Agreement to End Honduran Coup Marks Victory and Challenge

Last night, Oct. 29, Honduras' de facto regime finally agreed to allow Congress to vote to "restore full executive power prior to June 28". Conceding to international and national pressure, the Honduran coup appears to be facing its final days.

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 Victory

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:

1. Creation of a government of national reconciliation that includes cabinet members from both sides
2. Suspension of any possible vote on holding a Constitutional Assembly until after Jan. 27, when Zelaya's term ends
3. A general amnesty for political crimes was rejected by both sides
4. Command of the Armed Forces to be placed under the Electoral Tribunal during the month prior to the elections.
5. Restitution of Zelaya to the presidency
   
6. 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
   
7. Creation of a Truth Commission to begin work in 2010
8. Revoke sanctions against Honduras following the accords
   

The leader of the de facto regime, Roberto Micheletti, issued a statement Thursday night saying, "I am pleased to announce that a few minutes ago I authorized my negotiating team to sign an agreement that marks the beginning of the end of the political situation in the country."

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...

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."

Historians will chart the course of the little coup that couldn't.

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.

The Challenges

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.

Coup Catalyzes Honduran Women´s Movement

On the morning of June 28, women’s organizations throughout Honduras were preparing to promote a yes vote on the national survey to hold a Constitutional Assembly. Then the phones lines started buzzing.

In this poor Central American nation, feminists have been organizing for years in defense of women’s rights, equality and against violence. When the democratically elected president Manuel Zelaya was forcibly exiled by the armed forces, women from all over the country spontaneously organized to protect themselves and their families and demand a return to democracy. They called the new umbrella organization “Feminists in Resistance.”

On Aug. 18, Feminists in Resistance sat down with women from the international delegation for Women’s Human Rights Week, which they organized to monitor and analyze human rights violations and challenges for the organization. One after another they told their stories in a long session that combined group therapy and political analysis—a natural mix at this critical point in Honduran history and the history of their movement.

Miriam Suazo relates the events of the day of the coup. “On the 28th, women began calling each other, saying ‘what’s happening?’” At first no-one really understood the full extent of the coup, she says, but networks mobilized quickly and women began to gather to share information and plan actions. Independent feminists and feminists from different organizations immediately identified with each other and with the rising resistance to the coup. They began going out to help those who had been beaten and to trace individuals arrested by security forces.

For some, the shock of waking up to a coup d’état wasn’t new.

“This is my third coup,” relates Marielena. “I was girl when the coup in 1963 happened. Then I lived through the coup in 1972. We lived in front of a school and I saw how my mother faced the bullets, we thought they were going to kill her… Later in the university in the 80s I lived through the repression with many of the women here… So this has revived the story of my life.”

There is a saying in Honduras about the Central American dirty war that “While the U.S. had its eye on Nicaragua and its hands in El Salvador, it had its boot on Honduras.” For the older women who remember the terror of that time when over 200 people were disappeared and hundreds tortured and assassinated, the current coup stirs up deep fears. Gilda Rivera, director of the Center for Women’s Rights in Tegucigalpa, says, “I’ve had a messed-up life. I was among the students kidnapped by Billy Joya in the 80s… Now I’ve been to the border twice, I’ve lived with a curfew over my head. Sometimes I wake up alone, terrified.”

The older women agree that they have grown and their movement has grown since the 80s.
Marielena notes, “Today´s not the same as the 80s because there’s a popular movement that the coup leaders never imagined… What Zelaya has done is symbolize the popular discontent accumulated over the years.” She recounts the August 5 battle for the university where she works and the surprising participation of students. Her story is echoed in variations by many of the women present.

Although they battle nightmares and long-buried trauma, these women also see a new hope for the resistance this time around and for their own fight for women´s rights. The repression and fear has strengthened their resolve. “Sure, I’m afraid of dying but I´m not losing hope,” Gilda says. “I see hope in the faces of the people at the marches. And the solidarity from women, from all of you, keeps me going.”

For Jessica, events this year brought to mind the contra war of the 80s. “I never imagined that my daughters would have to be in a situation like this,” she says. As a mother who has lived through the period before Honduras began its incomplete transition to democracy, and the period when democracy was merely a word that belied a much cruder reality in the country, she worries. “I told my daughter not to go to the march. She said, ‘mom, what about my autonomy?’”

“My little girl—she’s 18 now, but she’s still my little girl—ended up going with me to the march. It was really gratifying for me that we went together.” These women know in their bodies and their hearts the costs of resistance. They also know that the costs of not resisting are far greater.

For the new generation of feminists, the catalyst came with the confrontation in front of the National Institute of Women on July 15. The day the coup-appointed head of the Institute was installed, Feminists in Resistance gathered to protest the takeover of “their” institution. Keila says, “The police used their billy clubs, they grabbed me by the neck. I was filled with so much rage—I was drowning in it.” Many women in the organization experienced a turning point in their lives that day. Adelai explains, “(The Institute) was my turf, something that belonged to me, and they attacked us there. That was a direct assault on our condition as women… What they did there really affected me personally.”

Despite a lot of suffering, the women in the Feminists in Resistance meeting agree that the exhausting dynamic of constant mobilizations and repression has deepened their commitment. Their movement has also come together and developed closer ties to the general movement. When word got out that the feminists were being attacked at the Women’s Institute, demonstrators from the entire demonstration of the National Front against the Coup immediately marched to the Institute to defend the women and show their solidarity.

Although the Front leadership continues to be mostly male, men in the movement have publicly recognized the contributions of the feminist organizations and women in the resistance. From tracking the wounded and detained, to marching day after day, to developing analysis and strategy papers, women’s organizations have played a critical role in opposing the coup.

At a meeting between leaders of the Front and Feminists in Resistance earlier in the day, Salvador Zuniga, a leader of the Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH) and the Front, recognized that women have been among the most active and courageous in the resistance movement. He pointed out that the feminist movement is at the center of the rightwing reaction that led to the coup.

“One of the things that provoked the coup d’état was that the president accepted a petition from the feminist movement regarding the day-after pill. Opus Dei mobilized, the fundamentalist evangelical churches mobilized, along with all the reactionary groups,” he explained.

The unprecedented role of women in the nation’s fight for democracy opens them up as a target for repression. Zuniga concluded in no uncertain terms, “What I can say is that the feminist compañeras are in greater danger than any other organization. This has to be made public.” His conclusion is based on the forces now in control of the Women´s Institute.

Besides being at the receiving end of the billy clubs and pistols along with the rest of the movement, women suffer specific forms of repression and violence; their bodies have become part of the battleground. Human rights groups including the Women’s Human Rights Week international delegation have documented rapes, beatings, sexual harassment and discriminatory insults. Army and police units routinely shout out “whores!”, “Go find a husband!”, "Go home where you belong!" at the more and more frequent confrontations between the women and the coup security forces.

It’s precisely that step out of the private sphere that makes these dangerous times so exciting and energizes the women of the organization. Many report being driven by the adrenaline of knowing that this time they are the ones defining their history. They ride a roller coaster of emotions, often pitching from euphoria to despair in a single day. But one constant is the satisfaction of binding in a political project with other women who understand the full scope of what they demand and share the contradictory feelings storming inside.

The budding movement that has come together in the heat of the coup as Feminists in Resistance faces some major challenges, the first to defeat the coup that now enters Day 54 on the resistance calendar. As the rightwing consolidates power and its own perverse brand of institutionalism, they feel like they´re looking down the barrel of a gun as far as their rights and safety are concerned. Rumors circulate that the coup will dismantle the Institute for Women. Congress is about to initiate obligatory military service, meaning that mothers throughout the country will be compelled to protect their children from forced induction. Their freedom of expression, freedom of transit, freedom of assembly have all been curtailed under the coup, along with everyone else who opposes the regime, except for them the physical enforcement of reduced liberties is accompanied by acts of sexual violence and threats.

Big questions are on the table at the meeting of Honduran and international feminists. How to fight for a necessary return to institutional order at a time when the vulnerability and insufficient nature of those institutions has been exposed? How to avoid relegating women´s demands to a lower plane in a period of acute political crisis? How to break through a media black-out that´s even more impenetrable if you´re against the coup and a woman? And how to simply hold your work and family together while spending hours a day in the streets and meetings.

Bertha Cáceres is a leader of COPINH, a leader of the Front, and mother of four. In her political work she has integrated her specific demands as a woman and believes that organized women must be front-and-center in the resistance against the coup.

“First, because (our struggle as women) means confronting a dictatorship based on different forms of domination. We´ve said that it´s not just destructive capitalism, not just the racism that has also been strengthened by this dictatorship, but also patriarchy. So we think our resistance as women means going a step further, toward a more strategic vision, a more long-term vision in fighting for our country.”

She points to a national constitutional assembly as a fundamental goal for women. “For the first time we would be able to establish a precedent for the emancipation of women, to begin to break these forms of domination. The current constitution never mentions women, not once, so to establish our human rights, our reproductive, sexual, political, social and economic rights as women would be to really confront this system of domination.”

The women of Feminists in Resistance have no illusions that this will be an easy task. In addition to the challenges above, the movement is in transition to a new stage of nationwide local organization and long-term strategizing, at the same time as it faces increasing repression and human rights violations. The question of the elections slated for November has created another deadline for definitions of Sept. 1, when President Zelaya has sworn to return to the country and campaigns would normally begin. Feminists in Resistance has a clear position to boycott any coup-sponsored elections, but some other parts of the movement and the international diplomatic community have been more ambiguous.

What´s certain amid these rapidly changing national scenarios is that Honduran women have built a movement that, despite little media attention and the barriers of a male-dominated society, has garnered international support from women around the world and respect from the general resistance movement. Their organization will continue to play a central role in what happens next in Honduras—a key determinant of the course of democracy throughout the Hemisphere.

Laura Carlsen is Director of the Americas Program. She is currently in Tegucigalpa as a member of the international delegation of Women's Human Rights Week in Honduras.

An Open Letter to President Obama on "Hypocrisy"

At the Summit of North American Leaders in Guadalajara, President Obama uncharacteristically lit into critics of his administration's actions (or lack thereof) to crack the coup in Honduras.

Obama said, "The same critics who say that the United States has not intervened enough in Honduras are the same people who say that we're always intervening and the Yankees need to get out of Latin America."

"If these critics think that it's appropriate for us to suddenly act in ways that in every other context they consider inappropriate, then I think what that indicates is that maybe there's some hypocrisy involved in their -- their approach to U.S.-Latin American relations that certainly is not going to guide the policy of my administration."

That stung. Feeling myself directly alluded to, I sent a letter to the White House. Here is the letter, and below are a few more things I would have said if I hadn't had a two thousand character limit on the form.

Dear Mr. President,

It is hard to express my disappointment at your remarks about those of us who have been working to end the military coup in Honduras. Calling us hypocrites was uncalled for, to say the least, rude, and grossly inaccurate.

The United States government has already declared that what happened on June 28 was a coup d'etat and the law demands that sanctions be applied to an illegal regime. This is not intervention; it is U.S. law. We have never demanded that the U.S. "intervene". We have only demanded that it be consistent with its own policies and resolutions and with actions taken by countries throughout the world. I have been truly concerned as a citizen and as a policy analyst who works on promoting democracy in Latin America that the U.S. position has not been entirely consistent and that the relative weakness of this position has been a factor in the intransigence of the coup.

Mr. President, many of your initial statements about the coup were firm and principled. I welcomed those statements as a decided change from the ideological posturing of the past.

Now I find that I am publicly slighted and and sidelined for calling for stronger measures. It is one thing to have a difference of opinion on how to end this bloody coup, which we all would agree has gone on for way too long. It is quite another to call on citizens to get involved in your government and then misrepresent our positions and insult our character when we do.

When outlining a new approach to Latin America, you have quoted Franklin Delano Roosevelt's principle of "mutual respect" in foreign relations. This principle must begin at home, between the president who ignited hopes for a new U.S. foreign policy and the citizens who are working to bring it to about.

I honestly believe an apology is in order, to me and to the thousands of people in faith-based organizations who have called for further sanctions in Honduras. I also urge you to review your administration's actions since June 28, the options still available, and the current stalemate, with the aim of developing a stronger pro-democracy position that is not "interventionist" but thoroughly in line with international and national law.

Sincerely and Respectfully,
Laura Carlsen

It is probably no coincidence that these remarks came out one day before the International Day of Action on Honduras. Scores of U.S. organizations, including national church organizations, unions, migrants groups and human rights networks have called for citizens to urge the Obama administration to withdraw the U.S. ambassador, apply economic sanctions and freeze assets of coup leaders. A letter written by Rep. Grijalva is circulating that calls for the above and that asks the government to speak out on human rights violations under the coup. The Delahunt-Serrano-McGovern Resolution in Congress calls for suspension of non-humanitarian assistance to the coup regime.

Obama's remark insults these widespread citizen actions, which are exactly the kind of grassroots mobilization and participation in policy and democracy that he encouraged as a candidate. There is a derogatory stereotype at the root of the remarks too. We are all lumped into some "Yankees out of (fill in the blank)" class that is not only explicitly accused of being hypocritical but also portrayed as having knee-jerk and uninformed opinions.

"These same people", may or may not be veterans of past campaigns against U.S. intervention in Latin America. In many cases, it is the organizing experience, knowledge and dedication of many who did indeed help to bring to light U.S. illegal involvement in the Central American dirty wars and contra activities that is structuring the grassroots movement in the U.S. against the Honduran coup. Many of them helped elect Obama. His snide criticism has called into question for them the administration's commitment to real change in the policies they fought so hard to banish and that have done so much damage to the U.S. image abroad. Many U.S. delegations have traveled to Honduras in the past month, have studied the Honduran Constitution and reviewed the chain of events since June 28. Their views are not uninformed and much less inconsistent

Today Hondurans from all over the country are converging on Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula in a show of strength to protest the coup. They have called on the U.S. government to cut off the lifeline it still holds out to the coup. They have not asked for intervention, just a chance to restore democracy in their country.

At the same time, the coup-controlled Honduran press is having a heyday with the Obama remarks. La Tribuna has a picture of Obama on the front page with the headline "Hypocrisy to Call for Intervention in Honduras"

The distinction between intervention and cutting off the coup is a no-brainer, and it's likely that Obama knows that. Given the international consensus that this is an illegal regime, sanctions follow by law. They are a withdrawal of support for a military-backed action condemned by the entire international community, not support for one legitimate faction over another in an internal democratic dispute.

The definition of hypocrisy is to have a pretense of a belief or commitment you do not actually hold or act on. Doubt about the true aims of the State Department in Honduras are on the rise as time goes by with funds flowing to the coup government, no further action on the part of the administration, and the coup still entrenched in power.

I would like to believe the administration's commitment to democracy in Honduras and the hemisphere is real. But the time has come to show some proof of that beyond resolutions and rhetoric. If the Obama administration fails to act on its stated commitment to restore President Zelaya to power, it opens itself up to the same accusation Obama rashly leveled at us in Guadalajara.

Third Stage of Operation Crack the Coup: Popular Mobilization

In an interview yesterday, I described the three stages of the coup so far. Stage one began with the immediate response of the international diplomatic community in condemning the coup d'etat in Honduras and supporting the immediate return of President Manuel Zelaya. Zelaya appeared before the Organization of American States, the United Nations, Central American and South American integration groups and received universal backing.

Many of us thought that this unanimous condemnation could break the coup, especially when the colossal of the north, the United States, weighed in against it. How long could the coup leaders last, iced out of the international system?

The answer turned out to be much longer than we expected and way longer than we hoped. The coup has gone into its second month. Either the diplomatic sanctions were not strict enough or the coup leaders have hidden sources of support that have led them to believe they can buck the rest of the world.

Both of these explanations are demonstrably true, and we can add to that a high dose of delusional thinking on the part of de facto regime that does not seem to understand its own dilemma. As documented here before, international rightwing forces have backed the fall of Zelaya since before the coup and continue to provide expertise and likely considerable financial resources. U.S. so-called "democracy promotion" programs including the National Endowment for Democracy, USAID and the International Republican Institute have also funneled large amounts of cash to Zelaya opponents. The Honduran oligarchy controls a huge percentage of national wealth and now has exclusive control over the national budget. Given the high degree of corruption in the country as a whole, it probably has some more shady sources as well but that remains on the docket for further investigation.

Sanctions by the U.S. government have so far touched only a small percentage of aid to Honduras and although joint military operations have been cut off, the School of Americas Watch reports that the school continues to train Hondurans and there have been no changes in operations at the Palmerola military base where the U.S. has military personnel. Freezing assets of coup members or applying trade sanctions have not even been discussed openly.

The second stage was the mediation promoted by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and led by Costa Rican President Oscar Arias. This stage has ended in failure as well. After Arias proposed a seven-point plan, the coup rejected the main point of Zelaya´s return. The coup announced that it would come back with an answer on Monday. Dilatory practices that end in more refusals have been standard coup behavior since the talks began.

Moreover, Zelaya´s return to office is not the only issue in mediation. There exists the problem that the State Department seems to favor a plan that will curtail the constitutional powers of the president.

Amb. Robert White, president of the Center for International Policy, writes,

"President Mel Zelaya is right to refuse to be delivered back to his presidential chair, trussed and bound like a capon, an impotent symbol of a democratic façade."

"If Secretary of State Clinton permits the coup regime to impose conditions on the return of the constitutional president, then she damages, perhaps irreparably, the OAS, and breaks faith with Oscar Arias who thought he had her unequivocal backing."

Americas Program on-the-ground writer in Honduras, Dick Emanuelsson just sent in a long report on the current situation in Honduras that combines interviews and eye-witness descriptions, history and analysis, and an understanding of the country that comes with years of living in Tegucigalpa and reporting for news agencies throughout the world on that troubled corner of the earth. We are currently translating it in its entirety for these pages.

Here is part of an interview with Marvin Ponce, congressional representative of the Democratic Unification Party and a member of the delegation that Zelaya selected for the dialogue in Costa Rica with Arias. Ponce met with State Department officials in Washington. Here he expresses his lack of faith in Arias and the mediation process.

“Oscar Arias is an enemy of social movements and has played a sad role by dragging out the process and proposing an agenda of seven points even though he is not a negotiator and even discarding the popular consultation, which was the reason for the coup...”,

"They (the coup leaders) have the arms—not only the military but also the communications media. We have broken the media blockade of the right and the groups in power, and you can see how the people have been mobilizing all this time without giving in.”

"We went to Washington to demand a stronger role of the United States that practically displaced the OAS; it took over the process and took it to Central America and to Arias where it became a sterile dialogue, meant to go on and on to wear out the president, the citizenry and give more force to the coup and practically converted the coup into a valid counterpart. The biggest mistake of the president was to sit down and dialogue with the coup. However, he believed that after talking with Hillary Clinton everything would end in two or three days because the mediation would have been an ultimatum to the coup to give up power."

“The first meeting with Arias was a failure. The second also, and the third brought in this other agenda. The coup leaders now say that they are taking the proposal to the national congress and the Supreme Court to consult—this is a bureaucratic way of buying time. Now the Obama administration is telling Zelaya not to go to Tegucigalpa but to Washington. The U.S. is playing a sorry role and in the end is playing to the coup because they do not want a concrete solution to the problem."

“When we were in Washington, the representative in charge of Central America in the State Department told us that they were doing a legal study to decide whether or not there was a coup in Honduras. That's why we say that the people do not want to submit to national or international coup supporters.”

Ponce believes the mediation is weakening regional efforts at ending the coup.

"The Secretary General of the OAS, Jorge Miguel Insulza, arrived in Tegucigalpa the third day of the coup just to advise the coup leaders that they had to give up power to the ousted president Zelaya. Now he has a low profile and suggests that Zelaya should not go back to his own country, in recognition of the Costa Rica agenda."

Honduran social organizations have rejected the failed mediation and we have entered the third stage of the drama, where growing popular resistance faces off with increasing repression. The potential for more violence grows each day, as shown in the terrible attack on demonstrators in El Durazno, Tegucigalpa yesterday (see photo).

This doesn't mean that other stages are closed off completely. Latin American organizations have begun efforts to increase pressures. Members of the Mexican Congress called on President Felipe Calderon, who is the current president of the Rio Group, to call a meeting of that group to step up pressure. But he too has bought into the failed mediation and refused .

Mark Weisbrot of the Center for Economic Policy research, writing for the Guardian says,

"Latin America gave Washington a chance to use its influence with the Honduran elite to restore democracy there. It didn't work. Now it is Latin America's turn to take the lead. Hopefully, Washington will follow."

Perhaps it will be a combination of renewed diplomatic efforts and the popular movement that finally restores constitutional order in Honduras. For now, the latter is on the forefront and deserves total international support for its efforts to end the impasse before more people are killed and wounded by a coup desperate to retain power gained against all conventions of international law and human decency.

High Noon in Honduras

Both sides are preparing for high noon in Honduras this weekend, as President Manuel Zelaya plans to return to his country and coup leaders vow to arrest him immediately if he does.

Zelaya was abducted by hooded members of the armed forces on June 28 and flown to Costa Rica. The coup established itself in power, anointed by a National Congress at odds with the president.

Since then, the drama moved from this small, impoverished country to the international stage. Zelaya traveled to Managua to attend a meeting of the Central American Integration System, where he picked up formal statements of support from Central American nations, the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA), the Group of Rio, and the whole alphabet soup of integration groups in the region.

From there, the newly famous president flew to New York for an appearance before the General Assembly of the United Nations, which also called for his immediate reinstatement. Zelaya met again with the Organization of American States (OAS) on July 1, which issued an ultimatum to the coup leaders to restore him to power in 72 hours or face suspension from the 34-nation bloc.

Zelaya had planned a return to his country for July 2, but postponed his return to allow the period to pass as international diplomacy went into overdrive. "The OAS has called for 72 hours and we agree with this decision," Zelaya stated. That places his return date for this weekend. Zelaya has refused to give details on the exact date or how he will return, saying he does not want to tip off armed forces leading the coup.

Meanwhile, self-styled "president" Roberto Micheletti has stated to the press that Zelaya "will never return" and refused to negotiate reinstatement. The coup issued arrest orders against Zelaya on 18 charges that include betrayal of the country and failure to fulfill his duties.

The Honduran crisis came to a head over a nationwide non-binding referendum called by President Zelaya to determine if citizens should vote in November elections on calling a Constitutional Assembly to remake the country's magna carta. The courts and the Congress ruled the poll illegal and when the president proceeded to carry out the vote, the armed forces moved in to take control.

All Sides Dig In

Supporters of the coup, opposition forces and the international community have all been busily working to consolidate their ranks over the past few days. On July 2, social organizations of workers, farmers, and citizens held a massive march through Tegucigalpa, where they delivered a message of gratitude for support for democracy at the offices of the United Nations.

Henry Alegria, interviewed by phone amid shouting demonstrators, affirmed that despite arrest orders, movement leaders are still safe and the ranks of the opposition are growing. Although the army has blocked pro-Zelaya groups from traveling to the capital in some places, so far there has been little bloodshed. Alegria noted, "They are using other kinds of tactics, like the curfew and accusing anti-coup leaders of crimes."

The coup declared a "state of exception," the equivalent to a state of siege, on July 1, suspending basic civil liberties including freedom of assembly, freedom of transit, due process, and justifying search and seizure without a warrant. The press has been placed under tight controls, with some media—including international media—shut down completely at times.

Honduran human rights leader, Bertha Oliva, stated, "With the suspension of these articles, they officially make us all vulnerable and justify their actions against basic human rights." Oliva called for urgent support from the international community.

Coup supporters have also rallied forces to protest the return of Zelaya and press for recognition of the coup government. They have held parallel rallies in Tegucigalpa, claiming that Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez is the force behind Zelaya, and asserting that the international community's position is due to ignorance of the situation.

Video images of the dueling demonstrations show the sharp split in the country. Honduras is the 16th most unequal nation in the world, with the top 10% of the population receiving 42% of income and the bottom 10% controlling only 1.2%. This situation feeds a steady stream of migrants to the United States, and many families now live off money sent home from relatives working there.

Zelaya draws his support among the poor primarily. Elected as a center-right politician from a wealthy ranching family, Zelaya moved to the left over the course of his four-year term. He especially galled business leaders by raising the minimum wage last December from $157 to $289 dollars a month, except in free trade zones. The UN notes that 44% of the population lives on less than two dollars a day. Unions and campesino organizations belonging to Via Campesina stand strongly behind the president.

On the other side are business leaders, media owners, and politicians. These forces claim that the return of Zelaya with the help of the international community would constitute an unacceptable "foreign invasion," and that the president was aiming to extend the term limit through the poll planned for the 28th.

The armed forces have played a powerful but discreet role since overthrowing the government. As in any military coup, their actions will largely define how events play out. So far, the top officers have formed a tight command with the civilian coup leaders. When Michelletti appeared before a pro-coup crowd, uniformed military officers stood firmly but silently in the background.

Via Campesina leader in Honduras, Rafael Alegria, said in an interview with the Americas Program that the army has blocked protesters from traveling to Tegucigalpa and other points. He added that the military could be preparing for war. "They are recruiting young people, ages 12-30, for military service. We don't know what the purpose is, but they are inciting people saying there could be a war. They are also calling out reservists and persons retired from the armed forces."

Intense Diplomatic Activity

The military coup in Honduras has all the sinister markings of the Cold War overthrows by dictators that characterized Latin America in the past. The president was kidnapped in the wee hours of the morning, wearing only his pajamas, and army forces occupied the streets of the small, impoverished nation.

But the world has changed since those times. The international community united across ideological lines in its condemnation, with the United States government joining the call for reinstatement of the left-leaning president.

President Obama called it a "terrible precedent" and the State Department has worked within the OAS to pressure the coup to back down and restore the rule of law.

The postponement of Zelaya's return offers yet another possible diplomatic solution to what could turn into a violent confrontation. The OAS text condemned the coup, recognized Zelaya as the president, and called for the Secretary General to seek diplomatic solutions. Its resolution states, "Should these prove unsuccessful within 72 hours, the Special General Assembly shall forthwith invoke Article 21 of the Inter-American Democratic Charter to suspend Honduras' membership."

The UN resolution deplores the interruption of "the democratic and constitutional order and the legitimate exercise of power in Honduras." The text demands "the immediate and unconditional restoration of the legitimate and Constitutional Government of the President of the Republic, Mr. José Manuel Zelaya Rosales, and of the legally established authority in Honduras."

International response has also included diplomatic and economic sanctions. The European Union and virtually all Latin American countries are withdrawing their ambassadors immediately.

Central American countries closed their borders to land trade with Honduras for 48 hours and the Central American Bank has suspended loans. Robert Zoellick, head of the World Bank, announced that the Bank will "pause" lending to Honduras under the coup. The Bank had a reported $270 million in the pipeline to Honduras and is a major source of lending for the country.

U.S. Response

The Obama administration has firmly supported OAS efforts to condemn the coup and reinstate Zelaya. The coup is the first real diplomatic crisis to confront the new administration, and although Honduras is a small (7.3 million pop.) and economically weak country that plays a very minor role in U.S. geopolitical strategy, the issues at stake make it a test case for a new foreign policy.

The response from Obama, and a generally on-message State Department, has already shown some major shifts from the foreign policy of his predecessor.

First, the administration broke with the ideologically defined criteria of democracy established by the Bush government. Zelaya's ties with Venezuela—its membership in the nine-nation ALBA—made it suspect to the Bush administration and many members still part of the U.S. diplomatic corps. By condemning the coup against Zelaya, the administration placed democratic principles above the ideological split created by the Bush administration between Latin American nations bound to alliances.

Second, the United States government has committed to working within multilateral organizations, especially the OAS, to resolve the crisis. Since before the abduction of the president, when rumors of a coup circulated and Honduran armed forces were deployed, the United States joined with other countries of the hemisphere to prevent the coup and later condemn it. Since then, it has allowed the OAS under Sec. General Jose Insulza to take the lead.

As the OAS deadline approaches, the U.S. government could do more. Among the following measures some are subject to delicate considerations of timing, since Honduras faces a very volatile situation in the next few days and avoiding massive violence and even war must be a top priority in arranging Zelaya's return.

The United States government should withdraw its ambassador from Tegucigalpa immediately. In Honduras today, there is no valid counterpart with which to engage in diplomatic dialogue. Latin American and European nations have already withdrawn their ambassadors. The continued presence of the U.S. ambassador could create a doubt about whether the United States is truly committed to isolating the Honduran coup diplomatically. With all eyes on the United States, that doubt could be interpreted as a crack in the door at a time when it is important to leave the coup no room to believe it can consolidate its illegitimate power.

The message must be crystal clear: There is no possibility of diplomatic engagement with a military coup.

The United States must support immediate suspension of Honduras from the OAS at the end of the 72-hour period if the coup is still in power. There have been some reports that a debate exists in the OAS over whether the suspension is automatic at the end of the deadline or requires a new meeting. The U.S. representatives in the OAS should support immediate suspension of Honduras if this period runs out with the coup still in power. Any waffling on a key diplomatic ultimatum would be a sign of weakness that could be interpreted as a lack of commitment to the rule of law in Honduras. It would also indicate a fracture in the OAS, which to date has acted swiftly and in a remarkably unified manner.

The United States must apply economic sanctions. Under Section 7008 of the Foreign Operations Bill, all U.S. assistance must be cut off in the case of a military coup. While Sec. of State Clinton has called the Honduran coup a coup, the State Department says it is reviewing the legal definition before sending word to Congress to cut aid. At stake is up to $42 million in aid planned for the Central American country.

This is one that seems to be a question of timing. Some argue that the sanctions should be announced before the deadline runs out to pressure the coup to allow the safe return of President Zelaya to office. Others argue that by holding the sanctions card until later, the international community has more to bargain with in the case on non-compliance with the deadline.

In any case, the law is clear that sanctions must be applied.

The United States should do all in its power to assure the safe and peaceful return of the democratically elected president, Manuel Zelaya. Presumably, this is being done. There is no room for negotiation that does not include restoring Zelaya to power unconditionally. The logistics of safely getting him home will be complicated and require the creativity and commitment of all nations, especially the United States.

The United States must speak up for the protection of human rights and civil liberties. The State Department has been relatively silent on the state of siege, army repression of demonstrators, and threats against grassroots movement leaders in the country. It must speak out more strongly to protect these people and warn the coup against the further criminalization and repression of the opposition.


For More Information:

Honduran Rural Leader Rafael Alegria: "Some Battalions Are Refusing to Repress the Population"

Text of UN Resolution and Call for International Support from Popular Resistance Front of Honduras

Zelaya Postpones Return, Mass Mobilization in the Country

Honduran Crisis Tests Commitment to Democracy

What could have been a military coup in Honduras seems to have been defused by the intervention of the international community. The opposition to President Mel Zelaya seems to have backed down for the time being and a more conciliatory president has announced that the situation is under control.

The acid test comes tomorrow, when the nation votes in a national poll called by the president and opposed by the legislature and the courts.

The events that led to the Honduran political crisis began with a simple question: Do you agree to install a fourth urn in the November 2009 general elections to decide on calling a National Consitutent Assembly that would approve a political constitution?

This question will be placed before the public in a non-binding poll that has caused an uproar within parts of the government and powerful sectors of society that have tried to block it.

Both the Honduran Congress and the courts ruled against holding the poll in recent days. The rulings sparked a crisis when the head of the armed forces, General Romeo Vasquez, refused to allow the army to distribute the urns and other materials for the June 28 poll.

As Commander in Chief, Zelaya fired Vasquez on June 24 for disobeying an order. The following day, organized citizen groups led by Zelaya went to the army base where the materials had been delivered to recover and distribute them.

The army then occupied strategic points in the streets of the capital city of Tegucigalpa, reportedly including the presidential residence. Playing chicken with the executive branch, the Supreme Court ordered that Vasquez be reinstated.

That’s when the situation began to smell like a military coup d’ etat. The presidency charged that the army mobilization was supported by “the media and economic oligarchy” and warnings of a coup circulated around the world.

Today, the country moved back from the brink of open conflict. Zelaya said in an interview that Vasquez will remain in his post, stating, “It’s true, I announced his removal, but I have not named anyone. He remains in charge of the Armed Forces and has expressed his obedience and discipline.” He also announced that he will ask the army to withdraw to its quarters.

At the time of this writing, the army remains in the streets and it is unclear if it will try to obstruct the process. Vasquez was reported as saying that the armed forces were standing by “to guarantee order in the country and respect for the Constitution”, according to EFE press.

International Support and the OAS Role
The Organization of American States (OAS), Bolivarian Alternative (ALBA), the United Nations, Mercosur and the European Union have all expressed support for dialogue and respect for democratic institutions in Honduras. In a highly charged geopolitical context, the content and effects of the endorsements differed in important ways.

The nine-nation ALBA bloc, to which Honduras belongs, stated unequivocal support for President Zelaya:
“We manifest our firmest support for the government of [Zelaya], in its just and decided actions to defend the right of the Honduran people to express their sovereign will and advance a process of social transformation in the framework of democratic institutions."

It went on to warn of consequences in the event of a coup:
"We will mobilize ourselves... in the event of any attempt by the oligarchy to break the democratic and constitutional order of this sister Central American republic."
This had the contradictory impact of signalling that the Honduran government could not be isolated in the conflict and of inflaming the anti-Zelaya factions in the country, especially the press, which has consistently criticized the president for his ties with Chavez.

The United Nations statement confined itself to stating “it is important for the country's leaders to act with full respect for the rule of law and democratic institutions, and to seek consensus on the pressing political issues through a peaceful and inclusive dialogue” and clarified that the institution was not sending observers to the June 28 vote.

The OAS actions went farthest in defusing the conflict. Honduras took its case before the Permanent Council on June 26. Honduran representative, Carlos Sosa, made a plea for support in upholding the country’s democratic institutions. Sosa noted that his government "had reason to believe that democratic institutions and legitimate exercise of power are at risk, are being threatened.”

Following deliberations over a draft resolution, the OAS pronounced its support for the rule of law and agreed to send a mission to Honduras to investigate the situation.
OAS involvement deflects the possibility that the military will force a scenario in which Zelaya is replaced, since this would clearly be interpreted as a break with democratic institutions. It also opens up space for a mediated dialogue among the warring factions, using the shared diplomatic arena to avoid unilateral outside intervention either in favor of or against the administration.

The OAS commitment, welcomed by the Honduran government, also lessens regional fears that the U.S. government will intervene against the Zelaya government. In The long history of intervention in the region and the Bush doctrine have left great skepticism about the U.S. role that has not disappeared with the election of Obama. Honduras served as the staging grounds for the illegal U.S.-supported war against the Nicaraguan government and hosts a U.S. military base.

The Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras(COPINH) charged in a communique on June 24 that the U.S. ambassador “alerted beforehand of the events denounced here, left the country and called on the directors of the World Bank, International Monetary Fund and other institutions close to the U.S. government to abandon the country, thus demonstrating his complicity with the forces attempting the coup.”

The Americas Program has contacted the State Department to confirm or deny the alleged departure of the ambassador but has received no response.

The United States undeniably has the military capacity to intervene and impose a solution. Moreover, Honduras has grown deeply dependent on the U.S. economy. Remittances from the U.S. were $2.56 billion in 2007--more than one-fifth of GDP--and the U.S. is by far the country’s major trade partner. In recent years the U.S. government has threatened to cut off visas, withdraw trade privileges or block remittances when it felt its interests negatively affected.

If the crisis came to a head, would the U.S. intervene militarily or through economical sanctions to pressure the left-leaning president?

Especially given its support of the OAS role, the answer is “very unlikely”. The Obama adminstration has repeatedly voiced its commitment to multilateral diplomacy. State Department spokesperson Phillip Crowley affirmed the position to work within the OAS, while avoiding specific mention of supporting the Honduran president:

“We urge all sides to seek a consensual democratic resolution in the current political impasse that adheres to the Honduran constitution and to Honduran laws consistent with the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter. And we think that the OAS has an important role to play here, and we urge the OAS to take all appropriate actions necessary to uphold the provisions in the charter.”

Although the U.S. representative to the OAS, Hector Morales, hinted at criticism of Zelaya, stating that “no branch of government can be above the law” and emphasizing the separation of powers, the U.S. joined other countries in supporting the OAS decision by acclamation.

Zelaya thanked the international community for support for the democratic institutions, calling it “healthy” and crediting their actions for staving off an attempt to break from institutional rule.

It is ironic that Honduras is once again on center stage at the OAS. Just weeks ago, the nation hosted the General Assembly where after protracted negotiations the organization agreed to repeal the suspension of Cuba. At that time, the ability to reach a difficult consensus revived hope that the OAS could play a strong and less biased role in the hemisphere than it has in the past.

Today’s decision reinforces that hope.

Just the Beginning
If Honduras gets through tomorrow’s poll without violence or political rupture, no matter what the results are it will be only the beginning of a long and tempestuous political process. This week’s crisis concentrated on the presidency, the balance of powers and the public’s right to voice its opinion on a national issue.

But if, as many expect, the results of the poll show strong support for a Constitutional Assembly, then the real hard part starts.

What the mainstream press has avoided reporting is that Zelaya has widespread popular support and the proposal to create a new constitution in the country has even wider support.

Depending on the source, the per capita gross national income in Honduras runs between $1,635 and around $4,000 dollars. Forty-four percent of the population lives on under 2$ a day, according to the United Nations.

State Department figures show 38 percent of the population unemployed or underemployed, not counting the over one million who have migrated to the United States in search of a livelihood they could not find at home.

Honduras is not only a poor country; it is 16th in the world in inequality. The top 10 pecent of households receives 42 percent of the wealth while the lowest 10 percent receives only 1.2 percent.

The skewed power and wealth lies at the basis of the current conflict. The labor, farm, indigenous and poor organizations supporting tomorrow’s poll want to see a new constitution that redistributes resources in such a way as to balance wealth and halt forced migration to the United States.

The Citizen Movement to Restore Honduras notes the commitment these grassroots movements have to their cause: “The poll is very popular, and has sparked the widespread mobilization of party activists and progressive sectors, in which we include ourselves, and the people in general who see an opportunity to make structurally change some of the many inequities in Honduras, and throw out, by means of new Constitution, institutions built on the corruption and privilege of the national and internationally powerful.”

Forces opposing the poll have rarely touched on this issue. In an effort to portray the conflict as a problem of a lone, crazed megalomaniac, the media rarely interview popular organizations and interpret the constitutional assembly as merely a mechanism to prolong the Zelaya presidency. While a change in term limits may or may not eventually be proposed, this leaves out issues that lie at the crux of the current conflict and seriously distorts the information coming out of the beleaguered country.

Laura Carlsen