July, 09 2009, 03:19pm EDT
For Immediate Release
Contact:
Latin America Experts Call on Clinton to Oppose Early Elections Option in Honduras
Anything Less Than the Urgent Restoration of Zelaya to Office "Would be an usurpation of the will of the Honduran people" They State in Open Letter
WASHINGTON
Over 35 scholars and experts on
Latin America sent an open letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
today urging against the idea of early elections in Honduras as a
possible resolution of the current crisis resulting from the June 28
military coup d'etat. Stating that "Anything less than the urgent
restoration of President Manuel Zelaya to office would be an usurpation
of the will of the Honduran people," the signers urged Clinton to enact
forceful sanctions on the coup regime to ensure Zelaya's prompt
reinstatement. The signers include Harvard emeritus professor John
Womack; scholar, author, commentator, and filmmaker Saul Landau;
Central America expert Hector Perla, and authors and Central America
experts Greg Grandin and Dana Frank, among others.
"It's supremely important that we not make any concessions to those who
have perpetrated military coups. By doing so, we establish a dangerous
precedent," said Dana Frank, Honduras expert and professor of history
at U.C. Santa Cruz.
The letter also notes that the coup regime has suspended civil
liberties, thus eliminating conditions under which free and fair
elections could take place in the near future. The signers also debunk
the pretext for the coup - Zelaya's supposed plans for reelection - by
pointing out that it would be almost impossible for Zelaya to be
reelected before his successor assumes office next year, and that
Zelaya stated before June 28 that he did not seek reelection.
The full text of the letter follows:
________________________________
July 9, 2009
The Honorable Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520
Dear Secretary Clinton,
We, the undersigned, are concerned by proposals by some in Washington's
foreign policy circles to push for early elections as a solution to the
crisis instigated by the illegal and anti-democratic coup d'etat in
Honduras. Anything less than the urgent restoration of President Manuel
Zelaya to office would be an usurpation of the will of the Honduran
people. Following resolutions by the United Nations General Assembly
and the Organization of American States calling for Zelaya's immediate
and unconditional return to office, the U.S. must ensure his prompt
restoration by enacting forceful economic sanctions against the regime.
Each day that the illegal coup regime remains in office further
jeopardizes the capacity for Honduras to enjoy free and fair elections
in November, let alone in an earlier time frame. Elections currently
would take place under a coup regime that has suspended civil
liberties, and where the conditions for free elections do not exist.
Such an election would not have international legitimacy. Democracy has
to be restored before a legitimate election can take place. It is also
important to avoid making concessions of any kind to the coup
government, as it would create a terrible precedent, showing other
anti-democratically minded and power hungry individuals that it can be
worthwhile to carry out a military coup in order to advance their
political agendas.
Since illegally seizing office by abducting the president at gunpoint
and putting him on a plane to Costa Rica, the coup regime has suspended
civil liberties and treated the Honduran people as the enemy. They have
revoked freedom of the press by imposing a media blackout, assaulted
and detained journalists, clamped down on protests, detained hundreds
of supporters of President Zelaya, and killed at least two people by
firing on demonstrators.
The regime claims it acted in order to prevent an unconstitutional move
by President Zelaya to extend his term. Yet an examination of the facts
reveals this to be a dubious excuse for an assault on democratic
institutions and the rule of law. President Zelaya's proposed survey
would have been a non-binding poll of public support for an additional
ballot - on whether a constitutional assembly should be created- in the
November elections. The actual question read: "Do you agree that,
during the general elections of November 2009 there should be a fourth
ballot to decide whether to hold a Constituent National Assembly that
will approve a new political constitution?"
Zelaya was not running for reelection in November, nor would he have
been able to. Therefore, Zelaya's successor was always slated to be
elected in November, to be inaugurated in January. Zelaya
had also stated before June 28 that he did not desire reelection.
Possible reelection was not the reason the military carried out the
coup. They opposed Zelaya's policies, and they have at times been
honest about their true motives: "It would be difficult for us, with
our training, to have a relationship with a leftist government,"
Honduran army attorney Col. Herberth Bayardo Inestroza explained
following the coup. "That's impossible."
There is one legal, just, and democratic solution to Honduras' current
crisis: the swift restoration of President Zelaya and the imposition of
economic sanctions-trade as well as aid, on the illegal regime. We call
on the U.S. to take the lead in ensuring this outcome.
Sincerely,
Marc Becker
Associate Professor of Latin American History
Truman State University*
Blase Bonpane
Director
Office of the Americas
Michael Brun, PhD
Dept. Economics
Illinois State University
Ron Chilcote
Professor Economics
University of California Riverside
Aviva Chomsky
Professor of History and Coordinator, Latin American Studies
Salem State College
Noam Chomsky
Professor of Linguistics
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Jaime Concha
Professor of Latin American Literature
University of California, San Diego
Luis Duno Gottberg
Associate Professor, Hispanic Languages and Literature
Rice
University, Houston, TX
Steve Ellner
Professor Political Science
University of Oriente, Venezuela
Professor Raul Fernandez
Social Sciences
University of California, Irvine
Dana Frank
Professor of History
University of California, Santa Cruz
James Goldfarb Devine
Professor of Economics
Loyola Marymount University
Greg Grandin
Professor of History
Director of Graduate Studies
New York University
Mark Healey
Assistant Professor of History
University of California, Berkeley
Daniel Hellinger
Professor of Political Science
Webster University
Forrest Hylton
Assistant Professor of Political Science/Int'l. Relations
Universidad de los Andes (Colombia)
Misha Kokotovic
Associate Professor
Department of Literature
UC San Diego
Saul Landau
Professor Emeritus
California State University, Pomona
Jorge Mariscal
Director, Chicano/a-Latino/a Studies
University of California, San Diego
Luis Martin-Cabrera
Assistant Professor of Literature
University of California, San Diego
Gilda L. Ochoa
Associate Professor of Sociology and Chicana/o - Latina/o Studies
Pomona College
Tanalis Padilla
Associate Professor of History
Dartmouth College
Diana Paton
Reader in Caribbean History
Newcastle University, UK
Hector Perla
Assistant Professor, Latin American and Latino Studies
University of California, Santa Cruz
Deborah Poole
Professor, Anthropology
Johns Hopkins University
Suyapa G. Portillo Villeda
CFD Fellow, History Department
Pomona College
Gerardo Renique
Associate Professor, Department of History
City College of the City University of New York
William I. Robinson
Professor of Sociology and
Global and International Studies
University of California-Santa Barbara
Dr. Victor M. Rodriguez
Professor, Department of Chicano and Latino Studies
California State University, Long Beach
Dr. T.M. Scruggs
School of Music
University of Iowa
Victor Silverman
Department of History
Pomona College
Steve Striffler
Doris Zemurray Stone Chair in Latin American Studies
Professor of Anthropology
University of New Orleans
Christy Thornton
Director and Publisher
N
orth American Congress on Latin America
Miguel Tinker Salas
Professor of History
Pomona College
Mark Weisbrot
Co-Director
Center for Economic and Policy Research
John Womack, Jr.
Professor of History, Emeritus
Harvard University
Stephen Zunes
University of San Francisco
*Institutional affiliations are listed for identification purposes only.
LATEST NEWS
Sanders Pushes Amendment to 'Cut Billions in Offensive Military Funding to Israel'
"Enough is enough," said Sen. Bernie Sanders. "We cannot continue to fund this horrific war."
Apr 23, 2024
U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders said Monday that he would put forth an amendment to remove offensive military funding for Israel from a House-passed aid package that the Senate is set to consider this week.
The amendment would "cut billions in offensive military funding to Israel from the proposed national security supplemental package," Sanders (I-Vt.) said in a statement. The package, approved by the Republican-controlled House over the weekend, includes $17 billion in unconditional military assistance to the Israeli government, which stands accused on the world stage of perpetrating genocide in Gaza.
The senator said he would also offer an amendment to "protect essential humanitarian operations" in the Gaza Strip, where millions of people are facing the possibility of starvation due to Israel's suffocating and illegal blockade. At least 28 children under the age of 12 have starved to death in Gaza in recent weeks.
Sanders' amendment would restore U.S. funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), the most important aid agency working in Gaza.
An independent report released Monday found that Israel has not provided any evidence to support its claim that a significant number of UNRWA employees are members of terrorist organizations. The U.S. suspended its UNRWA aid in late January in response to Israel's unsubstantiated allegations against the agency's workers, and the House-passed Israel legislation would prohibit funding for the organization.
Sanders said Monday that the Senate "should have a chance to debate and vote on the key components of such a massive package."
"In poll after poll, Americans have showed their increasing disgust for [Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin] Netanyahu's war machine and the humanitarian disaster it has caused in Gaza," the senator added. "Enough is enough. We cannot continue to fund this horrific war."
I look forward to offering amendments tomorrow to cut billions in offensive military funding to Israel from the proposed national security supplemental package and protect essential humanitarian operations. We cannot continue to fund this horrific war. pic.twitter.com/8JpxpT7IX2
— Bernie Sanders (@SenSanders) April 23, 2024
A Senate vote on final passage of the White House-backed aid package—which also includes aid for Ukraine and Taiwan—is expected before Wednesday night. As Punchbowl reported, "each senator will be limited to just one hour of remarks" following procedural votes on Tuesday, so "it's likely that those who oppose the measure won't be able to drag this out much later than tonight."
The Senate vote on whether to hand Israel billions more in unconditional military aid will come as the country's military appears poised to escalate its devastating assault on the Gaza Strip, which has killed more than 34,000 people so far.
Satellite imagery obtained and analyzed by Al Jazeera shows that Israel has positioned "troops and vehicles at nearby army bases and outposts just outside the enclave."
"The analysis indicates that Israel has deployed more than 800 military vehicles to two bases," the outlet continued. "At least 120 vehicles are stationed at the northern border of the Gaza Strip and 700 are in the Negev desert, to the south. The satellite imagery also reveals that Israel has established nine military outposts just outside the enclave. Three were erected in November and December 2023 and six were set up between January and March of this year. The outposts house soldiers, operational command centers, and military vehicles."
A U.S. State Department report released Monday acknowledges that Israel has been credibly accused of grave human rights abuses in Gaza and the West Bank, including extrajudicial killings and torture. U.S. law prohibits American military assistance for governments violating human rights, but the Biden administration has resisted global calls to cut off arms sales to Israel.
"The widespread nature of the abuses described in the human rights report is overshadowed by the State Department's inaction on these same findings," Raed Jarrar, advocacy director of Democracy for the Arab World Now, said Monday. "The State Department needs to read its own report and take immediate action against all abusive Israeli units."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Columbia Faculty Walk Out Over Student Suspensions, Arrests for Gaza Protests
While expressing gratitude for solidarity actions, Congresswoman Ilhan Omar—whose daughter was suspended—said that "this about the genocide in Gaza and the attention has to remain on that."
Apr 22, 2024
Over 34,000 Palestinians in Gaza have been killed by U.S.-backed Israeli troops, and Columbia University students have been suspended and arrested by New York Police Department officers in recent days for protesting the slaughter—which led to a walkout by the Ivy League institution's faculty on Monday.
The Guardian reported that "hundreds of members of the teaching cohort at Columbia walked out in solidarity with the students who were arrested" while "students put protest tents back up in the middle of campus on Monday after they were torn down last week when more than 100 arrests were made."
Yonah Lieberman, co-founder of IfNotNow, a Jewish-led U.S. group that organizes against Israel's apartheid, declared: "Solidarity with these faculty members. Shame on establishment politicians and agitators who are smearing the anti-war protest at Columbia as anything other than what it is: a courageous stand for freedom and peace."
Naureen Akhter, a founding member of the New York-based group Muslims for Progress, said: "Thank you to the professors who stood in solidarity with student protestors, who didn't give into instigators who are fanning flames of hate and division. Remember the calls are for transparency, divestment, and amnesty for students!"
Congresswoman Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.)—a critic of Israel's war on Gaza whose own daughter, Isra Hirsi, was suspended from Columbia's Barnard College last week for "standing in solidarity with Palestinians facing a genocide," as the 21-year-old junior put it—also noted the faculty walkout and "nationwide Gaza solidarity movement."
"This is more than the students hoped for and I am glad to see this type of solidarity," said Omar. "But to be clear, this about the genocide in Gaza and the attention has to remain on that."
Summary of events from the last day not related to Columbia:\n\n- Israel has not provided evidence that UNRWA staff are part of Hamas\n- A mass grave, including women/children was discovered\n- Doctors did an emergency c-section, saving a baby after an airstrikes killed her mother— (@)
The walkout in New York City followed 54 Columbia Law School professors sending a letter to administrators that states, "While we as a faculty disagree about the relevant political issues and express no opinion on the merits of the protest, we are writing to urge respect for basic rule-of-law values that ought to govern our university."
"Procedural irregularity, a lack of transparency about the university's decision-making, and the extraordinary involvement of the NYPD all threaten the university's legitimacy within its own community and beyond its gates," they wrote. "We urge the university to conform student discipline to clear and well-established procedures that respect the rule of law."
In a statement early Monday, several hours before the walkout, Columbia University president Minouche Shafik—who last week enabled NYPD arrests of students at the encampment—announced in her first statement since the sweep that all classes would be virtual "to deescalate the rancor and give us all a chance to consider next steps."
"Faculty and staff who can work remotely should do so; essential personnel should report to work according to university policy. Our preference is that students who do not live on campus will not come to campus," Shafik said. "During the coming days, a working group of deans, university administrators, and faculty members will try to bring this crisis to a resolution."
The national group Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) on Monday accused Columbia of creating "a climate of repression and harm for students peacefully protesting for an end to the Israeli genocide against Palestinians in Gaza" over the past six months.
"Columbia University has actively created a hostile environment for students who are Palestinian or who support Palestinian freedom. Additionally, the administration's actions have made the campus much less safe for Jewish students," JVP said.
According to JVP:
Instead of listening to the calls of Columbia and Barnard students to divest from the genocide perpetrated by the Israeli government, the university has called in the NYPD to arrest students, suspended them, and even expelled them. At present 85 students, 15 of whom are Jewish, are suspended.
Yesterday's statement by the White House, like the administrators of Columbia University, dangerously and inaccurately presumes that all Jewish students support the Israeli government's genocide of Palestinians. This assumption is actively harming Palestinian and Jewish students.
The administration has not only harassed Jewish students and failed to ensure their safety and well-being, it has also obstructed their religious observances during Shabbat and prevented them from accessing their Jewish community on the eve of Passover.
While President Joe Biden's Sunday statement was officially about Passover—a Jewish holiday that begins at sundown on Monday—and not the protests at Columbia and other campuses across the country, it was widely received as a response to the latter.
Biden said in part that "we must speak out against the alarming surge of antisemitism—in our schools, communities, and online. Silence is complicity. Even in recent days, we've seen harassment and calls for violence against Jews. This blatant antisemitism is reprehensible and dangerous—and it has absolutely no place on college campuses, or anywhere in our country."
Jonathan Ben-Menachem, a Ph.D. student at the university, toldCNN that "Columbia students organizing in solidarity with Palestine—including Jewish students—have faced harassment, doxxing, and now arrest by the NYPD. These are the main threats to the safety of Jewish Columbia students."
"On the other hand, student protesters have led interfaith joint prayers for several days now, and Passover Seder will be held at the Gaza solidarity encampment tomorrow," he added. "Saying that student protesters are a threat to Jewish students is a dangerous smear."
Columbia Students for Justice in Palestine said in a lengthy statement that "we are student activists at Columbia calling for divestment from genocide. We are frustrated by media distractions focusing on inflammatory individuals who do not represent us. At universities across the nation, our movement is united in valuing every human life."
"As a diverse group united by love and justice, we demand our voices be heard against the mass slaughter of Palestinians in Gaza," the statement continues. "We've been horrified each day, watching children crying over the bodies of their slain parents, families without food to eat, and doctors operating without anesthesia. Our university is complicit in this violence and this is why we protest."
The Columbia Spectator reported Monday that Columbia College passed a divestment referendum that "asked whether the university should divest financially from Israel, cancel the Tel Aviv Global Center, and end Columbia's dual degree program with Tel Aviv University," with respective votes of 76.55%, 68.36%, and 65.62%. However, a statement from a university spokesperson signaled the referendum would not lead to any shift in campus policies.
Beyond Columbia, there are ongoing demonstrations at institutions including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, New York University, the University of Michigan, and Yale University, another Ivy League school, where at least 47 peaceful student protesters were arrested on Monday.
Those arrested were "charged with class A misdemeanors, which is the highest class of misdemeanors in Connecticut—the same degree applies to third-degree assault," according to the Yale Daily News. Citing a university spokesperson, the student newspaper added that they "will be referred for Yale disciplinary action—which could include reprimand, probation, or suspension."
Pushing back against some administrators' statements, journalist Thomas Birmingham, who was with the Yale protesters overnight, said on social media: "Here's some things I saw... 1. Repeated and loud calls to remain peaceful. 2. Students locking arms, teaching Arabic and Hebrew, and passing around pizza and water. 3. Lots of singing."
Keep ReadingShow Less
​Modi Slammed for 'Direct Attack on Muslims of India' in Campaign 'Hate Speech'
"Modi's rhetoric against Muslims is extremely divisive and dangerous," warned one critic. "It would only fuel more hate and violence against the already battered community."
Apr 22, 2024
Critics on Monday condemned far-right Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi for what one group called a "hateful and dangerous" campaign speech in which he claimed that Muslim "infiltrators" would steal Indians' wealth if the opposition wins parliamentary elections that began last week.
Speaking to supporters at a rally in the western state of Rajasthan on Sunday, Modi said that the manifesto of the opposition Indian National Congress (INC) party details how to calculate "the amount of gold that mothers and sisters have" so that it can be redistributed to Muslims.
"When they were in power, they said Muslims have first right over resources," the prime minister claimed out of context. "They will gather all your wealth and redistribute among those who have more children. They will distribute it among infiltrators. Do you think your hard-earned money should be given to infiltrators? Would you accept this?"
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's rhetoric against Muslims is extremely divisive and dangerous. It would only fuel more hate and violence against the already battered community. pic.twitter.com/KT36FVpS6u
— Raqib Hameed Naik (@raqib_naik) April 21, 2024
Members of Modi's ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)—which does enjoy the support of a significant number of Indian Muslims—have often portrayed Muslims as outsiders. BJP officials have also pushed a baseless conspiracy narrative roughly analogous to U.S. white supremacists' "great replacement" theory, in this case positing that Muslim migrants and rapidly reproducing Indian Muslims will eventually outnumber Hindus—who make up around 80% of the country's 1.4 billion people.
Modi's remarks came a day after India's seven-step election of 543 members of the Lok Sabha, or lower legislative house, began. Modi is running for a third consecutive term. He's being challenged by INC President Mallikarjun Kharge, leader of the opposition in the Rajya Sabha, the upper legislative house. Results will be announced on June 4.
Kharge responded to Modi's remarks by blasting the "panic-filled" address as "not only a hate speech but also a well-thought-out ploy to divert attention" by the prime minister, the BJP, and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS)—a fascist-inspired political and paramilitary movement whose brand of Hindu supremacy heavily influenced the rise of the BJP.
"Lying for power, making baseless references to things, and making false accusations on opponents is the specialty of the training of RSS and BJP," Kharge said, adding that Indians "are no longer going to fall prey to this lie."
Indian journalist and
Washington Post opinion columnist Rana Ayyub said on social media that "this is not a dogwhistle, this is a targeted, direct, brazen hate speech against a community."
Thousands of Indians petitioned the country's Election Commission seeking punitive action against Modi.
"The prime minister, while campaigning... made a speech on April 21 in Rajasthan that has disturbed the sentiments of millions of Constitution-respecting citizens of India," one petition states. "The speech is dangerous and a direct attack on the Muslims of India."
Muslim groups around the world also slammed Modi's speech, which the U.S.-based Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) called "hateful and dangerous."
"It is unconscionable, but not surprising, that far-right Hindutva leader Narendra Modi would target Indian Muslims with a hateful and dangerous diatribe despite his role as the leader of a nation with such a diverse religious heritage," said CAIR national executive director Nihad Awad.
"We again call on the Biden administration to declare India a 'country of particular croncern' over its discriminatory and violent policies targeting Muslims and other religious minorities," Awad added. "Global Islamophobia is alive and well in India and must be confronted before it escalates to something even worse."
South Asia historian Audrey Truschke, a professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey, accused Modi of "straight-up fascism."
"Modi had a history of encouraging mass violence against Muslims," Truschke added. "So we should all take his words seriously."
Modi was chief minister of the western state of Gujarat in February 2002 when a train full of Hindu pilgrims was set ablaze, killing 58 people. The cause of the disaster remains disputed, but Modi was quick to blame Muslims for the fire. In a three-day paroxysm of intercommunal bloodletting, Hindu mobs murdered at least hundreds—and perhaps thousands—of Muslim men, women, and children. Many women and girls were raped. More than 250 Hindus were also killed during what came to be called the Gujarat riots, during which an estimated 150,000 people were also forcibly displaced.
A team sent by the British government concluded that Modi was "directly responsible for a climate of impunity" that enabled the pogrom. However, a special investigation commissioned by the Indian Supreme Court cleared him of complicity in 2012. Modi's alleged role in the massacre led to a U.S. visa ban during the George W. Bush administration that was lifted during the tenure of former President Barack Obama after Modi became prime minister.
Deadly violence against religious minorities and others has increased during BJP rule. And while the U.S. State Department has perennially criticized the Indian government's human rights record, Modi was courted by both the Trump and Biden administrations. Last year, the White House literally rolled out the red carpet for Modi, who was lavishly feted by President Joe Biden and invited to speak before a rare joint session of Congress. Several progressive lawmakers boycotted the address.
Earlier this year, Progressive International's (PI) executive body used Modi's consecration of a highly controversial Hindu temple on the former site of a 16th-century Muslim mosque destroyed by a Hindu nationalist mob as an opportunity to issue a warning about the accelerating erosion of democracy in India.
"The Modi government has made a decisive move to overthrow India's secular constitution in the name of a new Hindu supremacist nation," PI's statement asserted. "As prime minister, Modi has pushed this Hindu nationalism as India's dominant political force: banning the hijab in schools, introducing 'anti-conversion' laws, abusing municipal forces to demolish Muslim households and shops in cities, and pushing for a 'uniform civil code' in law."
Anti-Muslim speech has also increased dramatically in India, according to a report published earlier this year by the U.S.-based India Hate Lab. The publication detailed 668 incidents in 2023—75% of which occurred in BJP-ruled states.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular