Reply With QuoteIt looks like we have the answer to what his opposition will do. Appearently the Army has arrested the Honduran President, but things went for warm to hot overnight.
Originally Posted by AnalyticType
Honduras (catch all)
From Stratfor today:
Source: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/200..._tensions_riseHonduras saw several siginificant developments as tensions continue to rise following the June 24 dismissal of the Central American country's military commander....
What reaction/action do you perceive will develop within the Honduran military?
Zelaya wants to re-engineer the 1982 constitution, likely to his personal benefit: currently the constitution allows for exactly one presidential term. No doubt he wants more. Has he been studying up on the sweet deal Turkmenbashi had?
Source: http://www.stratfor.com/analysis/200...l_crisis_brews
Last edited by Jedburgh; 06-26-2009 at 02:53 AM.
"At least we're getting the kind of experience we need for the next war." -- Allen Dulles
A work of art worth drooling over: http://www.maxton.com/intimidator1/i...r1_page4.shtml
Coup
It looks like we have the answer to what his opposition will do. Appearently the Army has arrested the Honduran President, but things went for warm to hot overnight.
See things through the eyes of your enemy and you can defeat him.
LIttle Bit of Bias, But Lots of Information....
...about what actually occurred:
This article is slanted toward Honduras exiling President Mel Zelaya, and then moving on.
Honduras Defends Its Democracy
This article is slanted toward US involvement for forcing reinstatement of President Mel Zelaya.
Separate Article With Different Viewpoint
Looks to be more of an internal political crisis in which nobody was willing to stop pushing the envelope, eventually push comes to shove. Somebody gets to take an extended vacation out of the country.
This is going to be an interesting case to see how much political resources that POTUS wants to spend regarding Honduras - if any. You only have so much "political capital" to spend, and one of the big issues is going to be "Why Honduras, and why not (enter name here)".
Smart Move: Let your Sec. of State handle this, apply the appropriate level of outrage, and then move back onto the more pressing issues.
HO is a complex case
It appears, from what I have read - the articlesposted by Watcher seem to cover the possible realities - that Zelaya was deposed constitutionally, if in a rough and ready manner. The general reaction in Latin America has been knee jerk rejection of any military involvement but who was to carry out the Supreme Court's order to arrest him if not the military? This was hardly similar to the attempted coup against Chavez or Chavez' own coup attempt against constitutional President Carlos Andres Perez in 1992 (exact date?). In neither case had the other institutions of government charged the President with wrongdoing. The closest analogy I can think of is the period that led up to Augusto Pinochet's coup against Salvador Allende in 1972. In that case, the Congress and the courts had turned on Allende but neither had directed his arrest. Pinochet acted alone, in the end. The proof was in what happened next. While the coup itself was popular, the expectation was that the armed forces would return to barracks having done the job - they didn't. In HO, the armed forces were directed to take action by the court which was confirmed by the Congress which named Zelaya's successor according to the constitution. Appropriately, Secretary Clinton has not accepted that this was a military coup and the Adminsitration is acting cautiously.
Personally, I think the WSJ article got it right based on what I currently know, and therefore, we should act more forthrightly to support the Honduran congress and the court. That said, more and different information could change my perception.
Looks like it's too late...
Link to a BBC article on the situation. Looks like Obama's already made a statement of sorts.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Obama speaks
Yes, he made a statement calling it a coup and condenming it. That hardly changes the apparent facts which, in addition, include a statement by the new Pres (formerly Pres of the Congress = speaker of the House in the US) that scheduled free presidential elections will take place this Fall with international observers.
I happen to think the Pres is factually wrong; this is not a coup.
Cheers
JohnT
PS The military acting under orders of a civilian branch of govt can hardly be conducting a military coup. Indeed, when its actions were ratified by a second civilian branch - the Congress - I'd say 2 out of 3 ain't bad!
Last edited by John T. Fishel; 06-29-2009 at 11:51 PM.
Hi John ....
Mucho gratias for the briefing.
My thoughts are that 24 hours, to digest the facts and come up with a definitive legal opinion based on what WH legal, DoJ and DoS Legal Advisor think is the constitutional law of Honduras, is a very short time.
However, the crowd (OAS) is on Z's side - so, Pres. Obama here is probably being "practical" - keep even with Hugo ??
Not my area - so, JTF, keep us posted.
-----------------
My sat dish is haywire - some high winds in the last few days. I guess I'll bring a shortwave into the living room and go back to the old days of monitoring via radio - yikes !
Last edited by jmm99; 06-30-2009 at 12:01 AM.
POTUS has basically done what he had to do (sort of), but it gets tricky from here. First off, it's a whole lot easier to get in than it is to get back out - A lesson we've had a hard time over the last few years.
The real problem is that POTUS is now more subject to the whims of folks like Hugo Chavez in regards to where do we go from here; re: Honduras. What happens if Hugo Chavez gets the OAS to endorse military action against Honduras, and Hugo offers to lead the way?
or...
The US is Honduras biggest trade partner. What happens if the OAS puts drastic trade sanctions on Honduras, or any other national entity trading with Honduras?
The real problem out of this is that I see POTUS has potentially put us into the mix where the least stable LATAM leadership could easily turn out to be the band leader, and then, it's "What's The Plan??"
De nada, JMM
I don't know what the Honduran Constitution says about removing a President but Latin American constitutions usually don't say much since Presidents tend to dominate. Still, there has been a slight trend toward more respect for other govt insitutions in the recent past.
That said, if the WSJ interpretation of the facts is correct, the Obama, OAS, and Chavez position is like saying to the US that Congress had no right to impeach Bill Clinton or bring impeachment charges against Richard Nixon forcing his resignation.
This is, IMO, a case where the traditional Latin American doctrine of non-intervention is most appropriate. If followed, it would allow the Hondurans to deal with their own problem...
Cheers
JohnT
I for one am with you.
If the Honduran Supreme Court and their Congress agree...
This is a time to wish Honduras well and do nothing. If we roll for Chavez et Cie., we'll pay later.
Watcher
President Obama had the choice to be as cautious with HO as he was with Iran. Instead, he jumped in up to his eyeballs. What he appears to have failed to do is recognize that threats to democracy can and do come from elected presidents as well as unelected generals. As recently as 1992 we have the autogolpe of Alberto Fujimori, Pres of Peru, immediately followed by a similar attempt in Guatemala. Of course there are the current cases of Chavez' Venezuela and Morales' Bolivia where democratic freedom is being whittled away by presdientially sponsored plebiscitary democracy. In the former, democracy is gone... voted away democratically.
Cheers
JohnT
Quite so. I found that reaction especially disturbing from someone who has a legal background and should be able to recognize the difference between a coup and what appears to have happened in Honduras. BBC accounts seem to jive with what the WSJ is saying.
I think our best course would have been to stay clear.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Staying "clear" is very close to essentially agreeing with the coup. It wouldn't have been as blatant as Bush's tacit endorsement of the coup against Chavez, but in the face of a universal condemnation from the OAS, the EU, and pretty much every responding country and organization in the world, it would be a clear signal that we approved of the coup, or at least its results.I think our best course would have been to stay clear.
Moreover, that members of the coup itself have doubts about its "legality" can be seen in the faked resignation letter and the immediate declaration of martial law, as well as the clampdown on opposition media.
As for "jumping in to his eyeballs", needless to say I disagree. The Administration didn't recall the Ambassador, didn't declare an immediate cutoff of its quite significant military aid to Honduras, didn't call for Zelaya's immediate reinstatement, etc. The Administration did the minimum required to stay in step with the rest of the world.
Was it a sympathetic reaction perhaps?
I agree with SB and JTF. Several times on the news I watched Obama make those comments. My slip/bias may be showing a tad here, but given my perception that he's taking us toward (if not down) a similar road, I sensed a bit of defensiveness in his facial expressions and tone. There appeared to be the desire to speak his mind battling with the need to filter his words.
"democracy is gone... voted away democratically."
Just my 2psi
Last edited by AnalyticType; 06-30-2009 at 02:40 PM. Reason: added quote from JTF
"At least we're getting the kind of experience we need for the next war." -- Allen Dulles
A work of art worth drooling over: http://www.maxton.com/intimidator1/i...r1_page4.shtml
The Administration's thinking is likely along the lines of this quote:My slip/bias may be showing a tad here, but given my perception that he's taking us toward (if not down) a similar road, I sensed a bit of defensiveness in his facial expressions and tone.
Even so, one administration official said that while the United States thought the referendum was a bad idea, it did not justify a coup.
“On the one instance, we’re talking about conducting a survey, a nonbinding survey; in the other instance, we’re talking about the forcible removal of a president from a country,” the official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity during a teleconference call with reporters.
Last edited by Jedburgh; 07-03-2009 at 12:37 PM.
I'm still not convinced that what we're seeing here is a coup. All the reports I've seen indicate that the army acted at the behest of the Honduran supreme court, which in turn was acting based on legislation passed by the Honduran legislature. That and I wouldn't call Chavez a disinterested or objective observer. Of course he's going to act to keep a potential ally in office.
And is this really necessary?AT appeared to be simply expressing an opinion, and framed it with a statement indicating possible personal bias. No need to mock that.My own slip/bias may be showing here, but do you also think that FEMA is building concentration camps in Amtrak repair facilities, or that the President was actually born in Kenya?
Last edited by Steve Blair; 06-30-2009 at 03:01 PM.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
Faked resignation letter, declaration of martial law, shutdown of opposition media, forced expulsion of the elected President. Pretty sure the last measure is not in the Honduran Constitution any more than some of Zelaya's moves towards his nonbinding referendum on a possible Constitutional convention.I'm still not convinced that what we're seeing here is a coup. All the reports I've seen indicate that the army acted at the behest of the Honduran supreme court, which in turn was acting based on legislation passed by the Honduran legislature. That and I wouldn't call Chavez a disinterested or objective observer. Of course he's going to act to keep a potential ally in office.
When did I even bring up Chavez? He's hardly the only one calling this a coup --- pretty much the entire world is.
Glad to see you've made up your mind. My position tends to be closer to JohnT's, but to each his own.
"On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War
That's a waste...
Some day, those in this country who wish to do that will learn that it makes absolutely no difference in the way we are perceived by the rest of the world. Nor will it change the fact that we are both envied and despised by much of the world.
Been that way since World War II and while the viscosity goes up and down the scale depending upon events, it never fully dissipates. We waste much effort in even trying to cater to it.
That's is not likely to cease in the foreseeable future and all the apologists in the world won't effect any change...
What we should have done is express concern about the way it was done while in the same speech roundly and solidly and very publicly criticizing Chavez and Ortega for interfering in Honduras and encouraging Zelaya to attempt to subvert his own constitution.
Anyone who does not believe those two did and are doing that with tacit encouragement of many to tweak the Yanqui nose is living in a dream world.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks