Honduras, everything on the line

[Lizard_King]

It's ironic how the constitutional clause about not even allowing an attempt to change the one term limit, which presumably was put in place to prevent nascent dictators taking over, ends up being the starting point for a military coup. I wonder, will they respect such term limits themselves, now that they've seized power?

At the moment, it's not clear that the military is going to assume power in name. Michellini is guaranteeing that his acting presidency will end with the upcoming, already announced election.

What I don't get is why was Zelaya so adamant about this? Is he just that power hungry? Was there some reason he would believe he could pull it off? It sounds like the courts and military were clearly stacked against him, and it comes off like political suicide -- why not just take the Putin -> Medvedyev route?

Juan's post does a great job of explaining that. He was isolated within his party as well as within the political power structure as a whole. By pushing the military's buttons, a cynic could argue that he was cleverly leveraging the martyrdom he felt was likely to result from brinkmanship in this direction.

[Juan Rayo]

At the moment, it's not clear that the military is going to assume power in name. Michellini is guaranteeing that his acting presidency will end with the upcoming, already announced election.

Juan's post does a great job of explaining that. He was isolated within his party as well as within the political power structure as a whole. By pushing the military's buttons, a cynic could argue that he was cleverly leveraging the martyrdom he felt was likely to succeed from brinkmanship in this direction.

Micheletti is betting they can hold until the coming elections, and that the elections will validate the coup. And funny you should mention what a cynic may believe, cause that is exactly what a lot of people are suspecting atm.

Myself, I never credited Zelaya with enough smarts or balls to try that one, but to be honest he has surprised us a lot during his term, showing much more cunning that previously suspected for him. I am not quite ready to believe that is how it went but it is a possibility lots of people here are considering.

[Lizard_King]

Lizard King: no part of the constitution can be eternal. I believe in your case the US constitution changes via "ammendments", but not sure. And really it makes sense that a constitution can be changed as times change. If there are no legal ways to do so, then you start by building those legal ways and then make the changes. All within the democratic system.

That's fair enough. I understand where the designers of the constitution were coming from in Honduras (at least if I view it idealistically), and yes, we do have amendments but they are a complicated affair. Without exception, the states that have resorted to plebiscite based legislation on that scale at their level have ended up with some very mixed results, and I would argue Latin America's track record with those (broadly speaking) is no better.

Zelaya bypassed legislative power and the courts both. He was making a bet: "I have so much popular support they can't dare to stop me". On sunday, there was supposed to be a ballot, that even he agreed had no legal weight, asking Hondureans if they wanted the constitution to be changed.

Had the ballot taken place and the vote be big enough for "yes" that would have forced congress to accept the result and act upon it. Now keep in mind, these people form a very, very old ruling group, and there already were signs in the past 2 elections of the two party system getting weaker in Honduras (GOOD!), these are people no one in Honduras believe are not stained by corruption -them showing an obvious fake "president's resignation letter" that nobody bought was just the latest proof, and Zelaya was counting on this to build his own power base (amazing how people was willing to inmediatly forget Zelaya's own past corruption in exchange for some mediate benefits).

It sounds like you would agree that it was a case of calculated brinkmanship.

By the way we are in a night curfew atm, from 9pm to 6am. During those hours, new government has suspended rights of associaciation, congregation, has no need for a court order to raid houses, detain people and others. Freedom of speech is essencially, if not officilialy cancelled.

I was invited by a tv show to comment on the situation last night and it was taking off the air as we were some 15 minutes into it, plus the army came to make sure the journos didn't try anything funny. We were very politely, at gunpoint, escorted outside the building. This was prior to curfew taking effect but I guess they didn't need a court order for it anyways. They have also issued order for the detentation of a number of political and social leaders. It is a coup make no mistake.

It has me frustrated as hell. Whoever wins this (atm, I think Zelaya will, if only by sheer international condemnation of the coup) those of us have been working for years to create a moder, functional, democratic society in Honduras will be set back for decades.

That's extraordinary. Have you considered writing any of this stuff up more formally and sending it out? It seems the major news outlets are starved for on the ground reporting that could add an element of historical grounding to the discussion.

[Juan Rayo]

That's extraordinary. Have you considered writing any of this stuff up more formally and sending it out? It seems the major news outlets are starved for on the ground reporting that could add an element of historical grounding to the discussion.

Yes, we are working on it at the moment but as a concerted, planned effort. Much better writers out there doing it, so I just abuse Tom's forum by venting on it.

Update: as a curfew and "state of exceptions" can only be called by congress, not executive power, social movements have decided to ignore the curfew declared by new president.

Tanks and heavily armed troops + police have taken control of the streets we demonstrated it yesterday, in front of presidential house. Location of Mr. Cesar Ham still unclear but nobody believes the "was killed" part so far. Still a lot of confusing reports. Only radio stations allowed to transmit are either transmitting futbol, or interviewing members of congress. By the way, I am a part of the 10% or so of Honduran population with home access to the internet. Most people here have no idea that a number of governments have condemned the coup, as, of course, no radio or tv station still on air has so much as mention it.

[Jasper Phillips]

Instead, you opted to assume that I have no idea what I'm talking about and am taking a Kissingerian position simply because I am critical of Chavez in the same breath that I clearly describe what part of the kind of thing he does isn't nonsense.

Basically, yes. I think you have a knee jerk reaction to those that say bad things about the US, and in general a Rah-Rah-Go-Usa attitude. You absolutely came off like you thought Chavez was completely off base for his suspicion, as though anyone who would believe that could have no possible reason other than just hating the US.

Is there an anti-American anywhere you won't give a blank check to?

[Jasper Phillips]

At the moment, it's not clear that the military is going to assume power in name. Michellini is guaranteeing that his acting presidency will end with the upcoming, already announced election.

True, although I don't think anyone is fooled by where the power rests right now.

Juan's post does a great job of explaining that. He was isolated within his party as well as within the political power structure as a whole. By pushing the military's buttons, a cynic could argue that he was cleverly leveraging the martyrdom he felt was likely to result from brinkmanship in this direction.

I guess I can see that angle, if he felt he would be completely out of power anyway, and so had nothing to lose.

[Jasper Phillips]

Location of Mr. Cesar Ham still unclear but nobody believes the "was killed" part so far.

Interesting, why? I would have guessed those against this coup would be more suspicious.

Still a lot of confusing reports. Only radio stations allowed to transmit are either transmitting futbol, or interviewing members of congress. By the way, I am a part of the 10% or so of Honduran population with home access to the internet. Most people here have no idea that a number of governments have condemned the coup, as, of course, no radio or tv station still on air has so much as mention it.

Brutal. Still, 10% is quite a few, enough that you'd things would get out via phones and word of mouth. I'm surprised they didn't shut down the internet, although I guess that'd give more credence to calling the takeover a coup than they'd like.

[Lizard_King]

Basically, yes. I think you have a knee jerk reaction to those that say bad things about the US, and in general a Rah-Rah-Go-Usa attitude. You absolutely came off like you thought Chavez was completely off base for his suspicion, as though anyone who would believe that could have no possible reason other than just hating the US.

There's a huge gray area between Kissinger and Castro, and most of us inhabit it. Just because the US is the single worst thing to happen to Latin America since smallpox and Spaniards doesn't make Chavez good, and calling him on his bullshit is absolutely essential if people and systems who are actually worth a damn are ever going to rise to the top. Simply being opposed to the US will only get you so far, and you can't stop scrutinizing simply because of that.

[Juan Rayo]

Interesting, why? I would have guessed those against this coup would be more suspicious.


Brutal. Still, 10% is quite a few, enough that you'd things would get out via phones and word of mouth. I'm surprised they didn't shut down the internet, although I guess that'd give more credence to calling the takeover a coup than they'd like.

Oh we are getting news out as we can. Limited when so few people have access to the net and with no media we can use to speak up. Also, remember most middle and upper class -those with access to internet- were really scared of Zelaya's discourse and are against him.

[Eduardo X]

I bet that, as those 10% are probably wealthy, they're hoping those people would be the ones happy to see a "leftist" toppled.

Man, Latin America makes me sad. So much instability and power-mongering that all ends up just leaving the poor and working classes poor and working while the rich find new, incredible ways to get more rich.

Also, be careful, Juan. As this all seems to be going over peacefully, at least so far, I hope you don't get in trouble for getting news out.

[Juan Rayo]

Phone service just got taken out across country.
Internet may very well be next.

[Cubit]

Phone service just got taken out across country.
Internet may very well be next.

Yikes, Juan. Stay strong.

[Lizard_King]

Phone service just got taken out across country.
Internet may very well be next.

I wonder how Michellini will handle that. Or if he even has any say in any of these decisions.

[Phil_Stein]

Not directly related to the situation at hand, but out of curiousity:

Why are there so many small, separate, Central American nations? I know the background of Panama, a bit, but know almost nothing of the origin of the others.

Also (and probably related), are the nations relatively distinct in terms of language/culture/ethnicity/economics/traditions/etc?

[Juan Rayo]

Phil that's a great question, will be happy to venture an explanation later but it would take me some time.

Ok so the military just stormed Hondutel, the state's thelephone company. Phone service is going down. Some radio got taken off the air after they reported US embassador Llorens saying "some radio and tv stations were taken off the air and same is happening with phones, this is unnaceptable in a democratic society".

Gotta give it to the journos, some of them are trying.

[Lizard_King]

I'm going to reach back into some painfully long ago parallel education moments (I took Costa Rican history in Spanish at the same time as I took regular US-tracked history courses in English). I look forward to seeing Juan's take on it soon.

Not directly related to the situation at hand, but out of curiousity:

Why are there so many small Central American nations? I know the background of Panama, a bit, but not so much the others. i.e. What are the historical reasons for all these separate nations, rather than them all being in one nation - a nation between Mexico and Columbia, or even attached to Mexico itself (as states/provinces).

To make a really long story short, they were originally somewhat unified in the wake of independence from Spain, but over the course of the 1830's and 40's disintegrated into smaller chunks based largely around the interests of the competing elites (mostly composed of the America-born Spanish Criollos). The last gasp is usually regarded as the death of Morazan in 1842, although as with Bolivar's death being used as such a marker in South America you have to take that with a grain of salt.

The flip side of it is the obvious: it is in the best interests of everyone around Central America to keep them divided and weak. In the post Civil War active enforcement of the Monroe Doctrine, the US went to great lengths to ensure that unity was given the appropriate level of opposition, although it does go through fashionable cycles (an entertaining read, and I'm glad I found an excuse for it here. Pay close attention to the unnamed source's compare and contrast of Native Americans).

Nowadays it is a cause closely identified with the Latin American left, and you'll probably find its strongest proponents in people like Chavez. Unfortunately, their leadership and advocacy makes a strong case for many (particularly the upper classes) that such a move would be extremely unwise. I can't say that I blame them.

In recent years, the biggest steps have been in economic agreements, although unfortunately the most significant ones are in partnership with the US rather than designed to counterbalance it. Naturally the Chinese have made great inroads across the board as investors, but they are hardly an exciting alternative long term option with their current spin on neocolonialism.

Also (and probably related), are the nations relatively distinct in terms of language/culture/ethnicity/economics/traditions/etc?

There's two parts to that. There's the reality (no) and the perceived reality (coated in layers of weaselly nationalism that at the very least Costa Rica had no problem generating even without a whole lot of militarism to drive it). And then there's the issue most countries have across Latin America of the complicated relationship they have with the descendants of indigenous populations and the still-extant economic caste system that is still firmly rooted in most. I bring that up because that is the collective identity that people like Chavez and Zelaya are able to tap into, as well as that of the generally downtrodden, but have so far failed to bridge nationalist boundaries in very meaningful ways. Probably because they are too full of shit.

If you are really interested in the subject, I would recommend the Galeano book that Obama was so cavalier about not reading, Open Veins of Latin America. Regardless of what Chavez uses it to justify, it is a wonderfully written social and cultural history of Latin America that I would put on par with De Tocqueville for its cross-generational relevance. Except if DT had been writing in the 70's, was more of a lefty, and was a better and briefer writer.

[Tim James]

Lizard King: no part of the constitution can be eternal. I believe in your case the US constitution changes via "ammendments", but not sure. And really it makes sense that a constitution can be changed as times change. If there are no legal ways to do so, then you start by building those legal ways and then make the changes. All within the democratic system.

Zelaya bypassed legislative power and the courts both. He was making a bet: "I have so much popular support they can't dare to stop me". On sunday, there was supposed to be a ballot, that even he agreed had no legal weight, asking Hondureans if they wanted the constitution to be changed.

This happens in the US too, just far less brazenly. People generally go along with whatever is shit out of D.C. but I think everyone would blow a few gaskets if anyone tried to continue ruling past their agreed-upon term in modern America. The political tribes are so divisive right now you probably wouldn't get the idea even to cable news trash level.

[Tankero]

Not directly related to the situation at hand, but out of curiousity:

Why are there so many small, separate, Central American nations? I know the background of Panama, a bit, but know almost nothing of the origin of the others.

Also (and probably related), are the nations relatively distinct in terms of language/culture/ethnicity/economics/traditions/etc?

The answer to the first question can come in several flavors: Logistical, Historical, Anthropological or Cynical.

The answer to the second is: Yes. Very.

[Juan Rayo]

As the army was taking over the telephone company, they ran over one of the protesters with a car and then proceeded to kick the crap out of the rest.

link to video with the "running over" part, not pretty. The beating came afterward, looking for videos or pics.

Note this is not in any radio or tv station in Honduras, we all just using the net to share info.

[Sarkus]

Note that FDR's run for a third term was not unprecedented. Theodore Roosevelt also ran for a third term.

That's sort of but not technically true. TR became president in 1901 after the assasination of McKinley and finished out his term, then was elected once in 1904. While his run in 1912 would be considered a third term by the definition of the 22nd amendment, that wasn't necessarily the view at the time. From what I've read, the question of him breaking Washington's tradition by running in 1912 never was an issue, as opposed to it being an issue when FDR ran for a third time in 1940.

Also, US Grant ran in 1880 for a non-consecutive third term but did not receive the nomination and didn't pursue the third party route TR later did.

As an added note, Lyndon Johnson could have run for another term in 1968, and was intending to until relatively late.

[Phil_Stein]

Huh, Sarkus - I don't think I'd heard that view about TR before.

Note that Theodore Roosevelt's had just under seven and a half years in office - September 14, 1901 to March 4, 1909 according to Wikipedia.

Also, re: LBJ - he was pretty unpopular as well circa early 1968. Which means that of the post-FDR presidents who served more than 4 years, I think Truman, LBJ, Nixon, Clinton and W. were probably too unpopular to be elected again anyways (well, Nixon is an odd case, but was definitely unpopular towards the end of his presidency).

Arguably, Reagan and Ike might have won 3rd terms, but both were pretty old by the end of their terms, constitutional issues aside.

[Tim James]

I'm reaching here but even when I completely ignored politics back in the day, I swear I remember hearing noise about Clinton trying to run a third term. Wasn't there some worry he would ruin Gore's shot or some shit that had the political-media complex in a brief tizzy?

But look at us Americans; people are dying in Honduras and we're chatting US politics!

[Phil_Stein]

people are dying in Honduras

Of course, people in Honduras (and elsewhere) are presumably dying from the usual causes, like heart attacks and disease and whatnot.

But are they dying from political violence in Honduras?

I thought this issue hasn't been clearly resolved one way or another, though my information is primarily confined to what's been posted and some of what's been linked in this thread.

[Huzurdaddi]

Arguably, Reagan and Ike might have won 3rd terms, but both were pretty old by the end of their terms, constitutional issues aside.

I really wish Reagan had been reelected to a 3rd term, it would have been awesome. His third term would have been 1988-1992, and he revealed that he had been diagnosed with Alzheimer's disease earlier in 1994. However some psychologists began to detect possible signs of the disorder in his conversation speech and behavior during his 2nd term.

It would have been awesome, just to show how amazingly stupid the american populace is, that they would elect a person to the top elected position who has Alzheimer's.

Ike, OTOH, well everyone likes Ike. Heck I like Ike, what little I know of him. He sounded like a decent fellow. We could have done worse. Although that JFK fellow was ok.

[Cubit]

Although that JFK fellow was ok.

If you aren't counting his foreign policy...

[Trashcan]

Ike, OTOH, well everyone likes Ike. Heck I like Ike, what little I know of him. He sounded like a decent fellow. We could have done worse.

Well, we have Ike to thank for the overthrow of Mosaddeq and the coup's 30+ year consequence: The Islamic Republic of Iran.

[Lizard_King]

The answer to the second is: Yes. Very.

I don't mean to imply that everyone isn't from a unique snowflake of a country by my response, but I really don't think there are cultural differences sufficient to warrant the level of division between Central American countries. At the very least an EU level of cooperation is perfectly feasible, and it's clear the existing model has run its course. The other alternative is Chavez-style class warfare.

Note this is not in any radio or tv station in Honduras, we all just using the net to share info.

Hopefully you can keep it going.

[Tankero]

I don't mean to imply that everyone isn't from a unique snowflake of a country by my response, but I really don't think there are cultural differences sufficient to warrant the level of division between Central American countries.

Even if at their creation along natural borders (rivers, for example) these countries were distinct from one another largely for administrative purposes, they've developed along their own paths, and sometimes in opposition to their neighbors. At this point, there are cultural differences, animosities and strife between the Central American states (as is the case in South America). Now, if everyone could just tone down their egos, yes, EU-style cooperation could be possible. However, there are also huge economic differences between some of the would-be member states, which would be another obstacle that'd be difficult to overcome.

[Lizard_King]

Even if at their creation along natural borders (rivers, for example) these countries were distinct from one another largely for administrative purposes, they've developed along their own paths, and sometimes in opposition to their neighbors. At this point, there are cultural differences, animosities and strife between the Central American states (as is the case in South America). Now, if everyone could just tone down their egos, yes, EU-style cooperation could be possible. However, there are also huge economic differences between some of the would-be member states, which would be another obstacle that'd be difficult to overcome.

Like I said, that's where Chavez actually is useful. He is the boogeyman that the elites fear because his style of rule is so much more successful at harnessing the lower classes than their lazy, opportunistic nationalism has ever been. Once again, I don't think the differences are that huge. Sure, every other country than mine has an intolerable accent and they seem determined to be ignorant bottom feeders but if they were just willing to do what we told them...what? Why's everyone looking at me like that?

[Idar Thorvaldsen]

I have a question. How do tin pot dictators have such staying power? Not since crazy old FDR has the US had a President that wants to do anything but retire after his two terms. The job really seems to drain them.

Do these guys phone it in most of the time to stay fresh, or perhaps have to deal with less criticism from the media and opposition during their terms?

I'm guessing dictators have easier ways to deal with such criticism than US presidents do.