Honduras: What Should Our Response Be?

Posted on July 2nd, 2009 Austan Mogharabi 1 comment  Print This Post

The more I read about what is happening in Honduras, the more I am convinced that it might be best that Obama use the generic, “the Honduran people will decide their future,” statement. 

Daniel Larison, who supported Obama’s reaction to the Iranian coup (completely illegal, by the way), now seems pleased to skewer Obama on his response to the Honduran coup.  Here is the key quote:

What is so impressive about the bungling here is that it contradicts every argument the administration has made in support of restraint and caution when it comes to the Iranian protests. Obama didn’t want to insert the U.S. into an Iranian dispute. Iranians, he said, would decide their own future. Hondurans apparently are not accorded the same respect. Their sovereignty isn’t quite as important. Obama withheld judgment about the legality of what had happened in Iran. In Honduras, he just knows that what the military did was illegal, despite far stronger evidence that it was legal and a result of the proper functioning of their constitutional system.

Larison’s claims regarding the legality of the coup (from the point of view that the other branches of government supported the actions of the military), seem to be strengthened by interim President Michelleti’s declaration that the only way ex-President Zelaya would be allowed to return is “at the head of a foreign army.”  If he didn’t have solid support from the Legislature, the Supreme Court and other government institutions, it is unlikely he could make such a claim.

The best way to see the events in Honduras, according to Larison, is as the system of checks and balances working even though the means to enforcement were somewhat illegal.  The contradictions is a bit tough but I certainly see his point.  As I’ve mentioned in previous posts, the Attorney General, the Legislature and the Supreme Court all agree with the actions of the army (and claim to have authorized it – feel free to be skeptical, it is probably warranted).

This Honduran blogger, however, makes an interesting and important point:

I fear we have gone from bad to worse. At least Zelaya seemed to speak out for the poor. As one priest said this morning, despite all his errors and his vanity, Zelaya was the first major leader in many years to offer people a little bit of openness to the needs of the poor. The priest said he is not supporting the person Zelaya, but the cause of the poor. Micheletti is closely tied with the economic powers to be. An indication of his position is his support of privatization of water in his own district.

Also, Al Giordiano, a prominent blogger covering Honduras, is claiming that Michelleti and the Congress have suspended a number of Honduran rights.  Take his claims with a grain of salt as he is against Michelleti and for Zelaya.