MILITARY COUP IN HONDURAS: IS IT AGAINST OBAMA TOO?
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES, 22 Jul 2009
Two Events, Three Contexts, the Answer, Two Premises, Two Questions, Two Consequences, and Five Conclusions and Actions
Events (1):
Honduras (Central America): It is inhabited by 7.5 million people. It is one of the smallest and poorest countries in Latin America (poverty rate is 60 percent). It was called "Banana Republic" because it was absolutely controlled by the American "United Fruit Company". In its territory there is a US military base, the “Soto Cano” (Palmerola) base (1), used before by the United States to launch open and secret military operations against other countries. Honduras has a history of military coups backed up by the USA.
Manuel Zelaya, the democratically elected president: His house is assaulted by soldiers in the dawn of June 28th, 2009. The president is violently kidnapped wearing pajamas. He is taken in an airplane out of his country and left in the runway of the international airport of Costa Rica. A de facto government settles. It stops all energy, communication, radio and television services. It imposes restrictions to free mobilization and rights. The unarmed population is mobilized to oppose the coup. The army represses, shoots, kills or hurts many unarmed citizens that are peacefully protesting. There are several violations of human rights.
The defeated president states: “My ‘crimes’" are:
a. – To promote a consultation or poll to the population asking if they would like to vote in the next November presidential elections about the review “yes” or “not” of the Constitution of the Republic and
b. – To promote slight social reforms. Later, the aggressors charge the president with other crimes that they never presented according to the state of rights in this country. The accomplices of the army are a group of political and rich businessmen. The country was paralyzed by the popular movement. The aggressors were isolated by the international community.
Events (2)
Latin America: Historically governed by military dictatorships and coup d’état lead by different American governments. The region develops to the installation of democratic governments during the last decades; most of them progressive with different left, centre and right nuances. Decades of bloodbath, tortures, death squads, guerrillas and wars are left behind, and now there are slow democratic advances and installation of civil governments. Soldiers are taken to their barracks subordinated to civilian control.
Three Contexts:
1. – The coup is limited to Honduras and there have not been support, planning, or intervention by foreign forces. “No Latin American government believes this.”
2. – The coup is against the democratic advances of all Latin American countries by hitting first the weakest link in the chain of countries that build democracy in the continent, with the purpose of gaining military control or changing their civil governments and revert their advances and their democracies. All the governments of the region imagine so. That is why they have condemned this military coup unanimously.
3. – If this new experiment works in one small country in Latin America, it could spread to other and to other regions. In times of serious crisis and world collapse, being the United States in the foreground, everything is possible. That is the reason that there is a total and immediate rejection to the Honduran coup of all the nations in the American States Organizations (ASO) and in the UN.(2)
The Answer:
Before elapsing 24 hours of the coup, presidents and chancellors of 34 Latin American states met and disagreed with the coup in Honduras through organizations like Central-American Integration System (SICA in Spanish), RIO Group, Union of South-American Nations (UNASUR in Spanish), OAS (USA and Canada included), backed up then by the 192 countries of the UN.
There was an unparalleled historical event: Governments of diverse tendencies and from all regions of the world unanimously rejected the coup in Honduras and demanded the deposed president’s restitution. According to the universality and speed of the reaction, it seems that first Latin Americans and then all countries in the world, even developed countries, considered the coup in Honduras an experimental laboratory of secret forces that could be extended to their own countries, “developed countries included”. Nazism and fascism are still in the collective memory. If permitted, it could be the beginning of a neo-fascist wave against world democracy.
Two Premises
1. – In Latin America, it is unthinkable that the coup in Honduras could have occurred without support from the United States military, intelligence or political apparatus. Even more unthinkable is the idea that without U.S. support the illegal regime could have so far resisted unanimous international and national pressure, to the point of killing people, violating human rights or violently attacking a peaceful and defenseless rally. The unanimous and historical convergence of condemnation by all left, center and right governments of the OAS and even more, of the 192 countries of the UN confirm so.
2. – The whole international community (ALBA, SICA, RIO Group, UNASUR, CARICOM, OAS and the UN) and in particular Mr. Obama, the president of United States, and Mrs. Clinton, the Secretary of State, have rejected the coup and soldiers’ insubordination in Honduras. They have agreed that President Zelaya remains the legitimate president of Honduras. Besides, they have joined the world protests that demand the Honduran President’s reinstatement, and for the generals and accomplices to be charged for their crimes.
Two Embarrassing Questions:
1. – Did President Obama and Secretary Hillary Clinton have prior knowledge of the coup and of the possible participation of civilians or of the military, political and intelligence structures from the USA? … Did the president approve the operation as Kennedy approved the Bay of Pigs invasion in Cuba? (3)…. Did the American diplomats and soldiers in Honduras know about the impending coup? … Did they take part in it or were informed?
2. If the US Americans at any level knew about the coup beforehand, why did they not take steps to prevent it, to be consistent with the statements of President Obama and Secretary Clinton during the 5th Summit of America’s Presidents in Trinidad and Tobago in April?
If the answer is "Yes, Obama and Clinton had prior knowledge,"
then the international community was deceived and the 5th Summit of the Americas was a trap to tranquilize the continent while the United States was preparing a clandestine political and military operation in Honduras. This is not just a coup in Honduras: it is a coup against all Latin American countries; a military-political operation intended to break the peaceful democratic advances underway in the whole continent. It threatens all civilian governments, whether of the left, the centre or the right. Nevertheless, many governments in Latin America are prepared to give President Obama the benefit of the doubt and prefer to think that this operation was prepared behind his back.
However, if the answer is "No", President Obama had no prior knowledge,”
this would mean that there was illegal intervention within the USA of sinister forces in the political, military or intelligence apparatus, usurping or commanding the powers and privileges of the U.S. President with respect to the conduct of U.S. foreign policy, by attacking other democratic state such as Honduras, a friend of the USA, without the approval of the president (given the public denunciation of the coup of President Obama and Secretary Clinton). Worse still, this would imply the presence in the official state apparatus of the U.S. of subalterns –civil, military diplomatic or in intelligence — insubordination to the President of the United States.
In either case, a serious violation of international and of U.S. law would have occurred. An investigation from the same "U.S. establishment" should be called for to determine guilt and corresponding punishment, and to restore to President Obama the power he acquired from the people of the United States in democratic elections. The same is necessary with President Zelaya in Honduras.
Consequences
1. – It is, therefore, of the utmost importance to clear up this case. If there was U.S. involvement but President Obama was unaware of it, then there was a military insubordination and a coup in Honduras and a kind insubordination and/or coup d’état in the USA against President Obama; or even worse, a coup from an alternative force or government in the shadows of that country, a force with access to its military apparatus and maybe to its conventional weapons and weapons of mass destruction. Such an alternative force would have the means to overthrow or blackmail any government in the world, or to impose a new era of world neo-fascism control from the shadows: a situation that is a very serious danger for the international security.
2. – As a consequence, we would have: soldiers’ insubordination in Honduras, insubordination in USA and to the presidential authority of two democratic governments whose presidents were elected by their people: a coup in Honduras and something similar that is in process in the USA.
Five Conclusions:
1. President Zelaya should be restored immediately and unconditionally and those responsible for the coup should be punished. There should be no dialogue or mediation with the “de facto government” except for the purpose of carrying the OAS’s decision expressed by the clear mandate to its Secretary General Insulza. What is unacceptable is further delay, weakening, deviation or reversal of the OAS and UN decisions. The international community must also demand that United States carry out an immediate, exhaustive and public investigation and determination of the involvement of U.S. civilians or officials in the coup, or whether they encouraged or participated or even had prior knowledge of it.
2. The events in Honduras and the delay in implementing the demand of the entire Latin American and Caribbean region to re-establish the constitutional order in that country point to the need to consider the removal of all U.S. military bases in the region, which are dangerous for its incipient democracies. This can be discussed in the framework of the RIO GROUP or of the OAS.
3. A new era of mutual respect should be promoted between the civilian/democratic governments of Latin America and the United States. Military dictatorships, open or secret coups d’état, authoritarianisms, and manipulation of the rule of law and of democracy should be proscribed. Governments should be firm but prudent in their behavior and their rhetoric in order to avoid unnecessary confrontations and violent conflicts. Re-elections or ‘continuism’ should be avoided where they are not supported by the majority of the population expressed in a clean and transparent manner; for they provide a pretext for destabilization and foreign intervention aimed at reversing the democratic advances made in the region.
4. Apart from what the Honduran citizens internally decide, those responsible for the coup and their accomplices should be internationally prosecuted and punished by the world community. They have jeopardized the other democracies in the continent and in the world, creating a dangerous precedent that goes far beyond Honduras. The crimes committed are unacceptable and they should be held to account in whatever country to which they travel. They have damaged the vital security of other nations, first of all the Latin American and Caribbean; and their exemplary punishment is imperative to prevent coups d’état all over the world.
5. The unequal confrontation between Honduran civil society and the military is further demonstration that the people are defenseless in the face of coups d’état, military uprisings or authoritarian governments. A preventive, self-defensive strategy should aim at strengthening civil society organizations and international solidarity so as to be able to act effectively in a crisis. This will discourage the willingness to infringe democracy, the institutional order and the state of rights, and strengthen democratic governments against coups, authoritarianism and militarism. The defense also goes throughout the integration of Latin American and the Caribbean. What is behind the effort to impose a new era of dictatorships is the foreign control of the rich Latin American resources. We have entered a new era in the battle for Latin America, one that requires struggle on various fronts and in the most diverse scenarios.
We ask the reader to send this document to other persons, organizations and governments. Thank you.
_______________________________________________
(1). In the “José Soto Cano" base is located the combined task force called "BRAVO", composed of army’s troops, security and air force, and 1st battalion regiment No 228 of the American air force. It has 600 American troops, 18 HU-60, Black Hawk, and CH-47 Chinook combat air units. The President of Honduras announced in May 31st 2008 that it would be used for commercial flights and construction of a civil facility financed with funds of the Bolivarian Alternatives for the Americas (ALBA). The oil reserve of the Patuka River was discussed with the ALBA. This is the same area offered to the USA by a previous government (Maduro) to build another US military base in the Mosquitia area.
In January 2009 President Zelaya sent a personal letter to the President Obama complaining for interventionism and demanding that the new government respect the principle of non-intervention.
The head of the Air Force of Honduras, General PRICE SUAZO, studied and majored in the School of The Americas (USA), in 1995. General Romeo Vásquez, Chief of the Army and head of the coup is also a graduate from the same school, in the ‘80s. In the same years, OTTO REICH (Cuban member of the Cuban-American National Foundation), Former vice-secretary of G. W. Bush administration for Latin America, OLIVER NORTH (Iran-Contras scandal), and JOHN DIMITRI NEGROPONTE (Ambassador of the USA and now adviser in the US State Department), they all used the military base of PALMEROLA as a launching platform for destabilization of Nicaragua and the war of the ‘80s against that country.
They are guilty of the killings of 70,000 Nicaraguans and are considered by Hondurans to be the operators of the American military coup in this country. OTTO REICH agreed with the coup in the American congress showing its responsibility and implication. Republican Senator JOHN McCAIN coordinated the reception of the representatives of the Honduran coup d’état in the US congress. (Read US lawyer Eva Golinger denouncing the coup in http://www.transcend.org/tms/article_detail.php?article_id=1575)
(2) After the coup in Honduras and following the same format, a judge presented accusations against president Evo Morales in Bolivia and then in the OAS.
(3) The invasion of the Bay of Pigs in Cuba forced that country to get extra continental protection to defend its sovereignty. One consequence was the “Cuba Missile Crisis,” when the world came close to a thermonuclear war.
___________________
The Authors:
Antonio Jarquin (Medical Doctor/Sociologist – Nicaragua)
Wim Dierckxsens (Sociologist/Economist – Netherlands)
Paulo Nakatani (Economist – Brasil)
Dr. Paulo Campanario (Brasil)
Reinaldo Carcanholo (Economist – Brasil)
Remy Herrera (Economist – France)
This article originally appeared on Transcend Media Service (TMS) on 22 Jul 2009.
Anticopyright: Editorials and articles originated on TMS may be freely reprinted, disseminated, translated and used as background material, provided an acknowledgement and link to the source, TMS: MILITARY COUP IN HONDURAS: IS IT AGAINST OBAMA TOO?, is included. Thank you.
If you enjoyed this article, please donate to TMS to join the growing list of TMS Supporters.
This work is licensed under a CC BY-NC 4.0 License.
Read more
Click here to go to the current weekly digest or pick another article:
COMMENTARY ARCHIVES: