I am taking advantage of the fact that today's protests went forth without further setbacks to take a time-out and try to understand what is happening in Honduras and what will be the possible scenarios for Latin America. I say Latin America because what happens here involves the whole region, especially those countries that seek an option on the left to solve their problems.

I will begin with a profile of Manuel Zelaya, the deposed president who we are now defending as a symbol of democracy. He comes from one of the most conservative and traditional families from the region of Olancho. His political career was directly inherited from his father, Manuel Zelaya Sr., who not by accident was at one time involved in the assassination of peasants and the leaders of popular movements in the decade of the seventies. We still remember the massacre of the Horcones. While running, Zelaya said the son should not pay for the sins of the father and in this he is correct, although he did benefit from the mistakes of Mel Zelaya Sr. in arriving to National Congress at a moment when only those with strong political patrons could get in.

This is the context that Mel comes from. Legislator, and later minister of the Honduran Social Investment Fund during the governments of [former presidents] Reina and Flores in the decade of the 90s. He is elected president in a highly contested election. There are those who claim (I have no proof of this) that the election was a gift from the American Embassy. The difference in votes between him and his opponent Pepe Lobo did not leave a clear margin of victory. Let us recall that in 2006 Chavez's influence was spreading forcefully throughout the continent and Bush was determined in his goal of putting a stop to that influence.

When Mel took over the presidency he took on a country in extreme conflict. Practically all the social sectors of the country had been fighting against an administration (that of Maduro) that directly attacked nearly all the social victories of the previous decades. His government had been made up of prominent members of different political branches of the party, who were quickly replaced to create a cabinet of leftist intellectuals (and here and there a puppet of the establishment which he was never able to shake off: for example, Saro Bonano).

Around the second year of the government and facing the oil crisis he began exploring relations with Petrocaribe, causing a strong reaction from the right wing, which in turn pushed him even further toward ALBA [Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America] and thus toward Chavez. In addition to giving him a strong international ally, this attracted the attention of a sector of popular organizations that shared with him the goal of becoming a nation independent from large transnational oil companies. I can't forget seeing Mel, shouting in front of thousands of people at the presidential residence, "Long Live Socialism!" Totally unreal.

But despite his radical leftist discourse, he did little to build real organized social bases, aside from promoting the philanthropic approach approach of PRAF [the Family Allowance Program] and the Red Solidaria [Solidarity Network], he did little to solve the problems that the country faces. Agrarian reform, labor exploitation, the maquiladora industry, in sum, all of the problems that make us at present the Central American country that expels the highest number of nationals to the United States. His words were radical, but his actions were little different from that of any other liberal president that we've had.

The proposal of the constituent assembly appeared at the beginning of this year. It was a proposal that many viewed with suspicion. Nearly every president we've had has toyed with the idea of staying in power and Mel did not clarify the aim of said project. At the end, he said that he was not trying to get reelected but he said it with such little conviction that he was saying it just because he had to. There was never any serious discussion, at least from the presidential residence, about what they hoped to change in the constitution and who would be the constituents to undertake such a serious responsibility.

The popular sector social movement decided to take the proposal and turn it into a popular and democratic constituency, in which all the sectors that make up the nation would participate, forming a republic that would really represent all of us. Then came the poll, which was renamed a consultation and an ambiguous decree that made it seem as if its passage would immediately result in the formation of a constituent assembly. We all already know about the coup. Why do I explain all this? Because tomorrow Presidnet Zelaya and Micheletti the usurper are supposed to meet in Costa Rica to discuss a political exit from the crisis. Arias and Clinton (who proposed the meeting) are fierce adversaries of Chavez and, despite the support that ALBA has given Mel, what is certain is that they will now seek solutions to the problem that lie far from that group.

Honduras has turned into an essential theme for the ALBA bloc. It is the first link to break in a chain that appeared strong and that could drag along with it a series of populist leaders leading all the way to the center of the axis, with it changing the political panorama of the region. Paraguay, Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, are possible future "constitutional succession" scenarios.

That is why we suspiciously watched the frustrated administration and laughed at its clumsiness. That is why we watched in horror the stupidity of a coup that ignored the historical context and even more in indignation the stubbornness of the coup leaders and supporters.

We must recognize that the fact that this coup has the face of normalcy has taken us by surprise, that it seems to be the template for the future. The undeniable repression has been minimal compared with previous coups, and although all the structures of state security have been summoned against us, it is true that we move with a certain freedom and laxity, especially since the events of Sunday.

The resistance has come to propose a change of strategy, moving to the takeover of highways instead of mass mobilizations, and the different organizations are beginning to discuss the possibility of a prolonged resistance. I, who will not deny having always been a conspiracy theorist, cannot stop thinking that the CIA plan has worked marvelously since 2006, seriously damaging the socialism of the 21st century, and that Mel will only end up having been one more pawn in a complex political chess game.

We're being careful.

They will not win!