All very true. Venezuela's oil production is also steadily decreasing, owing to years of insufficient investment; the populace has gotten used to a diet of golden eggs and Hugo's been starving the goose, which puts him in an awkward position. Not nice being the candyman when the candy bag runs out. I also suspect that Hugo misses Bush badly, and needs a foreign policy crisis to rally support and distract from domestic issues. Whatever one thinks of the Bush-the-demon construct, it was very real to many people and was ready-made for exploitation by both Islamic fundamentalists and Chavez-style leftists.
The problem I have with this is that by pointing out their flaws, you enter into a dialogue. You point out their flaws, they fire back with a list of yours, real or imagined. If you have to ignore them sooner or later it is sometimes advantageous to ignore them from the start. For many observers the substance of what is said is irrelevant: what they see is Hugo talking and America responding, leading to the conclusion that America takes Hugo seriously. That's why I feel that if anything is going to be said it needs to come from well below the Presidential level.
Now we see Zelaya issuing ultimatums and calling for insurrection, which it seems to me puts him on pretty shaky ground: if violence ensues he is sending poor Hondurans out to die for him, if (more likely, I suspect) the response is tepid he seems impotent. Other nations may denounce the "coup", but is anyone going to start a war to restore Zelaya? I think not.
Ideally at some point Micheletti and his inner circle would offer to resign and allow the legislature and Supreme Court to supervise an internationally monitored election... we shall see!
Bookmarks