Detailed Notes on 'At War with Nicaragua' by Richard H. Ullman

Overview of Conflict: The Reagan Administration's policies towards Nicaragua are characterized as a war, albeit one without official declarations or direct military engagement. The U.S. supports counterrevolutionary forces (contras) aimed at destabilizing the Sandinista government without deploying U.S. troops directly.
U.S. Objectives: The administration's aim is the overthrow of the Sandinista regime, which they classify as a Marxist threat to regional stability. This focus overshadows other geopolitical crises.
Diplomatic Isolation: U.S. diplomats are tasked with rallying international support against Nicaragua, framing it as a threat comparable to historic adversaries.

Support of Contras: The central strategy involves supporting the contras, financed and trained by the CIA, with a force estimated at 10,000-15,000. This is accompanied by increased military cooperation with Honduras, including joint training exercises involving U.S. forces.
Nicaraguan Response: The Nicaraguan government, aware of U.S. intentions, refrains from direct conflict to avoid providing the U.S. a pretext for military action. The Sandinistas employ a strategy of restraint even as contras carry out violent incursions.

Contras’ Actions: Civilians are heavily impacted by violence; reports indicate that many victims of the contras are not combatants but civilians, resulting in widespread fear and community disruption. The Nicaraguan government claims over 700 civilian deaths linked to contra attacks.
Support for Sandinistas: Despite the violence, support for the Sandinistas persists among many in Nicaragua, as they believe they have gained social and economic benefits from the revolution, including access to land and social services.

Economic Isolation: The U.S. has imposed severe economic restrictions, cutting off access to credits and damaging Nicaragua’s economy, aiming to weaken its government. These sanctions inadvertently bolster Sandinista resolve among certain demographics, as they position themselves as defenders against U.S. aggression.
Impact on Agriculture: Destruction of agricultural resources by contras and sanctions-induced shortages exacerbate food security concerns in Nicaragua, but the government maintains support within the peasant population as they fear a return to the pre-revolutionary status quo.

Fear of Revolutionary Ideology: The Reagan Administration views the Sandinista government as an ideological threat, potentially spreading Marxist-Leninist ideology throughout Central America. This fear drives U.S. intervention policies purportedly to protect regional allies from revolutionary movements.
Comparative Analysis: Critics argue against equating U.S. actions in Nicaragua with Soviet interventions in Eastern Europe, asserting that political changes in Central America do not inherently threaten U.S. legitimacy or security goals, unlike the situation in Soviet-dominated nations.

Long-term Risks: Current U.S. policies risk making Nicaragua more militarized and reliant on Soviet support, increasing anti-American sentiment rather than reducing it. The article warns that military interventions may backfire, leading to a broader, more entrenched conflict.
Recommendations for Policy Change: Suggestions include pursuing diplomatic avenues for negotiations, focusing on multilateral frameworks for regional stability over armed conflict.

Reflection Needed: The author calls for self-reflection from U.S. policymakers regarding the consequences of their ongoing approach towards Nicaragua and the broader Central American region. The potential for a negotiated settlement should be explored as an alternative to conflict.