Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiUS Drops Call to Restore Ousted Honduran Leader
TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras - The Obama administration has backed away from its call to restore ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to power and instead put the onus on him for taking "provocative actions" that polarized his country and led to his overthrow on June 28.
![[US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton listens to a question at a press conference in Phuket, Thailand on July 23, 2009. Clinton said last month that Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was "reckless" to try to return home to his country a month after being ousted. The Obama administration has backed away from its call to restore ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to power and instead put the onus on him for taking "provocative actions" that polarized his country and led to his overthrow on June 28.
(AFP/File/Romeo Gacad)]](http://www.commondreams.org/files/article_images/honduras_clinton_0.jpg "honduras_clinton.jpg")
The new position was contained in a letter this week to Sen. Richard
Lugar, R-Ind., that also rejected calls by some of Zelaya's backers to
impose harsh economic sanctions against Honduras.
While condemning the coup, the letter pointedly failed to call for Zelaya's return. "Our policy and strategy for engagement is not based on supporting any particular politician or individual," said the letter to Lugar, the ranking Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The new U.S. position is likely to undercut diplomatic efforts to bring about Zelaya's return, analysts said.
It may in time help the administration win confirmation for three top State Department officials President Barack Obama has appointed to deal with the region. Senate Republicans have put their nominations on hold to protest U.S. policy in Honduras.
Some 1,000 pro-Zelaya demonstrators protested outside the U.S. Embassy in the capital, Tegucigalpa, Thursday after the State Department letter was made public in the Honduran media.
While condemning the overthrow of Zelaya and his pre-dawn expulsion, the Aug. 4 letter said that Zelaya, who's allied with Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez, was largely to blame for his plight.
"We also recognize that President Zelaya's insistence on undertaking provocative actions contributed to the polarization of Honduran society and led to a confrontation that unleashed the events that led to his removal," said the letter, signed by Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Richard Verma.
"I think this could open the door for an alternative option as president," said Jorge Yllesca, a political consultant based in Honduras, meaning that interim President Roberto Micheletti might try to end the political crisis by stepping aside, not for Zelaya but for the president of the Congress or the chief justice of the Supreme Court.
The crisis began when Zelaya insisted on staging a June 28 referendum on a constitutional change to allow him to seek re-election. Zelaya had only six more months in office before a non-Chavez ally was likely to take over as Honduras' next president.
Chavez and two of his South American allies, Bolivian President Evo Morales and Ecuadorean President Rafael Correa, have won public approval for new constitutions that are allowing them to extend their terms in office.
The Honduran Congress, the attorney general's office and the state prosecutor all advised Zelaya that Honduras' constitution didn't permit the referendum.
He went ahead anyway and was ousted.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, a conservative Republican congresswoman from Miami, applauded the State Department letter.
"It seems that the U.S. is stepping a bit away from its unabashed support for Zelaya," Ros-Lehtinen said in a telephone interview.
She'd prefer that the Obama administration break ranks with the rest of Latin America and Europe and drop its support for Zelaya.
"To reinstate Zelaya to power would be the wrong message to send," Ros-Lehtinen said. "It would say you can violate the law, go against the Congress and get away with it, and the U.S. will stand with you."
Republican senators angered by the administration's Honduras policy put a hold on Obama's nomination of Arturo Valenzuela to be assistant secretary of State for Western Hemisphere affairs, along with two key ambassadorial nominees.
Lugar, in a July 30 letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said he hoped that her explanation could "improve the prospects" of confirming Valenzuela this week.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., said Wednesday that he was "glad to see the State Department is finally beginning to walk back its support for Manuel Zelaya," but an aide said that DeMint hadn't lifted his hold on Valenzuela's nomination because despite the policy shift, Obama still supports Zelaya's return to power.
The Obama administration has taken a series of low-level steps to show its dissatisfaction with the Micheletti government.
The U.S. has revoked diplomatic visas for five Hondurans associated with the Micheletti government. It's suspended anti-drug operations from the U.S. military base in Honduras, withheld $16 million in defense aid and warned that it might not disburse the final 10 percent of money for Honduras under a $250 million aid program.
The U.S. also has strongly supported the mediation efforts of Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, who's proposed a compromise plan to reinstate Zelaya with limited powers. Micheletti has rejected the plan, while Zelaya has accepted it.
The letter to Lugar said that U.S. officials wouldn't go much further.
"We have rejected calls for crippling economic sanctions," it said.
The letter comes at a time when Zelaya is expressing his unhappiness with the Obama administration.
"The United States only needs to tighten its fist, and the coup will last five seconds," Zelaya said Tuesday in Mexico, adding that 70 percent of Honduras' economy depends on trade and remittances from the United States.
Mark Weisbrot, the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, said the Obama administration could seize the U.S. bank accounts of Hondurans associated with the coup and withdraw their tourist and diplomatic visas to the U.S.
"These are steps that are very easy to take and would have an impact," Weisbrodt said.
Dennis Jett, a former U.S. ambassador who now teaches at Pennsylvania State University, said the Obama administration has followed a middle course because it has competing goals.
"On one hand, our interests are saved if this guy is not in power or allowed to violated the constitution and perpetuate himself in power," Jett said. "But we do have the obligation to be supportive of democracy."
(James Rosen in Washington contributed to this article.)
On the Web
Read the State Department letters
85 Comments so far
Show AllWe need 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
Ok. So they don't want to support an individual politician. That's not a bad overall plan.
But how about supporting principles of governance based on the rule of law? What a bunch of phonies we have in DC.
Too disgusting for comment.
Joe
TIA and Jerry D Rose have hit on a critical point, one that must be brought home to the millions who somehow still place their trust in Obama. Not only that our two-party system is a duopoly serving the interests and needs of the capitalists; but that Obama was probably their preferred choice to be President at this particular moment in history. A smart, articulate, bi-racial guy with celebrity star power who could mesmerize the masses with talk of hope and change (all in generalities), thereby diffusing the peace/anti-war movement, sewing confusion regarding what constitutes real health reform, and at the same time refurbishing our "tarnished image" around the globe! I try to remind people that first and foremost, the job of President is to be CEO of the Empire. And you have to know going in that you must do what needs to be done to keep the Empire running smoothly. Because it's not the peoples' mandate you answer to, it's the mandate of the capitalits.
louie: thanks for your acknowledgment and I'm happy to endorse your urging that the "message" of Obama duplicity with the duopoly get to those "millions" still suffering from the effects of Obama kool-aid. But of course, TIA and I are far from being the only ones who have "hit on" this idea. You'll see it reflected in one or more articles that appear every Wednesday in the Black Agenda Report, so please keep looking at that website for information and inspiration.
I have a different take on it from that represented in most of the comments here. The government of the empire is not a monolith and there are many competing factions. Obama, with his recent attempt at schmoozing with Latin American leaders, was hoping to regain trust in the hemisphere so that the empire's long-term interests could be furthered through some more pro-corporate trade deals in the Americas. The hardcore national security types, who believe more in the traditional short-term brass-knuckles approach in Latin America than in the velvet glove long-term approach Obama was trying, trumped him and supported the coup and made it difficult for him to maneuver into a position more sympathetic with that of Latin American leaders.
The mouth-breathing, bloodthirsty, knuckle-dragging thugs of the empire bested the empire's smooth sophisticated operators which is a loss for human rights and democracy in the short term but may end up being a bit of a win in the long term.
It could be a "bit of a win in the long term" in that the national security brass knuckle types made it obvious that Obama cannot offer a new way forward, a more conciliatory approach, even if he wants to. So it is clear to everyone that it will be the same old knee-capping, ruthless USA imperialism, regardless of Obama's rhetoric. That gives a boost to the arguments of the left in the region and undermines those on the right who want to fool the people into believing the US has changed and will now be their friend.
Patience. President Obama has yet to get approval by the Senate for all his nominations. Also, don't forget the Israel Lobby and the Military Industrial Complex own the media, and they drive public opinion. So of course he has to walk a fine line. He's getting attacked by the right wing hunting pack and the ultra left wing types, so he has to be pretty sure-footed.
You know what i think? People like Zelaya and Chavez are so rash and volatile, they don't have what it takes to make lasting change. They're like comets, the show's pretty, but there's no lasting legacy.
Native, in the great scheme of things, Chavez is a flash in the pan. He is relying almost exclusively on oil exports to sustain his "revolution", and it's evident oil exports can't sustain his current spending rate.
My analysis shows he's underinvesting seriously in the oil infrastructure, and this means oil production is dropping. Coupled to the drop in oil prices from 2008 to 2009, this is putting a serious squeeze on his finances.
To counter the squeeze, he has resorted to currency exchange controls AND is also selling the dollars obtained by selling oil into the black market. This in turn is leading to very high inflation, and some scarcity.
The end point will be a drop in the standard of living, and this of course will lower his popularity, which will move him towards press controls and similar measures. Given his personality (he seems to be very impulsive and there's no evidence of a significant dialogue within the government before they take decisions), many of the moves he makes will be counterproductive.
Sometimes I wonder, is it possible he's being advised or has people within PDVSA who are actually CIA agents, trying to sabotage things? I've seen them do things which look so ill-considered, it smacks me of something recommended by somebody who wants Chavez to lose power.
Metrically, this sequence is projected by the Economist magazine in a very stark fashion: they are now projecting Venezuela will have the WORST economic performance of all nations except for Zimbabwe, during the 2009-10 bi-yearly period, with a drop in GDP of about 10.7 %. They are also projecting Venezuela to have the highest inflation rate in the world, also after Zimbabwe.
"The hardcore national security types, who believe more in the traditional short-term brass-knuckles approach in Latin America than in the velvet glove long-term approach Obama was trying, trumped him and supported the coup and made it difficult for him to maneuver into a position more sympathetic with that of Latin American leaders."
I agree with your assessment, but I would add that the main problem lies in the fact that his own Secretary of State has been bought by the big business interests that support the Honduran junta.
Hillary Clinton is a disgrace to its own party. Obama made a huge mistake to appoint this woman as Secretary of State. She is unqualified and has no principles.
His main problem is that Republican Senators are putting holds on his nominations for key State Department appointees. Support for Zelaya is being exchanged for Republican acquiescence to the nominations. President Obama has much bigger fish to fry than securing another 5 months in office for a poor performing banana republic president who happens to be in bed with Chavez.
fdoleza,
This poor performing banana republic could be the beginning of a reverse domino theory, insomuch that undemocratic forces across latin america will be galvanized by the successful precedent of Honduras.
The potential destabilization of two continents, and a return of the to the practices of the seventies and eighties seems like a pretty big fish to me.
It's hard to see why you think this way. It's not like we're about to see a bunch of coups all over the place, is it?
I believe the radical left may be about to see its peak because Venezuela has been dealt a hard blow by the drop in oil prices, and Venezuelan cash has been propping up leftist regimes and financing the left in elections. On the other hand, moderate leftists like Lula seem to be doing quite well, Brazil has a strong economy, already produces more liquid fuels than Venezuela, and is on its way to lift its production even more. Lula's brand of socialism is probably the best outcome for Latin America, and I don't think President Obama or anybody in the USA would mind seeing more presidents like Lula.
I get it, you have no respect for the people's right to self determination. It's all about machiavellian political interest and calculation for you. Interesting, I had never met a right wing Obama supporter before.
what a piece of crap article, except for the title, that is.
read this one from yesteday instead:
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/08/06-9
GottaGetOfftheGrid: And I might add, see this piece from the World Socialist Web that totally "deconstructs" all the fabrications about the coup contained the letter to Senator Lugar. http://www.wsws.org/articles/2009/aug2009/hond-a07.shtml
I volunteered for Obama in the general election and I have to say that this recent posture regarding Honduras and health care reform are making me lose my patience.
If he thinks that progressives will simply vote for him again because they have no alternative, he is highly mistaken.
People will stay home or vote for a third party.
I, for one, have supported Nader both in 2000 and 2004, and for this reason, I won't have any qualms about supporting a third party candidate in 2008 if Obama fails to deliver on his promises.
matthew loughran
the green parties across the USA would appreciate the support. everyone needs to support real third party alternative. Reading this and seeing our damn country's behavior in iraq and afganistan shows how corrupt and unrepresentative the two asshole corporate parties are.
the dems should be pround they are back supporting a fascistic government that is using death squads. the asshole lanny davis is supporting these winners and of course so does alot of the dims.
i realy love all of this change.
"I, for one, have supported Nader both in 2000 and 2004, and for this reason, I won't have any qualms about supporting a third party candidate in 2008 if Obama fails to deliver on his promises."
rip van politicjock, I think you may have already missed the 2008 election. There may be another one in 2012, however, if our country lasts that long.
It was obviously a typo, but thank you for you comment.
I kind of figured that, but it was too good to pass up...
Thank you for taking it good humor.
Go ahead, and make the GOP's day. I think President Obama is doing a pretty decent job - my main objection thus far is his inability to deal with the military industrial complex and lack of a viable strategy for Iraq and Afghanistan.
fdoleza,
While Honduras may a small fish to fry, it seems that health care reform has been transformed into a boon for insurance companies thanks to the blue dogs and Obama, who is now talking about "health insurance reform".
The Health Insurers Have Already Won
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/09_33/b4143034820260.htm
"provocative actions contributed to the polarization of Honduran society and led to a confrontation that unleashed the events that led to his removal"
There ya go Obama, now ya know what you should expect if you rock the status quo. Keep that cash a'comin to big banks and the corporate amerikan Mafia and their subsidiaries in China, and screw the sheeple.
Who is in charge of the Obama administration? Has there been a coup here or has Obama been a fascist from the start?
Goldman-Sachs is in charge. It's Obama's No. 1 campaign funder and it got a chunk of our $800 billion in taxpayer dollars after perpetuating massive fraud with the housing bubble. G-S raked in the Obama influence for chump change. Some people call it "change you can believe in."
Coups are for other places. They just rule here. Mussolini's definition of fascism is corporatism plus nationalism, and I'd say that's real close to describing where we are in the United States right now, minus the goose-stepping.
-TIA
"The crisis began when Zelaya insisted on staging a June 28 referendum on a constitutional change to allow him to seek re-election."
The question is, why does Tyler Bridges feel he has to misrepresent the situation and tout the State Department line?
1. Zelaya was seeking a constitutional convention, not a constitutional change.
2. The referendum was non binding and would not have changed anything.
3. If approved by the non binding referendum, the binding question of a constitutional convention would have been put on the ballot on election day in November; for this simple reason, Zelaya (who is not on the ballot) could not have extended his term because the constitutional convention, if approved by Hondurans on election day, could not have taken place until well into the term of the newly elected president.
http://prickly-pears.blogspot.com/
1. A constitutional convention is usually created to write a new Constitution. It's an anything goes setting with no clear rules regarding how to proceed. Given Zelaya's roughshod attitude towards those who disagree with him, such a situation would have been highly conflictive and may have torn the country apart.
2. The referendum may have been non binding, but clearly the intent was to create the conditions to take the country towards a constitutional convention - by placing a ballot in the election in November.
3. Given that a new Constitution was to be written, it would have been fairly easy to include in its text a clause eliminating term limits, allowing Zelaya to run again if and when the new Constitution was approved. Or, the radical left led by Patricia Rodas would have been able to try again to put one of their people in power.
Those who support Zelaya seem to be white washing the whole intent behind the "new Constitution" movement. I don't support the coup, it was illegal, murky, and it stinks. But let's face it, Zelaya stinks too.
"Those who support Zelaya seem to be white washing the whole intent behind the "new Constitution" movement."
No whitewashing here. The constitutional convention was supposed to replace the current reactionary constitution written by the Honduran oligarchy.
Wrong. See: "Honduran Coup: The US Connection," by Conn Hallinan, which explains,
"The story most U.S. readers are getting about the coup is that Zelaya -- an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez -- was deposed because he tried to change the constitution to keep himself in power."
"That story is a massive distortion of the facts. All Zelaya was trying to do is to put a non-binding referendum on the ballot calling for a constitutional convention, a move that trade unions, indigenous groups, and social activist organizations had long been lobbying for. The current constitution was written by the Honduran military in 1982, and the one-term limit allows the brass-hats to dominate the politics of the country. Since the convention would have been held in November, the same month as the upcoming presidential elections, there was no way Zelaya could have remained in office in any case. The most he could have done was to run four years from now."
I don't agree with your interpretation of the statements and actions by Zelaya prior to the coup. My interpretation is that indeed he was, in a muddled and half baked way, trying to force the issue to push for a Constitutional Convention to be created. In this he was being advised by Patricia Rodas and evidently pushed and financed by the Venezuelans - who aren't exactly known as political sophisticates.
"evidently pushed and financed by the Venezuelans"
Prove it.
I would only add to your comment, Naturally, that there is nothing wrong with a Constitutional Convention. We could well use one here in the United States.
-TIA
Re Thoughts_Into_Action August 7th, 2009 2:38 pm
A constitutional convention might well be our only hope for a non-violent people's revolution.
It might also be co-opted by the very forces we hope to dethrone (for example, see how health CARE reform has morphed into health INSURANCE reform in corporate media-speak).
It's certainly an idea worth exploring, but fraught with danger if we are not clear and united in our purpose and resolute in our actions.
As to "why does Tyler Bridges feel he has to misrepresent the situation and tout the State Department line?" because it's not Iran.
Why should Honduras have a free and democratic government unencumbered by over-bearing corporate interests? We don't.
Corporatocracy uber alles!
The Obama administration has backed away from its call to restore ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to power and instead put the onus on him for taking "provocative actions" that polarized his country and led to his overthrow on June 28.
This tells us everything, which we already really knew about the Obama administration. That is it will do what is necessary to stay in power, not do anything that might fall under the category of leadership that points the way to a better way of life. Ophuls from "Ecology and the Politics of Scarcity" says that politics is the art of creating new possibilities for human progress.
It could be that it is our CIA that is responsible for the current situation. Maybe Obama and the state department are really in charge and are just playing catch up.
The CIA is reponsible for the current situation in Honduras? Interesting hypothesis. What do you have to back such a claim?
They don't cover their tracks so well. I ran into one of them in Congo a long time ago, he got drunk and confessed he had been asked to become my friend to see what i was up to, but he realized his career had to be in trouble when all he had to do was sit around the pool and have drinks with me.
What I don't get is, why would the CIA want to have the Honduras military kick Zelaya out? Or do you think Zelaya himself is a CIA agent?
Obama's Honduras policy, Hillary's picture (in Thailand, no less).
Again, CD spins that Hillary is to blame for Obama's bad policies. Heaven forbid that progressives should ever know that she is further left than militarist, "centrist" Obama.
That said, a far better report was published here yesterday: "Honduran Coup: The US Connection," by Conn Hallinan, which explains,
"The story most U.S. readers are getting about the coup is that Zelaya -- an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez -- was deposed because he tried to change the constitution to keep himself in power."
"That story is a massive distortion of the facts. All Zelaya was trying to do is to put a non-binding referendum on the ballot calling for a constitutional convention, a move that trade unions, indigenous groups, and social activist organizations had long been lobbying for. The current constitution was written by the Honduran military in 1982, and the one-term limit allows the brass-hats to dominate the politics of the country. Since the convention would have been held in November, the same month as the upcoming presidential elections, there was no way Zelaya could have remained in office in any case. The most he could have done was to run four years from now."
I agree that this article is not the best. Obama himself has claimed that he's responsible for the polices undertaken by his minions.
However, there is a good editorial reason for running the photo of Hillary Clinton, even if it was taken in Thailand. She's the one who articulated the Zelaya is "reckless" claim. She also pretended that negotiations were still ongoing when they had been rejected by the coup regime (but not Zelaya). The "provocative actions" wording is straight from Clinton. Other commenters on Common Dreams have pointed to some of Clinton's aides having close ties with the coup regime.
I've heard people claim that Hillary Clinton was more left than Obama, but it's like splitting hairs. Neither is close.
This is the Clinton that was on the board of union-busting Walmart. This is the Clinton that gave us a health insurance plan that wasn't single-payer the first time around. It was a sop to the insurance companies, but they rejected it anyway. Her weak proposal set back reform efforts, and now we've got something not very good being pushed by Obama, who has rejected "socialized medicine."
I don't know where anyone gets the idea that Clinton is on the left. Did she vote against the war funding as senator? Does she really oppose this coup as secretary of state?
-TIA
"To reinstate Zelaya to power would be the wrong message to send," Ros-Lehtinen said. "It would say you can violate the law, go against the Congress and get away with it, and the U.S. will stand with you."
------------------
What f*kng planet has this lady been living on the last 10 years???
Just called Congresswoman Iliana Ros-Lehtinen's office to ask specifically which law she believes Zelaya has violated. Got transferred 3 times only to get a recording asking me to leave a message. Don't let this slandering excuse for a Congressperson get away with these lies. Please contact her with the same question.
Washington, DC Office
2470 Rayburn H.O.B.
Washington, DC 20515-0918
Telephone: 202-225-3931
Fax: 202-225-5620
Miami, FL Office
4960 SW 72 Avenue
Suite 208
Miami, Florida 33155
Telephone: 305-668-2285
Fax: 305-668-5970
Miami Beach Office
Lourdes Ruiz
Telephone: 305-934-9441
Monroe County Office
Kim Sovia-Crandon
Telephone: 305-304-7789
I haven't much to add to the comments already posted. It is sad when the realization sets in that our country has nothing to do with democracy and everything to do with global corporate colonialism. We treat the countries of Latin America as lego blocks, and when we don't like what we see we smash them apart and start again. We no longer import slaves to our shores. We go where the slaves are, build factories and put armed guards outside the doors.
Protests of the coup are still going on in Honduras, and news is emerging that the new regime is reacting as any military dictatorship would, detaining protestors, beating them, torturing them, executing them, and and tossing their bodies in public places to be found, horribly mutilated.
We continue to supply aid money to the new regime, while lobbied corporatocrats in public office here are wetting their pants over the possibility that our department of state might do or say anything to defeat or even compromise the brutal coup government.
Meanwhile the agricultural field workers and the factory workers of Honduras continue as always, with communities sharing one central outdoor tap to supply their drinking, bathing and washing needs, living on nothing, without electricity or any of the conveniences we take for granted, all so that you can see almost a whole aisle of bananas in every grocery store for 39 cents a pound. Now even the fast food places are offering a banana for a dollar on their menus.
When I visited Costa Rica a couple of years ago, I was told that the beggars there were Hondurans, who also came to work in the fields. The Hondurans are the "illegal aliens" all over Latin America, willing to go anywhere to escape the brutality of deep poverty.
Hillary and the rest of the whores for big money in Washington do thier scum bag act once again. Where's my waitress?
Exactly as I predicted the day the story broke: after much handwringing, military and other forms of aid continue to flow, and the putschists are still in power.
Gotta love that hope 'n' change.
To BETRAY all sense of decency in accusing Zelaya of being "reckless" or "provocative" for not succumbing quietly to the cowardly and ILLEGAL COUP that kidnapped the man is just beyond disgusting. WHAT are these people THINKING!!!???? (oh, yeah. "OUR INTERESTS".)... Can it be that "our" interests include, for example, AT&T's profitable growth, but exclude actual RESPECT FOR ANOTHER SOVEREIGN NATION'S RIGHT TO USE ELECTIONS AND NOT MILITARY COUPS FOR 'REGIME CHANGE' AT THE WHIM OF THE RIGHTWING CORPORATOCRACY!!!!?????????? Is there no backbone in these people when they mouth the word, "Democracy"? Do they just accept the growing fascism as inevitable? God save us~~
UGH. I've eaten only one banana in many months and it's coming up on me..... gotta run.
I believe the reckless and provocative designation was given to Zelaya by the US State Dpt letter due to his actions BEFORE the coup. Zelaya chose to ignore the Supreme Court and Congress when he took the ballots away from the location where the SUpreme Court had ordered they be stashed away, a few days before the coup.
Zelaya seems to be a very hot headed individual with very little respect for the other two branches of government in Honduras. Whether people like it or not, the government there was set up with a three-power structure. Zelaya's advisors, probably influenced by the rise of autocracy in Venezuela, pushed him to ignore the other two branches of government. This is what triggered the crisis.
The designation "reckless and provocative" was no doubt bestowed on Zelaya by Chiquita and Dole, who wanted him out of office.
You might have a case with what you say if it weren't known that the coup leaders trained at the School of the Americas, and that Chiquita and Dole had been protesting loudly about Zelaya's plan to raise the minimum wage in this poverty stricken country.
You say "Zelaya seems to be a very hot headed individual with very little respect for the other two branches of government in Honduras. Whether people like it or not, the government there was set up with a three-power structure. Zelaya's advisors, probably influenced by the rise of autocracy in Venezuela, pushed him to ignore the other two branches of government. This is what triggered the crisis."
Well it didn't trigger a coup here when Bush continuously showed his contempt for our three branch government system of checks and balances, when he waged war without congressional approval and wrote one after another of his "executive signing statements" claiming no need for legislative or judicial oversight.
I just stopped buying Dole's bananas even though they were organic and switched to fair trade conventional bananas.
That's right, it didn't trigger a coup here, but we have a much better constitution and tradition. The key is to remember the system was designed to have three co-equal branches, the president isn't emperor. Acting like an emperor doesn't seem to bother our presidents, who have been undermining constitutional order for many years, nor does congress seem willing to stand up to the president (if I were the congressional leaders I would simply cut off the president's budget and tell him to ride a bike for a while if he starts acting uppity).
Unfortunately for Honduras, their Constitution isn't a work of art (Latin American constitutions are long, wordy, and illogical). And evidently they lack a democratic tradition. This doesn't mean Zelaya was right - he was reckless, stupid, and created the crisis with his behavior. A wise individual would have known not to act hysterical the way he did when he ignored the Supreme Court and stole the ballots. And this is true whether the Supreme Court is packed by his oposition or not.
You are a mole. Don't insult Latin America. Our difference was that we did not have thousands and thousands of slaves, who through their suffering and free work gave your country enough capital to use it against other nations. That is the reason for the situation right now. It has nothing to do with your constitution being a work of art (it might be but as it is, was totally disregarded by Bush, so what is the point?)
The point is that when you have decent people who wants to govern for the majority in Latin America, we don't only need to contend with the powerful inside the country as you do (just witness the struggle to bring a decent health care plan to your country) but also with the influence of corporate interests from the developed countries, particularly the USA and Canada.
When Leaders like Castro, Arbenz, Allende, Chavez, Morales, Correa, Ortega or Zelaya appear in LA to try to change some of the gross injustices within our countries which follow the economic model of yours (which by the way is ruining all of you as well), the forces from within the USA launch a frontal assault including using psy-ops, which you must be part of, to confuse those who don't know our reality.
Venezuela, being an oil rich country, had presidents enriching themselves and their cronies with the majority of the people living in poverty. Of course benefitting grossly from this state of affairs were the big international oil companies: Exxon, Chevron, etc. Rings a bell? That is the reason for Chavez' popularity. He is changing the system to benefit the majority in Venezuela. Of course, the US government and corporations don't like this change.
In Honduras, something similar. Zelaya knew that the corrupt legislative and judicial branches would fall back on their claims of unconstitutionality and try to block his reforms. He wanted that "not so work of art" constitution changed so that it would help democratize the country. He raised the minimum wage by 60%. He cancelled new permits to polluting mining corporations. He was trying to involve the people in running their country. He is not reckless neither stupid. He just did not assess correctly the power of both, the sold-out oligarchy in Honduras and the leeches from the corporations.
The planet, right now, cannot stand any more of this plundering and all the accompanying crisis and wars for its continuation. The common people are not only struggling in Honduras, Venezuela or Bolovia. They are struggling in the USA as well. Is beyond me why do you malign someone trying to do the best for their country.
Native, you would have to show me where John Negroponte wrote the Honduran Constitution. Regarding what I know or not, I've told you in the past you should try to state what you know, rather than waste your time stating what others don't know, think, or propose.
For example, I do read Spanish, and I believe the Honduras Constitution ought to be changed (I said so before). So how's that for wasting your time and looking foolish?
The evidence for Zelaya's recklessness? He's sitting in Mexico whining, Micheletti is in charge, quite a few people have been killed and/or arrested, and I doubt he'll be back.
Finally, the US Constitution, as amended, isn't written to protect white privileged males. It's a pretty decent document, probably the best ever in its class. It does need slight changes, for example a strong term limits clause for all politicians.
Of course, we have to face the fact that most human beings speak with forked tongue, and this includes America's founding fathers. After all, it's a little odd to see people state all men are created equal and at the same time own slaves.
So Zelaya is whining in Managua. Zelaya's out because Zelaya started the mess by ignoring the Honduras Supreme Court.
Regarding the US Constitution, what's wrong with it? Why don't you like it?
"So Zelaya is whining in Managua. Zelaya's out because Zelaya started the mess by ignoring the Honduras Supreme Court."
fdoleza,
That's because calling for the referendum was not an abuse of power as the supreme court claimed. It was definitely an institutional crisis, but calling the military to solve it showed the true undemocratic intentions of Zelaya's critics.
Stealing ballots, I don't know where you got that. Zelaya's recklessness was in wanting to represent the people of Honduras, rather than the multinational corporations who pull the strings. One day our meddling with foreign countries will visit us. Every empire comes to an end, whether it falls apart and decays slowly, or whether it ends by the violence it provoked.
The Honduras Supreme Court ordered the ballots printed for Zelaya's survey impounded, and stored at a military base. They also declared the voting illegal. Zelaya organized a mob, entered the military base, and took the ballots. Stealing is short hand for violating the law (as he was violating a Supreme Court order).
The coup took place because sectors of Honduras society felt Zelaya had gone too far. This coup had nothing to do with the USA. The USA is an empire, but it is 95 % focused on the Middle East and Central Asia, because that's where the Israel lobby and the Weapons merchants feel they benefit. Latin America is a backwater, and Honduras is just a small banana republic. Literally.
Why not? Do you believe the people who read this site aren't interested in diversity of opinion?
Don't forget to focus on stating your opinions. I'm not a gringo, nor am I a troll. Which reminds me, when I visited Norway, I found prices to be so high, I could only afford to buy one souvenir, a small troll statue I bought at a shop near the port in Oslo. Greece is a lot better buy.
What in the world has the 'world' come to when the "Light of the World" (USA)----Democracy; Freedom Fighters (with Freedom Fries---remember them?) Liberty---(oh gosh I could go on forever and ever and-----) stand by and watch 'Democracy" trampled right here in their own 'back yard'-----and not say much about it---if anything at all.
Now,all of those 'Freedom Fighters" there in Honduras, you know the ones who went to the School of the Americas---in the USA (of course) then returned home to promote 'Democracy'----even if they have to force it on others----which is in reality the 'good ole fashioned way' 'Democracy' has always been applied in the USA--i.e. by 'force of arms'---------------have done exactly what they 'were trained to do'----trained 'talking Chimpanzees on long leashes' who do what big business America wants them to do.
Hey, America, do you really think that the world is not watching you? Do you really think that you will 'get away' with anything, much less all of the misery and pain and suffering you have promoted, financed, instigated and directly participated in for your entire history? Do you really think that you have that much time left to you?
History has a prediction that you will fail. The prediction is based entirely on the failures of other 'empires' that humanity has 'invented' over the thousands of years and not one of them has survived 'intact' for any length of time.
But American Empire is 'special'---?
Only in the small minds of those who participate.
Good Luck America, you really need it.
This just goes to show the difference between McCain and Obama.
McCain supported the military dictatorship from day one.
Obama first gave us HOPE that he would do the honorable thing and then supported the military dictatorship.
Obama's actions are actually worse than what the actions would have been if McCain had been elected. By pretending to support Democracy, Obama defused the protests here that would have happened at the time, and now weeks later he gets the same result that McCain wanted. Obama has successfully diluted the efforts of those bothersome fans of honesty and Democracy.
The only question is, was this his plan from the start, or have his actions been forced by the real US goverment in the CIA?
Yep, the duopoly works as a team to a common end.
If you recall John Kerry's Presidential campaign, he only talked about "managing the war," not ending it, even though war opposition among the public was at a fever pitch. It's kind of what Obama is doing today. The simple idea of the Dem Party is to better manage public opinion while carrying out agreed-upon policies. Republicans can just be their ugly selves. Frightened voters will get the same policies if they flock to the Dems.
So, Dem or Repug, both back the plutocrats that fund them. They represent the two sides of the business party. Both have supported and fostered coups throughout Latin America, often directly on behalf of U.S. corporations.
As for the plan in Honduras, it's not clear. It seems plutocrats in the U.S. and Honduras got spooked by Zelaya's harmless referendum proposal. Democracy has lately been flowering among our neighbors to the south, but it looks like the clamp-down from El Norte has begun.
-TIA
bystander: "Obama's actions are actually worse than what the actions would have been if McCain had been elected. By pretending to support Democracy..."
My friend, you have given the very nut in a shell (as another friend of mine used to say) of coup de grace to the "lesser evil" argument that frightened so many dubious Americans into voting for Obama lest "Mad Dog McCain" were to get into office. I'm not sure it was Obama's "plan from the start" to defuse all kinds of protest against existing domestic and foreign and domestic policies. But I'm pretty sure that it was the plan of the corporacratic forces that set up his presidency, maybe anticipating he would be the very compliant tool for advancing their "plans" as he has turned out to be. The "vetted" him well!
From the start, the looked like a US supported coup (for the innumerous reasons discussed on this site since it started). The letter to Lugar just adds more evidence. Since when is "provocative actions that polarize" the country justification for a coup. If Zelaya performed a crime, you start an impeachment process, not for the military to raid his house in the middle of the night, kidnap him at gunpoint, and fly him out of the country.
In addition, the letter states that the State Dept's policy is not to support any individual politician. In this case, the State Dept is putting a coup participant on the same playing field as an elected president.
From the Washington Post or Associated Press I would have expected this story---but McClatchy Newspapers, dedicated to speaking "truth to power"? The piece sugar-coats the latest and meanest hypocrisy in U.S. foreign policy by perpetuating the interpretation that Zelaya's effort at a constitutional reform that would liberate Honduras from foreign control was an effort to prolong his tenure on office. And to allow Dennis Jett, well known in my precincts as an operative out of the University of Florida, who has a shadowy connection with the School of the Americas and is a reliable mouthpiece for liberal-hawk policies of the Democratic Party, to give the milque-toast "on the other hand...on the other hand" benediction on this outrageous action? It's a hell of a thing to have to imbibe with your morning coffee.
Who would have thunk it? The US tacitly supports the military dictators and throws the Honduran Democracy under the bus.
United Fruit We Stand.