States have often called crony capitalism. We need to make sure that competition for contracts, et cetera, is, in fact, transparent and fair. As for international institutions, there are many in the United States that are sometimes with which the region is unfamiliar like, for instance, the Trade and Development Agency, which promotes, among other things, feasibility studies, and the only condition for assistance from the TDA is that subsequent contracts be fairly and openly competed and that American companies be allowed to compete. So there are resources out there and I, certainly, would endorse a greater concentration on Latin America and I think it can have a real impact. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question—a written question—from Chaney Howard, who is a business major at Howard University. You spoke about the erosion of democratic push in Latin America growth, specifically with the Lima Group. What do you feel would need to happen for a new power to be established or encouraged to help nations band together and improve democratic growth? DUDDY: Well, the Lima Group was—which was organized in 2017 for the express purpose of advocating for the restoration of democracy in Venezuela, fell apart, essentially, as countries began to look more internally, struggling, in particular, with the early economic consequences of the pandemic. Some of you will remember that, particularly, early on, for instance, cruise ships in the Caribbean, essentially, stopped sailing. Well, much of the Caribbean depends absolutely on tourism, right. So the pandemic, effectively, turned people's attention to their own internal challenges. I think that we have good institutions still. But I think that we need to find ways other than just sanctions to encourage support for democracy. The U.S. has been particularly inclined in recent years not to interventionism but to sanctioning other countries. While sometimes—and I've sometimes advocated for sanctions myself, including to the Congress, in very limited circumstances—my sense is that we need to not only be prepared to sanction but also to encourage. We need to have a policy that offers as many carrots as sticks, and we need to be prepared to engage more actively than we have in the last fifteen years on this. Some of these problems date back some time. Now, one particularly important source of development assistance has always been the Millennium Challenge account, and there is a key issue there, which, I think, largely, limits the degree to which the Millennium Challenge Corporation can engage and that is middle income countries aren't eligible for their large assistance programs. I think we should revisit that because while some countries qualify as middle income, when you only calculate per capita income using GDP, countries with serious problems of income inequality as well as poverty are not eligible and I think that we should consider formulae that would allow us to channel more assistance into some of those economies. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Kennedy Himmel, who does not have access to a mic, a student at University of Wisconsin-Green Bay. There seems to be surmounting evidence that suggests that U.S. imperialism has waged both covert warfare and regime change itself in Central American countries through the last century and our current one. The most notable cases was Operation Condor, which peaked during Reagan's administration. You suggested the problems plaguing these countries' embrace of primarily right-wing dictatorships is a product of crony capitalism, poverty, and corruption, which are all internal problems. Do you think some of these problems of these countries are a byproduct of U.S. and Western meddling, economic warfare, the imposition of Western neoliberalism? DUDDY: Well, that's a good question. My own experience in the region dates from the early '80s. I mean, certainly, during the Cold War the United States tended to support virtually any government that we perceived or that insisted that they were resolutely anti-communist. For decades now the U.S. has made support for democracy a pillar of its policies in the region and I think we have, largely, evolved out of the—you know, our earlier, you know, period of either interventionism or, in a sense, sometimes even when we were not entirely—when we were not active we were complicit in that we applied no standard other than anti-communism with the countries we were willing to work with. That was a real problem. I note, by the way, for any who are interested that several years ago—about five years ago now, if I'm not mistaken, Irina—the Foreign Affairs, which is published by the Council on Foreign Relations, ran a series of articles in one issue called “What Really Happened?”, and for those interested in what really happened in Chile during the Allende government, there is a piece in there by a man named Devine, who was actually in the embassy during the coup and was working, as he now acknowledges, for the CIA. So I refer you to that. My sense in recent decades is that the U.S. has, certainly, tried to advance its own interests but has not been in the business of undermining governments, and much of the economic growth which some countries have sustained has derived very directly from the fact that we've negotiated free trade agreements with more countries in Latin America than any other part of the world. I remember very distinctly about five years into the agreement with Chile that the volume of trading both directions—and as a consequence, not just employment, but also kind of gross income—hence, had very substantially increased; you know, more than a hundred percent. The same has been true with Mexico. So, you know, we have a history in the region. I think it is, largely, explained by looking at U.S. policy and understanding that it was—almost everything was refracted through the optic of the Cold War. But, you know, it's now many decades since that was the case. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go to Elizabeth McDowell, who has a raised hand. Q: Hi. I'm Elizabeth McDowell. I'm a graduate student in public policy at Duke University. Ambassador Duddy, thanks for your talk. I want to ask a question about a potential tradeoff between good governance and— DUDDY: I lost your audio. Please repeat. Q: How's my audio now? OK. My— DUDDY: You'll have to repeat the question. Q: My question is about critical minerals and metals in the region and, essentially, these metals and minerals, including lithium, cobalt, and nickel, copper, others, are essential for clean energy transition, and there are a lot of countries that have instituted new policies in order to gain financially from the stores since these minerals are very prevalent in the region. And my question is do you think that there's a tradeoff between sustainable development and having the minerals that we need at low cost and countries being able to benefit economically from their natural resource stores? DUDDY: Yeah. I'm not quite sure how I would characterize the tradeoffs. But, you know, as I mentioned with respect, for instance, to oil and gas but the same applies to lithium, cobalt, et cetera, in much of Latin America the resources that are below the surface of the Earth belong to the nation, right. They belong to the nation. And in some places—I very vividly remember in Bolivia—there was tremendous resistance at a certain point to the building of a pipeline by a foreign entity which would take Bolivian gas out of the country. And that resistance was rooted in Bolivia's history in the sense that much of the population had—that the country had been exploited for five hundred years and they just didn't trust the developers to make sure that the country shared appropriately in the exploitation of the country's gas resources. Just a few years ago, another—a major company, I think, based in—headquartered in India, opened and then closed a major operation that was going to develop—I think it was also lithium mining—in Bolivia because of difficulties imposed by the government. I understand why those difficulties are imposed in countries which have been exploited but note that the exploitation of many of these resources is capital intensive and in many of these countries is going to require capital from outside the country. And so countries have to find a way to both assure a reasonable level of compensation to the companies as well as income to the country. So that's the challenge, right. That is the challenge. For the time being, in some places the Chinese have been able to not just exploit but have been able to do business, in part, because they have a virtually insatiable appetite for these minerals and as well as for other commodities. But long-term development has to be vertically integrated and that—and I think that's going to take a lot of external money and, again, certain countries are going to have to figure out how to do that when we're talking about resources which, to a very large degree, are viewed as patrimony of the nation. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take the next question from Leah Parrott, who's a sophomore at NYU. Do you find that globalization itself, the competitive global markets, vying for influence in the region are a cause of the rise in the populist frustration that you have been talking about? DUDDY: Hmm. Interesting question. I suppose it has—you know, there is a connection. Just to give sort of a visceral response, the fact is that there are cultural differences in certain markets and regions of the world. Some countries have—you know, have taken a different approach to the development of their own labor markets as well as trade policy. I would say that, today, the reality is we can't avoid globalization so—and no one country controls it. So countries that have heretofore been unsuccessful in inserting themselves and seeing the same kind of growth that other countries have experienced are going to have to adapt. What we do know from earlier experiences in Latin America is that high tariff barriers are not the way to go, right—that that resulted in weak domestic industries, endemic corruption, and, ultimately, very, very fragile macroeconomic indicators. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Alberto Najarro, who's a graduate student at Duke Kunshan University. DUDDY: Well. Q: Hi. Good afternoon. Thank you for your time. My question is about El Salvador. I'm from El Salvador, and I'll just provide a brief overview. Since assuming the presidency and, particularly, over the last six months, President Bukele and the National Assembly dominated by Bukele's allies have moved quickly to weaken checks and balances, undermine the rule of law, and co-opt the country's judiciary, consolidating power in the executive. What do you think should be the United States' role, if any, in reversing trends of democratic backsliding in El Salvador? Given the recent events like the abrupt exit of the United States interim ambassador Jean Manes from the country, can the United States continue to engage with El Salvador, particularly, as Bukele strengthens relationship with leaders like Xi Jinping and Erdoğan? DUDDY: Well, first, my recollection is that Ambassador Jean Manes, who, by the way, is an old friend of mine, had returned to El Salvador as chargé, and I'm not sure that the Biden administration has, in fact, nominated a new ambassador yet. I tend to think that it's important to remember that we have embassies in capitals to advance U.S. interests and that when we withdraw those embassies or cease talking to a host government it hurts us as often—as much as it does them. To some degree, what we, I think, collectively, worry about is that Salvador is, essentially, on the path to authoritarianism. I note that Honduras, El Salvador, and Guatemala, none of those three, along with Nicaragua, were invited to President Biden's Democracy Summit in December, and, you know, it may well be that the U.S. should explore a range of inducements to the government there to restore independence to the judiciary and respect for the separation of powers. I, certainly, think that it is in the interest of the United States but it's also interest—in the interest of the region. That's why the whole region came together in 2001 to sign the Inter-American Democratic Charter. How exactly that should be effected—how we should implement the—you know, the will of the region is something that, I think, that governments should work out collectively because it is my sense that collective action is better than unilateral action. Certainly, the U.S. is not going to intervene, and there are many American companies already active in El Salvador. You know, the region has found the restoration of democracy—defense of democracy, restoration of democracy—a very, very difficult job in recent years and that is in no small measure because—it's not just the United States, it's the rest of the region—even sanctions are only effective if they are broadly respected by other key players. And I'm not always sure that sanctions are the way to go. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to take two written questions together since we have so many. The first is from Molly Todd from Virginia Tech. She's a PhD candidate there. When thinking of the U.S. role in democracy promotion in Latin America, how do you account for U.S. support of dictators in the region as well? And then William Weeks at Arizona State University—how much does China's influence encourage authoritarian rule and discourage democracy in Latin America? DUDDY: I'm not sure that—I'll take the last question first. I'm not sure that China's activity in the region discourages democracy but it has permitted certain strongmen figures like Nicolás Maduro to survive by serving as an alternative source of sometimes funding markets for locally produced goods and also the source of technology, et cetera, to the United States and the rest of what is euphemistically called the West, right. So China has, effectively, provided a lifeline. The lifeline, in my experience, is not particularly ideological. Now, you know, Russians in the region frequently seem interested in—to be a little bit flip, in sticking their finger in our eye and reminding the United States that they can project power and influence into the Western Hemisphere just as we can into Eastern Europe and Central Asia. But the Chinese are a little bit different. I think their interests are mostly commercial and they are uninterested in Latin American democracy, generally. So being democratic is not a condition for doing business with China. More generally, I think, I would refer to my earlier response. The U.S., basically, has not been supportive of the strongmen figure(s) who have arisen in Latin America in recent decades. But, you know, the tendency to embrace what many in Latin America call caciques, or strongmen figures—men on horseback—was established in Latin America, right—became evident in Latin America even in the nineteenth century. In the twentieth century, beginning, say, in particular, after World War II, we, definitely, considered things more through the optic of the Cold War, and I'm sure I'm not the only one who recalls that President Franklin Delano Roosevelt, at a certain moment in, I think it was 1947, commented on Anastasio Somoza that he was an SOB but, oh, well, he was our SOB. I think that approach to Latin America has long since been shelved. FASKIANOS: Thank you. I'm going to go next to Gary Prevost. Q: Ambassador, I share your skepticism about sanctions and I'll just ask a very direct question. It's my belief that the Biden administration is, at the moment, missing real opportunities for dialogue with both Venezuela and Cuba, partly because of this bifurcation of the world into democracy and authoritarianism, something which the Obama administration really avoided and, I think, as a result, gained considerable prestige and understanding in wider Latin America. So I've been very concerned that there are opportunities being missed in both of those cases right now. DUDDY: I'll disagree with you on one part of that, noting that I've already—and, actually, I wrote a piece for the Council several years ago in which I talked about the desirability of finding an off ramp for Venezuela. But I note that the—that many of the sanctions that are—sanctions were imposed on Venezuela, in particular, over a period of time by both Republicans and Democrats, and the problem for the U.S., in particular, with Venezuela is that as the country has become less productive, more authoritarian, they have pushed out 6 million refugees and imposed huge burdens on almost all of the other countries in the subregion. I'm not sure that the U.S. is, at the moment, missing an opportunity there and, for that matter, the changes that were brought into Cuba or to Cuba policy by the Obama administration, which I endorsed, were for the most part left in place by the Trump administration, interestingly enough. There were some changes but they were not as dramatic as many who opposed those—the Obama reforms—often hoped and who wanted to reverse them. So these are both tough nuts to crack. I think that it is at least worth noting that the combination of incompetence, corruption, authoritarianism, in particular, in Venezuela, which has transformed what was at one point the most successful democracy in the region into a basket case or a near basket case, I'm not sure, you know, how we get our arms around that at the moment. But I, certainly, endorse the idea of encouraging dialogue and looking for a formula that would promote the return of democracy. And, again, you know, having lived in Venezuela, I have a sense that many—you know, Venezuelans love their country. Most of those who have left did not do so willingly or, you know, with a happy heart, if you will. These are people who found the circumstances on the ground in the country to be unbearable. Now, how we respond to that challenge, I haven't seen any new thinking on it lately. But, certainly, dialogue is a part of it. Similarly, with Cuba, we have—you know, we saw fifty years of policy that didn't work. So I would hope to, sometime in the near future, see some fresh thinking on how to proceed on that front, too. You know, the difficult thing to get around is that these are not countries which respect human rights, freedom of expression, freedom of the press. They are, in fact, repressive, which is why we have hundreds of thousands of Cuban Americans living in the United States and why we have now millions of Venezuelans living outside their own national borders. It's a real dilemma. I wish I had a solution but I don't. FASKIANOS: We are almost out of time. We have many more written questions and raised hands, and I apologize that we're not going to be able to get to them. But I am going to use my moderator power to ask you the final one. DUDDY: Uh-oh. FASKIANOS: You have served—oh, it's a good one. You've served for most of your career, over thirty years, in U.S. government and now you're teaching. What advice or what would you offer to the students on the call about pursuing a career in the Foreign Service, and what do you say to your students now and the professor, or to your colleagues about how to encourage students to pursue? We saw that it's become less attractive—became less attractive in the Trump administration. It may be up—more on the upswing. But, of course, there is, again, the pay problem and private sector versus public. So what thoughts can you leave us with? DUDDY: Well, first of all, there's—in my personal experiences, there's virtually nothing quite like being an American diplomat abroad. My personal experience is—you know, dates from the '80s. I was actually very briefly an Air Force officer in the early '70s. I think public service is inherently rewarding in ways that often working in the private sector is not, where you can really have an impact on relations between peoples and nations, and I think that's very, very exciting. I come from a family, you know, filled with, you know, lawyers, in particular, in my generation, even in the next, and I know that that can be—that kind of work or work in the private sector, the financial community, whatever, can be very exciting as well. But diplomacy is unique, and one also has the sense of doing something that benefits our own country and, one hopes, the world. At the risk of, once again, being flip, I always felt that I was on the side of the angels. You know, I think we've made many mistakes but that, by and large, our engagement in the countries in which I was working was positive. FASKIANOS: Wonderful. Well, on that note, Ambassador Patrick Duddy, thank you for your service to this country. Thank you very much for sharing your insights with us. I know this is very broad to cover the whole region and we didn't do all the countries justice. DUDDY: And we have yet to—and we have yet to mention Haiti, about which I worry all the time. FASKIANOS: I know. There are so many things to cover. Not enough time, not enough hours in a day. And we appreciate everybody for your time, being with us for your great questions and comments. Again, I apologize for not getting to everybody. But we will just have to have you back. So thank you again. For all of you, our next Academic Webinar will be on Wednesday, February 23, at 1:00 p.m. (ET)with Roger Ferguson, who is at CFR, on the future of capitalism. So, as always, please follow us on Twitter at @CFR_Academic. Go to CFR.org, ForeignAffairs.com, and ThinkGlobalHealth.org for research and analysis on global issues. We will circulate a link to the Foreign Affairs edition that Ambassador Duddy mentioned so that you can take a look at that. And thank you, again, for your time today. We appreciate it. DUDDY: It's been a pleasure. Thank you. (END

¿Conoces a la dinastía Samoza? Una familia de políticos de la ultraderecha nicaragüense y unos asesinos. Hoy, hace 65 años, murió Anastasio Somoza, ocho días después de que un tipo le pegara cuatro tiros en mitad de una fiesta. Por Nieves Concostrina.

¿Conoces a la dinastía Samoza? Una familia de políticos de la ultraderecha nicaragüense y unos asesinos. Hoy, hace 65 años, murió Anastasio Somoza, ocho días después de que un tipo le pegara cuatro tiros en mitad de una fiesta. Por Nieves Concostrina.

Repasamos con Carlos Boyero la nueva película de James Bond y la última de Clint Eastwood, Nieves Concostrina nos habla del asesinato de Anastasio Somoza y repaso del día con Isaías Lafuente.

¿Conoces a la dinastía Samoza? Una familia de políticos de la ultraderecha nicaragüense y unos asesinos. Hoy, hace 65 años, murió Anastasio Somoza, ocho días después de que un tipo le pegara cuatro tiros en mitad de una fiesta. Por Nieves Concostrina.

¿Conoces a la dinastía Samoza? Una familia de políticos de la ultraderecha nicaragüense y unos asesinos. Hoy, hace 65 años, murió Anastasio Somoza, ocho días después de que un tipo le pegara cuatro tiros en mitad de una fiesta. Por Nieves Concostrina.

Las inéditas protestas en Cuba advierten un alboroto en El Caribe. La larga crisis haitiana sacudida ahora por la muerte violenta de un presidente no es novedad, simplemente ratifica la fragilidad de un Estado que no depende de si mismo. En Puerto Rico la crisis económico-administrativa han provocado una emigración masiva ya comparada con aquella de la postguerra que convirtió la ciudad de Nueva York en el municipio más poblado por puertorriqueños. Es casi cruel decir que esto conviene a la RD pero es la verdad. Cuba que tenía en el turismo su fuerte y que era el gran competidor dominicano no da visos de recuperación y las protestas de ayer indican lo profundo del deterioro. Hay serios problemas de abasto de alimentos, medicina y energía eléctrica. Cuando leía las noticias esta madrugada recordé el libro de Bosch aquel Póker de Espanto en el Caribe. En que Rafael Leonidas Trujillo en República Dominicana; Anastasio Somoza, Tacho, en Nicaragua; Marcos Pérez Jiménez en Venezuela, y Fulgencio Batista en Cuba, generaban un ruido parecido aunque diferente en sus orígenes. La crisis de Cuba, la de Venezuela y la de Haití tienen mucho en común. Cuba superó la crisis de la caída de la Unión Soviética con el financiamiento petrolero venezolano que también le entró un airecito a Haití. Ahora Venezuela tiene su propia crisis y con el presidente Biden manteniendo las medidas de Trump, Cuba está como la película aquella: Atrapada y sin salida. República Dominicana que ha logrado una recuperación de la llegada de visitantes y ya alcanza el 60 por ciento del 2019, el año antes de la pandemia, es el gran beneficiario de la situación. Es triste pero nos beneficia el mal de los demás.

Hace casi exactamente 42 años, el 20 de julio de 1979, la revolución Sandinista triunfaba en Nicaragua, derrotando al dictador Anastasio Somoza. Un poco más de cuatro decenios después, la historia pareciera mostrar dolorosamente que, para instaurar una democracia real, hace falta mucho más que una revolución exitosa. Daniel Ortega, quien es uno de los miembros fundadores del Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional, ha gobernado ese país centroamericano en tres oportunidades. La primera, como Coordinador de la Junta de Gobierno de Reconstrucción Nacional de Nicaragua entre 1981 y 1984; la segunda como presidente, entre 1985 y 1990; y la tercera, nuevamente como presidente desde 2007 hasta la actualidad. A juzgar por sus acciones de los últimos años, Ortega cree que todo este tiempo en el poder no ha sido suficientes para consolidar su proyecto político. Desde hace tres años, su gobierno ha venido reprimiendo cualquier movimiento, partido, medio de comunicación o figura pública que pueda significar un desafío democrático al control que tiene en su país. La primera represión masiva ocurrió en abril de 2018, cuando un grupo de pensionados inició una serie de protestas públicas por la modificación al sistema de seguridad social que estaba impulsando el gobierno de Ortega. Desde el inicio de las protestas, los pensionados fueron apoyados por los estudiantes de varias universidades del país. Si bien la reforma a la seguridad social fue la causa inmediata de las protestas, en el fondo se trataba de una movilización en pro de una apertura democrática de la política nicaragüense. La respuesta del gobierno de Ortega fue brutal: se estima que hubo más de 300 personas muertas a causa de las acciones de la policía y de agrupaciones paramilitares apoyadas por el Gobierno. A partir de ese año la persecución política y la represión se han convertido en los recursos ordinarios con los que el Gobierno nicaragüense enfrenta la oposición. De hecho, durante este año, en el que se celebrarán las elecciones presidenciales y de diputados a la Asamblea Nacional de Nicaragua —el órgano legislativo del país—, el gobierno ha venido encarcelando a las figuras más prominentes de los partidos de oposición y de la prensa crítica del gobierno. Esta es una estrategia desvergonzada para eliminar cualquier contendiente que pueda tener una oportunidad real de ganar las elecciones. Para analizar la situación de los derechos humanos y de la democracia en Nicaragua, así como para estimar el efecto que pueden tener las acciones de algunos actores internacionales en la apertura política y la realización de unas elecciones libres en ese país, nos acompañan: • Carlos Salgar, académico de relaciones internacionales y diplomacia, quien fue embajador de Colombia en Managua entre 2015 y 2020. • Mónica Fonseca, quien ha sido directora de derechos humanos de la Cancillería, asesora del Viceministerio de Asuntos Multilaterales, ministra consejera en la embajada colombiana en Roma y Consultora de Naciones Unidas en materia de derechos humanos. • Desde Managua, Maynor Salazar, periodista de investigación en Divergentes. Este es el primero de una serie de 4 episodios que dedicamos a los derechos humanos y la democracia en América Latina.

Today on Sojourner Truth: In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using crippling economic sanctions. Sanctions have devastating impacts on jobs, healthcare, food, water, education, transportation and more, impacting ordinary Nicaraguans. Today, we bring you audio from a presentation by the late Dr. Paul Oquist about the impact of sanctions on Nicaragua. Dr. Oquist was the Secretary Minister for National Policies under the Sandinista government. Although he was born and raised in the United States, Dr. Oquist was a lifelong supporter of the Sandinista Revolution. He held numerous positions in the progressive government during the 1980s, following the victory of the Sandinista Revolution, as well as after 2007, when the Sandinistas came back to power. In October of 2020, the U.S. government sanctioned Dr. Oquist, claiming that he was helping to "undermine democracy." As a dedicated environmentalist, Dr. Oquist refused to back the adoption of the Paris Agreement. He argued that the deal did not go far enough to cut global emissions and protect exploited countries from climate devastation. Sadly, Dr. Oquist passed away on April 11, 2021. He remains a hero to many in Nicaragua. Ramiro Funez, Assistant Producer of Sojourner Truth, recorded this presentation on March 15, 2021, during his participation in the Sanctions Kill & Friends of the Rural Workers Association Delegation to Nicaragua. This was Dr. Oquist's last public speech.

Today on Sojourner Truth: In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using crippling economic sanctions. Sanctions have devastating impacts on jobs, healthcare, food, water, education, transportation and more, impacting ordinary Nicaraguans. Today, we bring you audio from a presentation by the late Dr. Paul Oquist about the impact of sanctions on Nicaragua. Dr. Oquist was the Secretary Minister for National Policies under the Sandinista government. Although he was born and raised in the United States, Dr. Oquist was a lifelong supporter of the Sandinista Revolution. He held numerous positions in the progressive government during the 1980s, following the victory of the Sandinista Revolution, as well as after 2007, when the Sandinistas came back to power. In October of 2020, the U.S. government sanctioned Dr. Oquist, claiming that he was helping to "undermine democracy." As a dedicated environmentalist, Dr. Oquist refused to back the adoption of the Paris Agreement. He argued that the deal did not go far enough to cut global emissions and protect exploited countries from climate devastation. Sadly, Dr. Oquist passed away on April 11, 2021. He remains a hero to many in Nicaragua. Ramiro Funez, Assistant Producer of Sojourner Truth, recorded this presentation on March 15, 2021, during his participation in the Sanctions Kill & Friends of the Rural Workers Association Delegation to Nicaragua. This was Dr. Oquist's last public speech.

Today on Sojourner Truth: In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using crippling economic sanctions. Sanctions have devastating impacts on jobs, healthcare, food, water, education, transportation and more, impacting ordinary Nicaraguans. Today, we bring you audio from a presentation by the late Dr. Paul Oquist about the impact of sanctions on Nicaragua. Dr. Oquist was the Secretary Minister for National Policies under the Sandinista government. Although he was born and raised in the United States, Dr. Oquist was a lifelong supporter of the Sandinista Revolution. He held numerous positions in the progressive government during the 1980s, following the victory of the Sandinista Revolution, as well as after 2007, when the Sandinistas came back to power. In October of 2020, the U.S. government sanctioned Dr. Oquist, claiming that he was helping to "undermine democracy." As a dedicated environmentalist, Dr. Oquist refused to back the adoption of the Paris Agreement. He argued that the deal did not go far enough to cut global emissions and protect exploited countries from climate devastation. Sadly, Dr. Oquist passed away on April 11, 2021. He remains a hero to many in Nicaragua. Ramiro Funez, Assistant Producer of Sojourner Truth, recorded this presentation on March 15, 2021, during his participation in the Sanctions Kill & Friends of the Rural Workers Association Delegation to Nicaragua. This was Dr. Oquist's last public speech.

Today on Sojourner Truth: In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using crippling economic sanctions. Sanctions have devastating impacts on jobs, healthcare, food, water, education, transportation and more, impacting ordinary Nicaraguans. Today, we bring you audio from a presentation by the late Dr. Paul Oquist about the impact of sanctions on Nicaragua. Dr. Oquist was the Secretary Minister for National Policies under the Sandinista government. Although he was born and raised in the United States, Dr. Oquist was a lifelong supporter of the Sandinista Revolution. He held numerous positions in the progressive government during the 1980s, following the victory of the Sandinista Revolution, as well as after 2007, when the Sandinistas came back to power. In October of 2020, the U.S. government sanctioned Dr. Oquist, claiming that he was helping to "undermine democracy." As a dedicated environmentalist, Dr. Oquist refused to back the adoption of the Paris Agreement. He argued that the deal did not go far enough to cut global emissions and protect exploited countries from climate devastation. Sadly, Dr. Oquist passed away on April 11, 2021. He remains a hero to many in Nicaragua. Ramiro Funez, Assistant Producer of Sojourner Truth, recorded this presentation on March 15, 2021, during his participation in the Sanctions Kill & Friends of the Rural Workers Association Delegation to Nicaragua. This was Dr. Oquist's last public speech.

En entrevista exclusiva a RFI, el periodista nicaragüense Carlos Chamorro Barrio calificó de “rehenes electorales” a las 20 personas arrestadas en las últimas semanas por el régimen de Daniel Ortega en el poder desde 2007 y quien, según estiman sus adversarios, buscará un cuarto mandato en los comicios. La situación política en Nicaragua sigue agravándose y despierta varias voces de reclamo de diversas organizaciones de derechos humanos. Entre ellas, la Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (CIDH) que demandó, a través de un comunicado, proteger a opositores del gobierno del presidente Daniel Ortega que hoy se encuentran bajo arresto. "Los hechos ocurridos en estas semanas evidencian una nueva fase de la represión de cara a las próximas elecciones, que pone en duda la voluntad del Estado nicaragüense de realizar elecciones libres, justas y transparentes", afirmó la presidenta de la CIDH, Antonia Urrejola ante el consejo permanente de la Organización de los Estados Americanos (OEA). Urrejola recordó que la CIDH señala el quebrantamiento del Estado de derecho en Nicaragua desde 2018, cuando la respuesta del gobierno de Ortega a multitudinarias protestas en su contra tuvo conductas que "deben considerarse crímenes de lesa humanidad". Entre la veintena de detenidos recientemente, cinco de los cuales son precandidatos presidenciales para los comicios del 7 de noviembre, Urrejola destacó la situación de algunos arrestados con violencia, o con padecimientos de salud no atendidos. Mencionó en particular los casos de Violeta Granera, José Adán Aguerri, José Pallais, Suyen Barahona, Hugo Torres, Víctor Hugo Tinoco, Tamara Dávila, Dora Téllez, Ana Margarita Vijil, Luis Alberto Rivas, Miguel Mendoza y María Fernanda Flores. También señaló el allanamiento de la casa del periodista Carlos Fernando Chamorro. “Este lunes [21 de junio] más de 30 policías antimotines entraron a mi casa para capturarme. No lo lograron porque yo me puse el resguardo para proteger mi libertad y la de mi esposa para poder seguir haciendo periodismo”, dice a RFI Carlos Fernando Chamorro. “La policía asaltó mi redacción el 20 de mayo por segunda vez. Ya lo había hecho antes, en diciembre de 2018. Cuando digo que asaltó es que entró a mi redacción, donde en ese momento solo había un camarógrafo, se robaron todos los equipos sin ninguna orden judicial”. El gobierno de Ortega y su vicepresidenta y esposa, Rosario Murillo, justifican el arresto de opositores acusándolos de tramar un golpe de Estado en su contra. Ante el consejo permanente de la OEA, el embajador nicaragüense, Luis Alvarado, arremetió contra los "mercenarios y vendepatrias financiados y dirigidos" por Estados Unidos que, "a través de sus nexos con gobiernos extranjeros", buscan "reeditar el fallido golpe de Estado" de 2018 en el marco del proceso electoral. “No hay ninguna orden judicial contra mi persona”, dice Chamorro. “No se ha iniciado ningún proceso ni en la Fiscalía ni en ninguna instancia de gobierno. Yo simplemente soy objeto de una campaña de calumnias en los medios oficiales y también otra promovida por el propio Gobierno”. La CIDH, con sede en Washington, ya había emitido medidas cautelares para ellos en 2018 y 2019. La Corte IDH, con sede en San José, Costa Rica, emite medidas provisionales "en casos de extrema gravedad y urgencia" y su cumplimiento es obligatorio para todos los países miembros del sistema interamericano. “La CIDH está muy bien informada de la crisis de derechos humanos en Nicaragua”, dice Chamorro. “Nosotros describimos a los 20 arrestados como ‘rehenes electorales'. Y hay por lo menos ya cinco precandidatos presidenciales, entre ellos Juan Sebastián Chamorro, Félix Maradiaga, Arturo Cruz, Cristiana Chamorro y Miguel Mora, que están en la cárcel. Hay 20 rehenes que han sido secuestrados, y uso esa palabra porque están en cárceles en las que algunos tienen ya 15 o 20 días y ni siquiera han tenido contacto con un familiar o con un abogado”. Una resolución de condena de la OEA a la represión en Nicaragua fue aprobada el 15 de junio con el apoyo de 26 de los 34 miembros activos. El secretario general, Luis Almagro, pidió suspender la participación de Nicaragua en el bloque regional, pero para concretarse requiere el respaldo de dos tercios de una Asamblea General de la OEA, su órgano máximo. "Peor que Anastasio Somoza" Estados Unidos no respondió a las acusaciones de Alvarado sobre injerencia electoral, más que para señalar que esa "retórica banal" recuerda "el lenguaje de los regímenes autoritarios". "Es hora de que el régimen de Ortega-Murillo cambie de rumbo" y "permita al pueblo nicaragüense ejercer plenamente sus derechos", aseveró el embajador Bradley Freden, citando al secretario de Estado, Antony Blinken. Ortega, un exguerrillero que ya había gobernado Nicaragua de 1979 a 1990 tras la caída del dictador Anastasio Somoza, regresó al poder en 2007 con el izquierdista Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN) y se mantiene allí tras dos reelecciones sucesivas. Sus adversarios estiman que buscará un cuarto mandato en los comicios. Entrevista por Marilyn Lavado. Con AFP.

La primera vez que Jorge G. Castañeda estuvo en Managua fue luego del terremoto que la destruyó en 1973. En cambio, Rubén Aguilar salvó la vida gracias a que huyó hacia ese país. En el décimo episodio de La Vespertina, el periodista Salvado Camarena conversa con estos dos escritores mexicanos sobre el régimen de Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo en Nicaragua. Los analistas coinciden en que el gen autoritario del otrora líder de la revolución sandinista estuvo presente desde las primeras horas del triunfo de la insurgencia que desterró en 1979 a Anastasio Somoza.

TODAY ON SOJOURNER TRUTH, WE REBROADCAST THIS CONVERSATION BETWEEN MARGARET PRESCOD, CAMILO MEJIA, AND JOHN PERRY. In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

TODAY ON SOJOURNER TRUTH, WE REBROADCAST THIS CONVERSATION BETWEEN MARGARET PRESCOD, CAMILO MEJIA, AND JOHN PERRY. In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

Nacida en Managua, Nicaragua es poeta y novelista. Desde muy joven participó en el movimiento revolucionario que derrocó a Anastasio Somoza en 1979. Ocupó posiciones importantes en el gobierno y el partido Sandinista, del que se separó en 1993. Es autora de ocho novelas: “La Mujer Habitada” “Sofía de los Presagios” “El Pergamino de la Seducción” “Waslala” “El País de las Mujeres” “El intenso calor de la luna” “El Infinito en la Palma de la Mano “y “Las fiebres de la memoria” un libro de ensayos: “Rebeliones y Revelaciones” (2017) una memoria de sus años revolucionarios “El País bajo mi piel, ocho libros de poesía, entre ellos “El Ojo de la Mujer” y “Escándalo de Miel” y cuatro cuentos para niños: “El Taller de las Mariposas” es el más conocido. Ganó en 1978 el Premio Casa de las América en Cuba por su poemario “Línea de Fuego” y el Premio a la mejor Novela Política del Año en Alemania en 1989 por “La Mujer Habitada”.

In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

In 1979, the people of Nicaragua overthrew the U.S.-backed dictatorship of Anastasio Somoza. The Somoza family dictatorship ruled Nicaragua from 1937 until 1979, when the Sandinista National Liberation Front liberated the country from their rule. Upon taking power, the Sandinistas vowed to free their country from the grip of U.S. hegemony and prioritize the needs of poor people ahead of foreign corporations. Since then, the people of Nicaragua have faced constant attacks from war hawks in Washington. This, in an effort to topple the democratically-elected Sandinista government and impose a pro-U.S. government. During the 1980s, the U.S. armed and trained counter-revolutionary forces, known as the contras, in neighboring Honduras. Not only did the contras kill supporters of the Sandinistas and carry out terrorist attacks in Nicaragua. They also helped to smuggle drugs from South America into the United States, destroying Black and Brown communities at home. Although the Sandinistas lost an election in 1990 that temporarily removed them from power, they eventually came back in 2006 after another democratic election. Since 2006, the United States has continued to attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista government. This time, however, instead of using brute force and armed drug gangs, they are using soft power and Western-aligned organizations that claim to promote human rights. Millions of U.S. government and corporate dollars are spent on three Nicaraguan organizations, and Amnesty International and other global organizations produce unbalanced and unsubstantiated reports which malign Nicaragua. These reports portray Nicaragua as a country that needs to be saved from alleged human rights abuses committed by the government. However, as you will see, many of these reports are far from the truth and have more sinister intentions. Today on Sojourner Truth, we bring you audio from a recent webinar entitled, How U.S. Unconventional Warfare in Nicaragua Utilizes Human Rights Organizations. The webinar, hosted by the Alliance for Global Justice, examines the role played by international and local human rights organizations within U.S.-supported destabilization efforts in Nicaragua. During todays program, you will hear presentations delivered by Camilo Mejia and John Perry. Camilo Mejia is a Nicaraguan analyst and writer residing in the U.S. who is a former Amnesty International prisoner of conscience. John Perry is a long-time investigator, writer and resident of Nicaragua.

Welcome to the People's Voice Podcast. Visit us online at www.peoplesvoice.caIn 1972, the impoverished and oppressed people of Nicaragua suffered a terrible crisis when an earthquake struck the capital of Managua. An estimated 5000 people were killed, and the city centre was destroyed. International humanitarian aid flowed to the country, including blood and plasma donations from all over the world. Perversely, then dictator Anastasio Somoza intercepted large amounts of the emergency blood donations, which he then exported from his stricken country, at a huge profit.Almost 60 years later, Alberta premier Jason Kenney seems to be taking a page from Somoza's playbook. His government's Bill 204, The Voluntary Blood Donations Repeal Act, will cast aside legislation that guarantees blood and plasma as public resources and open the field to corporate blood banks who sell blood products for profit on the international market.Read the article in full.

Hace dos años, Nicaragua se prendió fuego con un alzamiento popular. Ahora, los problemas que atraviesa son de índole sanitaria, con un manejo muy pobre de la crisis del Covid-19. El régimen del presidente Daniel Ortega y su mujer Rosario Murillo, la actual vicepresidenta, es acusado de negar la pandemia y de subrepresentar largamente la cantidad de contagiados y muertos. Para actualizar la situación en ese país con conversamos esta mañana En Perspectiva con Carlos Fernando Chamorro, periodista, fundador y editor del diario digital Confidencial, hijo de la expresidenta Violeta Barrios de Chamorro y del periodista Pedro Joaquín Chamorro, quien fuera editor del diario La Prensa durante la dictadura de Anastasio Somoza.

Voces en la cuarentena - Daniel Ortega y Anastasio Somoza son la misma cosa, por Carlos Sanguinetti by En Perspectiva

On est Fatigué – Digbeu Du Far (Côte d’Ivoire)C’est du Zouglou, un style de musique propre à la Côte d’Ivoire.Il apparaît en 1990 à la suite de mouvement de grève et de contestation sur les campus universitaires d’Abidjan.Et de là né le sens même du Zouglou : relater les réalités sociales vécues par les jeunes ivoiriens, avec, tantôt des messages humoristiques, tantôt des messages politiques, mais surtout, le plus souvent, délivrer des conseils sur la vie.Parler d’amour, d’amitié, de fraternité et prôner l'idéal de la justice et de la paix. Mandjoulon – Salif Keïta & Les Ambassadeurs (Mali)Sans doute vous connaissez Salif Keïta, au moins de vu. L’africain blanc le plus connu du continent.Les Ambassadeurs c’était le groupe avec lequel a commencé Salif et avec qui il continuera pendant de nombreuses années.Un groupe par lequel passa aussi Amadou Bagayoko. C’est le Amadou de Amadou et Mariam !Mais aussi Keletigui Diabaté connu comme le maître indiscuté du balafon, le claviériste Cheick Tidiane Seck, les chanteurs Ousmane Dia (Star Band de Dakar) et évidemment le grand Salif Keita.Un monument de la musique Ouest-africaine donc ces Ambassadeurs. Les Djos – Le T.P. Orchestre Poly-Rythmo de Cotonou (Bénin)« Djo » en Afrique occidentale ça veut dire « le mec », « le caïd », « le dur ».Ça se moque des US dans ce morceaux.Est-ce que vous saviez que le Bénin s’appelle comme ceci que depuis 1975, et qu’avant d’être la République du Bénin, ce même territoire s’appelait République du Dahomey. Elle a gardé ce nom pendant un peu moi de 20 ans, de 1958 à 1960 puis après son indépendance, entre 1960 et 1975.C’était le nom officiel de cette république, état associé de la France. C’est à dire que la République de Dahomey déléguait à la France certains pouvoirs. Et d’ailleurs à cette époque il y avait un Ministère des Relations avec les États associés, qu’était le Vietnam, le Cambodge, le Laos, Dahomey etc... Cumbia Chinandegana – Macondo (Nicaragua)Un rythme salsa pour rendre hommage à la une cumbia.Le Nicaragua, c’est une guerre perpétuelle sur à peu près tout le XXème siècle.Ça comment avec les américains qui mettent en place un pion au pouvoir. La population se révolte. Les américains punissent. C’est comme ça pendant à peu près 20ans.Puis y a un mec qui s’appelle le Général Sandino qui unifie les rebelles nicaraguayens, et plus généralement tous les rebels central-américains pour bouter l’ennemi impérialiste hors des frontières. Enchainement de lourdes défaites côté américains. On négocie une paix. Sandino arrive au pouvoir. Mais quelques mois plus tard il est assassiné par Anastasio Somoza, dirigeant de la garde nationale et soutenu par les USA.On est à peine à la fin des années 30, et tu te dis que le siècle va être long. On va peut-être se faire une petite cumbia pour mieux le digéré non ? Ou alors une petite salsa ? Ou plutôt non, tiens, on va faire une salsa qui parle de la cumbia, ça nous fera du bien. Luna De Maracaibo – Tulio Enrique León (Venezuela)Ça c’est un standard vénézuélien « Luna De Maracaibo ». Maracaibo c’est la deuxième plus grande ville du Venezuela après Caracas, la capitale.Si t’aimes l’orgue, et les claviers en général il faut que t’ailles fouiller dans la discographie de Monsieur León parce que c’est une brute reconnue, On l’appelait « El Artista del Teclado », ce qui signifie l’artiste du clavier !Une histoire pas drôle c’est que Tulio Enrique est né non-voyant. La raison en était que sa mère avait reçu, lors de la grossesse, un coup qui est allé endommager le nerf optique de l’enfant. La coïncidence, veut que sa mère aussi était non-voyante, et la raison de sa cécité sont les mêmes que celles de son fils : la grand-mère de Tulio Enrique avait reçu, lors de la grossesse, un coup qui est allé endommager le nerf optique de la mère de Tulio Enrique. Hommage À Pelé – Les Loups Noirs (Guadeloupe)Les loups noirs n’étant plus si noir, mais plutot poivre et sel, ce morceau n’est plus à jour, puisque Messi vient d’avoir son 6ème ballon d’or.Le morceau est sorti en 1971 sur l’album « Encore », Pelé à cette époque joue encore au Brésil, à Santos plus exactement Femmes – Harold Nelson (Île de la Réunion)À la base, en écoutant ce séga de la Réunion, moi, j’ai compris « femme à barbe, femme à pipi ».Bon après j’ai réécouté, et en fait c’est pas ça.Alors, toi qui te reconnaîtra, auditeur réunionnais, je sais que c’est une évidence pour toi, alors manifeste toi sur notre page Taxi Brousse de facebook et dis-nous ce que ce morceau raconte. Ténéré – Bombino (Niger)Omar « Bombino » Moctar est un guitariste touareg nigérien, et le Ténéré c’est une région que l’on définit hyperaride, situé dans le désert saharien du Niger.Et à ce propos, en 1973, a été renversé en plein milieu du désert, un arbre. On disait de lui que c’était l’arbre le plus isolé du monde. C’est l’arbre du Ténéré, un acacia. Situé très précisément à 235 km au nord-est de la ville d'Agadez, au Niger, il faisait office de repère pour les routes des caravanes qui traversaient le désert.Cet acacia était le dernier survivant d'un groupe d'arbres qui avait poussé dans le désert à une époque de moindre aridité.Ses racines plongeaient à 30 mètres en-dessous de la surface pour rejoindre la nappe phréatique. Le 8 novembre 1973, l’arbre meurt renversé par un camionner libyen, probablement ivre.L’arbre est aujourd’hui exposé au Musée national Boubou-Hama à Niamey. Aï Aï Aï – Rigo Star & Koffi Olomidé (RDCongo)Tcha Tcho, pona yo mwana mwasi, le Tcha Tcho c’est un style de musique pour les filles disaient les hommes !Et le Tcha Tcho c’est quoi ? C’est ce qu’on appelle plus communément, le Soukous Love. C’est à dire une dérivation du soukous, beaucoup plus chaloupé, sensuel, ça se danse collé. En écoutant ça, on se dit c’est latino, ou que ça doit venir des Antilles. Eh non ! C’est la RDC.Rigobert Bamundele, dit Rigo Star et celui que l’on appelle « Le Rambo », ou bien « Papa Bonheur », ou alors « Grand Mopao Mokonzi », j’ai nommé Antoine Christophe Agbepa Mumba aka Koffi Olomidé. The Wind In A Frolic – Nigerian Union Rhythm Group (Nigéria)Le Nigéria accède à l’indépendance en 1960, et ce morceau, c’est juste avant, à la fin des années 50 qu’il sort. L’indépendance amène le bouillonnement artistique beaucoup d’échange ont lieu entre pays africains, puis entre africains et occidentaux (essentiellement USA et UK) chez lesquels les artistes nigérians puisent la basse funk, le jazz, le psyché-rock et évidemment la musique folklorique et donneront naissance à ce style de musique que l’on a déjà entendu sur Taxi Brousse : l’Afrobeat. Walking Up The Kings Highway – Joseph Niles (Barbade)La plus orientale des îles des Antilles.Un état indépendant depuis le 30 novembre 1966.Mais la Barbade fait partie du Commonwealth britannique, et est donc une monarchie parlementaire multipartite, puisque le chef de l’État est la reine Élisabeth II d’Angleterre. La reine qui est représentée sur place par un gouverneur général.Mais les barbadiens élisent un premier ministre qui est le chef du pouvoir exécutif. Ils ont aussi deux chambres du parlement qui, elles, s’occupent du législatif. Z’avez comris ou pas ? Le problème c’est la reine dans tout ça. C’est pourquoi en 2005 le premier ministre lance une réforme pour remplacer la reine par un président de la république. Et bah ça a été un flop, ils ont gardé la reine finalement. Shakespearean Quotations – Lord Christo (Trinidad & Tobago)Une version calypso de, ce que vous avez peut-être reconnu, l’Ouverture de Guillaume Tell, un opéra de Rossini. Et l’artiste aussi vous l’avez peut-être reconnu puisqu’on l’a déjà entendu sur Taxi Brousse, c’est Lord Christo. Miriya – Mama Sissoko (Mali)Mama Sissoko c’est une légende de la musique malienne. Il est l’ancien guitariste soliste du Super Biton de Ségou un groupe célébrissime des années 70.Depuis un peu moins de 30 ans, Mama Sissoko alterne entre sa carrière solo et les tournées du Super Biton qui est toujours en activité.Ce morceau Miriya c’est le dernier titre en date, sortie cette année et extrait de son single éponyme. Los Tres Niños Inocentes – Ramon Cordero (République Dominicaine)C’est une réunion du Boléro et du Tango, une musique associée pendant longtemps aux couches sociales les plus défavorisées de Saint-Domingue, je suis... je suis... La Bachata ! Et Ramon Cordero en a fait son savoir-faire, et il le fait extrêmement bien. La bachata, nous on en parle depuis le début des années 2000, mais ça existe depuis les années 60. Le morceau qu’on entend là date de 1980.

El musical homenaje de Dos gardenias, a la activista, poeta, novelista y exmilitante del Frente Sandinista de  Liberación Nacional (FSLN), Gioconda Belli, quien tuvo una extraordinaria historia personal, entrelazada con hechos históricos de su país, en la convulsionada década del 70', durante y tras el derrocamiento del dictador Anastasio Somoza. Su pensamiento y erotismo, su compromiso social y político, se oyeron en la voz de Eduardo Aliverti.

Peeter Helme: "Seda aastat võib üldistades nimetada kukutamiste ja võimuletulekute aastaks. Kambodžas kukutatakse punased khmeerid, Iraanis šahh, Ugandas Idi Amin, Rodeesias kaotab võimu Ian Smithi valgete valitsus ning Nicaraguast põgeneb senine diktaator Anastasio Somoza. Võimule tulijatest väärivad märkimist Suurbritannia esimene naispeaminister Margaret Thatcher ning Iraagi diktaator Saddam Hussein. 24. detsembril algab aga Nõukogude vägede sissetungiga Afganistani sõda.

Peeter Helme: "Seda aastat võib üldistades nimetada kukutamiste ja võimuletulekute aastaks. Kambodžas kukutatakse punased khmeerid, Iraanis šahh, Ugandas Idi Amin, Rodeesias kaotab võimu Ian Smithi valgete valitsus ning Nicaraguast põgeneb senine diktaator Anastasio Somoza. Võimule tulijatest väärivad märkimist Suurbritannia esimene naispeaminister Margaret Thatcher ning Iraagi diktaator Saddam Hussein. 24. detsembril algab aga Nõukogude vägede sissetungiga Afganistani sõda.

Iniciamos una nueva serie sobre dictadores latinoamericanos con la saga de la familia Somoza, empezando por el principio. Anastasio Somoza García, fue el primero de una dinastía de dictadores que gobernaron Nicaragua por 44 años. Anastasio Somoza fue un gran … Sigue leyendo →

Diálogo de la autora Gioconda Belli donde comparte las múltiples vivencias que han marcado su vida y le han servido de motivación para escribir numerosos libros en los cuales plasma claramente el amor a la patria, la responsabilidad social y su apoyo a las causas en favor del género femenino.

In June 1979 an American TV reporter was shot dead by government forces in Nicaragua. The killing led to the withdrawal of US support for Nicaragua's president, Anastasio Somoza. We speak to Stephen Cherry-Downes, who was working as Somoza's personal pilot at the time. (Image: President Somoza, Jan 1978. Credit: AFP)