« North Korean propaganda art is nearly always pretty interesting | artappraiser's Blog | Iran's rulers are clearly baiting the west for reactions »
Honduras
In a shallow attempt to divert attention away from their Iranian brethren (?), while you were getting out of bed today, Hondurans were having a military coup. Here's the basic rundown...
New York Times' current summary report.
Reuters: Honduras Zelaya calls for peaceful resistance to coup and
Chavez puts Venezuela troops on alert on Honduras.
..Over the past year, Zelaya has alienated Honduras's political and business elite by aligning with the Chavez-led group of socialist Latin American leaders...
Feel free to use comments for updates or discussion if a better thread doesn't appear.
Advertisement
Statement of Sec. of State Clinton
Statement of President Obama
June 28, 2009 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
BBC profile of Zelaya:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8123134.stm
June 28, 2009 3:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Huffington Post has translated liveblogging of the emergency OAS session by Laura Carlsen, Americas Program, Center For International Policy:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/laura-carlsen/live-blog-oas-session-on_b_222012.html
I've got to say that there's a lot of things I don't like about HuffPo, but kudos to them for this one. We need more stuff like that, the big papers are taking people off the beats of these international confabs. (Like the U.N. beat! Ridiculous how little that is covered these days, because the audience for it is so small. Years ago, there used to be a program on CNN on the UN beat--Richard Roth I think--hidden away on the weekend, but it was taken off the air for lack of interest. And do we ever hear what goes on at NATO headquarters?) How are we going to solve world problems in a rational manner if we don't support and show interest in talking out problems at the institutions that already exist?
June 28, 2009 3:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Interesting, aa. The Venezuela representative may just have a long time bias, or may have actual information, but the reference to Otto Reich is worthy of mention here.
The Electronic Briefing Book from the National Security Archives called, Public Diplomacy and Covert Propaganda: The declassified record of Amb. Reich, is instructive. Also his Wikipedia page.
June 29, 2009 5:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, I too noted it; Reich has a controversial reputation to say the very least.
June 29, 2009 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Honduran question is more important than many think, as absorbed as we all are in mourning the passing of Michael Jackson.
Unlike Iran, Honduras is a client state of the USA, practically a colony. If Zelaya is returned to office because of US pressure to respect the democratic process, then the USA will gain a tremendous amount of credibility all over the world very cheaply. If this doesn't happen then Obama and the USA will lose credibility accordingly. No one anywhere will ever believe that the USA couldn't turn this thing around if it wanted to.
The skinny:
This little coup could be more important for US credibility than Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan... If the USA can't control the situation in Honduras, how can anyone expect the USA to control anything in the Middle East or South Asia?
June 28, 2009 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
How can the US intervene in this? Send troops? What are you proposing that might work. I agree; this sounds serious, and the fact that it happened without (apparently) any of our spooks knowing about it is a black eye.
BTW, Artappraiser, you've been contributing much more lately, and I really appreciate your thoughtful posts.
June 28, 2009 4:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
We have a joint military base with them there!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palmerola
Soto Cano Air Base (commonly known as Palmerola Air Base) is a joint Honduras and United States military base near Comayagua in Honduras. A large concentration of US troops and the Honduran military Air Force academy use the airbase....
I heard in passing on CNN, the Pentagon reporter Barbara Starr came on with a phone connection and said something about that. I was not listening, was distracted, it sounded like something along the lines of we usually would get troops out in a situation like this, but I am not sure, I could be totally wrong about what she said.
June 28, 2009 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've heard since that he was flown by the air force (ours?) to Costa Rica, and that the Supreme Court in Honduras is not on his side, but that Chavez is. What a mess!
Is it true what I read elsewhere that ambassadors from other embassies have also been kidnapped?
Why is the CIA not on this?
June 28, 2009 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
A while later I caught CNN do an update, they had a talking head woman in front of the White House do a summary and then they showed a spokesperson for the National Security Advisor in front of the White House and he was answering the question about our military on the base. He said our military are there to work on drug trade exclusively and that have absolutely nothing to do with this, will have nothing to do with it, will be staying there, are safe and sound, and that the two things are totally separate from one another.
It's bull of course to stress that it's like our military there are on another planet, totally isolated from the rest of the country and only interacting with military that have nothing to do with domestic matters, as they are probably getting all kinds of poop from their Honduran drug fighting colleagues, (and they were probably standing there watching the flight take off for Costa Rica?) but you basically get the picture from him saying that they want it to look that way. I get the impression that the Obama administration is hoping everything gets settled/blows over without too much hullabaloo and they don't have to do anything.
As "midnight rambler" says below @ 9:14 PM, nobody ia an angel in this story as far as constitutionality is concerned, and the Obama administration is repeating a constitutionality mantra, suggesting to me they don't want to have to take sides if they don't have to.
June 28, 2009 10:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Michael Jackson died? Who'd a thunk.
I have been grieving over Billy Mays.
June 28, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
dick, if you had been a Michael Jackson fan (I have seen you state elsewhere that your were not,) or had been playing catch up by watching the recast of his videos, you would know that he is a friend of the urban underclass of Brazil, which suggests he might have been a covert agent involved with all of this, moidured by the very same people. You never know what "news u can use," you have to stay on top of everything, hah. :-)
June 28, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ha!
June 28, 2009 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh sure, you laugh. Just you wait, keep your eye on ex Mrs. Jackson Lisa Marie Presley:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/nixon-met-elvis/assets/doc_1.1_transcript.html
June 28, 2009 11:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yikes!
June 29, 2009 1:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
More seriously now, sorry to freak you out if you didn't know that little bit of American history trivia. The docs associated with the Nixon/Elvis meeting are some of the most popular at the National Archives, so much so that they have a little exhibit set up, here is the website the goes with it if you want the complete story:
http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/nixon-met-elvis/main.php
He really did want to be a "secret agent" for the Nixon admin.
June 29, 2009 4:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
Much like Elvis Presley
June 29, 2009 11:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
Dickday, I think you should give yourself the Dayly Award for that comment. Just sayin'.
June 28, 2009 5:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Certainly I could see it planting some thoughts in the minds of some Pakistani military.
June 28, 2009 4:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mérida, June 28th 2009 (Venezuelanalysis.com) – Military personnel kidnapped the ambassadors of Venezuela, Cuba, and Nicaragua in Honduras, along with the Honduran Foreign Relations Minister Patricia Rodas, according to Venezuela’s ambassador to the Organization of American States (OAS), Roy Chaderton.
Chaderton made the announcement just before noon today during an emergency meeting of the OAS in Washington that was convened to respond to the military coup d’etat underway in the Honduras.
“Excuse the interruption, it is an urgent matter. I have just received information in this moment that the ambassadors of Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela,and Foreign Relations Minister Patricia Rodas have been kidnapped by a group ofhooded military agents,” said Chaderton.
Rodas confirmed the kidnapping in a hurried phone call to the Caracas-based television channel Telesur as the kidnapping was underway, according to Telesur.
Early this morning, approximately 200 soldiers kidnapped Honduran President Manuel Zelaya from his home and took over the state television station. A conflict between Zelaya and top military officials erupted this week after the military officials impeded the distribution of electoral materials for a national poll scheduled for today on whether to have a national referendumto re-write the national constitution.
http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/4556
A superficial reading of the targeted ambassadors suggests that this coup is not limited to domestic political disputes.
Given that Venuzuela/US relations have just taken babysteps forward in easing bilateral tensions...Chavez' reaction suggests that jig is up.
Obama's "concern" means what?
That goddam useless word should be banned from all administration communiques.
June 28, 2009 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
oy, what do these guys think, that the Venezuela club is the new Soviet Union?
June 28, 2009 4:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
oy, what do these guys think, that the Venezuela club is the new Soviet Union?
Yes. Chavez is also one of the most admired leaders in the ME.
From Ynet Breaking...:
Chavez threatens military action over Honduras coup
Published: 06.28.09, 23:26 / Israel News
"Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez on Sunday put troops on alert over a coup in Honduras and said he would respond militarily if his envoy to the Central American country was kidnapped or killed.
Chavez said Honduran soldiers took away the Cuban ambassador and left the Venezuelan ambassador on the side of a road after beating him during the army's coup against his leftist ally, Honduran President Manuel Zelaya. (Reuters)"
SPECIAL PLEA TO DAVID SEATON FOR A TRANSLATION OF THE EL PAIS article confusingly referenced here:
"The United States on Sunday denied any involvement in the military coup d'etat against Honduran President Manuel Zelaya, after he called on Washington to clarify if it had a role in the action.
snip]
"Zelaya told Spain's El Pais that a planned attempt to wrest power him was thwarted after the United States declined to back the move.
"Everything was in place for the coup and if the US embassy had approved it, it would have happened. But they did not ... I'm only still here in office thanks to the United States," he said in the newspaper interview published on Sunday.
"Last (Friday) morning, at around 1 or 2 am, Congress was passing a decree to incapacitate me and the armed forces were mobilized. But phone calls were made – I can't say by who or from where - but these calls stopped the coup," he said."
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3738311,00.html
????????
June 28, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well Chavez has been working awful hard to get Russia to establish a long-range bomber squadron in Venezuela ...
June 28, 2009 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point. Yeah, I think few could argue that the man isn't a threat to big international capitalist interests. If that's who "they" are, you couldn't really argue that they are being paranoid without any reason at all. Also he has often played around with Ahmenejad in the last couple years. Venezuela/Russia/Iran, oil & natural gas, possible dreams of grandeur, a new OPEC type of thing, certainly one could see Russia already tried out flexing muscles about Europe's gas supply a while back.
June 28, 2009 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
P.S. If it's not about Chavez, why did he get so angry and threatening about it right away?
June 28, 2009 10:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
On what planet is Russia not a gigantic capitalist interest? I wouldn't call it democratic, but there is unquestionably an oligopoly at the helm.
The man may have some leftist tendencies, but like any reasonably intelligent leader of a "crappy little country"(Cf Pipes), Chavez has reached out to a major power to keep from getting steamrolled by another major power.
June 29, 2009 12:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any proof of that forthcoming?
And what good would it do the Russians anyway?
Next thing we know, you'll start ranting about your precious bodily fluids.
June 29, 2009 5:25 AM | Reply | Permalink
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2009-03/14/content_11011378.htm
Fuck off.
June 29, 2009 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
And also too.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/mar/16/chavez-russia-venezuela-nuclear-base
trucknutz.
June 29, 2009 10:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pro Chavez forces taking Honduras?
Been along time since I've heard anyone mention the domino effect with any credibility.
Might be an interesting few days.
June 28, 2009 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
No, Chavez is backing Zelaya. Please let us know if you have new information, because what is available so far is the opposite of what you're saying.
June 28, 2009 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
msa 3, you need to read the news stories a little more carefully, it is anti-Chavez types who have staged the coup and Zelaya who is friendly with Chavez et. al.
June 28, 2009 10:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
LMAO
June 29, 2009 1:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is reminding me of a Jonny Depp movie. It doesn't end well.
June 28, 2009 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's either more like anOliver Stone or more like a Paul Mazursky, we don't know which yet?
June 28, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Go and get "Once upon a time in Mexico," and see if you don't agree that it is a pretty good description of what is going on. Even if you don't, you can enjoy the Antonio Bandaris eye candy!
June 29, 2009 8:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why did Zelaya ignore the Honduran Supreme Court's decision that the referendum he planned is unconstitutional?
Shouldn't be as outraged against the attack on the judicial branch as we are in regard to the coup against the executive?
June 28, 2009 8:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, we should be protesting his detention and exile of the Supreme Court, Legislature, and chiefs of the armed forces - his seizing absolute control of the organs of state is unconscionable and must be reviled in the harshest of terms.
(And not in the "sternly-worded letter sense".)
June 29, 2009 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but nobody comes off looking good here. Zelaya was trying to hold a illegal referendum to allow himself to be reelected. The military commander was following the Supreme Court's ruling not to hold it and Zelaya tried to fire him. So in response the military overthrows and expels Zelaya, and the Congress (including much of his own party) approves. Meanwhile Chavez is threatening to invade Honduras to restore him. It's just another one of the massive screwups that you get when nobody thinks they should have to play by the rules.
June 28, 2009 9:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
How the heck is Chavez going to get his armies through Columbia, Panama, Costa Rica, and Nicaragua to invade Honduras? I know some of these countries are his allies, but isn't that somewhat ... laughably ambitious?
June 28, 2009 10:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, presumably it's typical Chavez bluster. But I assume Venezuela has a sizable navy and air force, so some kind of wackiness isn't out of the question if the Honduran army fractures. That seems unlikely given the unanimous vote in Congress to remove Zelaya though.
June 29, 2009 1:27 AM | Reply | Permalink
If they really wanted to do it, which I don't think they do, the Venezuelans could enter through Nicaragua, which is an ally. The capital of Honduras is relatively close to the border of Nicaragua.
June 29, 2009 5:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Venezuela is very well armed militarily in comparison to its neighbors. Having had excellent diplomatic and trade relations with the United States prior to Chavez, the US and European neighbors had been willing to sell the Latin American Saudi Arabia just about anything she requested for her defense. As
Lieutenant Colonel Chavez tried to overthrow the democratically elected government in Caracas back in February 1992, the battle between F16s and Mirages over the skies of Caracas was terrifying from the terrace of my little east Caracas apartment. Since then, the "bolivarian revolution" has invested enormously in armament from Russia and China. Rarely does a month go by during which the headlines on Venezuelan newspapers do not mention a major purchase for the military.
Bluster or not, it remains to be seen. When Chavez not so long ago sent tanks to the Colombo-Venezuelan border and threatened to invade in response to Colombia's execution of FARC guerrilla leader, it did turn out in the end to be bluster.
June 29, 2009 9:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
European nations, not neighbors, that is.
June 29, 2009 9:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, I see they have air-superiority (f-16s vs. f-5s) and some good attack capabilities by sea. It just seems that (without taking a Honduran airfield) they have the ability to move about 250 troops by helicopter and 6 landing craft that will move about 150 troops each (and a tank? ... having trouble getting specs on the S. Korean ships they are using).
With the land route (through Colombia ... no big fan of Chavez); I was more wondering how they'd pull off specifically an invasion. Doesn't that usually require the ability to mass troops? (or am I being simplistic here ... not a big military guy).
And re Colombia: The fact that Colombia claimed they had recovered concrete proof of Chavez buying $300m worth of weapons for air-drop to the FARC (including anti-tank and anti-aircraft weaponry) had a lot to do with him backing down ... and seemingly led to the arrest of Viktor Bout in Thailand. I'm not sure we can count on that dynamic here.
June 29, 2009 11:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
appreciate your input
June 29, 2009 1:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure if I understand why you think Zelaya position is illegal, midnight rambler. As I understand it the showdown/coup was over the military's opposition to a proposed national opinion poll, the "4th ballot box" that asked the yes/no question: "Do you think that the November 2009 general elections should include a fourth ballot box in order to make a decision about the creation of a National Constitutional Assembly that would approve a new Constitution?"
Yes, the Honduran congress and supreme court ruled against the 4th ballot box on the grounds that 7 of the 379 articles of the Honduran Constitution are not subject to reform. But, and this is the key, conducting an opinion poll is non-binding insofar as a constitutional referendum is concerned. In fact, the creation of a new New Constitutional Assembly, in and of itself, does not constitute an illegal act under this ruling since the majority of the national constitution's articles are subject to reform according to the existing constitution.
I have to ask myself what's been accomplished by the coup? I'd say that it is the voice of the people that has been repressed. Since one side wanted this voice heard, and another did not, I don't think it's accurate to claim that both sides are wrong and/or illegal.
June 29, 2009 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
sorry, I neglected to include a link.
http://narcosphere.narconews.com/notebook/kristin-bricker/2009/06/honduras-prepares-sundays-controversial-opinion-poll
June 29, 2009 2:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
What strange bedfellows all this makes. We're basically on Hugo Chavez's side here since we both oppose the coup. The Honduran Supreme Court seems to have a point -- the referendum on the constitution that Zelaya wanted was illegal, however, Zelaya has a point that the constitution the supreme court is protecting serves the elites and not the gente. It certainly looks as if Zelaya is popular and though I could be wrong in this case (and I don't know much, didn't even know who Zelaya was before this morning) it's usually the case that coups are used to knock people out of power only when the people, in a fair election, would rather have them stay.
Perhaps there's an opportunity to repair our relations with Venezuela in all of this. If we help broker a way back into power for the president, say with an immediate referendum on his presidency scheduled, we could serve democracy's goals and Chavez's. I've always felt that Chavez could be turned into a useful ally in any event.
June 29, 2009 9:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
There is already an election scheduled for November. I think the issue is that he's ineligible to stand again - and apparently his movement isn't broad-based enough to put forth another "anti-elite" candidate. The problem doesn't seem to be his presidency - it seems to be his desire to cling to power. I'm not sure how a referendum on if he should serve out his his last 6 months would fix the underlying tension.
If his exile were the result of the status-quo being threatened by street protests, I'd be a lot more sympathetic to Zelaya ... his decision to form a mob and take by force what he couldn't achieve through the courts makes me very leery of calling his a democratic populist movement.
For his part, Chavez has become a despot relying in no small part on hyperbolic rhetoric against the US to maintain his power. I don't see how he can change his stance on the USA without undermining his purpose for existence. IMO, that's like saying the GOP could be made into a useful ally on health care reform.
June 29, 2009 11:36 AM | Reply | Permalink
I think the difference between Chavez and the GOP (and boy would the GOP be angry if they knew we were using phrases like "the difference between Chavez and the GOP") is that Chavez is Chavez because the US alienated him. We could have made friends with him at one point, early on. So maybe we still can.
June 29, 2009 12:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
guys, go back and read the Gawker guy again (my first link on the post) he did a pretty good summary (and so early on, too):
he also says at then end, in that wonderful self-deprecating Gawker snark:
I myself, having read that first, then made the immediate link with Chavez trying to extend his own stay in power. Then lally posted the news on them taking out the ambassadors of the Chavez and his pals. That's partly why--rightly or wrongly--maybe my "sense" is overdoing it--I get this sense that this is all about fear of Chavez being an "outside agitator" and attempting to affect other nations to do as he has done. His reaction just confirms that narrative. On the one hand, it's extremely paternalistic to think that a country and it's leaders can't chose on their own to do as Chavez has done, on the other hand, he does has a reputation amond some of wanting to have more and more power and also to think conspiratorially.
And any lefties out there, before you jump on me about the latter, I will just say I think it's important in instances of Chavez' behavior to think: would I like what Chavez is doing if it were George Bush or Ronald Reagan or Henry Kissinger doing it?
June 29, 2009 2:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I pose you the same questions I did another (whom I do not expect to hear back.)
Aside from the obvious "encouragement" that a military that just gained power through coup might put on judges and members of parliament etc. to hastily write up some supportive statements and documents, and that typically non-binding referenda cannot be considered unconstitutional (and that it might have theoretically lead to a constitutional change, mooting the argument), does anyone have any solid information that the military was acting on a supreme court "warrant" (assuming here that it is actually possible to do and does not require an impeachment process)? The statement from the "high court spokesperson" refers to some "competent judge" -- presumably not said high court -- being the "origin" of this action by the military. There is no statement that the court, or any court, ordered the military to take action.
June 29, 2009 5:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't know and I don't think we know enough right now. A lot of my comments are speculation, hope I get that across, and I think others are doing the same without intent to spin. And actually, I started so people could offer helpful reported info., input, and speculation as they see it, find it, or think of possible related info. Most of us are all just trying to figure the real story out. Clearly (at least to me) Obama and Clinton's statements were hedged like they weren't sure yet either.
June 29, 2009 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't know the politics of Honduras, but the fact that Zelaya's party controls a majority in Congress and even they voted unanimously to remove him suggests it's not just a question of the elites vs. the masses.
June 29, 2009 2:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Remember when we armed and funded Saddam? Ah, those were the days. hahaaha
Sides change so often. Look at Europe for a thousand years.
And then make a good case for war. ha!
June 29, 2009 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.narconews.com/Issue57/article3580.html
"We Will Not Be Silenced or Humiliated"
"There Is Practically a State of Siege in Tegucigalpa, Honduras... Electricity Is Cut"
By the Civic Council of Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH)
Translated to English by Laura Carlsen
June 28, 2009
The COPINH condemns the cowardly and dirty coup d’tat against the Constitutional President of the Republic Manuel Zelaya Rosales. We denounce the fascist and terrorist role of the armed forces, of the national congress headed by Roberto Michellety Bain, of the communications media of sectors of the ultra-right, and the rest of the institutions submissive to the interests of the oligarchy and imperialism that this morning kidnapped the President and took him by the air force, prior to the initiation of the popular consultation in which the people are participating—even with the repression unleashed, even as the campaign of fear continues, and even when faced with the butt of the rifles of the soldiers. There is practically a state of seige in the capital and the rest of the country; electricity is cut off, they have a list of leaders to be captured, and Hondurans who are bravely demonstrating in front of the presidential residence are surrounded by tanks and helicopters. Even so they have installed the polls and are exercising their right to participate in the consultation as a form of rebellion. The Honduran people are mobilizing. Since early morning, our organization is calling out its members and has already begun the journey with representatives of the Lenca People on the way to Tegucigalpa.
We tell everyone that the Honduran people are carrying out large demonstrations, actions in their communities, in the municipalities; there are occupations of bridges, and a protest in front of the presidential residence, among others.
From the lands of Lempira, Morazán and Visitación Padilla, we call on the Honduran people in general to demonstrate in defense of their rights and of real and direct democracy for the people, to the fascists we say that they will NOT silence us, that this cowardly act will turn back on them, with great force.
We state that we do not recognize any “substitute” and WE WILL STRUGGLE FOR OUR PEOPLE, FOR OUR RIGHT TO DREAM OF A COUNTRY WITH JUSTICE, EQUITY, LIBERTY AND LIFE.
With the ancestral force of Iselaca and Lempira we raise our voices for life, justice, liberty, dignity and peace.
June 28, 2009
June 29, 2009 3:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is helpful info. on the Obama administration's situation/position in today's New York Times report, "In a Coup in Honduras, Ghosts of Past U.S. Policies." The relevant excerpt:
June 30, 2009 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
thanks for keeping this alive, AA. I've got a nagging feeling that Honduras is more important than we think. Man, "The Land that Time Forgot" big time. Here's a few things I've picked up - maybe true, but the whole country is locked-up news wise so who knows.
On the north coast two infantry battalions have turned against the coup - the Tenth in La Ceiba, and the Fourth in Tela.
Caracas TV station TelaSur reports its correspondents in Honduras have been arrested, along with AP correspondents. Both parties were live-feed documenting the demonstrations in front of the Presidential Palace from a rooftop nearby. Adriani Sivori of TeleSur said all the reporters were taken away to detention and were beaten by the soldiers, then released.
Twitter tweets from Honduras began very pro-coup, but anti-coup tweeters are now taking over.
El Salvador, Guatemala and Nicaragua have closed the border of Honduras for 48 hours.
Well, there's more, but I keep wondering if anyone is really interested. I think there's a good chance that this situation will lead to a civil war in Honduras - there is a lot more going on there beyond the immediate coup dynamics. Honduras' fragile economy (a tiny 3 billion a year) has been rocked severly by the global recession. No economic growth, period. In fact, their economy shrank 2.2 % last year. The energy is nearly entirely dependant on heavily discounted Venezuelan oil, and that is likely to be cut off completely after tomorrow's Petrocaribe meeting. Clinton is strongly resisting calling it a "coup" because she knows that the mandated sanctions, under OAS, will directly impact the Honduran underclass, the poor, which is a significant majority of the population.
June 30, 2009 2:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am very interested. Thanks for the poop, I see you have been doing a lot more reading on it than I.
I've got a nagging feeling that Honduras is more important than we think
Well even if isn't in the way you suspect, I was just thinking that the Obama administration's interaction with anything like this in any country is of extreme import. It's because "it's the world economy, stupid." He wants to move in a less interventionist direction but at the same time he is, like it or not, partly in charge of the world economy. When you've got a movement towards teh nationalization of resources or something similar, or you simply have new "cartels" or organizations of states forming, you have to pay detailed attention.
It's interesting that no one here seems to care a wit about what's been going on next door in Mexico, either. I have bounced around to other forums and see that has not been the case in the last couple of months elsewhere. You know, I've always thought it's kind of imperialist in a way when I see progressives/liberals think so "U.S.A.-centric," to think that what happens elsewhere can not affect them. The attitude presumes that we are so big that no one else can affect us. I myself tend isolationist but you have to be realistic about how intertwined we really are.
June 30, 2009 2:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Definitely interested! Not that you need to go out of your way so that the rest of us can be lazy, but if you are tapped in to some degree, new data is definitely welcome.
Thanks to artappraiser for the update, too.
June 30, 2009 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Heck, I'm just "tapped in" Narconews.com. I think one should tread carefully with their reports, even though I really do respect Al Giordano and his alt. news project - they have very good access to information in Latin America. But what the hay - can MSNBC or Reuters be trusted completely?
http://hondurasnews.com/
Kind of weird, but interesting. "Honduras News" (remarkably still online during a press shut-down) seems pretty anti-President Mel, so you can get a taste of what Zelaya has in the way of political enemies.
June 30, 2009 5:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
This short op-ed was really VERY helpful, it is mostly analysis explaining the situation, highly recommended. So good I was sorry I only got to reading it today. I'd prefer anyone read it rather than my comments below it if they can't read both:
It is as I suspected, all about Chavez, and Zelaya being a traitor to his original platform by going over to Chavez.
Vargas Llosa says Zelaya is very much a member of the oligarchy himself (gives convincing examples) and was elected as a center-right guy on a CONSERVATIVE platform (gives examples) and stayed that way 1/2 through his term. BUT THEN Zelaya was won over by Chavez, with, among other things, a generous oil subsidy, having an "ideological ephipany," joining Bolivarian Alternative. That is what I sensed as the story developed, the rest of the government seemed to be reacting to Chavez influence and Chavez to them, because the referendum was like an idea directly copied from Chavez. That makes the coup about Zelaya basically going "traitor" and not sticking with the politics and policies that he was elected with. In what I have read elsewhere, he seems to have even copied Chavez' arrogance in some of his behavior, and that is really what probably got some people scared that he was going whole hog Chavez, and to react so heavily to the referendum proposal, it was not just that, it is what he had done before. Meanwhile Vargas Llosa says his removal has backfired on the "coup" because Chavez is doing great P.R. across the Spanish media, making himself look like a hero defender of Honduras and its neighbors against evil forces, suggesting that the coup was a really stupid self-defeating move for whoever is on that side.
To me, it certainly does sound like Chavez is getting more Machiavellian as time goes on, it grows ever more clear that he wants to be a leader remembered for building some kind of leftist power coalition in South America, changing the status quo. Of course, taking power from the oligarchy and new paradigms are actually something that has been sorely needed there not just for decades but for centuries. But Chavez' egoism and power hunger about it is the worrisome part, he also reminds me of some of the big eventual "my way or the highway" downsides of the early Soviet leaders. Vargas Llosa, a bit scarcastically, calls him "the unlikely champion of Jeffersonian democracy in Latin America."
For the Obama administration, Chavez is a very tricky piece of work to deal with as they try to keep in mind what is best for U.S. citizens when dealing with him. He seems very power hungry, he seems to want very much to be paid the attention of a major world leader, not just the leader of Venezuela...remember how he acted when he tried to give Obama that book? And Vargas Llosa certainly suggests the same by framing his op-ed by starting out with: Chavez set a trap for the Honduran military.
(An aside: hah, you know I recall member David Seaton here suggesting something like the latter for the U.S. before the election. In some posts, he explained his revulsion to the moderate Obama by saying the U.S. needed more years of a conservative president in order for the people to really revolt and elect a leftie to really reform.)
July 1, 2009 1:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Vargos Llosa, in his op-ed (see my last comment,) said the ideal solution would be for Mr. Zelaya to return to power and leave office next year when his successor takes over. I am pretty sure that is what OAS is going for, the ideal is what they should support, after all. But he is pessimistic, he doesn't think the coup leaders will back down, and also, if he is wrong about that, he thinks it won't be a good result either because he thinks if reinstated Zelaya will keep pushing his re-election scheme.
July 1, 2009 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
This one today is good, too, it outlines all of Obama's moves throughout the region and also gets opinions on Chavez' possible reactions and who might build coalitions with who:
July 1, 2009 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ya know, AA, it's possible that President Mel doesn't have a high opinion of President Hugo, and still finds the ALBA trade bloc interesting...even self-serving. For example, Petrocaribe, organized under ALBA, is the sole soure of oil for Honduras since '07, and the price it paid was heavily discounted. Anyone in Honduras who had their hands in the petrochemical till also had a vested interest in ALBA and its success - without having to love socialism or Chavez. So I think this discourse runs the risk of becoming "over-chavezed," if you will. I mean, Venezuela's membership in OPEC doesn't mean that King Abdullah is working for socialism in his kingdom.
July 1, 2009 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink