Soviet-Empire.com U.S.S.R. and communism historical discussion.
[ Active ]
[ Login ]
Log-in to remove these advertisements.

Discreet Partners: Argentina and the USSR Since 1917

POST REPLY
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 758
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 30 Sep 2013, 00:43
So it seems to be generally accepted that the Communist Parties in Nicaragua did not support the Sandinistas, but I'm still not clear if this opposition came from the left (adventurist) or right (social democratic), in other words was the FSLN too radical or too moderate for the CPs?
Kamran Heiss
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 4381
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 07 Oct 2004, 22:04
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Resident Soviet
Post 30 Sep 2013, 14:00
For some reason, I have a feeling it's the latter (i.e. social democratic reformism). The Sandinista fell in 1990, when the Kremlin was not only surrendering its allies all across the world, but actively working to smash all strains of the left globally.
"The thing about capitalism is that it sounds awful on paper and is horrendous in practice. Communism sounds wonderful on paper and when it was put into practice it was done pretty well for what they had to work with." -MiG
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 758
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 30 Sep 2013, 20:34
soviet78 wrote:
For some reason, I have a feeling it's the latter (i.e. social democratic reformism). The Sandinista fell in 1990, when the Kremlin was not only surrendering its allies all across the world, but actively working to smash all strains of the left globally.


I guess that would match up with what Ismail said about the USSR initially being skeptical about the Sandinista Revolution having any chance of taking power.

I wouldn't exactly say that the world CPs were actively trying to smash the left on orders from Moscow, but Right Social Democratic factions within many CPs gained the upper hand exploiting the crisis of socialism. The CPSU Rightist Faction didn't have much interest in the world communist movement, one way or the other.
Kamran Heiss
[+-]
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 3618
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 22 Oct 2004, 15:15
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Politburo
Post 02 Oct 2013, 11:07
This is pretty interesting stuff that I haven't read a lot about yet. Interesting contributions to this thread so far. The Cold War in Latin America was obviously a complex affair.

If I recall correctly, in Argentina, repression against the left already began under Isabel Perón, before the coup. What should also be considered is that, while both Argentina and Chile were taken over by military juntas, they still fought against each other, and therefore both the US and USSR logically tried to support one or the other to gain more leverage in this region.

Another aspect of this is the composition of the left in parts of South America. For instance, the Argentinian left suppressed by the junta were originally Trotskyists who had begun to adhere to Maoist or Guevarist guerrilla strategies. The Fourth International had at this point decided to support armed struggle throughout South America. They also received support from Cuba. Of course they were pitted against reactionary juntas against which it is right to rebel, but one can't help but wonder whether guerrillas stood a chance against vast military machines that made Batista's goons in Cuba look like kittens. When does a justified rebellion turn into adventurism?

People already noted the consistent scepticism of the Soviet Union towards Latin American movements. The Cuban revolution took them by surprise, and it's no wonder that they took a similar position in Argentina. Evidently, the communist parties went along in this, with the PSP's positions in Cuba, the PCA in Argentina, the Communist Party of Nicaragua, etc. And much earlier, in Costa Rica, the Popular Vanguard Party supported the reformist-catholic government that was overthrown in the civil war that led to the abolition of the Costa Rican military.

The Falklands/Malvinas war complicated things further. Argentina's claim was (and is) supported by progressive nationalists across the continent, while at the same time, France, Israel and the USSR all secretly facilitated material support to Argentina. Chile, on the other hand, backed the British against their Argentinian enemies. The US briefly considered pushing for some kind of negotiated solution, but in the end the special relationship with Britain prevailed. The Argentinian junta itself used the war to weaken the rebellious atmosphere at home, and at one point they tried to enlist former guerrilleros to attack British targets.
User avatar
Soviet cogitations: 758
Defected to the U.S.S.R.: 28 Jan 2008, 19:10
Ideology: Marxism-Leninism
Komsomol
Post 02 Oct 2013, 21:56
The conservatism of Soviet-backed CPs in Latin America was part of the reason I was so surprised that the Nicaraguan CPs didn't support the Sandinistas. Reagan's lies aside, the FSLN was a democratic socialist/social democratic movement. It is currently a member of Tony Blair's Socialist International and Ortega is a big Christian. I suppose it was the means rather than the ends that made the FSLN radical, in that it was willing to use armed struggle against Somoza. Although I would add that FSLN ultimately assumed power peacefully through democratic parliamentary elections, which is part of what makes Reagan's arming of the Contra terrorists so disgusting.

According to wikipedia the pro-USSR Socialist Party initially supported Somoza!
"At the time of its foundation, PSN supported the regime of Anastasio Somoza García. PSN considered that Somoza was an anti-fascist ally"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua ... list_Party

IDK how reliable wiki is, but it does match up with general Communist policy in Latin America in the 1940s. I remember in Outline History of Americas, WZ Foster actually asserted that Batista's Cuba was numbered among the progressive governments in Latin America.
Kamran Heiss
Alternative Display:
Mobile view
More Forums: The History Forum. The UK Politics Forum.
© 2000- Soviet-Empire.com. Privacy.