Q COSTARICA — Legislator and former First Lady Claudia Dobles reacted with evident indignation and annoyance to the recent statements made by President Laura Fernández regarding the political and social situation in Nicaragua.
The legislator’s discontent erupted after the president stated in an international interview that the conditions in the neighboring country cannot be compared to those of Cuba or Venezuela, arguing that Nicaraguans enjoy a thriving economy and, moreover, have the government they have chosen.
These words raised alarms in various political sectors, but Dobles’ response was one of the most categorical, calling Fernández’s statements shameful, although she added that they were not entirely surprising.
For the legislator, it is unacceptable that the head of state has avoided at all costs referring to Nicaragua as a dictatorship.
In her strong rebuttal, Dobles pointed out that the argument that the Nicaraguan people democratically elected their current rulers ignores an undeniable reality: at least the last three electoral processes in that nation have been thoroughly questioned by the international community. Furthermore, the main opposition candidates were imprisoned or exiled by the regime of Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo.
Read more: “Ignorance or indifference”: Fernández is criticized for supporting the Nicaraguan regime
The former first lady also took a direct jab at the current administration, stating that this stance reflects a continuation of the policies of Rodrigo Chaves, which, according to her, also avoided labeling the neighboring government a dictatorship, ignoring the constant human rights violations reported in that country.
Dobles’s complaint carries particular historical and political weight due to the role Costa Rica played during the administration of her husband, former President Carlos Alvarado (2018-2022), a period in which she served as first lady.
During that administration, the country faced the direct impact of the Nicaraguan sociopolitical crisis that erupted in April 2018.
Instead of opting for pragmatism, the Alvarado government maintained a confrontational diplomatic stance with Nicaragua and opened the country’s doors with a strictly humanitarian approach, receiving an extraordinary wave of more than 70,000 formal asylum applications from citizens fleeing persecution and violence.
Therefore, the current position by President Fernández is perceived by the Partito Acción Ciudadana (PAC) as a dismantling of the traditional values of solidarity and defense of democracy that have historically guided Costa Rican foreign policy.
Finally, the legislator closed her message with a direct warning to the local population, urging them to take note of how the dictatorial regime in Nicaragua managed to consolidate its power precisely through the capture of the media, control of the judiciary, and the dismantling of all institutions that guaranteed the independence of the branches of government and electoral transparency.
However, President Fernández’s stance also finds support among those who defend a realistic and pragmatic approach to international relations, arguing that her words accurately reflect the macroeconomic context of the northern neighbor.
From this perspective, it is emphasized that Nicaragua, unlike the humanitarian collapse and chronic shortages experienced in Cuba or Venezuela, maintains an active market economy, with stable flows of foreign investment, ongoing projects, and strong commercial dynamism fueled by remittances. Under this interpretation, the president’s moderate rhetoric is perceived by many sectors as the right decision to avoid fueling an unnecessary confrontation with a nation with which Costa Rica shares a border and with which it has direct contact, given that thousands of Nicaraguans reside and work in Costa Rican territory.
It is worth remembering that both countries are strongly intertwined by historical economic ties, with Nicaragua being Costa Rica’s main trading partner in Central America and the key destination for a large portion of its national production and exports. Therefore, breaking off diplomatic channels would jeopardize a vital exchange for the region’s development, which is why the president’s words are considered by many to be a sign of prudence and political wisdom.
This commercial and demographic landscape is further complicated by a stark geopolitical reality shared by various analysts, who point out that while Nicaragua lives under an authoritarian regime where Sandinismo controls all branches of government and suppresses free elections, Costa Rica has virtually no room to maneuver to alter this internal situation.
Those who justify President Fernández’s caution argue that the forceful condemnations, reproaches, and confrontational rhetoric issued by previous administrations, such as those of former presidents Luis Guillermo Solís (2014-2018) and Carlos Alvarado, did not weaken the Nicaraguan regime’s grip on power. On the contrary, they closed off essential communication channels crucial for border security and the flow of goods.
From this perspective of constructive non-intervention, it is concluded that Costa Rica should not jeopardize its own stability by fueling sterile disputes with a neighboring political landscape it cannot change. This reinforces the president’s stance as a logical path to safeguarding national interests above ideological conflict.