June 28 was the date when the Armed Forces kidnapped the elected president, Manuel Zelaya, and forcibly exiled him to Costa Rica. If the agreement brokered this week holds, the Honduran resistance movement will have turned the ugly precedent of a modern-day military coup d'etat into an example of the strength of nonviolent grassroots resistance.
The points of the agreement are the same ones that the de facto regime has rejected since talks began in San Jose, Costa Rica. By last week, there was supposedly agreement on all points except the reinstatement of Zelaya.
Although the decision to restore Zelaya to power must receive a non-binding opinion from the Supreme Court and then be approved in Congress, it appears to be a done deal. Zelaya's team reportedly had the support of members from the UD Party, 20 members of the Liberal Party and more recently the support of the National Party to revoke the decree that was issued to justify his removal from office. That decree was originally accompanied by a forged letter of resignation that was immediately denounced.
President Zelaya expressed "satisfaction" at the agreement. Zelaya's negotiating team had agreed long before on the terms of the revised San Jose Accords, and negotiations were hung up on the coup's refusal to allow reinstatement of the president. The terms are:
- Creation of a government of national reconciliation that includes cabinet members from both sides
- Suspension of any possible vote on holding a Constitutional Assembly until after Jan. 27, when Zelaya's term ends
- A general amnesty for political crimes was rejected by both sides
- Command of the Armed Forces to be placed under the Electoral Tribunal during the month prior to the elections.
- Restitution of Zelaya to the presidency
- Creation of a Verification Commission to follow up on the accords, consisting of two members of the OAS, and one member each from the constitutional government and the coup regime
- Creation of a Truth Commission to begin work in 2010
- Revoke sanctions against Honduras following the accords
Micheletti noted that "accepting this proposal represents a significant concession on the part of this government." In the last round of talks, he had insisted that the Supreme Court decide the question of reinstatement. He added, "But we understand that our people demand us to turn the page of our history in these difficult moments. For that reason, I have decided to support this new proposal to achieve a final accord as soon as possible."
Few people know what magic words were uttered to change the opinion of one of the most stubborn dictators in recent history. But they probably came out of Tom Shannon’s mouth.
For months, both sides have noted that the U.S. government is the only entity with the power to break the impasse, due to Honduran military and economic dependency on the United States. In a press conference held in Tegucigalpa shortly before the agreement, Shannon explicitly confirmed that the sticking point was "political will" (the coup's unwillingness to accept Zelaya's reinstatement) and that the U.S. government was there to induce that political will.
"From our point of view, the deal’s on the table. This is not really a question of drafting or of shaping a paragraph. It’s really a question of political will. And that’s why it was so important, I think, for us to come to Honduras at this moment to make clear to all Hondurans that we believe the political will that is displayed and expressed by Honduras’s leaders should respect the democratic vocation of the Honduran people and the democratic aspirations of the Honduran people, and the desire of Honduras to return to a larger democratic community in the Americas... And that’s why we came, to underscore our interest in ensuring that the political will is there to do a deal."Shannon mentioned legitimizing the elections and future access to development funding from international financial institutions as carrots (or sticks) in the negotiations:
"...An agreement within the national dialogue opens a large space for members of the international community to assist Honduras in this election process, to observe the elections, and to have a process that is peaceful and which produces leadership that is widely recognized throughout the hemisphere as legitimate. This will be important as a way of creating a pathway for Honduras to reintegrate itself into the Inter-American community, to not – and not just the OAS, but also the Inter-American Development Bank and its other institutions, and to access development funding through the international financial institutions."It worked—at least in the formal stages, as the world now awaits implementation. The State Department was in a celebratory mood following the success of the high-level delegation consisting of Shannon, deputy Craig Kelly and the White House NSC representative for the Western Hemisphere, Dan Restrepo. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held a special press conference from Islamabad announcing the "breakthrough in negotiations" in Honduras:
"I want to congratulate the people of Honduras as well as President Zelaya and Mr. Micheletti for reaching an historic agreement. I also congratulate Costa Rican President Oscar Arias for the important role he has played in fashioning the San Jose process and the OAS for its role in facilitating the successful round of talks...Historians will chart the course of the little coup that couldn't.
I cannot think of another example of a country in Latin America that having suffered a rupture of its democratic and constitutional order overcame such a crisis through negotiation and dialogue.
This is a big step forward for the Inter-American system and its commitment to democracy as embodied in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. I'm very proud that I was part of the process, that the United States was instrumental in the process. But I'm mostly proud of the people of Honduras who have worked very hard to have this matter resolved peacefully."
But from this observer's chair, negotiation and dialogue played a minor role in the seeming resolution. In the end, the mobilization of Honduran society sent a clear message that "normal" government would not be possible and even more widespread insurrection loomed unless a return to democracy reopened institutional paths. International pressures and sanctions played a far greater role in cornering the coup than the technical terms of an accord that is vague, difficult to implement and contentious. In this context, the challenges ahead are enormous.
If it weren't for the extraordinary levels of commitment, participation and awareness generated by the democratic crisis over the past four months, the challenges Honduran society now faces could easily be considered impossible for any democracy to face. They include:
1) Restore constitutional order, within the presidency, the new cabinet and state institutions
This is a mammoth task. Zelaya cannot just step back into the Presidential Palace and assume that society has returned to its pre-coup state. Under the terms of the agreement, he must form a new cabinet with the participation of coup supporters. Anger runs high and this will be a controversial and delicate undertaking. He must review the damage done to national coffers under the coup regime. He must reestablish a relationship with the Armed Forces and the other branches of government. Many institutions have undergone purges of personnel under the coup and must be reestablished and work to regain legitimacy.
2) Organize elections for Nov. 29 or a later agreed-upon date
If the original date is not changed, that leaves less than a month before nationwide elections. Imagine a nation moving from the complete breakdown of its democratic system and institutions, to campaigns, to elections in less than thirty days. Anti-coup candidates had pulled out, other campaigns had been met consistently with protests, and now the mere logistics of organizing elections raises serious issues.
The timeline is critical to the process. Zelaya told AFP that the timeline is under discussion today and pointed out a concern that has been growing among international organizations and the Honduran public: if reinstatement and the return to democratic order do not happen immediately, the elections scheduled for Nov. 29 will be in jeopardy. His return, he noted, "must be well before the elections to be able to validate them."
In fact, despite the breakthrough, the legitimacy of the elections is already in jeopardy. If the reinstatement process drags out, as the negotiations did, Hondurans worry they could find themselves in the middle of an electoral farce. Even if all goes smoothly, nothing will be easy or exactly "normal". The United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union had all announced they would not send elections observers to coup-sponsored elections, also citing the logistical difficulties of putting together effective teams on such short notice. Now the OAS has indicated it will try to do so but logistics continue to be a problem. The European Union indicated it required six weeks to put together such an elections mission and could no longer consider it.
Honduran law provides for a three-month campaign period prior to the vote so would need to be modified to accommodate a Nov. 29 election. Even an immediate end to serious human rights violations—many of which are essential to free and fair elections, such as freedom of expression, freedom of press and freedom of assembly—will leave wounds and gaps. As the agreement was being hammered out, security forces attacked a peaceful march that had acquired all the permits required by the de facto government to legally demonstrate.
3) Continue moving toward a vote on holding a Constitutional Assembly
This demand is not going away, despite the agreement between Zelaya and Micheletti not to raise it until after Jan. 27. This point of the accords caused Juan Barahona, a leader of the National Front Against the Coup, to resign from the Zelaya negotiating team because it has become central to the movement not only to restore, but to expand Honduran democracy.
A Constitutional Assembly now appears more necessary than ever. It would serve to repair the contradictions in the current Constitution that coup-mongers exploited to rupture the democratic order, and channel the legitimate demands of organizations of peasants, indigenous peoples, urban poor, women, youth and others. Since the awakening of popular sectors in resistance to the coup, it is not possible to conceive of a free and stable society without proceeding with a Constitutional Assembly.
Rush to Define Positions
Zelaya was quick to point out that obstacles remain. "This is a first step to bringing about my reinstatement that will have to go through several stages. I'm moderately optimistic," he told AFP news service from the Brazilian Embassy, where he has been holed up since Sept. 21.
The reinstatement of President Zelaya will likely be voted on soon. Emails from the Honduran Internet groups that have formed a virtual community to debate and decry the military coup in their country, now demonstrate a range of feelings, from jubilation to open skepticism. Elections pose a huge challenge to anti-coup forces since a wide range of opinions play out within the diverse National Front Against the Coup.
Hondurans now move into the next phase of a long struggle to rebuild and broaden democracy. The challenge includes holding free and fair elections in the short term, but also includes critical issues of expanding democratic rights and participation beyond the elections and the system of representation. They must find ways to heal deep wounds and confront an economic and political crisis that is far from over.
If the coup finally falls and Zelaya is restored to power, Honduran society and the international community will score an historic victory. It must be remembered though, that the victory is a defensive one—it marks the successful rollback of anti-democratic forces in a small but determined nation.
Those forces will not desist—in Honduras or in other places where democracy is vulnerable and nefarious interests are strong. Until democracy in the fullest sense—participatory and dedicated to nonviolence—gains ground, the world could be stuck in long battles to defend against attacks instead of moving forward toward societies where this kind of offensive against the rule of law can no longer occur.