Honduran Regime Reneges on Political Deal

Despite a political agreement anounced two weeks ago to restore ousted Honduran president Manual Zelaya to power, the military-backed regime of Robert Micheletti apparently has no intention of letting the deposed leader return to office, infomed sources say.   In fact, the regime is apparently using Zelaya’s promised return as little more than a PR ploy to neutralize domestic and international opposition and to build diplomatic support for the country’s upcoming presidential election.

Meanwhile, evidence is mounting that the US State Department — which had previously sided with Zelaya and the Organization of American States (OAS) in their efforts to get the illegally deposed president reinstated — knew all along that the de facto regime was planning to renege on the deal, but under pressure from US conservatives and from influential Democratic lobbysists, acquiesced in the regime’s manuever.

Now, unless the de facto regime moves quickly restore Zelaya to power — which appears highly unlikely — the country’s bitter 4-month old political crisis could be unresolvable, experts say.

For the Honduran regime, its latest political gambit – essentially, a “coup within a coup” – could prove costly.  Most of the international community, including key US allies in Europoe and Latin America, are on record saying they will not recognize the legitimacy of the November 29 presidential election in Honduras unless Zelaya is first reinstated.

And Democrats, most of whom have supported Zelaya’s return, could decide to continue the current suspension of US aid to Honduras or even impose tighter conditions that would completely isolate the regime and further undermine the nation’s already weak economy.

It’s still unclear how or why the latest political crisis transpired.  On paper, the two sides apparently had reached an agreement that would have let Zelaya finish out his full term in office – with greatly restricted powers.   In many respects, the deal was a victory for the Honduran right, which had not only ousted Zelaya illegally, but, in the face of widespread diplomatic protest, had successfully stalled his return to power.

All the right had to do was agree to let Zelaya return to office ever-so-briefly – a mere three weeks, plus time for a political transition – and its worries would have been over.

But the October 30 deal, as written, made Zelaya’s return contingent upon a formal vote by the Honduran Congress.  And apparently that was too big a temptation for the right to resist.   While Zelaya assumed that the reinstatement vote would be largely pro forma, and would come soon, Congress began stalling, and now, according to sources, it’s all but certain that the regime plans to renege on the entire deal.

Zelaya probably should have known better.  In an interview with the Blomberg News service just a day after the agreement was signed, Maria Facusse de Villeda, a top Micheletti aide confided:  “Zelaya won’t be restored.  But just by signing this agreement we already have the recognition of the international community for the elections.”

So was Zelaya naïve?  Perhaps.  But it’s also clear that the US State Department, led by Tom Shannon, the interim assistant secretary of state of inter-american affairs, probably misled Zelaya from the start.  It was Shannon who insisted in late October that Zelaya sign the agreement with Micheletti, despite the need for Honduran Congress approval.  The Congress would be obligated to reinstate him in a timely fashion, Shannon assured Zelaya.

But in an interview conducted last week – an interview conducted in Spanish, and thus less likely to be reported by the US media – Shannon “clarified” that it was up to the Hondurans to decide how to handle the pre-November 29 election transition.  So, asked the interviewer, is the US prepared recognize the outcome of the November 29 election whether Zelaya is restored to power or not?   “Si, exactamente (Yes, that’s right),” Shannon replied.

Arguably, the Obama administration’s reversal on Zelaya’s restoration is rooted its own long-standing discomfort with the former rancher turned leftist.  Even while backing his claim on the presidency, many in the administration have echoed the golpista argument that Zelaya was attempting to impose a Venezuelan-style “populist authoritarian” regime and had largely precipitated his own ouster.

But there’s also a slightly more sinister explanation:  Obama simply cut a deal with the right.  Sen. James DeMint (R-SC), the arch-conservative who has blocked confirmation of Obama’s Latin America appointees, including Shannon, because of dissatisfaction with Obama’s support for Zelaya suddenly released that hold last week – a move neatly conciding with Shannon’s “clarification.”

And just for good measure, newly appointed Senator James Lemieux (R-FL), who replaced the retiring Sen. Mel Martinez, has issued a confirmation hold of his own – this one focused squarely on Shannon. So, there’s clearly a lesson here for Obama: the right’s appetite for appeasement, in Latin America, and elsewhere, is probably insatiable.

In the final analysis, though, it’s the Honduran people who will decide whether the ouster of Zelaya was justified and whether new presidential elections that move forward without their illegally deposed president will be considered legitimate.  Polls indicate that a heavy majority of Hondurans still oppose Zelaya’s ouster and by a 2-1 margin, they reject Micheletti.  Zelaya and his supporters are likely to call for a full-fledged boycott of the November balloting but it’s unclear how much of the citizenry will respond when the opportunity to elect a new president presents itself.

Looking beyond the election, Zelaya’s legacy is already coming into view.  Whatever his faults, he clearly managed to excite ordinary Hondurans about using elections and the national government to institute economic reforms that favor workers and the poor.  It won’t be easy to put this genie back in the bottle.   And the military, which has a long history of repressing Honduran popular movements – even aiding the right with death squads in the 1980s –  has been given a new lease on life as the final arbiter of Honduran politics. Therefore, whoever wins the presidential election in November, renewed conflict between these two forces – the people and the army – is probably inevitable.

Stewart Lawrence is a recognized specialist in Latino and Latin American affairs, and author of numerous policy reports and publications. He can be reached at stewlaw2009@gmail.com


More articles by:

Stewart J. Lawrence can be reached at stewartlawrence81147@gmail.com

Weekend Edition
March 16, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Michael Uhl
The Tip of the Iceberg: My Lai Fifty Years On
Bruce E. Levine
School Shootings: Who to Listen to Instead of Mainstream Shrinks
Mel Goodman
Caveat Emptor: MSNBC and CNN Use CIA Apologists for False Commentary
Paul Street
The Obama Presidency Gets Some Early High Historiography
Kathy Deacon
Me, My Parents and Red Scares Long Gone
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Rexless Abandon
Andrew Levine
Good Enemies Are Hard To Find: Therefore Worry
Jim Kavanagh
What to Expect From a Trump / Kim Summit
Ron Jacobs
Trump and His Tariffs
Joshua Frank
Drenched in Crude: It’s an Oil Free For All, But That’s Not a New Thing
Gary Leupp
What If There Was No Collusion?
Matthew Stevenson
Why Vietnam Still Matters: Bernard Fall Dies on the Street Without Joy
Robert Fantina
Bad to Worse: Tillerson, Pompeo and Haspel
Brian Cloughley
Be Prepared, Iran, Because They Want to Destroy You
Richard Moser
What is Organizing?
Scott McLarty
Working Americans Need Independent Politics
Rohullah Naderi
American Gun Violence From an Afghan Perspective
Sharmini Peries - Michael Hudson
Why Trump’s Tariff Travesty Will Not Re-Industrialize the US
Ted Rall
Democrats Should Run on Impeachment
Robert Fisk
Will We Ever See Al Jazeera’s Investigation Into the Israel Lobby?
Kristine Mattis
Superunknown: Scientific Integrity Within the Academic and Media Industrial Complexes
John W. Whitehead
Say No to “Hardening” the Schools with Zero Tolerance Policies and Gun-Toting Cops
Edward Hunt
UN: US Attack On Syrian Civilians Violated International Law
Barbara Nimri Aziz
Iraq Outside History
Wilfred Burchett
Vietnam Will Win: The Long Hard Road
Victor Grossman
Germany: New Faces, Old Policies
Medea Benjamin - Nicolas J. S. Davies
The Iraq Death Toll 15 Years After the US Invasion
Binoy Kampmark
Amazon’s Initiative: Digital Assistants, Home Surveillance and Data
Chuck Collins
Business Leaders Agree: Inequality Hurts The Bottom Line
Jill Richardson
What We Talk About When We Talk About “Free Trade”
Eric Lerner – Jay Arena
A Spark to a Wider Fire: Movement Against Immigrant Detention in New Jersey
Negin Owliaei
Teachers Deserve a Raise: Here’s How to Fund It
Kollibri terre Sonnenblume
What to Do at the End of the World? Interview with Climate Crisis Activist, Kevin Hester
Kevin Proescholdt
Secretary of Interior Ryan Zinke Attacks America’s Wilderness
Franklin Lamb
Syrian War Crimes Tribunals Around the Corner
Beth Porter
Clean Energy is Calling. Will Your Phone Company Answer?
George Ochenski
Zinke on the Hot Seat Again and Again
Lance Olsen
Somebody’s Going to Extremes
Robert Koehler
Breaking the Ice
Pepe Escobar
The Myth of a Neo-Imperial China
Graham Peebles
Time for Political Change and Unity in Ethiopia
Terry Simons
10 American Myths “Refutiated”*
Thomas Knapp
Some Questions from the Edge of Immortality
Louis Proyect
The 2018 Socially Relevant Film Festival
David Yearsley
Keaton’s “The General” and the Pernicious Myths of the Heroic South