tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21674624.post2282656270569515900..comments2024-02-21T05:16:22.788-05:00Comments on Two Weeks Notice: A Latin American Politics Blog: Informal contacts and the Honduran crisisGreg Weekshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15765114859595124082noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21674624.post-33142041270468785862009-11-01T19:27:39.259-05:002009-11-01T19:27:39.259-05:00They carry 'immense power' in 'every&#...They carry 'immense power' in 'every' Latin nation? Really? And the evidence for that is what, exactly?<br /><br />I've seen the Church fight divorce laws and lose across the whole region. Acceptance of same-sex marriages is growing and several cities across the region have created some form of civil unions for gays. Again, the Church is losing. <br /><br /><br />Voters don't even care too much what the church says.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21674624.post-59695693753304979992009-11-01T18:27:31.316-05:002009-11-01T18:27:31.316-05:00At the risk of sounding redundant, I must argue im...At the risk of sounding redundant, I must argue impassionately that a perfect example of such "informal contacts" include the mediators within the Catholic clergy. Their role has been downplayed quite a bit in the press, but we all know that they carry immense political power (in which direction, it depends) in every Latin American country. It is clear that they participated in negotiations at some level--how much is still uncertain.<br /><br />I am confident that the details will begin to emerge over the next few months.<br /><br />www.thevaticanlobby.blogspot.comRoberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11903525298588963429noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21674624.post-58294355575304741352009-11-01T13:31:41.089-05:002009-11-01T13:31:41.089-05:00Reuters has an interesting article on where the si...Reuters has an interesting article on where the situation stands:<br /><br />http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idINIndia-43595620091101<br /><br /><br />The accord never mandated that Zelaya be reinstated, only that Congress vote on it and take into account what the Supreme Court has to day about it. According to Reuters the SC may opine that Zelaya should not be allowed back and some congressmen are saying they will vote for whatever the SC says.<br /><br />Of course now Zelaya is claiming that the pact demands his restitution, which is simply not true. If that's what he wanted he should have not signed the agreement, since the agreement makes clear there is no guarantee that Zelaya can become president once again. But since Zelaya and his supporters have long made clear they couldn't care less about any other institution in the country, it's not very surprising. <br /><br />So the situation remains in flux. Will Congress decide to just let him be, and have Zelaya assume power for the last couple of months of his presidency? It could be the simplest choice, particularly since he has been so emasculated (Unity government, no control of armed forces). Or will they say no, in the hope that the agreement means that even if they reject his return the US (only one that truly matters) will recognize the upcoming elections.<br /><br />I was leaning towards the first (let him be) but some recent comments make me think that rejection could still happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com