LETTERS Doctrine and patriots
Sir: Graham Greene argues (Letters, 31 October) that indoctrination in patriotism is acceptable during 'a war against terrorist members of Somoza's National Guard etc. But the depressing thing is how little of the appeal in the text book passages I cite is couched in genuinely patriotic terms. The call to arms is made by FSLN, not the fatherland. It's as if the young Graham Greene had been confronted with a pic- ture not of Kitchener, but of Lloyd George, saying 'My coalition has need of you!' Moreover, in my examples the FSLN, militia and ANS are depicted as entities somehow desirable in themselves, not as means to defeat the Contras, who are scarcely mentioned. What we would appear to have, then, is indoctrination in collectivism, a militarised society and a revolutionary stance — a trinity sadly familiar in the totalitarian states of the Soviet bloc — rather than in the fighting of a patriotic war.
Graham Greene is very wide of the mark in writing off the opposition of the Sandi- nistas as 'terrorist members of Somoza's National Guard'. The Contras consist of less than one per cent former Somoza National Guards. Up to one third of the Contras and former Sandinistas, people disillusioned with the souring of the San- dinista revolution into tyranny. The Contra leader Dr Adolfo Calero, who visited Lon- don recently, was actually imprisoned by Somoza.
It is the Sandinistas among whom former Somoza supporters are heavily repre- sented. Francisco D'Escoto, currently, Nicaraguan Ambassador to the Court of St James's, was a diplomatic representative of the Somoza regime in Japan. His brother Miguel D'Escoto, currently the Sandinis- tas' foreign minister, was a godson of Anastasio Somoza II.
`Mercenaries' hardly describes the Con- tras adequately. They receive American money — I know of no Third World armed resistance that doesn't get foreign aid, since fighting is expensive — but only a fraction of the £3 billion in military and economic aid that the Sandinista regime gets from the USSR. Their being paid `under the table'—an oversimplification anyway — reflects US domestic political circumstances and has no bearing on what- ever righteousness attends their cause. Does Graham Greene object to the maquis in World War H and the mujahideen resistance to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan on the grounds that they were/are paid `under the table'.
About kidnapped conscripts I am too ill-informed to pronounce, though com- mon sense suggests that whereas press gangs may have worked for manning Nel- son's navy they are unlikely to be effective in stocking guerrilla armies, who to be useful must be highly motivated and who can all too easily melt away in the awkward terrain if unenthusiastic. There are con- scripts in the Contras forces, but they are Sandinistas who have come over., Calling the Contras exclusively 'terror- ists' ignores well documented instances of Sandinista anti-semitism, attempted geno- cide, arbitrary arrest followed by torture, assassination of political opponents and surely particularly repugnant to a Catholic such as Graham Greene — persecution of church-goers. The Contras have claimed to be fighting for genuinely free elections. The Sandinistas palpably repress opposi- tion.
Charles Mosley 15 Onslow Avenue Mansions, Onslow Avenue,
Richmond, Surrey
Previous page
