9 out of 10 Nicaraguans reject threat of US sanctions
 What sanctions is the US proposing and on what pretext? On 3 October 2017, the US House of
Representatives unanimously approved the Nicaraguan Investment Conditionality Act of 2017, (NICA Act).
The threat of the Act becoming law escalated on 22 December 2017 when Senator Ted Cruz, with cross
party support, introduced the Act to the Senate.
If approved by the Senate and signed off by President Trump, it would mean that the US would use its
influence in international lending institutions to block all loans to Nicaragua from the World Bank, InterAmerican
Development Bank and other institutions. Running at US$250 million annually, these loans are
being invested in education, social programmes, electrification, roads and other infrastructure initiatives.
The Act states that the US would block loans until, to the satisfaction of the US State Department, the
Nicaraguan government takes effective steps to ‘hold free, fair, and transparent elections overseen by
credible domestic and international electoral observers and promote democracy, as well as an
independent judicial system and electoral council.’
 How have Nicaraguans reacted? The NICA Act has met with near unanimous condemnation in
Nicaragua by the government, the National Assembly, trade unions, the private sector, almost all political
parties, religious leaders and over 80% of Nicaraguans according to the most recent opinion poll carried
out by M&R Consultores in December 2017. The same poll indicated that 91.6% of those questioned think
that the NICA Act would negatively affect all Nicaraguans, not only the government. In addition, 84.8%
believe that that NICA Act would impact negatively both the economy and democracy itself.
‘Irrational, offensive, harmful to the human rights of Nicaraguans, and a violation of Nicaragua’s
sovereignty.’ – Nicaraguan government’s reaction to the Act
What would the impact of the NICA Act be on Nicaragua? It would create economic instability
and reverse the Nicaraguan government’s highly successful poverty reduction programmes; those who are
most impoverished would suffer the most serious consequences. It could also have an impact on
international investment in Nicaragua so critical to the country’s development and economic stability. In
turn this could mean an economic downturn that is highly likely to have a knock on effect across the region
and add to the flow of migrants to the US.
Democratic Texas representative, Vicente Gonzalez in opposing the NICA Act stated: «Enacting this bill
could have serious consequences in the region. My district was ground zero for the last immigration surge
and I would like to prevent this from happening again. How can we in good conscience support a measure
that would punish the poorest country in Central America?»
 Who instigated the Act? Behind the Act are Republican representatives Albio Sires and Ileana RosLehtinen,
Cuban-American politicians notorious for targeting and undermining socialist and left-leaning
governments in the Americas. The Act has now been taken up by a cross party grouping of senators led by
Republican Ted Cruz.
 Is the US really concerned about the promotion of the rule of law and democracy? The
Organization of American States (OAS) observer mission to Nicaragua’s largely peaceful municipal elections
held on 5 November 2017 highlighted some flaws in the process but pointed out that this would not have
changed the outcome. The Nicaraguan government has accepted the criticisms and pledged to work with
the OAS to continue to strengthen the institutionality and transparency of its electoral processes.
This contrasts sharply with Honduran elections on 26 November declared so flawed by the OAS observer
mission that they have called for new elections. OAS secretary general Luis Almagro described the
elections as being of ‘very low quality’ technically, plagued by irregularities, and lacking integrity.
Despite this deeply flawed process and the deaths of 27 people in subsequent protests, the US State
Department announced that ‘The Honduran people exercised their democratic rights by taking part in
elections on 26 November. The United States looks forward to working with the democratically elected
leaders of Honduras.’
Why would US Congressional representatives and senators want to make Nicaragua so
poor that undocumented immigrants would join Guatemalans, Hondurans, and El
Salvadoreans making their way to the Mexico – US border? The Act is primarily ideological and
has little to do with rationality. A statement by Senator Ted Cruz on 22 December echoes the sentiments of
Ronald Reagan in the 1980s alleging that Nicaragua’s links with Venezuela and Russia ‘raise national
security implications not only for the US but for all our allies throughout the western hemisphere.’
 Why does the Nicaraguan government enjoy such high levels of support?
• According to a poll carried out by M & R Consultores in October 2017, President Daniel Ortega had
an almost 80% approval rating among Nicaraguans. 77.5% said that he had led Nicaragua correctly, while
77.8% said that the FSLN government gave them hope. The poll also showed that 78.6% of the people
believed the government worked for the benefit of the population and 71.5% considered the government
‘democratic’.
• The October 2017 World Bank report on Nicaragua concludes that the FSLN government, led by
President Ortega since 2007, has achieved a remarkable turnaround in reducing poverty and inequality,
raising productivity, diversifying the economy, while promoting greater economic and social stability. This
includes free health care and education at all levels, extensive electrification, housing and road building
programmes, and support for small family businesses, particularly for women. ‘Nicaragua’s
macroeconomic stability has allowed the country’s decision makers to shift from crisis control mode to
longer-term, pioneering strategies to fight poverty, particularly in remote rural communities.’ World Bank
report October, 2017
• Because Nicaragua is one of the safest countries in Central America, it has become a popular tourist
destination with low violence, drug and homicide rates. The US State Department’s Nicaragua 2017 Crime
and Safety Report concludes that “Nicaragua has low overall reported crime rates” with a reduced
homicide rate at 8/100,000 inhabitants. Nicaraguan police and military have prevented drug cartels from
gaining a foothold in the country, unlike the other countries of Central America.
• Contrary to US accusations of lack of freedom in Nicaragua, the country has no political prisoners
and no censorship of the press. All of the print media and most radio stations are owned by the opposition.
Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group www.nscag.org, nscag@nicaraguasc.org.uk
FB nicaraguasc, twitter NSCAG_UK 86 Durham Road, London N7 7DT Tel: 020 7561 4836 Jan 2018
 
Fuente: http://www.nicaraguasc.org.uk/

9 out of 10 Nicaraguans reject threat of US sanctions
 What sanctions is the US proposing and on what pretext? On 3 October 2017, the US House of
Representatives unanimously approved the Nicaraguan Investment Conditionality Act of 2017, (NICA Act).
The threat of the Act becoming law escalated on 22 December 2017 when Senator Ted Cruz, with cross
party support, introduced the Act to the Senate.
If approved by the Senate and signed off by President Trump, it would mean that the US would use its
influence in international lending institutions to block all loans to Nicaragua from the World Bank, InterAmerican
Development Bank and other institutions. Running at US$250 million annually, these loans are
being invested in education, social programmes, electrification, roads and other infrastructure initiatives.
The Act states that the US would block loans until, to the satisfaction of the US State Department, the
Nicaraguan government takes effective steps to ‘hold free, fair, and transparent elections overseen by
credible domestic and international electoral observers and promote democracy, as well as an
independent judicial system and electoral council.’
 How have Nicaraguans reacted? The NICA Act has met with near unanimous condemnation in
Nicaragua by the government, the National Assembly, trade unions, the private sector, almost all political
parties, religious leaders and over 80% of Nicaraguans according to the most recent opinion poll carried
out by M&R Consultores in December 2017. The same poll indicated that 91.6% of those questioned think
that the NICA Act would negatively affect all Nicaraguans, not only the government. In addition, 84.8%
believe that that NICA Act would impact negatively both the economy and democracy itself.
‘Irrational, offensive, harmful to the human rights of Nicaraguans, and a violation of Nicaragua’s
sovereignty.’ – Nicaraguan government’s reaction to the Act
What would the impact of the NICA Act be on Nicaragua? It would create economic instability
and reverse the Nicaraguan government’s highly successful poverty reduction programmes; those who are
most impoverished would suffer the most serious consequences. It could also have an impact on
international investment in Nicaragua so critical to the country’s development and economic stability. In
turn this could mean an economic downturn that is highly likely to have a knock on effect across the region
and add to the flow of migrants to the US.
Democratic Texas representative, Vicente Gonzalez in opposing the NICA Act stated: «Enacting this bill
could have serious consequences in the region. My district was ground zero for the last immigration surge
and I would like to prevent this from happening again. How can we in good conscience support a measure
that would punish the poorest country in Central America?»
 Who instigated the Act? Behind the Act are Republican representatives Albio Sires and Ileana RosLehtinen,
Cuban-American politicians notorious for targeting and undermining socialist and left-leaning
governments in the Americas. The Act has now been taken up by a cross party grouping of senators led by
Republican Ted Cruz.
 Is the US really concerned about the promotion of the rule of law and democracy? The
Organization of American States (OAS) observer mission to Nicaragua’s largely peaceful municipal elections
held on 5 November 2017 highlighted some flaws in the process but pointed out that this would not have
changed the outcome. The Nicaraguan government has accepted the criticisms and pledged to work with
the OAS to continue to strengthen the institutionality and transparency of its electoral processes.
This contrasts sharply with Honduran elections on 26 November declared so flawed by the OAS observer
mission that they have called for new elections. OAS secretary general Luis Almagro described the
elections as being of ‘very low quality’ technically, plagued by irregularities, and lacking integrity.
Despite this deeply flawed process and the deaths of 27 people in subsequent protests, the US State
Department announced that ‘The Honduran people exercised their democratic rights by taking part in
elections on 26 November. The United States looks forward to working with the democratically elected
leaders of Honduras.’
Why would US Congressional representatives and senators want to make Nicaragua so
poor that undocumented immigrants would join Guatemalans, Hondurans, and El
Salvadoreans making their way to the Mexico – US border? The Act is primarily ideological and
has little to do with rationality. A statement by Senator Ted Cruz on 22 December echoes the sentiments of
Ronald Reagan in the 1980s alleging that Nicaragua’s links with Venezuela and Russia ‘raise national
security implications not only for the US but for all our allies throughout the western hemisphere.’
 Why does the Nicaraguan government enjoy such high levels of support?
• According to a poll carried out by M & R Consultores in October 2017, President Daniel Ortega had
an almost 80% approval rating among Nicaraguans. 77.5% said that he had led Nicaragua correctly, while
77.8% said that the FSLN government gave them hope. The poll also showed that 78.6% of the people
believed the government worked for the benefit of the population and 71.5% considered the government
‘democratic’.
• The October 2017 World Bank report on Nicaragua concludes that the FSLN government, led by
President Ortega since 2007, has achieved a remarkable turnaround in reducing poverty and inequality,
raising productivity, diversifying the economy, while promoting greater economic and social stability. This
includes free health care and education at all levels, extensive electrification, housing and road building
programmes, and support for small family businesses, particularly for women. ‘Nicaragua’s
macroeconomic stability has allowed the country’s decision makers to shift from crisis control mode to
longer-term, pioneering strategies to fight poverty, particularly in remote rural communities.’ World Bank
report October, 2017
• Because Nicaragua is one of the safest countries in Central America, it has become a popular tourist
destination with low violence, drug and homicide rates. The US State Department’s Nicaragua 2017 Crime
and Safety Report concludes that “Nicaragua has low overall reported crime rates” with a reduced
homicide rate at 8/100,000 inhabitants. Nicaraguan police and military have prevented drug cartels from
gaining a foothold in the country, unlike the other countries of Central America.
• Contrary to US accusations of lack of freedom in Nicaragua, the country has no political prisoners
and no censorship of the press. All of the print media and most radio stations are owned by the opposition.
Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign Action Group www.nscag.org, nscag@nicaraguasc.org.uk
FB nicaraguasc, twitter NSCAG_UK 86 Durham Road, London N7 7DT Tel: 020 7561 4836 Jan 2018
 
Fuente: http://www.nicaraguasc.org.uk/