Two Weeks Notice: A Latin American Politics Blog

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Zelaya and exile

Spiriting Zelaya out of Honduras has turned out to be a bad move. Perhaps more than any other single action, it screams out "coup" (though storming his house is right up there). Army General Romeo Vasquez, who was in charge of the operation (despite being officially fired), has an interesting take. He actually says he likes Zelaya personally, and claims taking him out of the country was intended to avoid bloodshed:

''He is an excellent boss. He is a good person. I tried to have a friendship with him, but the friendship ends with duty,'' Vásquez said. "We had to get him out of the area to avoid worse things. We felt that if he stayed here, worse things were going to happen and there would be bloodshed.

I've studied the Latin Americna military for a long time. I do not remember any general making such a statement, discussing personal friendship alongside his perceived duty as he overthrew him. It is another unusual part of a highly unusual story.

U.S. aid and Honduras

The question of whether to call the situation in Honduras a coup keeps popping up. In comments to a previous post, Matthew Shugart mentioned seeing the importance of the term "military coup." The specific wording comes from section 508 of the Foreign Operations Appropriation Act (see here for a U.S. embassy site discussing it). Anyone can call it a coup, which makes no difference. Apparently adding "military" is the key. I suppose someone could argue it is not a "military" coup if the military does not rule, even if the military was responsible for the physical act of overthrowing the president.

"None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made available pursuant to this Act shall be obligated or expended to finance directly any assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup or decree: Provided, That assistance may be resumed to such government if the President determines and certifies to the Committees on Appropriations that subsequent to the termination of assistance a democratically elected government has taken office: Provided further, That the provisions of this section shall not apply to assistance to promote democratic elections or public participation in democratic processes: Provided further, That funds made available pursuant to the previous provisos shall be subject to the regular notification procedures of the Committees on Appropriations."

The World Bank and Honduras

The World Bank has announced it has "paused" its lending to Honduras. In these situations, especially with Honduras' weak economy, money talks, though the amount involved ($80 million for development projects this fiscal year) may not hurt the coup government. Notably, the U.S. government has not initiated any such "pause."

Jail vs. exile

The "replacement government" (the BBC puts it nicely) has said that Zelaya will be jailed if he returns to Honduras, as he says he will on Thursday. If that is the case, why was he not simply jailed on Sunday? There is still no evidence of any legal avenue for forcibly exiling him.

Zelaya at the UN

President Zelaya is scheduled to address the UN General Assembly today at 11 a.m. EST. Let's see what tone he strikes. Right now he has everyone condemning the coup, but he needs to maintain that support, so he has to strike a balance between showing outrage while not being inflammatory.

Obama and Honduras

Here is Obama's statement about Honduras:

PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, let me first of all speak about the coup in Honduras, because this was a topic of conversation between myself and President Uribe.
All of us have great concerns about what's taken place there. President Zelaya was democratically elected. He had not yet completed his term. We believe that the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the President of Honduras, the democratically elected President there. In that we have joined all the countries in the region, including Colombia and the Organization of American States.

I think it's -- it would be a terrible precedent if we start moving backwards into the era in which we are seeing military coups as a means of political transition rather than democratic elections. The region has made enormous progress over the last 20 years in establishing democratic traditions in Central America and Latin America. We don't want to go back to a dark past. The United States has not always stood as it should with some of these fledgling democracies, but over the last several years, I think both Republicans and Democrats in the United States have recognized that we always want to stand with democracy, even if the results don't always mean that the leaders of those countries are favorable towards the United States. And that is a tradition that we want to continue.

So we are very clear about the fact that President Zelaya is the democratically elected President, and we will work with the regional organizations like OAS and with other international institutions to see if we can resolve this in a peaceful way.

It is nice at least that he openly calls it a coup, and is clear about not recognizing any other government.

The U.S. has been careful not to call for Zelaya's return, however, which keeps the options open for some sort of negotiated solution that does not involve him remaining president. It is very hard to see how that work in practice. Update--see comments, as this is not accurate.

Monday, June 29, 2009

Zelaya returning to Honduras?

According to the Guardian:

Ousted President Manuel Zelaya says he wants to return to Honduras this week accompanied by the head of the Organization of American States.
Zelaya says he will accept an offer by OAS Secretary-General Jose Miguel Insulza to return to the Central America country with him. Zelaya says he wants to make the trip Thursday.
He spoke Monday in Nicaragua during a meeting of Latin American leaders to discuss Sunday's coup in Honduras.
Insulza had made the offer moments before Zelaya spoke.

Now this would be interesting. Obviously Zelaya would claim to return as president, whereas the powers that be in Honduras claim him as ex-president. Not sure how Insulza would navigate that...

Honduras and legality

Roberto Micheletti and other coup supporters insist everything was legal. If their actions could be deemed legal by virtue of specific laws, that would bolster their assertion that Zelaya's removal was legitimate. Yet the coup is now about 36 hours old, and to my knowledge no one has explained what law was followed, who issued the court order for picking up Zelaya and flying him out of the country, and what legal basis the new government has for remaining in power until the next presidential election.

Why is that?

Honduras and non-recognition

“We can’t accept or recognize any government other than Zelaya’s,” Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva said in his weekly radio program today. “If Honduras doesn’t reverse its position, then it’s going to be totally isolated in the middle of an enormous contingent of democracies.”

That could start having practical consequences in terms of trade, investment, participation in international organizations, etc.

The OAS and Honduras

Not surprisingly, there are protests in Tegulcigalpa, and roadblocks. The longer this government insists on remaining in power, the more likely it is that violence will ensue.

So can the OAS do anything useful? Let's see. Chris Sabatini at Americas Quarterly has a good post on the topic, concluding with:

In the case of Honduras, President Zelaya passed over the head of the Congress to call for vote on June 28 that would have allowed a national referendum in October on a series of unspecified-constitutional reforms, including the removal of term limits to allow him to run for re-election. President Zelaya’s plan was constitutionally questionable from the beginning, bypassing the Congress and opposed by the Supreme Court. When the head of the army expressed his disapproval he was removed, even though the Supreme Court called for his restoration.
Each of these actions to tear down checks and balances and consolidate executive power should—in theory—have triggered the consideration of the OAS under the Democratic Charter. But they didn’t. And now we’re left with an OAS that is—rightly—condemning a coup that could have possibly been averted and forced to call for the return of a President who himself had done little to respect his own constitution.

Zelaya and the law

So what does Honduran law say about what Congress and the courts should have done if they believed Zelaya was breaking the law? (I mean, besides kidnapping him in his pajamas.)

The answer is not clear--both Matthew Shugart and Steven Taylor take a look, and get to the point of finding reference to a decree that derogated a relevant part of the constitution, but they cannot find the text of the decree in question. I can't either, and now a Google search for the text of the decree brings up Steven's post that he can't find it!

Here is the constitution itself. I have been critical of the constant constitution writing/amending in Latin America, but I must say this one is ripe for rethinking. It is one of the most confusing constitutions I have read.

Sunday, June 28, 2009

OAS response

So how long will the Micheletti government exist? The OAS makes clear that no one will recognize him and that Zelaya must be returned to office:

REITERATING the principles established in the Charter of the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Democratic Charter on the strengthening and preservation of the democratic institutional system in member states, andRECALLING CP/RES. 952 (1699/09) of June 26, 2009, relative to the situation in Honduras,RESOLVES:

1. To condemn vehemently the coup d’état staged this morning against the constitutionally-established Government of Honduras, and the arbitrary detention and expulsion from the country of the constitutional president José Manuel Zelaya Rosales, which has produced an unconstitutional alteration of the democratic order.

2. To demand the immediate, safe and unconditional return of President José Manuel Zelaya Rosales to his constitutional functions.

3. To declare that no government arising from this unconstitutional interruption will be recognized.

Obama and Honduras

According to the Guardian, U.S. officials are working to get Zelaya back into the presidency and believe there will be consensus in the OAS to say the coup "cannot stand."

President Barack Obama called Sunday for "all political and social actors
in Honduras to respect democratic norms, the rule of law and the tenets of the
Inter-American Democratic Charter" as the Central American crisis unfolded.

For those conditions to be met, Zelaya must be returned to power, U.S.
officials said.

Knowing trouble was brewing in Honduras over several weeks, the Obama
administration warned power players there, including the armed forces, that the
United States and other nations in the Americas would not support or abide a
coup, officials said. They said Honduran military leaders stopped taking their
calls.

Diplomatic recognition in Honduras

Diplomatic recognition is now one of the obstacles to the proclaimed presidency of Ricardo Micheletti. As yet, no government has recognized him as legitimate, and condemnation has been the norm. I would be shocked if any Latin American government recognized him, which means his chances of remaining in power very long are not good.

Honduras update

Check out Laura Carlsen from the Center for International Policy live blogging about the OAS discussion of the Honduran coup at The Huffington Post. For example:

* Roberto Micheletti has been sworn into office as president by the military coup.
* OAS countries refuse to recognize him or to negotiate in any form with coup leaders.
* OAS countries issue calls for the immediate return and reinstatement of President Manuel Zelaya in his legitimate functions.

Secretary General Insulza reports that Cuban, Nicaraguan and Venezuelan ambassadors attempted to accompany Honduran Foreign Minister when she was forcibly abducted by military coup leaders, but were violently pushed away from the vehicle. They are not being held captive. As others discuss diplomatic actions--clearly needed and appropriate--these ambassadors provided a lesson in real solidarity, by putting their own lives on the line.

As far as I can tell, this coup has no support anywhere. I cannot imagine any government recognizing Micheletti.

Obama administration response to Honduran coup

Short and sweet from Hillary Clinton. I am glad to see this type of response and hope the administration is working from behind the scenes to put pressure on the coup participants. It makes no difference what you think of Zelaya--no freely elected president should be overthrown.

The action taken against Honduran President Mel Zelaya violates the precepts of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and thus should be condemned by all. We call on all parties in Honduras to respect the constitutional order and the rule of law, to reaffirm their democratic vocation, and to commit themselves to resolve political disputes peacefully and through dialogue. Honduras must embrace the very principles of democracy we reaffirmed at the OAS meeting it hosted less than one month ago.

UPDATE: From the BBC, Zelaya said in an interview that he knew of a plot against him, which was foiled only because the U.S. embassy refused to back it:

In an interview with Spain's El Pais newspaper published on Sunday, Mr Zelaya said a plot to topple him had been thwarted after the US refused to back it.
"Everything was in place for the coup and if the US embassy had approved it, it would have happened. But they did not," Mr Zelaya said.

Coup in Honduras

Honduran President Zelaya was arrested by the military, apparently by a court order (it is not clear what court or what judge) and is now in Costa Rica. If it was a regular court order, it makes no sense for him to be removed from the country, which is one reason why I am already using the term "coup." I have not yet seen who is currently chief executive.

There are many troubling aspects to this situation, but in particular it is discouraging that the Honduran courts, legislators, etc. still turn to the armed forces to act as political arbiters.

This is going to make the situation far, far worse than any other solution the opposition could have devised.

Vote in Honduras

Hondurans go to vote today on the non-binding "public opinion poll" about whether to have another vote to rewrite the constitution. Opponents (including some in President Zelaya's own party) are asking people not to vote, so turnout will be a key factor in determining how binding the non-binding vote should be viewed.

If you can read Spanish, it is instructive to take a look at the lead articles in different Honduran newspapers--there is nothing like a crisis to bring out the slant of each paper.

Saturday, June 27, 2009

Crisis in Honduras

Honduras continues moving toward open conflict, as President Zelaya pushes for a vote on the constitution, which both the Supreme Court and Congress have indicated is illegal, and the military does not support. See Matthew Shugart for an analysis of the numbers in the legislature (and whether to call the vote a plebiscite or referendum--he opts for the former). And Boz has background here and here. It is an unusual situation, with Zelaya insisting that it is just a "public opinion poll."

Hugo Chávez has expressed his strong support for Zelaya, though interestingly in a statement he even acknowledged that "everybody is against it."

“In short, what is happening in Honduras is that the Congress is against the electoral consultation, the Supreme Court too, the General Attorney, the Church and the bishops are against it, the bourgeoisie is against it; that is to say, everybody is against it, any resemblance with our reality is not a coincidence.

Presumably someone is for it, though his approval rating is only about 30 percent.

Regardless, this is yet another example of constitution-itis in Latin America. There has been a slew of entirely new constitutions written in recent years (though this is by no means a new phenomenon). Honduras is currently on its 16th constitution, from 1982. It is a poor country based largely on agricultural exports (e.g. coffee and bananas) controlled by foreign investors and constantly beset by natural disasters. A new constitution will not change those realities, just as previous constitutions did not.

Friday, June 26, 2009

Conventional weapons sales in Latin America

The Bolivian government has given an arms wishlist to the Russians, who are providing credit for the purchase. This comes on the heels of the Chileans buying F-16s from the Netherlands on top of anti-submarine planes from France. Maybe now Bolivia will have to buy the submarines for the Chileans to fight. Or maybe the Chileans think Venezuela will send its brand new Russian subs southward?

It is depressing to see more and more countries circling around Latin America, looking for good conventional weapons markets. There just aren't real threats--even when Hugo Chávez blustered about sending tanks to the Colombian border, no one took it seriously. In addition, the global economic crisis is hitting developing countries quite hard, and this money should be channeled elsewhere. In the Chilean case, proposals to reform the copper law keep popping up, but have yet to gain traction.

Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

© Blogger templates The Professional Template by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP