The coup in Honduras is a little off topic, except that Cuba has joined the rest of the hemisphere’s governments in condemning it. (See this guide to the events in Honduras from the Council of the Americas.)
Nonetheless, I understand that people don’t like Hugo Chavez and his style of governance, and that recent events in Honduras look like the first reel of the movie that has played in Venezuela.
I understand that Chavez and his allies in other countries have figured out that the way to advance an authoritarian agenda is not head-on, but rather to get elected legitimately and start eroding democratic institutions and violating democratic norms from the inside. I understand that using referenda to end constitutional limits on presidential re-election, or on term limits, is a big part of this agenda. (Although Colombia’s President Uribe, no leftie, has chafed against term limits too.) I understand that President Zelaya, nearing the end of his term, was pressing to change the constitution to allow his re-election, starting with a nonbinding referendum, and that his efforts were rejected in Honduran courts.
What I don’t understand is how the Honduran military’s resolution of this situation – putting troops in the streets, seizing broadcast media, grabbing the President in his pajamas and putting him on a plane to Costa Rica – has earned so much applause on the right in the United States. Is a B-movie military coup the only tool or a legitimate tool to counter the advance of Chavez-style leftist politics in this hemisphere?
40 comments:
try reading the history of Latin America for the past 200 years, particularly in the 1980s. the right and the military coup is like bread and butter. what i don't understand is why anyone would be surprised by the reaction of the american right.
term limits is yet another american arrogance -- if other countries don't play by our rules of democracy then we oppose and criticize.
let the Latin Americans figure out what they want, and put a sock in trying to structure democracy in other countries simply through the limited and chauvinistic lens of the two party dictatorship we have here in the USA
An interesting parallel between Honduras and Cuba is that both countries' constitutions prohibit amendments that change the constitution in some basic ways. In the case of Honduras is the one term limit for the President. In the case of Cuba is the irrevocable socialist character of the Cuban government.
It is a pity that Zelaya was not arrested, held in Honduras, and given a political trial. It is not clear if that was a legal and constitutional option. What is clear is that there was a political and constitutional crisis created by Zelaya's insistence on holding a public poll against the expressed and unanimous decisions of the Honduran National Parliament and Supreme Court. The military was a tool that followed the orders of both of these government branches.
For a US parallel imagine Richard Nixon ignoring the Supreme Court order to turn the White House tapes to the Congress defying both the Congress and the Supreme Court, and then using political groups to raid the Congress and the Supreme Court to take over records and archives. It didn't happen much to the credit of the US establishment in 1973. The Congress and the Supreme Court prevailed and endured.
Vecino de NF
Phil, although you tried to word your comments carefully, I urge you to investigate the claims made by the right in Honduras more skeptically. First off, there was never any attempt to end term limits. This is the boogyman created by the right to justify all this. In fact, Zelaya said over and over again that he was not interested in re-election. Second, the scheduled referendum on Sunday was not binding and therefore not subject to the provisions of the Constitution that delegates elections to the Congress and Electoral authorities. This was meant to be an informal polling of the people to guage interest in having a real referendum on creating a Constitutional Assembly. He wanted to get the process off the ground before he left - as he identified this Constitution written under the military Dictatorship to be a source of many problems. He wanted to show that the people support it. Holding an informal poll was never against the law but the powers that be made it a issue because they smelled blood. They are trying to tell us that excessively consulting with the people is evidence of authoritarianism or a dictatorship. This absurd argument needs to be fought on its face.
I am very conflicted about this Honduran golpe.
I regard myself as a European-style democrat.
But Zelaya's actions remind me so much of "Ego" Chavez...that I can sympathize with the Honduran army and even the oligarchy in opposing his unofficial referendum.
On the other hand, to be in bed with Chavez, the Castros and the ALBA lackey's...even if the OAS, the US and UN are also there... well, the whole thing gives me... a sour stomach.
Perhaps Zelaya's arrest and trial would have been a better... if slower solution...rather than an impulsive coup.
You guys are so obsessed with Chavez and Castro...we need to get away from this obsession and work to build a new "Our America"
I understand why Chavez gets under your skin, but don't let him turn you into a fool who thumps his chest and ends up supporting dictators.
listen to you freakin' clowns...if this had been Colombia, and Uribe had defied the legislature and the courts to push for a referendum for another term and the courts ordered the army to put him on a plane, you'd all be crying that "DEMOCRACY HAS BEEN SAVED IN COLOMBIA!!!!"
Except, anonomous, that is not at all what happened in Honduras. Zelaya did not push for a referendum for another term. The term limit issue is a red herring that Zelaya made clear he was not interested in. And the Supreme Court decision was only regarding a binding poll. Zelaya switched it to a non-binding poll, which was not ruled on and the Executive has every right to pursue.
ok leftside I guess you know Honduran law better than the country's Supreme Court.
and just how did Zelaya "make clear he was not interested" in another term?? Just because he SAID SO??? Maybe that was good enough for someone like you who doesn't live in Honduras but obviously it wasn't good enough for a lot of people who do and presumably know Zelaya a little bit better than you do...
Zelaya spent the last year needlessly antagonizing the United States (and the other democratic institutions in Honduras) and now we're supposed to drop everything to put him back in office? Let him stew in his own juices. He made this bed, let him lie in it.
Zelaya was not entitled to call for any sort of consultative or electoral process under the Honduran constitution. A similar situation emerged in the last two years in the Basque Autonomy in Spain where the nationalist party (PNV) wanted to hold a referendum on new autonomy rules for the Basque Autonomy. It was opposed by the Spanish government as something that no local government could call. Imagine the outrage in the US if a referendum was called by a governor in a State where there is no constitutional mandate for it. The governor would be impeached before he could say don't cry for me Argentina!
If changing the constitution was so important to Zelaya, he should have worked to gain control of the Honduran Parliament that is the one constitutionally able to amend the constitution. Of course that would not be a revolution just a constitutional democracy at work!
If Zelaya shows up in Honduras, he may be arrested. If he tries to show up protected by Cuban or Venezuelan Special Forces, there will likely be another Central American war that would result this time in the demise of both Ortega and Colom. Funes may survive because Salvador is showing a little more maturity this time. Once again back to the future!
Vecino de NF
and just how did Zelaya "make clear he was not interested" in another term?? Just because he SAID SO???
The burden of proof is on those charging that Zelaya had a devious plot to end term limits. That evidence simply does not exist. Zelaya said again today: "I will return as a farmer when my mandate is over. Never to be president ever again." Unfortuantely, nothing will ever be clear enough for folks with the case of Castro-Chavez paranoia.
Vecino, the Spanish local government example has no relevance. And yes, Zelaya realized that Congress would have to allow a Constitutional referendum. This non-binding poll was an effort to show Congress that the people wanted that opportunity. Unfortuantely Zelaya's political opponents dead against hearing what the people had to say. So much so that they had to kidnap the President on the polling day. It would be absurd if I wasn't watching it happen. But seeing all those on the right jump on board a military coup is always interesting.
leftcrank, pointing out that Zelaya was no angel in all this and "jumping on board a military coup" are two entirely separate things.
Leftside,
Could you please point out in the Honduran consitution, legislation, or jurisprudence what gives the President of Honduras the power to conduct a "non-binding poll" on any subject much less whether to call a constitutional assembly? He was told not to do so by both the Honduras Parliament , and the Honduran Supreme Court in unanimous decisions. If he was not able to call a non-binding poll by law, and was warned repeatedly that such action was illegal, Zelaya committed a crime. Where is this logic wrong?
Whether the Honduran institutions conducted themselves in the best way possible is debatable under Caesar's wife's rule (she not only has to be good but has to appear to be good) but that may be more an indicator of serious systemic governance problems rather than any malicious political motive.
Vecino de NF
this is all about cheap anti-American sentiment. if Zelaya had not become a born again ALBAista and started insulting the United States over the past year, no one would be making a big stink over this. In fact, if a pro-American president in the region had done what Zelaya has done over the past year, the world would have said his undemocratic actions provoked the crisis and would start preparing for the next election. if anyone can't see this you're smoking crack or else are cohabitating planet leftside.
Vecino, I advise you to read the Citizen Participation Law of Honduras. It gives Honduran citizens the right to influence the government through referendums, consultations, and polls.
He was told not to do so by both the Honduras Parliament , and the Honduran Supreme Court in unanimous decisions.
He was told that a legally binding referendum that would begin a process of Constitutional reform would be illegal. He switched the language to be non-binding. The court never ruled on this issue, as far as I can tell (the Honduran web sites appear to be blocked). But common sense dictates that you don't need a Court or a Congress to authorize a public opinion poll.
Leftside,
Could you please post a link or reference to The Citizen Participation Law of Honduras?
As far as "you don't need a Court or a Congress to authorize a public opinion poll", it would appear common sense that a government can not take an action outside the law as enacted by a legislative branch and determined by a judicial branch. Does Honduras law allows the President of Honduras to spend public monies on a poll without legislative sanction?
Vecino de NF
leftside, when you're in a hole, the best thing to do is stop digging
Who is in a hole? Only the Honduran military and right-wing who have made a historic blunder. They are totally 100% isolated.
Vecino, the Law of Citizen Participation allows people to sign petitions to address a grievance or concern. In this case, 500,000 Hondurans (almost 1/6 voters - or 35 million Americans) signed their names requesting Constitutional reform.
And again, there was a law against changing the Constitution with regards to term limits. There was a law that said you needed Congressional approval for a Constitutional referendum. Neither of those things were to take place on Sunday. Holding a non-binding poll is not illegal. Again, the court ruled on a a binding poll.
Vecino, are you really backing the coup?
the only blunder here was made by Zelaya trying to circumvent Honduras's system of checks and balances.
of course vecino backs the coup, he certainly hasn't condemned it, his right wing perspective has been consistent throughout this blog; his attempts to justify what has happened in honduras just solidifies that.
a referendum for the people to decide something (binding or not) opposed by the political elite. can't have that happen in the right wing world's perspective of democracy. that's what drives them crazy about chavez, castro and the move in Latin America.
a political crises, if there even was one, decided by a military coup. hmmm, that's good old style right wing politics. keep up the good work
Leftside,
Is the "Citizen Participation Law of Honduras" you cite the one that was signed by Zelaya on January 27 2006 and published in La Gaceta on February 1st, 2006 (Num 30,917)? Because if it is, I do not find the instrumentation for any kind of poll (binding or non-binding) in it. Plebiscite and referendum are mentioned in articles 3, and 4 but article 4 refers to the Constitution and other laws as far as the instrumentation of either one. So the previous question stands: what legal basis could Zelaya use to call a non-binding poll?
As far as 500,000 Hondurans signing a petition calling for constitutional reform, it sounds to me that's a call to the Honduran parliament to consider it (according to the Honduran constitution the Parliament is the legally constituted body that can start a constitutional reform or the process to amend the constitution). There were to be elections later this year and it would have been legitimate for different candidates to run on this very issue if it was so important to so many Hondurans. Having said that you can start to collect the 35,000,000 signatures to change the US Constitution to your liking, but unless you get 2/3 of each house of the US Congress to propose your amendment , and 3/4 of the states legislature to ratify it, good luck getting your change instituted in a constitutional manner!
As far as whether I personally support the coup or not, all I have to say is that is an internal Honduran matter to be resolved by Hondurans. Not being a Honduran I have no dog in that fight except a natural sympathy for democratic government implemented through the rule of law. On that basis I have very little sympathy for Zelaya's actions, and I feel sorry that Hondurans could not remove him from power through a less dramatic process.
I must also publish a legal disclaimer. I am not a lawyer in Honduras nor an expert in Honduran law. Any comments expressed in this blog are just observations based on my reading of Honduran laws and newspaper accounts. No one should rely on my comments on this subject as legal advise on Honduras law.
Vecino de NF
Anonymous 10:20 AM,
"of course vecino backs the coup..."
Suggest you read my extensive posting. I asked Leftside a question that you may be able to answer: "what legal basis could Zelaya use to call a non-binding poll?". Do you have the answer to this question?
As far as being right wing, do you have a final solution to the "right wing" problem? I just need to know what do you have in mind for people you consider right wing.
Vecino de NF
PS If you are interested in dialogue, please sign with a handle.
The Congress on June 24, 2009 established that there could be NO referendum - binding or NOT binding, within 180 days from an election date. The Congress passed that "law" in order to have the "legal" argument for the coup. That is WHY the military refused to administer the non-binding referendum.
I suggest that rather than discuss issues on the basis of philosophy, ideology and personal predilections and Phil P pay attention to the details in Honduras. As Cantinflas used to say "en el detalle esta la diferencia."
No one has really addressed yet WHY THE COUP TOOK PLACE. The reasons given are bogus, so why get rid of Zelaya just a few months before his term ended?
Project Director,
The Honduran Parliament passed the new law prohibiting referendums within 180 days of an election with a unanimous vote, right? Could you elaborate whether there were any Presidential veto options, and whether the transfer of power to Micheletti is the right order of succession in Honduras?
Vecino de NF
vecino, why this obsession with final solutions? on your other blog you suggested final solutions for the gusanos, now for the right wingers. what kind of nazi are You
so answer the question are you in favor of the coup or not. do you think regardless of your justifications or the questions, do you think the coup was justified. (10 bucks says he won't answer directly)
Anonymous 1:35PM,
Whenever there is dehumanization of the other through epithets or branding (gusanos, right wing, nazi, etc), one must wonder if there is a secret wish for eliminating the physical presence of the other. That's why I inquire whether there is a final solution in the works against gusanos, the right wing, and others the arguments break down into name calling.
By the way the question "what kind of nazi are You" falls in the category of why do you deny that you abuse children? It's tendentious and sophomoric. BTW do you deny being a Nazi child abuser?
Talking about not answering direct questions. I posed one to you and others: "What legal basis could Zelaya use to call a non-binding poll?" I am still waiting for your answer.
Although I am tempted to fall in your manichean trap for the sake of getting your ten bucks (cash I assume in this hard times), I would respond that I am not sure that it was a coup in the classical sense (Pinochet, Batista, etc). Power was transferred to a civilian (the right one? see my questions to Project Director on this topic), and the military was an instrument to carry out the wishes of other branches of the government rather than a direct acquirer of political power. (This looks more like what happened in Ecuador with Bucaram or in Haiti with Aristide.)
BTW the right wing may not like Chavez, Castro, et alles for the reasons you cited but those who dislike Chavez, Castro, et alles are not all right wingers. Some of them are very respectable Marxist-Leninists.
For the record I am not a Nazi, a child abuser, nor a manichean. Also for the record there is only one kind of Nazi: a bad person. Is that direct enough for you?
Vecino de NF
Vecino, if you don't see the insanity behind justifying a military coup because an informal poll the people of Honduras was about to take place, I am afraid there is not much I can do for you. The real question is why was the establishment so against asking the people, even in a non-binding way, whether they wanted an opportunity to change the Constitution written during the military regime of the 80s?
Again, it is true that only the Congress has the right to formally begin the Constitutional reform process. But holding a public opinion poll is not the same thing as beginning that process. Don't you see the legal difference? The Honduran President responded to the Supreme Court decision. He backed down - by makng the poll non-binding.
No leftcrank the real question is why was Zelaya so intent on circumventing the other institutions of democracy, the legislature and the judiciary?
Leftside,
Please note the comment from Project Director! There was a law passed by the Honduran Parliament prohibiting any poll. Zelaya defied the law by going forward with his poll even though there was an injuction against using the polling ballots issued by the Supreme Court.
I take it from your response that you do not know of any legal basis for a Honduran president to hold an official poll, and that the only competent body to amend the constitution is the Honduran Parliament. (BTW your references to Zelaya responding to the Supreme Court decision was overtaken by later decisions by both the Supreme Court and the Parliament.)
BTW what do you feel needs to be done for me? ("I am afraid there is not much I can do for you.) Just an expression, I hope!
Vecino de NF
what is it with you knee-jerk leftists anyway?? just because he becomes a born-again Chavista he gets a free pass to trample all over the country's separation of powers??? who are the real anti-democrats here?
I have asked more than once what LEGAL basis did Zelaya had to call the referendum? I have not received any satisfactory answers. It appears that the Honduran Armed Forces chief asked the same question and was fired on the spot. The following link (http://www.miamiherald.com/news/americas/story/1121928.html) from The Miami Herald outlines a chronology of events. Is this chronology in dispute? If it isn't then there was no military takeover in Honduras but rather the Armed Forces acting at the behest of other branches of the government. Apparently today's Wall Street Journal and other outlets are also calling it that way.
Vecino de NF
Vecino,
lucky for Leftside now there are direct flights from L.A. to Havana. I wonder if he ever consider taking one and settling donw in Cuba. Nah, he loves being in the heart of the "enemy" fighting the good fight. It is here that his wisdom is needed to enlighten thoe wayward right wing gusanos he hates so much.
As someone advised him a few postings before, he better get his ass down to Cuba soon before there is a change there. After that somebody may have his name and number and he won't be allowed in as an enemy of the Cuban people.
leftside actually living in Cuba hah! He wouldn't last one week -- as soon as he found out he couldn't find brie and wine at two in the morning he'll high-tail back to the lap of capitalist luxury in Los Angeles before you can say Che Guevara...
Vecino, you stopped reading where it counted. Check out article 5 in the Citizen Participation Law. It says "any power of the State can convene the general public... to issue opinions, formulate and propose solutions to collective problems affecting them. The results are not binding..."
But what gets me is that you refuse to understand that the onus is on those who just kidnapped a President to provide the legal justification - not me. Their reasons were written after the fact. The military admits the decision to remove Zelaya was made "at the last minute." They claim to be acting on a Supreme Court decision that no one has seen. They are making up things as they go along. It is blatant. The Constitution says the military is supposed to be "apolitical, obedient and non-deliberating. In this case, they've even admitted there was "clamour in the ranks" over the decision to intervene. As Central Americans well know, the military must be kept under civilian control. If this is allowed to stand it would set back the region for 20 years.
In fact, the more I learn, the more it's clear to me that the pattern of Court and high-military decisions the last week were of such an extraordinary, reaching and capricious manner to render them criminal. From what we've heard, they are based on such complete falsehoods that make it clear this was all part of a an illegal coup, where everyone knew their role and played along. Old, stupid elites who couldn't stand another 7 months of this guy who truly posed little threat to Honduran capitalism but had began telling the truth.
They tried to cobble together a weak ass story about the Constitution being broken by a poll as meaningful as American Idol. They made up the whole term-limit issue - totally manufactured it - and many US newspapers printed it as fact. The Court was clearly making law and stepping all over the toes of the executive - saying Zelaya could not fire the top General (as Commander in Chief). The courts are supposed to judicate history not make it. The first ruling was about a binding process of reform. Fine, sorted. Then another that said the State could not pay for a referendum. Fine, sorted...
I am disappointed but not surprised that those who claim to love freedom and democracy the most are those who are backing this most crude military putsch the most - completely alone in the world of nations... but the will always have the Herald and WSJ in their corner it appears.
Here's the link to the Law of Citizen Participation in case anyone cares.
Leftside,
Thank you for both the link and pointing out that Article 5 could be interpreted as the legal basis for the non-binding referendum. That answers part of my question, but FYI I did not stop reading at Article 4. Article 5 articulates the right of citizens to petition the government. So you are saying that a petition was sent to Zelaya to call a non-binding pool, and he took it upon himself to organize it. Did the President of Honduras has a legal right to set up this poll under this Law (I don't see it), or is there another law that addresses this issue?
Thanks!
Vecino de NF
Yes, again there was a petition with approximately 500,000 signatures - or 800,000. And yes, you can see that the Law says ANY state organ or power can convene participatory measures.
Leftside,
Thanks for the clarification! I think I now understand the legal point of view of both the hound and the fox. Obviously no one in Honduras ever saw the play or movie Becket and forgot the admonition of Becket to Henry II about the importance of aesthetics. The NY Times article does a good job of putting forward the point of view of the Honduran armed forces.
Have a nice holiday!
Vecino de NF
In his latest syndicated article, Carlos Alberto Montaner makes an interesting suggestion. He says:
"If a conflict explodes, one of the poorest countries in the Americas will suffer the bloodletting already experienced by Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua during the Cold War.
"However, there is a satisfactory solution within almost everyone's reach -- to move up the general elections planned for November. The candidates are already there, freely elected in open primaries, and both enjoy much popularity. Why plunge that society irresponsibly into a maelstrom of violence? Once the new government is selected, a government enveloped in the legitimacy generated by a democratic process, the Honduran people can put this lamentable episode behind them."
I'd be interested in your reaction.
/s/ NEWSPAPERMAN.
Newspaperman, the whole world has said clearly what needs to happen. The elected needs to be restored to his rightful place. Period. There will be an election in 5 months where he will then be gone. Allowing a coup to occur in blatant violation of the Constitution - and changing electoral rules - does nothing but set back the rule of law in Central America decades. The coupsters in Honduras and their defenders in Miami are the only ones trying to find a way to legitimize their actions and make all this commotion about democracy go away.
Post a Comment