Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Fears of Civil War as Honduras Talks Collapse
TEGUCIGALPA - An international mediator warned of civil war in Honduras after talks broke down between representatives of the country's rival governments.
Honduran soldiers holding sticks are deployed at the Democracy Square in the Presidential Palace in Tegucigalpa. An international mediator has warned of civil war in Honduras after talks broke down between representatives of the country's rival governments. (AFP) Representatives of the de facto rulers on Sunday rejected a proposal by mediator Oscar Arias, the Costa Rican president, that ousted leader Manuel Zelaya return as president in charge of a "reconciliation" government.
Arias, who has won a Nobel Peace Prize for his work resolving conflict in Central America, warned Honduras was at the brink of "civil war and bloodshed".
"We have started organizing internal resistance for my return to the country," Zelaya told reporters in Nicaragua, where he has been based since he was forced out by the army on June 28.
Arias pleaded for talks to resume after a 72-hour break but there was no sign his appeal would be heeded, though sources close to the negotiations said the two sides might meet again on Wednesday.
Neither Zelaya nor acting president Roberto Micheletti, a congress leader who heads the de facto government, were in Costa Rica for the talks.
Micheletti backers took exception to the use by Arias of the words "civil war". One, Honduras deputy foreign minister Martha Lorena Alvarado, accused the Costa Rican president of "taking us towards a situation of near-panic".
Alvarado welcomed the call for 72 hours' reflection, but ruled out allowing Zelaya to return as president.
Micheletti's government has promised to arrest Zelaya if he does come back and prosecute him for treason and 17 other charges.
Zelaya's supporters in Honduras, however, said they would intensify their protests pressing for his reinstatement. They called a strike for Thursday and Friday.
The leader of the National Front Against the Coup d'Etat, Berta Caceres, told AFP her group opposed Arias's plan for a reconciliation government that included those she termed "the putschists."
The secretary general of the Organization of American States, Jose Miguel Insulza, said his body would press the de facto government to recognize "this is a coup that failed." The OAS would hold a meeting Monday on Honduras, he said.
Zelaya has vowed to go back to Honduras with or without agreement from his rivals.
He tried to fly back on July 5 on a plane borrowed from his ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, but aborted the landing when Honduran military vehicles parked on the runway.
Rumors suggested he might next try to cross the border from Nicaragua.
Many Honduran lawmakers, judges and military leaders believe Zelaya triggered the crisis by organizing a June 28 referendum, without congressional approval, on changing the constitution.
They fear the wealthy rancher, who swerved sharply left after being elected in 2005, wants to lift the one-term limit on Honduran presidents to prolong his mandate.
Such a move has been adopted by several left-wing leaders in Latin America, all following Chavez's suit.
President Evo Morales of Bolivia and Rafael Correa this year changed rules to enable them to stay in power.
Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega chose Sunday -- the 30th anniversary of his leftist Sandinista revolution -- to declare he too would seek to change his country's constitution to seek reelection.
A statement issued late Sunday by acting US State Department spokesman Robert Wood urged more energetic efforts to achieve a negotiated solution.
"This weekend's talks produced significant progress, and created a foundation for a possible resolution that adheres to the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and the decisions taken within the Organization of American States," Wood said.
Without mentioning Venezuela and its allies by name, Wood also called on OAS states to "underscore their commitment to the peaceful resolution of political disputes" and "remain mindful of the principles of non-intervention and self-determination."
Washington has backed the OAS demand that Zelaya be returned to power, and frozen military aid to the de facto government. But it has also warned Zelaya against rash moves that might jeopardize dialogue.
- Posted in
36 Comments so far
Show AllThe hemisphere's passe bully warning democratically elected presidents against "rash moves" is soooooooo ludicrous.
"Zelaya has vowed to go back to Honduras with or without agreement from his rivals."
This is the last line of this Agence France Presse article that is actual journalism.
The rest is propaganda designed to fool European and Norte Americano readers into seeing the democratic movement toward sovereignty, representation, and integration in South and Central America as somehow wrong, and U.S. Imperialism in those places as somehow right.
A U.S. State Department official reminding others to stick to "non-intervention" in the Americas?
Hilarious!
The questions we should ask ourselves when we are told that many newly elected Governments in the Americas are moving to extend or abolish term limits are:
1. Why are such strict limits in place in the first place?
2. What are the effects on a State when not just its Executive, but also its Legislature is restricted to one or two terms?
3. Who benefits from these effects?
4. Do the moves to abolish term limits have popular backing?
5. If so, why?
6. Who exactly is opposed to these moves, and other moves toward democratization, integration, and true sovereignty?
7. What are their motives for this opposition?
8. If all these are answered, which side of the dispute should democracy-loving Europeans and Norte Americanos be on?
9. Are this and other Corporatist media articles on the subject asking or answering these questions?
10. If not, why not?
Events never occur inside a vacuum. The history of the places and people involved, as well as the history of the institutions that present the situation are always relevant and enlightening.
It is only when we are being asked or tricked into forming opinions based purely on ideology (usually not even self-generated in the first place) that events are presented without these key background questions.
-matti.
matti, bringing the smart. Thank you.
Here's who the Independent thinks is responsible for the Honduran coup: http://www.truthout.org/071909V?n
It has a more American flavour than we have been led to believe until now.
Yep. But nobody but the rubes are buying the Michelleti bullshit story about Zelaya. Zelaya is coming back. And then he'll have to watch his back big time. I remember when Chavez threw a bunch of "missionaries" out of Venezuela because they were a bunch of intelligence people in disguise. When there's money to be had, a lot of people will do just about anything, no matter how vile.
As a frequent traveler to Honduras, I can only say "Thank God for Mel Zelaya," he is definitely a man for his time. Like FDR, he has betrayed his class for the benefit of the general society, no doubt for pragmatic reasons. No country can move ahead if it prostitutes itself, and Honduras has been a prostitute of foreign (mostly US, but others also) corporations and the US military for a long, long time. The elite have maintained their wealth by cooperating with foreign interests, in the process keeping their own citizenry poor, oppressed and terrorized. Now they have a true democratic movement, and the time for suppression has at long last ended.
I wonder at the forces that led to this time in history: liberation theology, and the empowerment of the masses, evangelical churches and their community work, US garbage shipped to Honduras and reappearing in Honduran homes as old, refurbished TVs, refrigerators, etc. Hondurans, even in the simplest chosa (shack) have an idea of how the rest of the world lives, and they want the chance to live it in their own country - not to have to flee to the US to live in fear, sending money back to their families and dreaming of the time they can go home. How I would love to return to that country and see decent public schools, teachers paid a living wage, the end of poisoning the environment by un-regulated extractive industries - including gold mining, and rampant corruption. When we fought for environmental protections in the US, who would have thought that this would mean degradation in foreign lands, like Honduras. We're all in this together. Viva la patria!
To follow rapidly changing events in Honduras, consult the following websites:
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/democra-phobia-fear-citizen-power-honduras
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiMfsxfzmro&feature=related
Google Narco News Bulletin, and catch up with Al Giordano
Another excellent source is Rightsaction.org
Watch their excellent documentaries on Canada's Goldcorp mining in Honduras, and Goldcorp's attempts to mine in El Salvador.
I read that El Salvador just put the kibosh on gold mining. Hopefully Zelaya will do the same in Honduras.
"Washington has backed the OAS demand that Zelaya be returned to power, and frozen military aid to the de facto government. But it has also warned Zelaya against rash moves that might jeopardize dialogue."
Rash moves? The US warns Zelaya against rash moves (returning to the country he is president of) against an illegal coup. The US has yet to act with any decisiveness against the coup leader. Stall, stall, stall until the media stops covering it seems to be the strategy. Incredible how "patient" our government is with an illegal coup (awfully convenient).
Speaking of rashness. On the other hand, Obama is silent as Israel kills 1400 Gazans, injures 1000 thousands more, damaged or destroyed over 22,000 buildings, farmland, employs a blockade that is causing the population to become enemic, shoots and arrests fishermen, shoots Gazan farmers, kidnaps US citizens (Cynthia McKinney as she tried to deliver aid)... Nor has I heard Obama publicly warn Israel on any rash moves against Iran.
Lanny Davis had worked close with Joe Liberman then with Bill Clinton then Hilary then Obama is the same guy that is the PR spokesman for the Hondurain military coup government is also a senior advisor to AIPAC!
The threat is from Nicaragua and Venezuela sending their socialist para-military militias to invade Honduras, kill people who do not agree with them, and destroy the economy of Honduras.
The goal of the leftists outside of Honduras is to install a socialist dictator in Honduras in the same manner death threats and a one party take over of the election commission in Venezuela resulted in the constitution and supreme court of Venezuela being changed just the way Chavez, the then want to be, and now defacto dictator of Venezuela, wanted it to be.
Result, Chavez avoided term limits, shut down the non-government controlled media in Venezuela, replaced all the members of the Supreme court with his cronies, changed the constitution, and effectively made himself President ( dictator ) for life in Venezuela.
Same script is now being played out in Honduras. Apparently, Obama is giving the green light to this invasion by his attempts to portray any elected politician or Supreme Court justice in Honduras who is trying to defend the Honduran democratic constitution of being a member of a military dictatorship.
Obama to the Socialists dictators: "go ahead and take Honduras, I have your back if the Honduras military resists the foreign mercenaries you are sending into Honduras".
Your "reality" bears no relationship to the reality on THIS planet.
Folks like you have no business posting on a planet Earth site.
Chavez at no time has shut down any media in Venezuela. That must have occurred on your planet, Alpha-BS.
PS: The only country which employs mercenaries on THIS planet is an obtuse bloated bully called the US of A.
Can't even mention the Honduras President by name! Do you even know it? You paint pure right - wing political hokum here using corporate watercolors made back in the 50's. Old style paint by numbers but ...as back then.... where's the real artist?
Hey Reality--
For the record, for-profit media openly critical of Hugo Chavez (both print and electronic) is quite alive and well in Venezuela. You should also know that the former news director of the leading opposition TV station resigned his position once he realilzed that his station was falsely reporting the situation in the country (during Chavez' kidnapping) and assisting the coup.
If you go to You Tube, you could watch "The Revolution Will Not Be Televised" which was produced by an Irish TV documentary film crew that was there at the time and not sound so much like an ignorant troll of the RNC as you now do.
Poet
This is s very tricky mess. If the coup stands, then it will enbolden elites across Latin America to seek to foment similar insurrections. If the coup is resisted and civil war results, it would be just about impossible for the US military to not get involved--so tightly are they and the Honduran miltary linked.
Right now the biggest victory of the elites appears not to be the Micheletti Coup, but rather the reaction of Correa, Chavez, Morales, and Ortega all vying for the chance to be Presidente' for life. They have not been able to mentor any serious leadership cadre' and thus their governments' and movements' continuation are dependant on their own personalities for their continuation.
Que lastima!
Poet
Not quite.
First of all, this is the 3rd coup attempt this decade. All were by right wingers, and all had support by the US government.
1) Venezuela (2002) - Certain military persons temporarily overthrew Chavez and installed Pedro Carmona. The US government briefly supported the military coup until it backfired when there was a lack of support for the coup by the military. During this time, Carmona's interim government dissolved the National Assembly, the Supreme Court, and annulled the Venezuelan constitution. Despite the right wing attempt to paint Chavez as a dictator, he received more than 60% of vote in an election monitored by the Europeans.
2) Haiti (2004) - The US military kidnapped and shipped Aristide out of the country and allowed Guy Phillipes (human rights violator and formerly trained by the US) gain control through a bloody coup.
3) Honduras(2009) - The military assisted in the coup by kidnapping Zelaya and allowing Micheletti take illegally take power with support Congress. General Vasquez, who led the coup was trained by the US. Not only that, the US has troops stationed in Honduras and supports its military. Despite condemnation by the Organization of American States, the US has done but provide some lip service, possibly because it's own CIA sponsored plan lacks public support.
The coup´s being smiled on by Obama the Professional Smiler has already resulted in the coup plotters of Venezuela trying for 2002 Redux.
Your take on the progressive presidents of Latin America is straight from Fox News.
Poets should be original thinkers and writers.
You are in the wrong biz, spin spouter.
It's way past time to close the School of the Americas. American tax dollars should not be used to train dictators and death squads in Honduras or anywhere else.
Tell President Obama: close the School of the Americas now!
http://tinyurl.com/closeSOA
To believe that the United States government was not supportive of a regime change, if you will, in Honduras is to ignore 100 years of US involvement in the region, all of it predicated on support for the multinationals who profit from the resources in the region, and all of it in support of the small group of wealthy elite who benefit by keeping the masses of the poor under their thumb.
If having Bill Clinton's crony being spokespeople for the military's acting president, Micheletti, isn't clue enough to the US's interest in the outcome, along with the SOA's henchmen being leaders in the takeover, then the Obama Administration is stupid, which of course we know they are not. The are not stupid, but are complicit in yet another military takeover of yet another democratically elected leader.
And so it goes.
But the hope for the US itself is not to be found in another successful stab at democracy in Central and South America, but is to found in the movement by people in that region to finally break the yoke of US control and begin addressing the gap between rich and poor and the raping of its lands by the multinationals who decide US foreign policy in the region. The people united will never be defeated, or so that is the last best hope anyway.
This blog site practices the policy of silencing those who disagree with their political view immediately... by de-activating the political opponents log in account ...
and then attacking the political opponent personally and making false claims they are not telling the truth after you have prevented them from rebutting such derogatory statements.
Many label such actions censorship and propaganda.
Clever though, if you just deleted the posts someone might notice, instead you deactivate the account and then savage both the person and the logical argument after preventing them from responding.
I intend to respond to the false arguments made here - if there are no more posts by me - then the censors have struck again.
If you think it's bad here, try the Huffington Post where even reasonbale non-inflammatory comments get censored frequently.
If anyone deserves to be censored on this site, it is precisely YOU.
It´s not because you disagree with anyone that you should be censored.
It´s because you are a liar.
Next time, wipe yourself after posting.
People are not censored because they tell lies.
People are censored BECAUSE THEY TELL THE TRUTH.
Liars are very easy to expose if there is a level playing field of ideas.
Censor ship is used to make the playing field uneven and thereby allow lies told by the folks doing the censorship to go unchallenged.
The individual posting under the screen name:
Poet, on July 21st, 2009 7:07 am
claimed:
"For the record, for-profit media openly critical of Hugo Chavez (both print and electronic) is quite alive and well in Venezuela."
This an attempt by "poet" to suggest that the media ( newspapers, magazines, television stations and radio stations ) in Venezuela are free to support opposition parties and voice opinions that are against the dictator of Venezuela as they were before he came to power.
Nothing could be farther from the truth.
The U.S. Media has made a point of widely covering the take over and silencing of all types of media by the dictator Chavez.
Many major television stations and newspapers have been taken over by the government, shut down or silenced.
The remaining private ownership of a few media outlets is a privilege granted by the dictator as long as you toe the government line.
Again this has been widely covered by the main stream US media and "Poet" insults the intelligence of the readers of this blog by suggesting you are too stupid or too ignorant to know the truth.
The individual posting under the screen name:
"marci d" claimed:
You "Can't even mention the Honduras President by name!"
Everyone can name the Honduran president. Secretary of state Hillary Clinton just called him!
That would be President Roberto Micheletti.
President Micheletti is of the same political party as the exiled former President. President Micheletti was elected to the position of President by the freely elected Congress which is controlled by the same political party as the former President now in exile. The vote was over 100 to single digits in the Congress controlled by the former President's own party.
"marci d" was probably referring to the former President who was of the same political party as President Roberto Micheletti.
The former President is in exile and is threatening to start a civil war and kill thousands of people.
His supporters say he wants to do this so he can serve only six months as President.
If that is true he believes life is very, very cheap.
Or could it be he wants to be a President for life like the dictators of Venezuela, Iran and Cuba ???
The individual posting under the screen name:
"nativetongue.miami" on July 20th, 2009 8:13 pm
claimed:
"Chavez " ( the dictator of Venezuela ) at no time has shut down any media in Venezuela."
That might be true if you consider sending in the military to occupy a television stations and then allowing it to continue to broadcast as long as you agree with what is broadcast is not "shutting it down".
It might be true if you also believe nationalizing a privately owned media outlet and putting it under government control is not "closing it down".
It might also be true if you believe that taking away a radio stations long time owners license to broadcast was not "shutting it down".
It might also be true if you believe that using the threat of taking away ownership of a private media company from it's current owners ( like you had already gotten away with doing ) to gain full censorship rights for the government of the media outlet not "closing it down".
Again this has been widely covered by the main stream US media and "nativetongue.miami" insults the intelligence of the readers of this blog by suggesting you are too stupid or too ignorant to know the truth.
First, it should be noted that Chvez is not a dictator but was elected democratically. Second, in terms of the claim that he controls the media in Venezuela, the following from Wikipedia, it ending in a what seems to be a fair comment by FAIR:
In 2006, President Chávez announced that the terrestrial broadcast license for RCTV—Venezuela's second largest TV channel—would not be renewed.[50] The channel's terrestrial broadcasts ended on May 28, 2007 and were replaced with a state network.[51] RCTV is accused of supporting the coup against Chávez in April 2002, and the oil strike in 2002-2003. Also, it has been accused by the government of violating the Law on the Social Responsibility of Radio and Television.[52] The director of the station, Marcel Granier, denies taking part in the coup.[53] According to journalist Eva Golinger, "In the days before the April 11, 2000 coup, Venevisión, RCTV, Globovisión and Televen replaced regular programming with anti-Chávez speeches and propaganda calling for viewers to take to the streets."[54] One of the main justifications for the coup was news footage aires by the private stations on April 11 showing Chávez supporters on the Puente Llaguno bridge shooting at an unseen target earlier that day, with a voiceover saying that they were shooting at a peaceful opposition march. It was later proved that the Chávez supporters on the bridge had not been shooting at a march, they were exchanging fire with Metropolitan Police positioned behind cars and buildings; the opposition march had not passed near the bridge and was not fired at from it. The airing of this report was followed, later on the 11th, by an interview with a group of dissident generals who said that because of the deaths caused by the government, they would no longer recognise Chávez as president. CNN news correspondent Otto Neustadl said that he was told on the 10th, before the events took place, that "tomorrow, on the 11th there will be a video of Chávez, there will be deaths and then 20 military officials of high rank will appear and pronounce themselves against the government of Chávez and will request his resignation." Eva Golinger concludes from this and other evidence that "The media involvement in the coup had clearly been premeditated."[55]
RCTV is still broadcasting via cable and satellite and is widely viewable in Venezuela.[56] The failure to renew its terrestrial broadcast license has been condemned by a multitude of international organizations.[53][57][58][59] However, Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR) questioned whether, in the event a television station openly supported and collaborated with coup leaders, the station in question would not be subject to even more serious consequences in the United States or any other Western nation.[60] In a poll conducted by Datanalisis, almost 70 percent of Venezuelans polled opposed the shut-down, but most cited the loss of their favorite soap operas rather than concerns about limits on freedom of expression.[51]
Well, let me insult your miniscule intelligence yet another time, pal.
Chavez has shut down no media in Venezuela.
I was in Venezuela reporting for a month in 2007--starting from the day RCTV made its last open air broadcast after not having its license renewed due to criminal acts of sedition and to having violated the media laws of Venezuela.
I also posted daily under another screen name to this site during the time I was there so that folks who CHOSE to know what was really going on in Venezuela could do so.
You, clearly, were not among those who CHOSE to hear the truth from on the ground.
The back of my hand to you and your rabid insults.
nativetongue.miami stated:
"I was in Venezuela reporting for a month in 2007--starting from the day RCTV made its last open air broadcast after not having its license renewed due to criminal acts of sedition and to having violated the media laws of Venezuela."
"nativetongue.miami" just gave us an example of a media outlet shutdown in Venezuela.
The reason they were shutdown according to "nativetongue.miami": "criminal acts of sedition and to having violated the media laws of Venezuela"
Translation:
1. Criminal acts of sedition: they criticized government policy and/or the dictator.
2. Violated the media laws of Venezuela: they did not submit to prior censorship before reporting the news.
Pretty standard stuff from the days of the Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany.
Dictators write laws too - the difference is the biggest crimes are criticizing the dictator or supporting a domestic political rival of the dictator.
The individual using the screen name:
"nativetongue.miami" on July 20th, 2009 4:06 pm
Claims:
"The hemisphere's passe bully warning democratically elected presidents against "rash moves" is soooooooo ludicrous."
Obama needs to either get out the "man-up" pills or the Vaseline, because he is about to be "tested".
The dictator of Venezuela is about to start a proxy war between democracy and the rule of law on one side and left wing dictatorships on the other.
Obama will have two decisions to make:
1. Which side does he want to be on, and,
2. If he does not want to join the dictatorship side, is he man enough to back them down.
RC, you should read and reply to progressive 101's post, as she/he seems to have hit it on the head. This is also one of the posts you chose not to challenge.
Good idea. I will read it and reply as time permits.
Frankly I am amazed any of my posts remain on this blog.
At first glance it appears to be an echo chamber with out much diversity.
rc_phoenix:
You seem to be a fan of freedom of the press. I'm confused, therefore, by your championing of the "main stream US media" (which i suppose explains your corporate driven perspective on this issue), or perhaps you were not aware that only 5 huge corporations -- Time Warner, Disney, Murdoch's News Corporation, Bertelsmann of Germany, and Viacom (formerly CBS) -- now control most of the media industry in the U.S. (General Electric's NBC is a close sixth). If this is the case, I recommend you educate yourself on the right-wing foundations and institutes that influence much of what ends up in the mass media.
" Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the [U.S.] media."
-Noam Chomsky, American linguist and US media and foreign policy critic
nativetongue.miami stated:
"I was in Venezuela reporting for a month in 2007--starting from the day RCTV made its last open air broadcast after not having its license renewed due to criminal acts of sedition and to having violated the media laws of Venezuela."
"nativetongue.miami" just gave us an example of a media outlet shutdown in Venezuela.
The reason they were shutdown according to "nativetongue.miami": "criminal acts of sedition and to having violated the media laws of Venezuela"
Translation:
1. Criminal acts of sedition: they criticized government policy and/or the dictator.
2. Violated the media laws of Venezuela: they did not submit to prior censorship before reporting the news.
Pretty standard stuff from the days of the Soviet Union and Hitler's Germany.
Dictators write laws too - the difference is the biggest crimes are criticizing the dictator or supporting a domestic political rival of the dictator.
nativetongue.miami opined:
"If anyone deserves to be censored on this site, it is precisely YOU."
Thank-you for the compliment.
People are not censored because they tell lies.
People are censored BECAUSE THEY TELL THE TRUTH.
Liars are very easy to expose if there is a level playing field of ideas.
Censor ship is used to make the playing field uneven and thereby allow lies told by the folks doing the censorship to go unchallenged.
beautiful-light July 21st, 2009 4:40 pm
"RC, you should read and reply to progressive 101's post, as she/he seems to have hit it on the head. This is also one of the posts you chose not to challenge."
I did re-read his/her ( the writing style strikes me as that of a Lady but that is just an impression ) two lengthy posts.
I agree with some of her statements of fact. Disagree with a few and just am not sure about others.
On the subject of Haiti, I am just not sure how one could be a great leader in that country. The country is an environmental disaster and outside help will be needed for decades to come.
There is not much left to exploit in Haiti so most actions of outside countries are motivated by charitable intentions.
I believe Chavez is an old style dictator and he probably deserves the bad reputation he has internationally.
I believe the Honduran people should be able to pick a new President at the polls in November, or earlier, in peace and the current two competing Presidents should just fade away.
I believe Chavez in Venezuela and Ortega in Nicaragua want neither peace nor democracy in Honduras and intend to start a war to prevent an election campaign in Honduras over the next four months.
I have no clue what Obama's goals are in Honduras or even whose side Obama is on.
Time to go to bed, Good Night.