For months Zelaya and his supporters had been calling for the direct intervention of the US. In order to finally settle the stalemate, on October 23rd, Secretary of State Clinton took the initiative to help solve the crisis, or at least facilitate the achievement of a consensus. Secretary Clinton dispatchied several top US officials to the country to meet with both sides. The US officials’ presence was considered a crucial element in the negotiations between Zelaya and Micheletti, which ultimately led to a resolution.
Recent remarks from former OAS Secretary General César Gaviria and former Mexican Foreign Minister Jorge Castañeda, delivered during a gathering in Sao Paolo, strongly criticized the current OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza’s efforts to uphold Zelaya’s constitutional position as a foundation to resolve the current crisis and to guarantee that no extra constitutional change would occur. Gaviria came forth with the entirely specious and mock political thesis that: “it is impossible to put Zelaya back in power since the Court, the Congress and the military are not with him.” Both Castañeda and Gaviria wrongly maintain that Brazil demonstrated a lack of commitment to an enlightened policy, when, in fact, President Lula’s administration clearly did the honorable thing by inviting Zelaya to take refuge in its embassy and to be a powerful factor in backing steps to resolve the Honduran dispute.
Both Gaviria and Castañeda have expressed the position that the Brazilian embassy has become a place of refuge for “subversive” activities, an outrageous claim. Moreover, Gaviria expressed his criticism against the OAS’s attitude toward Honduras prior to when the coup took place, arguing that the OAS should have criticized the “excesses committed by Zelaya” while he was president that caused discontent within the Supreme Court and the military. Gaviria also underscored that the OAS’s efforts to resolve the crisis should have been more balanced in order to accommodate Micheletti. Gaviria seems to have overlooked that the ousting of Zelaya was utterly unconstitutional and a clear violation of the Inter-American Charter.
Given the illegitimacy of Micheletti’s takeover, Honduras has seen escalating incidents of human rights abuses in the country, especially targeted at Zelaya’s supporters rallying outside of the Brazilian embassy, where he has sought refuge. Gaviria and Castañeda’s remarks expressing their backing for Micheletti and a disapproval of Zelaya, are simply unforgivable and are more an example of their unremitting arrogance than constructive advice.
These comments are reminiscent of comparable statements issued by US Republican legislators, especially by four US Representatives who visited Honduras and met with Micheletti, but not Zelaya, earlier in the month. This undoubtedly was meant to interfere with and refute any likelihood that serious negotiations between both sides could be carried out at that time.
Republican Senator Jim DeMint of South Carolina adamantly had lobbied Congress to reverse the US State Department’s condemnation of the coup, while simultaneously blocking Obama’s appointments of Arturo Valenzuela and Thomas Shannon for the positions of Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. DeMint and his colleagues appear to believe that the coup was a necessary action taken because Zelaya had violated the constitution in an attempt to extend his presidential term. This was clearly a canard, since he was only asking that a consultative process take place with no legal standing, and which he most likely would have lost. If successful, he only would have the right to run for reelection in a contest where the odds of his winning would be grossly against him.
Loading tweets...
7 comments
Barbara Schieber says:
October 30, 2009 at 7:35 pm (UTC -6 )
Very good objetive analysis.
This is usefull information for decision makers.
A mini analysis of how the media in the US took sides in this poiticial crisis would be a very important ingredient for a further article. Example : The Wall Street Journal.
We sincerely hope that the Wall Street Journal will one day recover their senses and start to cover objectively the news of the world, or better jet, they should shut down.
Their usefulness as an information source has come to an end, now they are a source of disinformation.
saludos
Edwin Molina says:
October 30, 2009 at 10:13 pm (UTC -6 )
This article is misleading. The final decision whether Mr. Zelaya will be reinstated to power will be taken by the National Congress with a previous opinion of the Judiciary branch. This solution was brought to the table by Micheletti's negotiators. Lets wait until this happens and not draw final conclussions. This is the problem that Mr. Arias and Mr. Insulza faced when dealing with this type of analysis, where they priviledged their own views and passions, rather than making an indepth analysis of the situation. Whereas, Mr. Ortega in Nicaragua is following the same Chavista pamphlet by destroying the democratic institution, in Honduras just did not happen.
Dudley Ankerson says:
October 31, 2009 at 12:25 pm (UTC -6 )
Enter text right here!
The personal attacks on Gaviria and Castañeda in this article are gratuitous, offensive and irrelevant to the arguments. It seems the writer has more interest in attacking her perceived betes noirs than in composing an objective assessment of the situation in Honduras. There are various points of view relating to this unhappy episode and no one party has a monopoly of right on its side. Zelaya's behaviour prior to his illegal expulsion was questionable and provocative. There seems little doubt he was an instrument of the Venezuelan government's geopolitical ambitions in the isthmus. It was this which drove Micheletti and his supporters to act as they did. On the other hand the behaviour of Micheletti and his supporters was illegal and in violation of human rights. The OAS conspicuously failed to resolve te dispute. Sadly it was only when the US lent upon the de fact regime in Tegucicalpa that a solution was reached. A triumph for Obama but a setback for the inter-American system.'
Hector Garcia says:
October 31, 2009 at 2:45 pm (UTC -6 )
While I have little respect for Gaviria and Castaneda, their record speaks for itself, some comments on these two ex-diplomats was unnecessary in what was a very good analysis of the situation in Honduras. What concerns me is whether things will return to the Pre-Zelaya status quo and that might be the outcome with an unrepentant armed forces and a legislature that failed to follow its own constitution.
Ivan Perez says:
November 1, 2009 at 1:07 am (UTC -6 )
It seems that COHA is more interested in bashing some right-wing politicians than objectively observing what's going on in the hemisphere. The agreement reached in Honduras will be decided upon in 72 hours by the Honduran Congress. Meanwhile, terrorist attacks in Honduras continue, with two electrical towers purposely sabotaged by Zelaya supporters as well as the Vice-Minister of Defense's 81 year old father being kidnapped at gunpoint in the capital. I suppose left-wing human rights violations really aren't human rights violations at all.
Cornelius says:
November 2, 2009 at 5:26 am (UTC -6 )
I liked it. So much useful material. I read with great interest.
Augustus Neyer says:
January 5, 2012 at 1:10 am (UTC -6 )
I’ve been browsing on-line greater than 3 hours lately, yet I by no means discovered any attention-grabbing article like yours. It’s pretty price enough for me. Personally, if all website owners and bloggers made good content as you probably did, the web will likely be a lot more useful than ever before.