EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Showdown in 'Tegucigolpe'
One of the hemisphere's most critical struggles for democracy in 20 years is now unfolding in the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa (nicknamed "Tegucigolpe" for its long history of military coup d'états, which are called golpes de estado, in Spanish). Despite censorship and repression, popular anger over the June 28 military overthrow of democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya is growing. International condemnation has been near-unanimous, and the Organization of American States has suspended Honduras, the first time the hemisphere-wide body has taken so drastic an action since 1962.
In a reversal of many decades of U.S. support for right-wing golpistas in Latin America, the Obama administration has denounced the coup. However, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, rather than backing the largely nonviolent popular uprising for Zelaya's unconditional return to power, has instead been pushing for the country's legitimate ruler to compromise with the very forces which illegally exiled him from the country and have been violently suppressing his supporters.
The United States is now offering support for mediation efforts to be led by Costa Rican president Oscar Arias. The Obama administration tried to discourage the exiled Honduran president from his attempt this past Sunday to return to his country and has apparently succeeded, for the time being, in preventing him from trying again. Clinton pressed this point on Tuesday in pushing for mediation, arguing that it would be a "better route for him to follow than attempt to return in the fact of the intractable opposition of the de facto government."
Clinton also said, "Instead of another confrontation…let's try the dialogue process." What this ignores is that while the coup plotters have no legitimate standing, the Honduran people have a constitutionally guaranteed right to rebel under such circumstances. According to Article 3 of the Honduran constitution:
No one owes obedience to a government that has usurped power or to those who assume functions or public posts by the force of arms or using means or procedures that rupture or deny what the Constitution and the laws establish. The verified acts by such authorities are null. The people have the right to recur to insurrection in defense of the constitutional order.
What the Obama administration apparently fears is that if it allows the burgeoning pro-democracy movement to take its course, it may end up with a similar outcome to what transpired in Venezuela in 2002 — following a similar coup against that country's left-leaning president, Hugo Chávez. Within days, a popular movement had forced right-wing elements of the military and their wealthy civilian allies to step down. Chávez returned to govern and emboldened by such a popular outpouring of support, he moved the country further to the left.
The United States could help such a movement succeed if it wanted to. If the Obama administration chose, the United States could impose strict economic sanctions on Honduras that would, combined with ongoing strikes and other disruptions, grind the economy to a halt and force the illegitimate junta in Tegucigalpa to step down.
Unfortunately, while there's no evidence suggesting that the United States was responsible for the coup, there appear to be reasons the Obama administration may not want the coup plotters to suffer a total defeat.
Zelaya's Significance
Despite being a wealthy logger and rancher from the centrist Liberal Party, Zelaya has moved his government well to the left since taking office in 2005. During his tenure, he raised the minimum wage and provided free school lunches, milk for young children, pensions for the elderly, and additional scholarships for students. He built new schools, subsidized public transportation, and even distributed energy-saving light bulbs. He also had Honduras join with Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Cuba, and three small Caribbean island states in the Bolivarian Alternative for the Americas (ALBA), an economic alliance challenging the neoliberal orthodoxy that has dominated hemispheric trade in recent decades.
None of these are particularly radical moves, but it was nevertheless disturbing to the country's wealthy economic and military elites. More frightening was that Zelaya had sought to organize an assembly to replace the 1982 constitution written during the waning days of the U.S.-backed military dictator Policarpo Paz. A non-binding referendum on whether such a constitutional assembly should take place was scheduled the day of the coup, but was cancelled when the military seized power and named Congressional Speaker Roberto Micheletti as president.
Calling for such a referendum is perfectly legal under Article 5 of the 2006 Honduran Civil Participation Act, which allows public functionaries to perform such non-binding public consultations regarding policy measures.Despite claims by the rightist junta and its supporters, Zelaya was not trying to extend his term. That question wasn't even on the ballot. The Constitutional Assembly would not have likely completed its work before his term had expired anyway.
Yet the Obama administration is implying that the country's legitimate democratic president somehow shared responsibility for his illegal overthrow. The initial White House response was rather tepid, initially failing to denounce the coup, simply calling upon "all political and social actors in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the Inter-American Democratic Charter." Similarly, Clinton insisted the day after the coup that "all parties have a responsibility to address the underlying problems that led to yesterday's events." When asked if her call for "restoring the constitutional order" in Honduras meant returning Zelaya himself, she didn't say it necessarily would. Similarly, in a press conference on Tuesday, State Department spokesperson Ian Kelly evaded reporters' questions as to whether the United States supported Zelaya's return. This places the United States at odds with the Organization of American States, the Rio Group, and the UN General Assembly, all of which called for the "immediate and unconditional return" of Zelaya.
There are serious questions as to whether Clinton can be trusted to make a clear stance for democracy, given her traditionally pro-interventionist position on Latin America. As a senator, she argued that the Bush administration should have taken a more aggressive stance against the rise of left-leaning governments in the hemisphere, arguing that Bush has neglected such developments "at our peril." In response to recent efforts by democratically elected Latin American governments to challenge the structural obstacles that have left much of their populations in poverty, she expressed alarm, saying, "We have witnessed the rollback of democratic development and economic openness in parts of Latin America." Though no doubt aware that U.S. policy toward leftist regimes in Latin American in previous decades had included military interventions, CIA-sponsored coups, military and financial support for opposition groups, and rigged national elections, she argued that "We must return to a policy of vigorous engagement."
The United States and Honduras
The United States certainly has a history of "vigorous engagement" in Honduras, actively supporting a series of military dictatorships from 1963 through the early 1980s. Though military rule formally ended by the end of 1982, the weak civilian presidents who followed in the subsequent decade served only at the pleasure of Honduran generals and the U.S. embassy. John Negroponte, who later served as George W. Bush's ambassador to Iraq and the United Nations, as well as his Director of National Intelligence (DNI) was the U.S. ambassador to Honduras during this period.
During the 1980s, thousands of U.S. forces were sent to Honduras to train Honduran security forces as well as train and support the rightist Nicaraguan contras, which were engaged in a series of cross-border terrorist attacks. The CIA organized, trained, and equipped a special military unit known as backed Battalion 316, bringing in Argentine counterinsurgency experts as advisors on surveillance and interrogation. These advisors had been part of the "dirty war" in their country during the 1970s, in which more than 10,000 people were murdered. Honduran armed forces chief Gen. Gustavo Alvarez Martinez personally directed the unit with strong U.S. support, even after acknowledging to Negroponte that he intended "to use the Argentine method of eliminating subversives." Though Alvarez' personal involvement in large-scale human rights abuses were well-known to State Department and other U.S. officials, the Reagan administration awarded him the Legion of Merit for "encouraging the success of democratic processes in Honduras."
Former Honduran congressman Efraín Díaz told the Baltimore Sun, in reference to U.S. policy towards human rights abuses in his country, "Their attitude was one of tolerance and silence. They needed Honduras to loan its territory more than they were concerned about innocent people being killed." Under Negroponte, CIA officers based in the U.S. Embassy frequently visited a secret prison where captured dissidents were routinely tortured. It was one of a number of facilities to which U.S. officials had regular access that were off-limits to civilian Honduran officials, including judges looking for victims of kidnapping by right-wing paramilitary units.
Despite this history, including revelations of his role in covering up for such human rights abuses, Negroponte had little trouble on Capitol Hill during the Bush administration. Senator Jay Rockefeller (D-WV), then the ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, praised Negroponte for having "served bravely and with distinction," and for bringing "a record of proven leadership and strong management." Representative Jane Harman (D-CA), then the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, praised him as "a seasoned and skilled diplomat, who has served with distinction," saying he was a "smart choice" to become the first DNI. This enthusiastic support for Negroponte among leading congressional Democrats, despite his well-documented role in human rights abuses while U.S. ambassador to Honduras, is indicative of how little regard the majority party in Congress cares about democracy in Central America.
The Legacy Today
The legacy of U.S. support for repression in Honduras is very much part of recent events.
The leader of the June 28 coup, Honduran General Romeo Vásquez, is a graduate of the notorious School of the Americas, a U.S. Army training program nicknamed "School of Assassins" for the sizable number of graduates who have engaged in coups, as well as the torture and murder of political opponents. The training of coup plotters at the program, since renamed the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation," isn't a bygone feature of the Cold War: General Luis Javier Prince Suazo, who played an important role in the coup as head of the Honduran Air Force, graduated as recently as 1996.
Former members of Battalion 316 were involved in the coup as well.
Unfortunately, while far more knowledgeable of recent history than most recent presidents, Obama doesn't seem willing to apologize, much less make amends, for U.S. complicity in supporting repression in Latin America. I am writing this article en route to Chile, where the United States played a major role in the downfall of another democratically elected leftist leader, Salvador Allende, back in September of 1973. Just five days before the coup in Honduras, Chilean president Michelle Bachelet visited President Obama in Washington. When asked by Chilean reporters whether he was willing to apologize for the U.S. role in bloody 1973 coup and its aftermath, Obama brushed off the suggestion by saying, "I'm interested in going forward, not looking backward."
Meanwhile, U.S.-armed and trained security forces have violently dispersed largely nonviolent demonstrators protesting across the country, including shooting into a crowd of demonstrators near the airport on Sunday, killing two. Rather than acknowledge the widespread popular opposition to their illegitimate rule, the Honduran junta, like its authoritarian counterparts in Iran, have instead tried to blame outsiders for the unrest, in this case Cuba and Venezuela. Yet the Honduran people, like the Iranians, don't need outside agitators or foreign funding in order to resist. This isn't about geopolitics but about democracy. Unfortunately, backers of the rightist junta in Honduras, like backers of the rightist regime in Iran, are repeating fabricated stories of outside interference to discredit a genuine home-grown pro-democracy movement.
What may be at work in these U.S. and Costa Rican-led mediation efforts is some kind of deal where Zelaya can return, but under conditions that would preclude a constitutional assembly, any challenges to oligarchic interests, or any further efforts to promote economic justice. Similar kinds of pre-conditions were forced upon the deposed Haitian President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, prior to U.S. assistance in his initial return from exile in 1994.
How much the junta leaders are willing to compromise will depend on what is going on outside the meeting rooms.
One factor would be the ability of the pro-democracy movement to organize, think strategically, expand their ranks and maintain a nonviolent discipline. Fortunately, the rebellion thus far has been largely nonviolent, which would be far more effective in such circumstances.
For various historical reasons, Hondurans don't have the same kind of history of armed revolution as their neighbors. Even during the dictatorships of the 1970s and 1980s— while the country's immediate neighbors Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua experienced major armed insurrections — the armed Honduran revolutionary movement was quite small and never had much of an impact.
By contrast, civil society organizations engaged in strategic nonviolent conflict have grown dramatically in recent years, including peasant organizations, indigenous and Afro-Honduran movements, human rights monitoring groups, environmental groups, women's groups, an anti-militarization movement, and student groups, as well as three major labor federations. A series of strikes, blockages of major highways, and land seizures occurred over the past year as civil society became increasingly mobilized.
The second factor which could tip the balance is how firmly the United States comes down in support for democracy. Obama has at times been clear in his support for the legal process, declaring, "We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the democratically elected president there." Recognizing larger implications of this stance, he added, "It would be a terrible precedent if we start moving backward into the era in which we are seeing military coups as a means of political transition rather than democratic elections."
Still, it was a full week before the United States announced it would slash aid to Honduras, and there have been no imminent signs of tougher sanctions. Unlike most Latin American countries, the United States has not withdrawn its ambassador from Tegucigalpa.
The United States, which hosts a U.S. Southern Command task force at the Soto Cano Airbase, 50 miles northwest of Tegucigalpa, exerts enormous influence on Honduras. Therefore, the pressure pro-democracy forces in the United States can bring to bear upon our government may prove as crucial as the efforts of brave pro-democracy forces within Honduras.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
19 Comments so far
Show AllConsidering how dependent the Honduran military is upon the U.S., it's likely that U.S. military advisors &/or the CIA were involved in this coup d'etat, as per the '02 military coup in Venezuela, as per the '73 military coup in Chile, as per the '53 military coup in Guatamala. What this latest coup shows is that U.S. foreign policy vis a vis Latin America hasn't changed one bit, it's still stay a capitalist-roader or else & democracy be damned.
It is extremely easy to write about the situation, with no idea of what actually has happened in Honduras. But it is disturbing that a journalist can take the strong leaning on the leftist side and declare the Zelaya led movement as democratic leanings.
I am former military myself, having served in the US forces in Honduras, and having married a Honduran. I have seen the many abuses of this deposed president Zelaya.
Where in this article is it mentioned that there were almost a hundred laws passed to Zelaya for executive signature to be signed into law (since 2006) that sat on his desk and were never signed when the government kicked him out in June 2009.
Where is the reporting about the teachers organization that is obligating its members to vote for Zelaya's referendum to extend his claim in order to receive an "bonus"? Where are the mentions of the many arrests of Nicaraguan agitators that are in prison.
I know of people who were being paid to attend these protests in support of Zelaya. These aren't figments of my imagination, these are real Hondurans.
By the way, where are the mention of the Supreme Court didn't say that he couldn't go the legal route to get a referendum? What they said was that as president he could not call for a referendum, that power does not fall into the executive power. The legal way to get a referendum was to have an appointed assembly to submit a referedum. When he was told that then he changed the name of what he was trying to do from a referendum to a "Poll" which he was going to push out using the military corp to distribute the voting booths (urns) for the public to vote. However, for a poll, it does not fall under executive perview, it falls under the dept of census, which is not attached to the military. The establishment of the "poll" was illegally using the military resources. That is what the Supreme Court said. And since they said it, the military couldn't legally follow the presidential order to distribute the poll, which is why the military refused, which is why the Chief of Staff was fired.
Truth is that Zelaya had LEGAL means to get a referendum for an add'l term. He didn't want to go that non-binding "poll/census" route because it took too much time, and he probably wouldn't have been able to do it in his term. That's why he fired the military chief and appointed one that he thought he could control to force the distribution.
Another fact also failed to make your article, and that was the ballots were flown in from Venezuela, on Venezuelan aircraft. That was pretty convenient, too convenient.
By the way, where was the mention that the vote from congress to remove Zelaya from power was UNANIMOUS even though it was his own party who controlled the congress?
This is a sham of an article. You should do some basic research before spouting doctrine that this was a democratic movement. The ELECTED congress removed the elected president from office. That is the check and balances of democracy.
Your idea of democracy is just like chavez. One person - One vote, until that person is in power and then take away the power of the vote by paying people to vote for you (like Honduras was beginning to do through its labor unions and its Teacher's Unions by providing bonuses if they voted for the "elected" president's proposed reforms. That's Chavez style democracy. And the last step of the Chavez style democracy was taking away the power of the Supreme Court by increasing the seats of the Supreme Court and appointing pro-chavez judges, and then making letting Supreme Court judges fire-able when the president wasn't happy with their voting record.
Yeah, that's real democracy for you.
What would you do without Chavez as a scapegoat? If he didn't exist, you would have to invent him. But then again, I'm sure without Chavez, you would find some way to blame Castro or Daniel Ortega. BTW you boast about being stationed in the US military in Honduras as if the US had any business being there in the first place.
Shades of what the Argentinan top brass said - more or less it was us or them - when put on trial for having tossed leftists out of airplanes during that country's military junta days; also what the SS Stormtroopers say to this day about their barbaric actions in Eastern Europe during WW II. Come to think of it, your words are what one would expect from someone who was in any way connected to the murderous Honduran military during the heyday of Yankee counterrevolutionary activity in Central America, which means that your statement has to be taken with several grains of salt, being that you have a conflict of interest, not to mention the brain-washing that the military puts its recruits through. Time you learned that you didn't serve your country, you served the powers that be. As for your patriotism, consider the words of Mark Twain - "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, your government only when it deserves it."
Hi Yourstruly: good post. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm assuming you were responding to Jose if I'm not mistaken. Regards.
Correct, seems that between working the computer & thinking I'm mistake prone. It's akin to not being able to walk & chew gum at the same time.
Hopefully I'll get this one right.
Best wishes
Yeah a former member of the imperial occupation forces can give us an "objective" view. You might want to turn off the Fox and CNN news and crack open a history book: Howard Zinn is a good author to start with, your ignorance is showing through.
Chavez won the election with 62% with European election observers approving the vote. Maybe you need to stop watching Fox television.
Here is the first sentence from the European Union Report on the Venezuelan elections (from the European Union's election observation):
"1. Overall, the 2006 Presidential Elections were held in respect of national laws and international standards concerning electoral administration and the electronic
voting system."
Former military that married a Honduran.
How would you feel about the Honduran military having a base in your home town AND marrying into your poor American family?
Yeah, I know. It never occurred to you.
You don't want to hear it but if you are a man of truth and not some cardboard asshole, google Consortiumnews website. Perry has the whole agonizing story of the staging and drug running from HONDURAS (probably while you were there) for the Iran-contras. Are you a friend of Oliver North? He is a traitor, a liar and a scum that passes for a patriotic Christian these days. Are you?
Hey my friend, i think that this Jose is not even a Honduran. I think Jose is a Republican Party supporter, or an ultra-right wing, libertarian Tea Party terrorist. You know the Tea Baggers who are behind Ron Paul have a very weird libertarian, nazi, white-nationalist ideology. Their idea of "Democracy" is not even libertarianism. It is Oligarchic-Reaganism. They want a "Free market" system without taxes for the rich and with lots of taxes and scams for the poors. With no food stamps, no public schools, and all utility services privatized. This system is in fact a system which would benefit nazi-business owners really, which at the end of the day will not be a free market system but more or less the same system we have now. So a Ron Paul "free market" economy and system would be another copy-cat of the 8 infamous years of zionist Israelis Republican Neocons.
,
Indeed, what is the US military doing in Honduras? What is the US military doing in the 1000 other bases it has all over the world? It does just what it usually does--help the rich and afflict the poor.
We've seen a lot of activity from the right this past week with editorials, op-eds, and comments attached to web pages -like Jose above - presenting in fine detail the intricacies of the Honduran Constitution, the perfidy of Zelaya, and usually capped with that time-worn favorite: the spectre of foreign agitators. In these fevered accounts, the most commonplace of democratic practices - like,say, an executive attempting to out-manoeuver a recalcitrant legislature, or appoint sympathetic jurists to judicial positions, or labor unions making a recommendation to its membership ahead of a crucial vote - become fraught with the most sinister of motives. Add a dollop of wild fear-mongering (my favorite in this case is the "Venezualan ballots" which, I guess, may look like pieces of paper with a poll question printed in ink, but due to their origin must somehow be something really really awful because... because... because you're not supposed to think it out this far but be trembling at the mere mention of Venezuala).
I would argue that most of this blather is basically unprincipled, and the reason for that being most of the activities that in this case are being held up as grievous violations against democracy would be, if committed by ideological allies, either unmentioned or considered business as usual. That the full array of anti-democratic actions taken by the coup leaders can be spun as a defense of democracy, presented as such without a trace of irony, and in the most vociferous terms, is a bit of a joke. The punchline to that joke - and I'm waiting to see how the Rule Of Law advocates squirm around this one - came out of Honduras yesterday, as it was revealed that the "interim President" Roberto Micheletti himself had once advocated a presidential succession and constitutional change which he today claims to be treason so vile.
Check it out for yourself -
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/kristin-bricker/2009/07/micheletti-tried-change-honduran-constitution-1985
link won't copy, but story found at www.narconews.com
wow. would that some of obama's 'forward-looking' could actually include some consideration of HISTORICAL FACT around the (human rights and environmental ramifications of) u.s. support of coups against democratically elected latin american leaders. has he even cracked open that galeano book yet('open veins of latin america')? i get the feeling that missing from his education on latin america was reading kinzer & schlessinger's 'bitter fruit'. sadly, clinton has no excuse in my opinion, having been given the chance to truly grasp the dangers in entrusting the soa-trained deathsquad protectors of the neoliberal oligarchs, even given her meeting with sr. diana ortiz (clearly tortured by u.s.-backed operatives) back during bill's admin.... read ortiz' 'blindfold's eyes' or rigoberta menchu's 'i, rigoberta' for a reality check if you don't think our cia is capable of going to any length of atrocity for the sake of multinational corporate interests. too bad this story isn't getting anywhere near the airplay that michael jackson's death is. no offense to michael, but can we move 'forward' please? i feel sick. must be that banana.
Here we have two corrupt governments (US and Honduras) juxtaposed. A populist leader who had been part of the elite "betrayed" the oligarchy. In our case a brutal dictator "Bush" strips us of our rights and further enriches the wealthy. The outrage here was met with a clever PR campaign to stick us with a fake populist even though I'm sure Bush an Cheney fought like crazy to keep themselves in power. Here the oligarchy told those two to leave quietly in order to preserve the corrupt system. In Honduras, the same process is occurring but since a genuine populist was there, they hustled him out. They continue the same bullshit.
Today Obama is in Ghana, pontificating against Zimbabwe and other African government under the pretense of fostering democracy. Old News. Only a fool overlooks the recent discovery of vast amounts of oil and the US quest to find an African base to AFRICOM, the news predatory device.
Obama just left the G8 gang. He can facilitate so called democracy in Africa by allowing Africa control of its own natural resources and trade. Currently Africa is a bystander to G8 schemes, Africa does not control its export partners, it does not control its export priorities; It cannot chooses its trade partners without G8 country intervention, it is not allowed to process its own raw material. Great African leaders have continuously overthrown and replaced by members of the same G8 countries with liars, kleptomaniac and thieves. Honduras and Venezuela are but recent examples of the attempt to corrupt governments of the people.
In effect Africa has no presidents. What Africa has are supervisors of giant money generating plantations.
What is called corruption in African governments is a symptom of a bigger problem. The corrupt government are preferred by the GG countries since they enter into unilateral/secret agreement with foreign corporations and entities. Why should any foreign entity bother with the nuisance of parliament, public participation, accountability etc when a face to face arrangement with the dictator will suffice? Remember what happened in the Turkey parliament when George Bush wanted to be allowed military flyovers in turkey into Iraq. Their Parliament voted against it,. It is far easier to corrupt an individual that to do a congress
The claim of corruption in Africa will be solved if Africa is left alone by pretenders to undergoes the necessary evolution of its development and destiny.
Today Obama is in Ghana, pontificating against Zimbabwe and other African government under the pretense of fostering democracy. Old News. Only a fool overlooks the recent discovery of vast amounts of oil and the US quest to find an African base to AFRICOM, the news predatory device.
Obama just left the G8 gang. He can facilitate so called democracy in Africa by allowing Africa control of its own natural resources and trade. Currently Africa is a bystander to G8 schemes, Africa does not control its export partners, it does not control its export priorities; It cannot chooses its trade partners without G8 country intervention, it is not allowed to process its own raw material. Great African leaders have continuously overthrown and replaced by members of the same G8 countries with liars, kleptomaniac and thieves. Honduras and Venezuela are but recent examples of the attempt to corrupt governments of the people.
In effect Africa has no presidents. What Africa has are supervisors of giant money generating plantations.
What is called corruption in African governments is a symptom of a bigger problem. The corrupt government are preferred by the GG countries since they enter into unilateral/secret agreement with foreign corporations and entities. Why should any foreign entity bother with the nuisance of parliament, public participation, accountability etc when a face to face arrangement with the dictator will suffice? Remember what happened in the Turkey parliament when George Bush wanted to be allowed military flyovers in turkey into Iraq. Their Parliament voted against it,. It is far easier to corrupt an individual that to do a congress
The claim of corruption in Africa will be solved if Africa is left alone by pretenders to undergoes the necessary evolution of its development and destiny.
Omar Bongo of Gabon, arguably one of the richest men in the world and the longest serving African presidents(42 years) died several weeks ago. Few reading this know who this kleptomaniac and absolute dictator was. Why, he was a darling of the west, he was used to destabilize other African government, he was instrumental in the kidnapping of President Aristide to the Central Africa Republic. Not surprising, at his death the G8 countries especially France and US by way of Obama eulogized that thief in ways that reminded me of Mother Theresa, MLK and Jesus Christ all rolled into one
Only the vocabulary of psychiatry can explain why people still listen to these characters.
As the old saying goes, the devil always finds work
"the pressure pro-democracy forces in the United States can bring to bear upon our government may prove as crucial as the efforts of brave pro-democracy forces within Honduras."
Write to Clinton, Obama and your congressional representatives. Tell your friends to do the same. Go to lawg.org for a quick link to contact your government. Don't leave the Honduran protestors to do all of the work.
I generally like the work professor Zunes has done and I do not support the coup that brought Michelleti to power but you have to understand the background of Manuel or "Mel" Zelaya. He owns a cattle ranch in the state of Olancho which is a remote, rough and one of the most dangerous places to live in Honduras. I would not recommend a tourist to travel on its remote and lonely roads.
Manuel Zelaya is a late comer to the populism movement. When he was elected he supported a free trade agreement with the US. His reforms came very late in the day to curry favor the Chavez government in exchange for aid. He is a very unlikely champion of the working poor. His father was found to be culpable in the murder of Colombian Priest, Father Ivan Bettencourt and an American priest Father Michael "Casimir" Cypher as part of a massacre called the "Los Horcones Massacre." The name "Las Horcones" is the name of the hacienda owned by Manuel Zelaya's father Jose Manuel Zelaya. Manuel would have been 28 at the time of the massacre. These were Maryknoll priests who worked dedicated their lives in dedication to the poor much in the spirit of father Roy Bourgeois.
In July of 1975 in the state of Olancho, as written about in the book Murdered in Central America, Donna Whitson Brett & Edward T. Brett Orbis books publishers for the Maryknoll priests pgs 32-33 writes that Father Ivan and Father Michael had been arrested by the military along with 5 male and female campesinos for subversive activities (read communist). He and Father Michael and the five campesinos were brought to Los Horcones. The events are unclear. There were reports that father Ivan was tortured, had his tongue cut out, teeth pulled out and was castrated and murdered. The fate of Father Michael "Casimir" Cypher is unclear. The female campesinos were raped and all were then murdered. Their bodies were then thrown in a deep well at the end of the hacienda and then dynamited to hide the evidence.
The bodies were discovered days later. Public outrage over the massacres brought about a military commission to investigate the murders. The commission implicated elements of the military and Mel Zelaya in the massacre and the cover up. (Pgs 35-36)
What young Mel Zelaya knows of these events is unclear but he was a fully aware adult when these events occurred at the behest of his father "Mel" Zelaya. The events that occurred and the current portrayal of Manuel Zelaya as a poplulist are at odds with each other and don't square with the events of the past.
I guess I never realized there are so many supporters of the Socialist style of government. I've been to Cuba and it is astounding to see all the wonderful things that have transpired. A Doctor, for example gets his education and becomes a Lic. Doctor but is paid about $35.00 per month. Driving a taxi pays better so many moonlight driving one. If you have a room for rent you must have permission to rent it and then you must only charge what the gov. says to. The money then goes to the gov. and you get some back. A Restaurant has no control of its menu or prices. It is a beautiful a place but poverty is everywhere.
Without capital investment by investors (the Capitalist demons) there are no good paying jobs.
Yes, there is no doubt there are bad things in Capitalism but at least you can tell the boss to drop dead and get another job.
I guess the idea that the leftists like to spread around is that good is bad and up is down. Commerce is what makes the world go around and I'll take my chances with a society that creates jobs with rewards for excellence.