Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Honduras: Solution or Stall?
Hardliners in the coup government, however, see a loophole in the accords, which gives the Honduran National Congress the power to approve or reject Zelaya's return. And no sooner was the ink dry on the accord when a top Micheletti advisor, Marcia Facusse de Villeda, told Bloomberg News that "Zelaya won't be restored." In a barefaced admission that the coup government was trying to buy time, Facusse said that "just by signing this agreement we already have the recognition of the international community for the elections." Another Micheletti aide, Arturo Corrales, said that since the congress is not in session, no vote on the agreement could be scheduled until "after the elections."
But such a calculated reading of the agreement will not play well with most countries, including the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union, which have repeatedly called for restoration of Zelaya. Brazil--whose Tegucigalpa embassy has given Zelaya shelter since his dramatic surprise return to Honduras over a month ago--applauded Shannon's deal, yet made it clear Zelaya had to be reinstated. And in Honduras, the National Party, whose candidate is expected to win next month's vote, wants this crisis to be over. Its members in Congress may join with Liberal Party deputies loyal to Zelaya to approve the deal.
The accord leaves unresolved the issue of whether the widespread human rights violations that have taken place since the coup will be investigated and prosecuted, only vaguely rejecting an amnesty for "political crimes" and calling for the establishment of a truth commission. More than a dozen Zelaya supporters have been executed over the last four months. Security forces have illegally detained nearly 10,000 people; police and soldiers have beaten protesters and gang-raped women. And the very idea of a negotiated solution to the crisis grants legitimacy to those provoked it.
Still, if Zelaya were to be restored to the presidency, even just symbolically, to preside over the November elections and supervise a transfer of power to its winner, it would represent a significant victory for progressive forces in the hemisphere. Here's why:
1. The attempt by Micheletti and his backers--both in and out of Honduras--to justify the overthrow of Zelaya by claiming it was a constitutional transfer of power will have definitively failed. If this justification was allowed to go unchallenged, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the rest of Latin America.
2. Efforts to rally support for the coup under the banner of anti-leftism, or anti-Chavismo--much the way anti-communism served to unite conservatives during the Cold War--will likewise have failed.
3. It will confirm the political influence--and unity--of Latin America's progressive governments, particularly Brazil and Venezuela, which have taken the lead in demanding that the coup not stand--a position that aligned them with much of the rest of the world.
4. It will be an important push back for Republicans like South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint and Otto Reich, who tried to use the crisis to push for a more hardline US policy against the left in Latin America. It is DeMint who has put the hold on Shannon's confirmation, as well as on the confirmation of Arturo Valenzuela, Obama's pick for Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs.
5. It will hopefully help the Obama administration realize that in many Latin American countries, there is no alternative to working with the left. In Honduras, the violence of the coup government, as well as the fact that the extended crisis smoked out its less than savory supporters, like Reich, awoke not too pleasant memories of the Cold War. Reich recently penned an essay urging Obama to replicate Ronald Reagan's successful Latin American policy, which the Iran-Contra alum believed paved the way for the fall of the Berlin Wall. Many, however, remember too well Reagan's patronage of death squads and torturers. And reports that Honduran planters were importing Colombian paramilitaries to protect their interests were not helping defenders of the coup make their case. As protests continued, it became clear to all who paid attention that it was the good guys - trade unionists, peasants, Native Americans, environmentalists, feminists, gay and lesbian activists, and progressive priests - who were demanding the return of Zelaya.
6. Zelaya's return would be a huge boost for those good guys, who are largely responsible for the inability of the coup government to consolidate its rule. Against all expectations, they have defied tear gas, batons, bullets, and curfews, and engaged in creative and heroic acts of resistance, growing stronger and more unified than they were before the coup four months ago. They will engage with the new government from a position of strength, while the elites who have long ruled Honduras will be fractured and chastised.
The accords brokered by Shannon force Zelaya to renounce any attempt to convene a constitutional convention, yet the National Front against the Coup - the umbrella group that has coordinated opposition to Micheletti - has made it clear that that demand is "non-negotiable" and that it would continue to push for it, no matter who is president.
It was of course fear of a constituent assembly that provoked the coup in the first place, and it is an irony probably not lost on those who executed it that a large majority of Hondurans, according to a recent poll, now think that such an assembly would be the best way to solve the country's political crisis.
The last thing Micheletti and his supporters want to see is Mel Zelaya, with his white cowboy hat and wide smile, addressing a large crowd filling the streets of Tegucigalpa celebrating his reinstallation, building momentum for fights to come. And this is why Shannon's deal is anything but done.



13 Comments so far
Show AllAh the sweet taste of the 'success of failure'.
The Tao te Ching speaks very succinctly about paradigm that rationalizes in the manner of the de facto 'coupsters' (what a term).
They illustrate Tao by virtue of their distance from it. To paraphrase - if they were not far from it, it would not be Tao.
aaaoohhhmmm....
Thank you, Professor Grandin, for this perceptive analysis. I would, however, like to hear more about why the US administration has been so lukewarm in their opposition to the coup regime. Are there economic factors or geo-political strategic factors that are in play here?
Also, could the Organization of American States have done more to help restore Zelaya to power? If so, why didn't they do this?
While Grandin is absolutely correct that the jury is still out on any number of issues, it seems that he is overly optimistic about even best-case outcomes and US progressives are missing a very important central point:
Even if Zelaya were returned today, and even if the Congress did not block his return, there are only 29 days left until the Nov 29 presidential election.
Apparently the right-wing National Party is going to win that election and the so-called Liberal Party (Zelaya's own party) has made him a pariah.
Where's the win for the people here who have put their lives, careers, jobs, survival on the line in rallying around Zelaya to stand up to the Liberal Party's coup against its own president?
Somebody please explain what I am missing here.
Based on subsequent revelations, it seems likely this agreement is more a stall than a solution. It looks like Professor Grandin's article includes too much wishful thinking and not enough careful analysis.
If the agreement were meaningful, Zelaya would emerge from the Brazilian Embassy. Case closed.
This is a lousy deal for democracy to let those who pulled off this coup and systematically violated the rights of their people by brutally raping, beating, contriving in the disappearance of and killing these people seeking to get their country back from these military thugs no doubt in service to corrupt, super wealthy US power elites on the far right.
AD
This is a lousy deal for democracy to let those who pulled off this coup and systematically violate the right of their people by brutally raping, beating, contriving in the disappearance of and killing these people seeking to get their country back from these military thugs no doubt in service to corrupt, super wealthy US power elites on the far right.
AD
Did the self-respecting, hard-working people of the world have a right to expect better? I say: NO! Why? Because, at the dawn of the third millenium, unfortunately, it is not enough to be hard-working, self-respecting, impeccably honest and well-informed to have the right to expect fair treatment. Barbarity is rampant at the dawn of the Third Millenium. So, besides having all the qualities mentioned, one has to have cultivated an appreciable degree of skepticism that one always applies to conflict situations to know what to expect and adopt strategies that take the possible deceptive moves of one's vis-a-vis into account.
Unfortunately Zelaya is too honest, too trusting a person. The same may be said of the Costa Rican President. Only Chavez and Morales must have foreseen the possibilty that Micheletti and his crooks will have calculated that those who mediated the deal were crooks like them while Zalaya is too trusting, and therefore guile or outright treachery will pay off, and the intermediaries would wave the move of as 'smart'.
It is the long record of such treachery that makes Ahmadi-Nejad so careful in signing agreements that prove his country's peaceful nuclear energy ambitions.
The Brazilin ambassador
What is it with the community not having any comments on this situation? American hegemony always has been at its worst in Latin America. This is not a small story.
I agree completely! It is a major story, with important implications not only for Central and South America, but also for the US public.
And, why are Latino organizations and civil rights organizations so silent about this?
agreed! this is not a small story! however, if you try to follow the "blow by blow" details from any of our major broadcasters....well....very sketchy. ALBA, the U.N. europe...all have decried this militant takeover. Obama originally referred to Michelliti's actions as a coup, but then redacted. why?
BIG MONEY INTERESTS!
to officially join the rest of the world, admitting that a government takeover at gunpoint fits the def. of coup, would have legally forced us to pull out our military base and impose trade sanctions, interrupting business as usual. Micheletti's golpistas, have a lobbyist, Lanny Davis, flirting with congre$$. check the money trail here:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23119.htm