As the old saying goes, about the only thing we ever learn from history is that we never learn from history. That's certainly held true when it comes to American presidents and their wars. FDR wanted to get into World War II so badly that he goaded the Japanese into attacking Pearl Harbor, and he didn't give the American forces there any warning, and the result was the carnage inflicted upon America in World War II, where over a million Americans were killed or wounded.

Johnson wanted to attack the North Vietnamese, so he used this trumped-up incident to gather the support he needed and the result was 58,000 Americans killed and 153,000 wounded, not to mention over a million Vietnamese killed and multitudes wounded, and scores more who are dying today from unexploded bombs and mines, or from chemicals like Agent Orange that remain in the soil and the water.

And Bush was itching to attack Iraq, so he put the mother of all deceptions across on people with his phony "weapons of mass destruction" story and the result has been more than 2,100 Americans killed and 16,000 wounded “so far” as well as tens of thousands of Iraqis killed or wounded.

So American presidents can be a very bloodthirsty lot, as well as terrific liars when it comes to getting their way, while they criticize other world leaders who commit similar crimes! But the Lord's keeping track of it all, and one day they'll face the great Judge of the universe and have to account for their actions, or their war crimes, no matter how they may try to justify them now.

In the modern period, Costa Rica has evolved into being the most peaceful and progressive state among the original five Central American republics. It also possesses the area’s highest standard of living and has the healthiest and most literate population. So its politics must be considered within a context of affluence and stability that is lacking in much of the hemisphere.

PLN and Arias

The party also has been disgraced by the scandalous financial activities of its 1994-1998 President José María Figueres, son of the country’s revolutionary leader, who is but one of three recent presidents to allegedly accept bribes from foreign cell phone providers.

PUSC’s leader for many years, was Rafael Calderón Fournier, son of pre-revolutionary leader Rafael Angel Calderón Guardia, who was also accused of accepting such bribes while he was president from 1990-1994. Although PUSC has been moderately rightwing, and has tended to represent conservative members of the business and professional elites, Calderon’s problems with alleged bribes from foreign cell phone providers, and the recent similar activities of PUSC president Miguel Angel Rodríguez, who followed Figueres in office, undercut Calderon’s influence in PUSC and severely damaged the party’s political future.

Because the political agendas of the PUSC and the PLN have drifted relatively close to each other, they have opened themselves to be challenged by more populist elements in the country, a growing trend of the 21st Century. In 2001, PAC was formed by Ottón Solís, an ex-PLN deputy and former minister of planning during Arias’ first term, in order to challenge the “ideological centrism” of the two parties with a “third force.” Backed by a number of former PLN and PUSC leaders, he presented a plan emphasizing popular participation in government, public ethics and transparency, opposition to neo-liberal economic reforms, and governmental guarantees to ensure social mobility and poverty reduction. However, Solís was a candidate ahead of his time, and he was soundly defeated in the 2002 elections. Nevertheless, his new party won 14 seats in the assembly, thereby undermining PUSC President Abel Pacheco’s efforts to enact legislation. Then, in 2006, national politics were drastically changed when PAC became the country’s second most popular party, while PUSC poorly ranked fourth.

Political issues were more clearly presented this year than in previous campaigns. The commonly heard term “voto útil,” meaning “useful vote,” was said to symbolize the voter’s faith in their role in the electoral process to stimulate change. In other words, instead of simply adhering to one’s old biases or supporting family traditions, many voters now voted “with their heads.” The leading issue appears to have been CAFTA-DR, backed by PLN and its candidate, in contrast to the PAC and its candidate calling for a re-negotiation of the agreement. Another related issue was the role of the United States in its efforts to impose the so-called “Washington consensus,” with its structural adjustment policies, free trade, and emphasis on exports. Solís called for changes in these policies, which, according to many critics have done little to reduce the 20% poverty rate that is now at its highest level since 1994. Furthermore the issue of corruption associated with the three past presidents tainted both leading parties.

Candidate Solís conducted an intense campaign in which he held a series of face to face discussion meetings with voters (23 in January alone). Holding a doctorate in economics, Solís was quite at ease with discussions of economic issues. Many of his ideas were summed up in his statement that ”the middle class is bordering on poverty and the poor are at the point of misery….Something bad is happening in Costa Rica: much wealth is produced, but few benefit.”

Candidate Arias ran a more haughty campaign, and refused to debate his chief opponent in the month before the elections. His campaign platform was based on a “si se puede” (yes we can) approach filled with positive proposals. But he also advocated increasing both taxes and social spending, while promising macroeconomic discipline. He strongly supported CAFTA-DR and maintained that by accepting the agreement, Costa Rica can become the first “developed” country in Latin America. He denied that he was a neo-liberal, but said he wanted to “balance” the populism of the old PLN with some of the economic philosophy of the right.

According to a poll conducted in April, 2005, the greatest national problem in Costa Rica was considered to be the high cost of living, coupled with inadequate income to cover basic necessities. Other problems included inflation, public corruption, CAFTA-DR, and the growing lack of public security. Political analysts also pointed to a publicly perceived lack of direction and decision-making in the government. These issues and attitudes were reflected in the political changes of 2006, and they will emerge again in the upcoming years of policy-making with the new Arias administration, as well as in future elections.