Comments on: Quick Thoughts on Honduras

By: Thoughts On Obama And Honduras « Hidden Unities

Thoughts On Obama And Honduras « Hidden Unities — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 19:24:26 +0000

[...] Chirol @ Coming Anarchy ZenPundit TDAXP Catholicgauze Jonathan @ Chicago Boyz Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)Chavez, Obama And A Plucky RivalA New Start For CubaDrastic Changes In VenezuelaChavez: Smiles, handshakes don’t change view of â��imperialist’ U.S. [...]

By: Chirol

Chirol — Mon, 06 Jul 2009 00:31:22 +0000

Update: I noted there were possibly troops in Nicaragua trying to move into Honduras. Seems there may be some truth to that afterall

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N05200016.htm

By: T. Greer

T. Greer — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:12:44 +0000

It seems I forgot to link to the Chicago Boyz post I was referencing. You can find that Here.

By: T. Greer

T. Greer — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 04:11:26 +0000

I think a comment I left over at Chicago Boyz is relevant here:

“I am not sure I buy this.

The opposition would be in the right if they had waited. If they had waited until the Honduran congress had impeached the President. But they didnâ��t. Instead, the military broke the standstill. It was not the courts, nor the congress that removed Zelaya from power, but the military. They produced a court order seeking his arrest â�� after they had arrested him. Congress produces a letter of resignation (mostly likely forged or produced under duress) after Zelaya is gone.

And what does the interim government do once they take power? They shut down dissenting media outlets, refuse international media access to the country, break up protests, issue a curfew and send tanks down the street.

Yes, what Zelaya was doing was illegal. Yet in cases of democratic governance, fire should not be used to fight fire. The abandonment of democratic institutions before they have been tested by the opposition cannot be supported. Nor can any coup that removes a democratically elected leader before it is given the authority to do so. Post-hoc approval by the remaining branches of the Honduran government is not enough to justify this coup.

By: bobby gibson

bobby gibson — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:14:12 +0000

I am a Christian Missionary living and serving in Honduras. I and most of the people here support the National Congress and its decision, after being forced, By Zelaya, to take action to prevent a Chavez run by proxy government in Honduras.
As i write this email, all that stands between me, my family, our orphans, the other Americans, and the good people of Honduras from being under mob rule are the brave soldiers and police standing in the streets being hit by rocks, bottles, and curses. Apparently most of the leaders of the paid mobs were sent in by Venezuela, and his other dictator friends. Zelaya has ordered them to return to their quarters, while Chavez has called for rebellion in Honduras.
We may owe our lives to those brave men, so don’t critize them unless you want to releive one of them for a shift. President Obama has thrown his support to Chavez and the thugs roaming the streets of Tegucigalpa. While i am thankful to be a U.S. citizen by birth, and i think it is the greatest country on earth, I am ashamed of its president. He is more like a rock thrower than a peace maker. I wish that we had some congressmen in the U. S. as brave as the ones here.
Bobby Gibson
bobbyhonduras@yahoo.com

By: tdaxp » Blog Archive » What is happening in Honduras?

tdaxp » Blog Archive » What is happening in Honduras? — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 01:03:43 +0000

[...] reading reactions at Catholicgauze, Coming Anarchy, Half Sigma, and Zenpundit, and following the news in China Daily, I am confused why the United [...]

By: Darin

Darin — Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:22:31 +0000

I’m going to have to disagree too.

He was going to put to referendum to change the constitution to allow the president to serve two terms correct? But before he even made it that far, the military stepped in. That’s a coupe in my book.

Now said referendum was illegal to hold to begin with. I think that’s a problem. Constitutions need to be modified but stay within the original intensions and guidelines. A constitution that establishes no way of updating itself is a bad constitution.

Had his term ended yet refused to vacate the office and then the military stepped in, it would have been a great day for Honduran democracy. But as I understand it, that’s not what happened.

By: Munro Ferguson

Munro Ferguson — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 22:47:09 +0000

Alvaro Llosa had an interesting op-ed in todays NYTimes pointing to Hugo Chavez as the essential “winner,” when all is said and done in Honduras. (If you haven’t already you’ll have to go through a pain in the ass free registration process to read the article on line.)

By: Kit

Kit — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 16:53:59 +0000

The whole situation makes no sense to me; it’s not just the US refusing to recognize the new government, but as far as I know no government has recognized the new Honduran government. In fact I’ve read people who have argued that because Obama hasn’t called for the immediate restoration of Zelaya to power, he must be somehow involved in the coup. The biggest problem seems to be that there exists no mechanism in the Honduran constitution for removing a President who violates the constitution.

By: Brand X

Brand X — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 05:32:05 +0000

Chirol, I guess we’ll have to agree that we disagree. The form of democracy practiced in Honduras might be what you and I expect, but the military is not supposed to be enforcing the law, or whisking people out of the country in the wee hours of the morning. That’s a big problem, IMO. Another question: If Zelaya was on his way to becoming a dictator, how would that be possible as he doesn’t have the support of the military?

By: Chirol

Chirol — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 02:18:13 +0000

Brand X: I’m not saying that my information is perfect either. I just wanted to mention I got current information from on the ground.

To be clear, my preferred method would have also been democratic, i.e. that the president himself would have respected the rule of law. But in the context of Central America, I think this is about the best we could hope for and given that the intention of the military seems to be to protect the constitution, NOT to seize power, I’m ok with this.

Also, awesome post by Michael Waller on the subject here. If you haven’t heard of him or read his work, do so. His blog is updated infrequently but worth the wait.

By: Brand X

Brand X — Tue, 30 Jun 2009 00:11:38 +0000

Chirol, thanks. Granted I don’t know anything about Honduran politics, it strikes me as a bad thing for the military to be enforcers. Aren’t arrest and impeachment options? I also find it ironic that force was the preferred method over the much more democratic action of holding a referendum.

By: Chirol

Chirol — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 19:05:10 +0000

Long time family friends in Honduras.

By: Thomas

Thomas — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 18:20:08 +0000

Who are your sources?

I’m given to distrust blogs as a source of news in general so without some kind of corroboration, this is kind of a non-starter.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:27:47 +0000

Why does the OAS and the US feel it necessary to spit on the democratic wishes of a majority of the Honduran population and society that opposed this naked power grab? I somehow doubt this will be the last power grab by a Chavez related thug.

By: Chief Wiggum

Chief Wiggum — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:22:17 +0000

Coming to a country near you?

In January of this year, Democrat Representative JosÃ© Serrano introduced HJ Res 5, a measure to repeal the 22nd Amendment, which provides the only term limit on federal office â�� the Presidency. The amendment, added in 1951, restricts anyone from seeking a third term in office. Who ever thought we would be having the “President for Life” argument again here? It has a nasty third-worldishness about it.

By: Chirol

Chirol — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:52:12 +0000

Brand X: In a world where there is no check on presidential power and the military steps in, removes the problem and then steps out, allowing congress to appoint the next leader in line as designated by law.

One fun fact is that the ballots for the referendum were made in and shipped from Venezuela!! Probably all pre-voted too.

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:26:29 +0000

Also, what do you expect from the US when they put rank and file leftists in charge of the State Dept and other organs of power related to Latin America whose ideas of US policy there were created during the formative 70’s & 80’s?

By: Eddie

Eddie — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:23:41 +0000

He was an elected leader breaking the law in a manner suited to advance himself and not his country. The law has to be upheld in these countries or we will be forever experiencing such instances. That Uribe in Colombia is complaining about this is not a surprise, he has been busy trying to usurp the law there in order to hold on in office. No matter that he is a US ally or a good leader, the law is the law.

By: Grant

Grant — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 11:04:02 +0000

While I will admit that on its face the situation seems to be laudable, may I remind the readers that we have little data on the political tendencies or history of the nations Congress, military, or Supreme Court. For all I know, it’s entirely possible that the Congress and Supreme Court is stacked with large numbers of land owning elite who were opposed to a populist president. It’s not as though the news agencies have given us a detailed background on the situation.
Besides that, the fact remains that an elected leader was apparently forced out of office which is never a good trend to start. However I do note with great annoyance that Chavez still blames the United States for the affair even though our president and state dept. were generous enough to continue to recognize Zelaya as president.

By: Brand X

Brand X — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 05:55:15 +0000

Huh? In what strange world is it laudable for a military to settle constitutional issues?

By: ADenisJ

ADenisJ — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 03:28:50 +0000

Are you wondering at all why the OAS, including conservative Colombia, and the European Union disagree?

By: Munro Ferguson

Munro Ferguson — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:18:27 +0000

Couldn’t have said it better myself. While Obama, for the most part, has handled the Iranian crisis well he’s way off the mark on Honduras. The idea that every democracy needs to function, fit and form, as the US does is ludicrous. That seems to be the basis for this administrations reaction (it’s “undemocratic”) to what seems to me to be a rather efficient removal of a potential oligarch. If that isn’t the administrations modus then I have to speculate whether or not it’s an attempt to appease Zelaya’s allies in the region in an effort to not “rock the boat,” as it were. The latter makes sense as the administration is likely a bit behind in forming a cogent Latin American foreign policy. The former makes zero sense and suggests a degree of either incompentance or naivete.