The U.S. and the Coup: A Real Change of Course or a Just a Farce? (R. Pastor Fasquelle)

The U.S. and the Coup: A Real Change of Course or a Just a Farce?
Rodolfo Pastor Fasquelle (Translation by Adrienne Pine; original below)

Kudos to the European Union, whom history will recognize for its consistent posture in suspending aid since the second day. We are moved by the solidarity of Mexico and of course that of all Latin America and the UN. Never before in history have all the nations of the world supported an overthrown government. Nonetheless, it escapes no one that the possible solution or the degeneration of the current predicament in Honduras depends on the policy of the United States, the only power with the material instruments to overcome the stubborn madness of the usurpers, if they wanted to use them. It would seem that a certain ambivalence is at play.

Despite the fact that the embassy in Honduras without a doubt advised the coup leaders against that course of action, it did not manage to convince them, and perhaps it also lacks sufficient arguments to persuade them to entertain the only solution being considered by the community of nations and which favors the majority of Hondurans. Perhaps the U.S. tried to find a way to deescalate the conflict. But it has an objective record of the facts. The embassy in Tegucigalpa has to know things that perhaps are not understood there in the Capitol (that the resignation letter was illegitimate, as was the famous arrest warrant for the president), but there is not an unequivocal position in Washington which is, of course, a politically complex world. And although it has skillfully played with the idea of aligning itself with the OAS and the UN, U.S. policy has lacked force and specificity. As a U.S. editorial today states, the Latin American Office of the State Department is staffed by enemies of the overthrown government, inherited from Bush. A couple of the members of the committee that received President Zelaya in Washington have declared in the past that the fourth ballot box was a "form of distraction" and would have little reason to want to defend him.

The first official statement after the coup did not condemn what had happened. Afterward, undoubtedly Latin American solidarity tilted the balance to make necessary a series of statements of greater clarity, deeming what had happened a coup d'etat, and the U.S. voted in accord with the unanimous resolutions in the OAS and UN and signed international resolutions confirming that this has been a coup d'etat and they adopted a consistent position: demanding the return of the constitutional president of the country, yet still leaving it to be seen whether this return could be subject to negotiations and a series of conditions.

And then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, several of whose ex-collaborators has been closely tied to the coup leaders and the right-wing conspiracy behind them, asked president Zelaya to "cooperate" with the mediation process presided over by the Nobel Prize winner Arias, even though this is an insult and she knows it. But this ambivalence has been maintained, and while Mr. L. Davis carries out a dirty and public lobbying campaign on behalf of CEAL [The Business Council of Latin America] in the U.S., using documents originating from the bureaucracy of a government the U.S. doesn't recognize, distorting positions, and manipulating the facts, the U.S. backs down on its official statements.

In recent conversations with delegations of Honduran members of civil society, Christopher Warren, a State Department representative, insisted that "although Obama may have said that this was a coup, this is a technical determination that has not been officially declared" and a supposed "spokesperson" publicly joked yesterday at the White House about the U.S. president's lack of knowledge of Honduran law, dodging the issue and making the coup in Honduras into a joke, while we confront systematic violations of human rights and the harsh prospect of a civil war; and they don't realize or they don't care about being accused of making an experiment. Recently, representatives of the embassy in Honduras have responded to U.S. citizens who propose applying pressure, stating that the mission is not ready to recommend sanctions.

The U.S. right wing has been perfectly consistent. It has organized, using its formidable power, rallying powerful senators on various committees together with traffickers in false information creating perverse distortions of what is going on. The media aligned with the right-wing conspiracy in the U.S. libel us with impunity, reprinting the baseless accusations of the coup supporters. Other articles in influential media outlets have insisted on continuing with the more or less absurd theme of the hidden agenda of the president on the one hand to remain in power and on the other, given that there the theme of reelection is not looked down upon, with the idea that the intent was to create a communist dictatorship allied with H. Chavez. This becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. United States senators like J. Kerry who should, because of their responsibilities, be better informed, have insisted that President Zelaya tried to turn around and torpedo the Congress (and this is not true Mr. Kerry, you should be better informed), while others carry on with the same old story without taking into account the original crime, which was instrumentalizing the judiciary for political ends. Neither does it make sense to argue that proposing changes to the constitution is a crime, since those who have formally done so are the National Party candidates and members of Congress, while all we proposed was to carry out a poll.

Those of us in the deposed government do not have the same type of resources to counteract this damage. The U.S. should not intervene unilaterally; it should align itself as President Obama has said in the past he would do, with the will of the majority (and here I can say with the unanimity) of the international community, including all his friends and allies. The policy espoused by Obama (that of renouncing unilateralism) will become a joke if the US avoids the risks of being consistent.

Fortunately we are not alone in the U.S. The progressive sectors sympathize with our cause and know that our sin was to try to democratize our country and take it out of the hands of a criminal group. I was not always in agreement with the ex-ambassador Ford, but I agreed with him when, in private, he expressed his belief that our land, Honduras, is a country held hostage to a caste of politricksters. Because they're not politicians; they're disguised delinquents. Democracy cannot have caveats. It is democracy or it isn't. And this isn't, even less so after the coup. The United States contingent of a conference of experts on Latin America which met recently demanded to their authorities that they be consistent in their positions on democracy. Furthermore many other independent academics and critics have expressed to us their support, reaching out to their networks as well as to the State Department, providing at least correct and truthful information with with we can begin to counteract the trick of the lobby.

A resolution of the security council of the UN would have to override a U.S. veto, which would be costly. The U.S. cannot turn its back again on its noble tradition of respecting freedom of expression, for due process in a State of Law, for the separation of powers of the state and for human rights. It cannot back down from its political stance without suffering a blow to its international prestige, which it needs to protect for strategic reasons. It cannot betray this prestige, returning to the old politics of protecting its "bastard children" without consequences.

Behind the curtain a cynical attitude prevails (expressing itself, for example, in jokes about Honduran legislation), trying to pass itself off as realpolitik and go back on the earlier statements of Obama and the votes of the OAS and UN. If effective pressure is not applied toward the restoration of the government, after lamenting this tragedy, we are going to laugh at the hilarious farce of the U.S.'s supposedly new policy...Soon enough. Today, Saturday, as the negotiations wrap up, we will know what the true politics of the U.S. are.

Original:
Rodolfo Pastor Fasquelle
EEUU y el Golpe: un genuino golpe de timon o un vacilon?
Un aplauso para la Union Europea, con que la posteridad seguirá agradecida por su postura consistente, de suspender su ayuda desde el segundo dia. Conmueve la solidaridad de Mexico y por supuesto la de toda America Latina y las NNUU. Nunca antes en la historia han respaldado todas las naciones del mundo a un gobierno derrocado. A nadie se le escapa que, sin embargo, la posible solución o la degeneracion del predicamento actual que vive Honduras pasa por un esclarecimiento de la política estadounidense, única que tiene los instrumentos materiales para doblegar la terca locura de los usurpadores, si quisiera usarlos. Y pareciera que priva una ambivalencia.
A pesar de que la Embajada en Honduras sin duda advirtió a los golpistas en contra de ese curso de acción, no logro convencerlos y quizás no tenga tampoco argumentos suficientes para persuadirlos de permitir la solución única contemplada por la comunidad de las naciones y que favorece la pluralidad de los hondurenos. Quizás trato –EEUU- de buscar de descompresionar el conflicto. Pero tiene un registro objetivo de los hechos. La Embajada en Tegucigalpa tiene que saber cosas que quizás no entienden alla en el Capitolio (que la renuncia es falsa igual que las famosas ordenes de captura para el Presidente) pero no hay una posición inequívoca de Washington que, además, es un mundo políticamente complejo. Y aunque ha jugado hábilmente con la idea de alinearse con la OEA y NNUU, a la política estadounidense le ha faltado contundencia y concrecion. Como dice un editorial estadounidense hoy, la oficina de America Latina del Departamento de
Estado esta poblada con enemigos del gobierno derrocado, heredados de Bush. Un par de los miembros de la comitiva que recibió al Presidente Zelaya en Washington han declarado en el pasado que la Cuarta Urna era “una distracción de manera” y tendrían pocas razones para simpatizar con su defensa.
El primer comunicado después del golpe no descalificaba lo sucedido. Despues seguramente la solidaridad latinoamericana inclino la balanza y obligo a una serie de declaraciones mas claras que calificaban lo acontecido como golpe de estado, los EEUU votaron con la unanimidad de la OEA y de NNUU y firmaron resoluciones internacionales que aseguran que esto ha sido un golpe de estado y adoptaron una postura consistente: exigiendo el retorno del Presidente constitucional del país, aun si dejando entrever que ese retorno podría sujetarse a una negociación y a una serie de condiciones.
Luego la Canciller Hillary Clinton, varios de cuyos ex colaboradores han sido vinculados a los golpistas y a la conspiración de la derecha que los respalda, pidió al Presidente Zelaya que “cooperara” con el proceso de mediación que encargo al Nobel Arias, incluso cuando eso supone cierta indignidad y ella lo sabe. Pero se ha mantenido la ambivalencia, mientras el Sr. L Davis hace para el CEAL un lobby sucio y publica en EEUU documentos originados en la burocracia de un gobierno al que no reconoce EEUU, distorsionando las posiciones, manipulando los hechos, las declaraciones oficiales estadounidenses retroceden.
En conversaciones recientes con delegaciones de hondureños de sociedad civil, Christopher Warren, personero de la cancillería de EEUU ha insistido en que, “aunque Obama hubiese dicho que este era un golpe, esa calificación es una determinacion técnica, que no ha sido oficializada” y un supuesto “vocero” se burlo ayer públicamente, en la Casa Blanca, de la falta de conocimientos de la ley hondurena del Presidente de los EEUU, esquivando y tomando todo el tema del golpe de Honduras a burla, mientras nosotros nos enfrentamos a violaciones sistematicas de derechos humanos y al duro prospecto de una guerra civil; y no se dan cuenta o no les importa que se les acuse de jugar a un experimento. Recientemente, personeros de la Embajada de Honduras han respondido a los ciudadanos estadounidenses que proponen medidas de presión, que la misión no esta lista para recomendar esas sanciones.
La derecha estadounidense ha sido perfectamente congruente. Se ha movilizado con su poder formidable rodeando a los poderosos senadores de las comisiones correspondientes con traficantes de informaciones falsas y con distorsiones perversas de lo que esta ocurriendo. Los medios alineados con la conspiración derechista en EEUU nos difaman impunemente, reproducen las acusaciones sin fundamento de los golpistas. Otros artículos en medios influyentes han seguido insistiendo en el mas o menos absurdo tema de la intención oculta del Presidente por un lado de continuar en el poder y por otro, puesto que alla el tema de la reelección no es rechazado, en la idea de que la intención era establecer una dictadura comunista alineada con H. Chavez. Esa profecia se podría cumplir solita.
Senadores estadounidenses como J. Kerry que tendrían, por sus obligaciones, que estar mejor informados han insistido en que el Presidente Zelaya trato de darle la vuelta y torpedear al Congreso (y eso no es cierto Sr Kerry , usted debe ser mejor asesorado), mientras otros continúan con la cantaleta formalista sin tomar en cuenta el delito de origen , que fue la instrumentación de la judicatura para fines políticos. Ni tampoco que, si proponer cambios a la constitución es delito, quienes lo han hecho formalmente son los candidatos y los diputados Nacionalistas, porque nosotros solo propusimos levantar una encuesta.
Para contrarrestar ese daño, en el gobierno depuesto no tenemos el mismo tipo de recursos. Los EEUU no deben intervenir unilateralmente, deben alinearse como ha dicho en el pasado que haría el Presidente Obama, con la voluntad mayoritaria (aquí puede decir unánime) de la comunidad internacional, incluyendo a la totalidad de sus amigos y aliados. La política anunciada por Obama (de renunciar al unilateralismo) pasaría a ser una burla si EEUU evade los riesgos de ser congruentes.
Afortunadamente no estamos solos dentro de EEUU. Los sectores progresistas simpatizan con nuestra causa y saben que nuestro pecado fue tratar de democratizar nuestro país y quitárselo de las manos a un grupo criminal. No siempre coincidi con el ex Embajador Ford, pero estuve de acuerdo con el cuando, en privado, me expreso su convicción de que el nuestro, Honduras, es un país rehén de una casta de politicoides. Porque no son políticos si no delincuentes disfrazados. La democracia no puede ser cualificada. Es ,o no es democracia. Y esta no lo es, menos después del golpe. Un congreso de académicos estadounidenses, expertos en America Latina, que se reunió la semana pasada exigió a sus autoridades ser congruentes con sus posiciones democráticas. Ademas muchos otros académicos independientes y críticos nos expresan su apoyo, asi como a sus redes de contacto y al Departamento de Estado, proveyendo al menos información corregida y veraz
con que se pueda contrarrestar la trampa del lobby.
Una determinación del Consejo de Seguridad de NNUU tendría que superar el veto de EEUU para los que por lo demás seria costoso. EEUU no puede darle la espalda otra vez a su noble tradición de respeto por la libertad de expresión, por el debido proceso en un Estado de derecho, por la independencia de los poderes republicanos y los derechos humanos. No puede retroceder frente a la política anunciada sin sufrir un desgaste de su prestigio internacional, que debe preservar para sitios mas estratégicos. No puede traicionarse impunemente volviendo a la antigua política de proteger a “sus hijos de puta”.
Atrás del telon prevalece sin embargo una actitud un tanto cinica (esa que se expresa en chistes acerca de la legislación hondurenha) que quiere pasar por realpolitik y que darle la espalda a las primeras declaraciones de Obama y los votos en OEA y NNUU. Si no hay presiones efectivas para la restauración del gobierno, después de lamentar esta tragedia, todos nos vamos a reir siglos de la pretendida nueva política… Soon enough. Hoy sabado vamos a saber cual es la verdadera política de EEUU al culminar las negociaciones.

Comments

constitutionalism and Micheletti's constituent assembly

While constitutionalism has been continually cited by Micheletti's gang as the "legal" framework to oust Zelaya, was it not Micheletti himself that proposed a constituent assembly (around 1986) with the specific aim of prolonging the then sitting president's run in office beyond two terms?

The prohibition against even proposing the possibility of a second term should of course have led to his own being barred from office for ten years, as his was a clear contravention of constitutional articles. That did not happen. Of course, Micheletti's then candidate was a man vetted and coddled by the ultra right wing oligarchy.

Legally, proposing a ballot box initiative to consider the possibility of a constituent assembly is not specifically barred in the 1982-3 Honduran Constitution. It requires a liberal reading of the law--by an ultra-conservative group seeking to prevent even the possibility of democratic change to conclude that Zelaya be overthrown.