[months for 6 months for $3 Il Enclosed…]

Scan page 12

months for 6 months for $3 Il Enclosed is a $ I want to join ciali:

information.

Name Address City State Zip Tel. Send to: 3435 Rm. 308, contribution. •.and receive a free pamphlet!

As part of our fall subscriptions drive, we are offering one of our pamphlets listed in this issue to any new subscriber (offer nds Dec. 15, 1 987).

Scan page 13

.. Nicaraguan peace plan "... Ortega stated that the government had to government had decided declare war on Nicaragua withou consulting the American people.' (continued from page force... If we were to agree to a dialogue, it. would mean agreeing to a return of the National Guard. It would be the beginning of a series of concessions that would ultimately lead to handing over the revolutionary power, the people's power."

Hard cop, soft cop President Reagan has vowed to continue his fight for an additional $270 million in contra aid—in defiance of the Esquipulas II peace plan, which calls for an end to all aid to "irregular forces in the region." Reagan insists that his hard stance in support of the contras is what made "the signing of the Guatemala accord" possible in the first place.

Speaking to the Organization of American States on Oct. 7, Reagan said: "Without the freedom fighters [contras], the Sandinistas never would have signed the Guatemala accord, and there would be no pressure on the Sandinistas to reform."

According to James F. Clarity, a New York Times staff-writer, "Reagan administration officials said they are basing their strategy on the expectation that the Sandinistas will not negotiate the cease-fire with the contra leadership. Then, if the new [$270 million contra] aid was approved by Congress, the contras could resume fighting toward their goal of overthrowing the Sandinista government."

Another wing of the U.S. capitalist class, however, is pushing for a more flexible anti-Sandinista policy. The New York Times, for example, in an editorial dated Oct. 9, 1987, sharply criticized President Reagan's request for $270 million in renewed aid for the contras. "It's hard to imagine a message more destructive to all interests, including that of the contras," the Times editorialists stated.

The Times continued: "Negotiation might better achieve America's goals in Central America... The Sandinistas have a dreadful track record, and there's every reason to fear they will betray their word, revert to repression, and stifle debate once the pressure is off. The question is, does pressure from the contra army work? Could not the peace plan be made to work more surely?"

Making the plan "work"

The New York Times argues that the Reagan administration should hold off on requesting more aid to the contras until at least next January, when an international Verification Commission would determine whether the Sandinista government had complied with the peace accord. At that point, the Times continues, if the Commission found that Nicaragua had not lived up to the agreement, renewed aid to through military force, whereas the Democrats seek to undo the revolutionary process through the medium of concessions."

Ortega calls for referendum Speaking at a public reception in the South Bronx on Oct. 9, President Ortega ... Ortega stated stated that the U.S. government had decided "to declare war on Nicaragua without consulting the American people." He continued: "If the president of the United States respects democracy, the most logical thing would be for him to call a public referendum so that the American people could state clearly whether they agree or not with his policies toward Nicaragua."

Ortega's call for a national referendum on the U.S. government's war on Nicaragua is a good one and should be taken up by the anti-intervention movement. Working people should have a say in whether or not war should be waged with their tax money and in their name.

Speaking shortly after Ortega at the South Bronx rally, however, a spokesperson for a local anti-intervention coalition responded to Ortega, stating that a referendum on war was not necessary because the American people had already expressed America.

This coalition spokesperson backed up this statement, explaining that on one day, Sept. 12, over 27,000 signatures had been gathered in over 125 sites in New York City urging the U.S. government to support the Esquipulas II peace plan.

The strategy of obtaining signatures for the peace plan is incorrect. The Sandinista government, which is under the imperialist gun, has every right to negotiate with whomever it chooses to gain a reprieve against the continued contra war. Alan Benjamin /Socialist Action But the U.S. anti-intervention movement must not be derailed into calling for support to a peace agreement the Sandinistas have felt compelled to sign.

"Out Now" vs. "Negotiate Now!"

Self-determination means that the people of an oppressed nation should have the right to decide their own future. But the United States, which has subjected Central America to economic exploitation and military oppression, has no business helping decide the fate of these nations.

When a people are being held at gunpoint by international bandits, they may be compelled to make sacrifices to gain a reprieve. It is the duty of concerned witnesses to the crime, however, to denounce both the deadly vandalism of the bandits and the political ransom extorted.

The "negotiations" position is inherently and fatally flawed. It implicitly accepts the "right" of the U.S. government to limit the right of the Nicaraguan people to determine and regulate their own affairs.

The "Negotiate Now" demand also leads to an adaptation to liberal Democratic Party politicians—so-called "peace candidates"who hide their pro-war voting record in Congress behind advocacy of "a negotiated end to the war."

Referendum on war!

Opposition to the U.S. war against Nicaragua runs deep among the American people.

In this respect, Daniel Ortega's call to allow the American people to vote on the question of contra aid—and war!— is profoundly progressive. This demand paves the way for mobilizing the American people to inject their own foreign policy of peace and self-determination for Central America, in general, and Nicaragua, in particular. This demand also exposes the bipartisan secret war policies of the U.S. government.

On April 25, 1987, more than 200,000 people marched in the streets of Washington, D.C., and San Francisco to demand an end to U.S: intervention in Central America and an end to U.S. support to South African apartheid. This national march was initiated by 19 union presidents, representing a majority of the organized labor movement, and by scores of the nation's prominent religious leaders.

The success of the April 25 protests means that the movement should set even higher goals for itself in the future. More unions, more working people, more churches, and more community groups should be involved.

April 25 proved that it is possible to build a majority movement in this country against the U.S. war in Central America. It is possible to defeat the warmakers and allow the Nicaraguan people to live in peace.