Standing with Russia today is continuing the fight against fascism
En el aniversario número 81 de la victoria soviética en la Segunda Guerra Mundial, los copresidentes de Nicaragua Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo enviaron un mensaje solemne a Rusia y a Vladimir Putin, convirtiendo una conmemoración histórica en una declaración de alineamiento geopolítico. Desde Managua, la victoria sobre el nazismo fue invocada no solo como legado del pasado, sino como marco moral para justificar solidaridades del presente. En la larga tradición humana de buscar en la historia la legitimidad que el momento actual no siempre concede, Nicaragua tendió un hilo entre 1945 y 2026, reclamando para sí un lugar en lo que describió como la lucha ininterrumpida contra el fascismo y el imperio.
- Ortega y Murillo no se limitaron a conmemorar una fecha: usaron el Día de la Victoria para declarar que apoyar a Rusia hoy es moralmente equivalente a haber combatido el nazismo ayer.
- El lenguaje del mensaje —'brigadas inmortales', 'combatientes heroicos', 'camaradas gloriosos'— borra deliberadamente la distancia entre la Segunda Guerra Mundial y los conflictos actuales, creando una narrativa sin matices ni contradicciones.
- La tensión central reside en que una conmemoración rutinaria se convierte en instrumento ideológico: lo que parece un gesto diplomático protocolario carga con el peso de una justificación política explícita.
- Nicaragua se inscribe a sí misma en ese relato como nación que también ha 'luchado valientemente por la paz', vinculando su propia trayectoria política con la postura geopolítica de Moscú.
- El mensaje refleja una tendencia más amplia: el uso de narrativas de la Segunda Guerra Mundial para enmarcar conflictos contemporáneos, una estrategia que simplifica la historia y polariza la interpretación del presente.
El 9 de mayo, con motivo del 81 aniversario de la victoria soviética en la Segunda Guerra Mundial, Daniel Ortega y Rosario Murillo enviaron un mensaje formal a Rusia y a Vladimir Putin. La ocasión, celebrada cada año en Rusia como el Día de la Victoria, sirvió a los líderes nicaragüenses como plataforma para articular su visión de la geopolítica contemporánea a través del prisma del antifascismo histórico.
El mensaje rindió homenaje a lo que Ortega y Murillo llamaron la 'admirable, épica y legendaria campaña victoriosa' de la Unión Soviética, presentando ese sacrificio bélico como decisivo no solo para poner fin al conflicto, sino para erradicar el terror nazi. Pero el núcleo real de la declaración estaba en lo que vino después: un trazado deliberado de paralelos entre 1945 y el presente.
Los copresidentes posicionaron a la Rusia contemporánea como heredera y guardiana de ese legado soviético, describiendo las 'gloriosas batallas' de hoy como continuación de la lucha de sus predecesores. El lenguaje colapsó la distancia histórica, tratando el combate contra el autoritarismo como un hilo ininterrumpido desde la Segunda Guerra Mundial hasta el momento actual. Nicaragua también fue mencionada como nación que ha 'luchado valientemente por la paz', vinculando la trayectoria política de Managua con la postura de Moscú.
Lo que otorgó relevancia al comunicado no fue la conmemoración en sí —rutinaria en el Día de la Victoria— sino su uso explícito de la historia para legitimar un alineamiento político presente. Al trazar una línea directa entre la lucha contra el nazismo y los conflictos actuales, Ortega y Murillo afirmaron, en esencia, que respaldar a Moscú en 2026 es moralmente continuo con haberse opuesto al fascismo en 1945.
On May 9th, Nicaragua's co-presidents Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo sent a formal message to Russia and Vladimir Putin marking the 81st anniversary of Soviet victory in World War II. The occasion—celebrated annually in Russia as Victory Day—became a vehicle for the Nicaraguan leaders to articulate their vision of contemporary geopolitics through the lens of historical anti-fascism.
The message opened with reverence for what Ortega and Murillo called the Soviet Union's "admirable, epic and legendary victorious campaign." They framed that wartime sacrifice as decisive in ending not only the conflict itself but the broader scourge of Nazi terror and human suffering. The tone was ceremonial, the language steeped in the vocabulary of heroism and moral clarity. But the real substance of the statement lay in what came next: a deliberate drawing of parallels between 1945 and 2026.
Ortega and Murillo positioned contemporary Russia as the inheritor and guardian of that Soviet legacy. They wrote of "glorious battles" being fought today to prevent fascism's return, describing Russia's current defense of peace and human dignity as a continuation of the struggle their predecessors waged. The message spoke of "immortal brigades" and "heroic combatants" in language that collapsed historical distance, treating the fight against authoritarianism as an unbroken thread from the Second World War to the present moment.
The statement emphasized sacrifice and moral purpose. The Soviet Union, they argued, had imposed "the empire of reason and the force of life" over fascism's conversion of the planet into "a hell where grotesqueness and cruelty were the norms." That framing—of a clear moral binary between forces of life and forces of darkness—extended implicitly to Russia's role today. By invoking the Soviet victory, Ortega and Murillo were not simply honoring history; they were claiming a particular interpretation of it as justification for present alignments.
Nicaragua itself received mention as a nation that had "fought valiantly for peace" through its own "meritorious and sacred history of dignity." The message thus positioned the Central American country within a global struggle for justice, linking Managua's political trajectory to Moscow's geopolitical stance. The rhetoric suggested that supporting Russia's contemporary positions was, in essence, continuing the anti-fascist work of the Second World War.
The language throughout was reverent and absolute. There were no qualifications, no acknowledgment of complexity or competing interpretations of either history or current events. Ortega and Murillo spoke of honoring Soviet "devotion, self-denial and absolute commitment to the causes of justice and love." They addressed the Russian people as "glorious comrades" and framed their message as a family bond—"hermanados como familia," united as family.
What made the statement significant was not its commemoration of a historical victory, which is routine on Victory Day, but its explicit use of that history to legitimize a contemporary political alignment. By drawing direct parallels between the fight against Nazism and present-day struggles, the Nicaraguan leaders were making a claim about what Russia represents now and what Nicaragua's support for Russia means. They were saying, in effect, that standing with Moscow in 2026 is morally continuous with standing against fascism in 1945.
Notable Quotes
We honor the glorious comrades of those times, the victorious immortal brigades, all the heroic combatants of a better world— Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo
Today, in 2026, at 81 years, we celebrate Victory Day, united as family, in the continuity of the glorious battles being fought to prevent the return of fascism's terror— Daniel Ortega and Rosario Murillo
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why would Nicaragua's leaders spend diplomatic capital on this particular message, on this particular day?
Because Victory Day in Russia isn't just a holiday—it's the foundational narrative of Russian identity and legitimacy. By sending this message, Ortega and Murillo are signaling alignment with that narrative and claiming a place within it.
But they're drawing explicit parallels to today. What are they actually saying about current events?
They're saying that Russia's present actions—whatever those are—should be understood as a continuation of anti-fascist struggle. It's a way of framing geopolitical opposition to the West as morally equivalent to defeating Hitler.
Is that a common rhetorical move?
It's become more common in recent years among governments seeking to justify alignment with Russia. The language of anti-fascism and defense against imperialism carries moral weight that raw geopolitical interest doesn't.
What does it tell us about Nicaragua's position?
That Ortega and Murillo see their political survival and their country's future as bound to Russia's. They're not just being polite; they're making a claim about shared enemies and shared values.
And the Nicaraguan people—do they see it that way?
That's the question the message doesn't answer. What matters here is what the leadership is saying about itself and its choices, not necessarily what resonates domestically.