DOROTEA WILSON, a leader of the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) and a member of its National Directorate, is on a tour of Australia, speaking about the issues of land rights and autonomy. She is from the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua and was involved in the establishment by the former Sandinista government of laws which gave the ethnically unique people of the region the right to form autonomous governments. She spoke to NEVILLE SPENCER at the Asia Pacific Solidarity Conference in Sydney.
Question: Elections recently took place in the Atlantic autonomous regions of Nicaragua. How did the autonomous regions come into existence?
Unlike the Pacific coast, the Atlantic coast of Nicaragua has suffered both British and Spanish colonialism. It has diverse cultures, traditions, ethnic groups and languages.
Of the indigenous communities, Miskitos live mainly in the north, Sumus-Mayagnas in the agricultural frontier zone, Ramas and Garifunas in coastal communities.
The British brought African slaves to the region and established Creole English as the main language. There is a distinct geographic demarcation between these socio-ethnic groups and the rest of Nicaraguan society with its mestizo [mixed Spanish-indigenous] majority.
Before 1979, the Somoza family dictatorship governed Nicaragua. Our coffee, beef, lobsters, oil seed and sugar all went to the US. US companies exploited our forests and fishing reserves without even paying royalties. The Somozas and their allies silenced any opposition.
After the victory of the Sandinista revolution, the revolutionary government tried to solve the problems of the coast. We tripled the number of teachers and made available services which had never been seen before.
A literacy campaign won a UNESCO prize, and within a year reduced the illiteracy rate from 52% to 14%. On the Atlantic coast we carried out the campaign in the four main languages: Miskito, Spanish, Creole English and Sumu. For the first time Costeñas were appointed to important political positions and administrative posts.
However, this was not sufficient. Sandinistas from the Pacific coast arrived with the best of intentions to help improve conditions. However, they did not really have the understanding or experience to promote successful intercultural relations.
Serious mistakes were made from the start. Forms of social organisation which worked well in the struggle to depose Somoza on the Pacific side did not automatically apply on the coast. The people saw many of the revolutionary measures as a threat to their culture and forms of social organisation.
These mistakes were put to advantage by those who opposed the revolution. You know about the US-backed war of aggression against us, which cost 70,000 lives.
The revolution concluded that the only way to achieve peace and democracy was to recognise and preserve the cultural richness and diversity of the Costeños.
On October 30, 1987, the national parliament passed the Autonomy Law. In a related measure, the Sandinista government also abolished the Somoza constitution and passed a new constitution on January 9, 1987.
However, the regulations which are necessary for the
Autonomy Law were never passed. They were lamentably postponed due to problems associated with the war and then our unexpected electoral defeat in 1990.
The historic responsibility of enacting this legislation fell to the government of Violeta Chamorro. However, her government was deaf to the legitimate claims of the Costeños.
Question: What was the result of the elections and what does it mean for the people of the Atlantic coast?
Since the reform of the constitution, we have had elections on the Atlantic coast every four years. The first was in 1990. There is one government for the North Atlantic Autonomous Region and one for the South.
During the first election, held at the same time that the Sandinistas were defeated in the national elections by Chamorro and the UNO coalition of right-wing parties, supported by the US, our result was about 50% for us and 50% for UNO.
In 1994, the result was not so good. We got about 45%. But we stood alone as Sandinistas. We didn't form an alliance like the right did, so it did show us that people were still looking for an alternative, for a solution to the crisis, for justice and peace and for better living conditions.
This time in the North we got 45% and in the South 48%. And this is because President Alemán used money from the state to buy gifts for people. He used the promise of establishing assembly plants to convince people that there would be economic progress on the Atlantic coast. He also promised to build an international airport on the Atlantic coast. It's not going to happen, though.
There was a large amount of abstention because the awareness about and the implementation of the autonomy law during the previous eight years made people sceptical. Because you had Chamorro's government and Alemán's government, which didn't care about autonomy, the number of people on the councils was cut, there wasn't enough funds for their proper functioning, and all the decisions have been made from Managua and not by the people of the Atlantic coast.
So it was very hard during the last eight years to establish a genuine regional government. One of the most controversial issues is that the Atlantic coast is very rich in resources — there are timber and fish and other resources — but the resources are not use by the aboriginal people who live there; decisions about their exploitation are always made by the Managua government.
Question: What similarities are there between the people of the coast and Australia's indigenous people?
There are similarities because of the close connection between the aboriginal people and their land. The Miskitos, Sumus and Rama call their land Mother Earth.
What is happening to them is similar to what is happening at Jabiluka and on Australian pastoral lands — all these companies come in and have permission from the central government to exploit the natural resources, taking their fish and their land, their wood.
Question: The FSLN will hold its congress in May. How does the FSLN assess its current situation, and what will be the major issues at the congress?
I think the FSLN and its militants have increased the maturity of their consciousness about what we have to do for the people of Nicaragua.
We have to win power again through the elections. We are not gong to take up arms again, although we would if it were necessary. The Alemán government is like a reincarnation of the Somoza dictatorship. We have to use all different forms of struggle to keep the gains of the revolution which were made during the '80s.
There are different currents in the front. Some are proposing that there should be profound change in the front. Others are thinking about the leadership, that we have to propose new leadership, young people, and that the percentage of women should be higher.
We think that the main leadership is very strong within the front, but we also have to look for new leadership. We need to maintain and widen our support — 40% in the election of 1996. We need 10% more to come back into power.
There is a lot of expectation in the congress. In our previous congress, there was a big crisis which resulted in a split. I don't think that there will be another split because these issues are being discussed in the front. The different currents are not proposing a split, but they are proposing changes to be addressed internally, and there is a mature discussion.
Question: At a previous congress, the FSLN set a quota of women to be elected to party bodies. How successful has this been in ensuring the participation of women?
On a national level, it has been good, but we think it would have been better if it had been implemented from the start at a local level also, in the municipalities, the regions and the departments. So now we are proposing that the quota be implemented at all the different levels.