a OPINION _ Page 4 Ex-contra Friday, November 18, 1988 The Michigan Daily" 0 _, , _ . opp Edgar Chamorro is the former head of the FDN, the main Contra group based in Honduras. He is currently a senior fellow at the International Center for Develop- ment Policy in Washington D.C. Chamorro accepted political amnesty and since then he travels frequently and freely in Nicaragua. He works together with the loyal opposition in Nicaragua today-a group opposed to the war and the CIA. Chamorro spoke with Daily news writer Paul de Rooij at Harvard University on Nov. 13, 1988. Daily: Mr. Chamorro, could you explain why it is the case that we perceive that the conflict in Nicaragua right now is diminish- ing? Chamorro: It is the case because the emphasis of the U.S. administration has been to use their forces inside Nicaragua [and supply them with] money and propa- ganda to influence the political debate in- side Nicaragua. So, I have noticed an in- crease in the polarization of the political parties in Nicaragua. Many of the political parties now side with the contras, and the Sandinistas have been left on the other side. I see this as an influence of the polarization created by the present policy. I also noticed that the newspaper L a Prensa, Radio Catolica, and many other news media, especially radio newscasts, have been abused by influence coming from the United States. I have read this and I have heard this from several people that the U.S. may have been "instrumentalizing" those newspapers and people working inside Nicaragua for the purpose of creating a black and white pic- ture, e.g., that there is no possibility of change without using force or without keeping the contras. There has been a deterioration in the political life inside Nicaragua, and I blame this on the U.S. created polarization. The other aspect that I found deteriorating in Nicaragua is that the private sector is taking a very negative attitude that is seen in meetings of COSEP [Council for Private Enterprise] and pronouncements of the private sector that are very negative of the government in Nicaragua. During the recent crisis La Prensa and the political parties were away from the reality of Nicaragua and the tragedy resulting from the low-intensity war that has been waged against Nicaragua. D: How is the political climate in Nicaragua, especially for political organization work? Is there re- pression, or are people able to freely associate and organize? C: Well, people are freely associating. The problem is a practical problem that parties have been multiplying in the last two or three years. We have now in Nicaragua a situation where we have more than 22 political parties. Eighteen or so of these parties have been created to have this huge opposition to the Sandinista gov- ernment. I believe that there is a lot of ar- tificiality due to the money coming from outside of Nicaragua to foment these political parties, and to give the impres- sion that there is a strong opposition to the Sandinistas. But I do not believe that this opposition is strong, it is not an op- position that has unity. They have not been able to come with a clear political alternative. loses U.k D: Would you say that the contras are going to disappear? We hear a lot in the U.S. that there is a split in the leadership, and that they are filtering back from Nicaragua into Honduras, and there is talk that they are going to be resettled to the U.S. Do you see this happening, or has this been an electoral ploy of some sort? C: I believe the latter, this is an electoral ploy. This was not a time to make waves in the press about the contras, [they] tried to keep the contras in a low profile. I be- lieve that the contras will come back once Bush is installed, and he probably will keep the same policies as Reagan's, the policy of negotiation from strength. That means that he'll keep the contras. The contras have internal problems and.divi- sions, but the CIA will be able to get strongest man they have, Bermudez or some other, in a capacity to lead the con- tras again. D: You once wrote New York Times stated that the strategy was to population. Is this egy of the contras? intervention a letter to the in which you contras' only terrorize the still the strat- D: Could you explain what hap- pened in Nicaragua a few months ago when [U.S.] ambassador Melton was kicked out of Man- agua? Was he overseeing or ob- serving a demonstration by one of the opposition parties? What ac- tually happened to your knowl- edge? C: I don't believe that he was personally involved in the demonstration, but there were people from the U.S. embassy who have been giving money and advice to the political leadership of the people that put together that demonstration. I know that Mr. Melton went to Nicaragua with a very negative attitude. He was only talking to the opposition; only building bridges with the opposition. He was not talking to the government at all. He was perceived in Nicaragua as a Trojan horse, who was go- ing to bring about the fall of the Sandin- ista government from the inside by orga- nizing unions and political parties. So, I believe that the Sandinistas saw this as a threat to stability. They accused him of serious destabilization, a topic on which he is an expert. D: How independent is La Prensa? Is it just a mouthpiece for the CIA? And I also would like to know how Nicaraguans regard that newspaper. C: There is a group of Nicaraguans that like La Prensa because it is a paper with a great tradition, and it represents the historical opposition to any government. And La Prensa is saying what some sec- tors in Nicaragua want to hear. La Prensa is not an objective or independent paper, it is paid by the CIA. D: Could you also tell us about cardinal Obando y Bravo. How much is he connected to the CIA, or is he actually an independent force? C: Basically he agrees with what the U.S. is doing. He has never been a critic of the contras, and he never has come out strongly against the policies of the U.S. On the contrary, he has been very complacent with what is going on. He disappointed me by not being a mediator or reconciliator of the Nicaraguan family. He lost his neutrality by always siding with the critics. I believe that he took i political position. Now how much he's being used, or how much aware he is of being used, I don't know. I don't know if the CIA is paying him directly. But I do know from documents that I have seen that Oliver North and other U.S. officers have been paying high church officials of Nicaragua to make them belligerent. And there also has been aid from the U.S. to influence the position of the church by constantly supporting the base communities organized by the Catholic church as a way to oppose the policies of the Sandinistas. I do believe that there has been enough money going to the church to make them lose credibil- ity. D: What are the prospects in the coming years? What do you think is going to happen in Nicaragua? What do you view as a likely outcome? . C: Well, the most likely is that the San- dinistas will stay in power. They are not going to fall. Secondly, the United States is not going to invade, because they are not in a position to do so. The only al- ternative that I see is a political accommodation, and a change of the pre- sent policy to a policy of realistic accom- modation with the government that after all was elected by the Nicaraguans. [The U.S. may] try to influence the next election, but I do not see how they could alter the normal course of events in Nicaragua. That is, that the Sandinistas are a reality, they came to power and they are going to stay in power. The best way will be to work with the electoral process inside Nicaragua, and to let the Nicaraguans decide. I don't believe that the U.S. can continue to go on with the same rhetoric. I think that the next admin- istration will change course, [but] probably not in the covert action area. They will keep covert action going, but they will probably emphasize a different approach, and I don't know what that will be. I just don't see the next administration rushing to invade Nicaragua. C: It has been the strategy in the sense that one of the purposes of this war is to make life miserable to people. This is done by terrorizing as well as by destroy- ing the economy by damaging the infras- tructure of the country. So, I do believe that in a low-intensity war terrorizing is part of the strategy to make people leave areas of the country to move to the cities or out of the country. As a matter of fact, radio propaganda has been telling Nicaraguans to leave the country. The propaganda has been to scare people out of Nicaragua to create a politi- cal vacuum. This is a situation created on purpose to debilitate the Nicaraguan gov- ernment, and also [to] leave the image that the Sandinistas are persecuting the population forcing people leave. This will justify the policy of the U.S. to keep on fighting against the Sandinistas because nobody wants to stay inside Nicaragua. Ex-contra leader Edgar Chamorro Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan I . .. ........ .... .... ............ to.the.d..or 4 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Vol. IC, No.52 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Its UN, not US THE UNITED NATIONS will convene before the end of this year to try to re- solve the Palestine and Israeli conflict. 'nfortunately, Yasir Arafat, chair of the Palestine Liberation Organization might not be allowed to testify. If U.S. officials succeed in blocking' Arafat's visa, he would be denied ac- cess to address the United Nations at its headquarters in New York. These U.S. officials include 51 U.S. senators who sent a letter to Secretary of State Shultz, imploring him to deny the visa. Shultz responded by saying that he has "no desire whatever to see Arafat in the United States." Further- more, if Arafat applies for a visa, Shultz "will apply severe scrutiny to it in the light of applicable law and regu- lations and other circumstances perti- nent at the time.". According to U.N. regulations, the United States cannot deny access to people who are invited to address the assembly unless they are a "security threat." Arafat is not a "security threat." The -PLO is not going to sacrifice its chair- man just to commit terrorist acts inside the United States. If it wanted to ter- rorize the United States, it could easily get less prominent PLO members into the country. The PLO also renounced terrorism in areas outside of Israel at the recent: Palestine National Council meeting. The U.S. government should believe succumbing to terrorist demands. The PLO has made no threats against the United States. Shultz would be exercising shrewd diplomacy by allowing all parties to participate in the U.N. meeting. Security is not the concern of the 51 senators. Their letter asserted: "Arafat should be denied access to our country until he and the PLO renounce terror- ism as a tool of foreign policy." They are exploiting the privilege of having U.N. headquarters on U.S. soil by hypocritically using the visa as a tool of foreign policy. The United States is trying to black- mail the PLO into changing its foreign policy by denying Arafat the right to speak. Just because the United Nations is located here does not mean that it is the property of the United States. Not issuing the visa is censorship. After all, it would prevent the United Nations from receiving important PLO testimony that it needs to make a sound and fair decision. Arafat deserves to plead the Palestinian case, but will be denied this opportunity because the U.S. government is suddenly afraid of words. There is, however, a loophole in the regulation that traps Arafat in a Catch- 22. The president of the United Nations Council on Foreign Relations said that they will not extend an invitation to Arafat "unless and until a visa is is- sued." The regulation says that the Fed. Society defends format To the Daily: I am writing in response to a letter by Mike Cohen, entitled "Protest Feds on Campus", in which he asserted that Univer- sity President Duderstadt in- vited the Federalist Society to host its national convention at the law school next semester. Cohen went on to accuse Dud- erstadt of "kissing up to the far right" to "further his racist and sexist aims." He (Cohen) also make a series of vague but vicious attacks against the Federalist Society. 1. President Duderstadt did not invite, nor was he even aware of the fact that the Uni- versity of Michigan chapter of the Federalist Society is host- ing the organization's national symposium this March, 1989. Cohen's claims to the contrary are either hallucinations or blatant lies. 2. Cohen's assertion that "[it] is no secret that the Federalist Society... supports a variety of racist and sexist views" is sheer nonsense. The Federalist Society has been widely praised for its efforts to promote respect for the Constitution, which specifi- cally guarantees the rights of racial minorities. The Michi- gan Chapter of the Federalist Society was founded by a woman, and a woman has held the office of President or Co- President of the Chapter since Such censorship is clearly for- bidden by the First Amendment of the Constitution, and it is therefore no wonder that Cohen opposes the Federalist Soci- ety's defense of that Constitu- tion. Lastly, I am concerned that the stated policy of the Daily Opinion Page to "not print material which is factually in- correct" was completely ig- nored with regard to the above- mentioned letter. Responsible journalism mandates that edi- tors make at least some at- tempt to confirm the factual content of all printed letters. In this case, every alleged "fact" turned out to be completely false. While Mr. Cohen is cer- tainly entitled, thanks to orga- nizations like the Federalist Society, to his misguided po- litical opinions, he has clearly, with the help of the Daily, overstepped the bounds of ci- vility by first fabricating events, then by making a series of vicious accusations based upon those fabrications. -Janice Seale Kielb November 2 Thank you for your support To the Daily: On Monday October 31, the Latin American Solidarity Committee (LASC) conducted a bucket drive to raise emergency funds for the victims of Hurricane Joan in Nicaragua. Thanks to the generosity of the students of U. of M. and the citizens of Ann Arbor, we were able to raise one thousand dollars, which will be on its way to Nicaragua by the time you read this letter. On behalf of Pastors for Peace, through whom we raised the money, LASC would like to thank those of you who contributed for your generous support. Given the incredible poverty of Nicaragua, as well as the U.S. government's refusal to aid Nicaraguan' hurricane victims, every bit raised here that Monday represents an especially meaningful contribution. In the .finest tradition of our sister- city relationship with Juigalpa, Nicaragua, the citizens of Ann Arbor have again demonstrated their solidarity with our sisters and brothers in Nicaragua. -Kathryn Savoie November 2 Last day to give gift of life To the Daily: "I don't have time!!" "I'm scared of needles!" "I'll do it tomorrow!" "I need my end ergy!" I've heard these excuses all too often when asking someone to hive blood. But we can't give excuses to those who desperately need this blood. In the Southeastern Region of Michigan alone, over 1,000 pints of blood are used a day. Unfortunately, the donations are not able to sustain the even increasing need for blood. To., day is the last day of the U. of M. vs. OSU Blood Battle. There are valid reasons foi not giving blood: medical, weight, illness. However those without these excuses must decide if their reasons are legitimate or not. It doesn't take that mush time - just 30 minutes. and it's not very painful. -John C. Lin November 3 Correction: Yesterday, the Daily printed a dated letter by Libby Adler which incorrectly stated that Salaam-Shalom, the Arabj Jewish peace project meet at p.m. on Sunday in the fish bowl. The group now meets on Sunday at 7 p.m. in thd Michigan Union room 2209; The Daily opinion page apolog gizes for this mistake. t 14, CF 4emt i