Honduran Military Caught in the Middle of Power Struggle Between the President and Congress
In several of his interviews following his arrest and expulsion from Honduras, President Manuel Zelaya has portrayed himself as an innocent victim of a coup d'état (“golpe de estado”). His view has been amplified by foreign leaders such as President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, Daniel Ortega of Nicaragua, and Rafael Correa of Ecuador.
The impression that this view has conveyed to the world is that the arrest by Honduran troops during the morning of June 28 signaled a dangerous return to the 1960s and 1970s when rogue generals such as Oswaldo López Arellano and Juan Alberto Melgar Castro regularly overthrew presidents by force and ruled Honduras through military juntas. This impression is inaccurate. Honduras’ armed forces have invested much time, effort and financial capital during the past three decades to reform itself and emerge as a professional and apolitical institution.
The decision to arrest and exile Mr. Zelaya was made by Honduras’ Supreme Court and backed by a Congress that is nearly unanimous in its opposition to Mr. Zelaya. The military, led by the head of the Joint Chiefs, General Romeo Vásquez Velásquez, moved against the president only after the Supreme Court, the Congress, the Attorney General, and the Commissioner for Human Rights determined that a series of political maneuvers by Mr. Zelaya were illegal under the country’s Constitution and had the potential to cause severe public unrest and lead to Mr. Zelaya trying to remain in office past his current four-year term. The Constitution of Honduras prohibits second terms for presidents.
General Vásquez was placed in the unenviable position of having to choose whether to be loyal to his Commander in Chief or to the Constitution, as interpreted by the Judiciary and Legislative branches of the government. Mr. Zelaya weakened his own credibility with the military by publicly sacking General Vásquez for refusing to support a legally questionable referendum that had been scheduled to begin the morning of his arrest. The dismissal of Vásquez led the heads of Honduras’ three services of the armed forces, as well as the civilian Minister of Defense, to resign in a show of solidarity.
The reality is that the Honduran military found itself in a no-win situation by a continually escalating conflict involving Honduras’ three branches of government. The inability of Honduras’ civilian political leaders to establish a civil dialogue on how to resolve their differences forced General Vásquez and his staff to choose their allegiance. Ultimately, the general opted for what he viewed as defending the Constitution. If there are any “victims” in this chapter of Honduran history, it is the armed forces, not the politicians.
| < Prev | Next > |
|---|
News Categories
Latest Press Releases
-
Volunteers Needed to Teach at Jungle School in La Ceiba
...
Readmore... -
Hondurans Charged in Miami With Cocaine Trafficking
...
Readmore... -
Physicians in Georgia Raise Funds for Medical Mission to Guaimaca
...
Readmore... -
Radio Reporter Israel Zelaya Killed Near San Pedro Sula
...
Readmore... -
Honduran Teachers Continue Strike
...
Readmore...
Follow us on Twitter
Join our Facebook groupGold Sponsor
| |
Silver Sponsor
| |
Emilio Martínez, Bolivia
Would the United States have accepted foreign sympathizers of Richard Nixon
who would want to reinstall him as president?
Perhaps those who rush to qualify the recent political events in Honduras as a coup d’État should remember the case of Richard Nixon, who was removed from his office after the American Congress initiated a process brought on by the Watergate scandal.
For those who don’t know or don’t recall the episode, let me summarize it. On June 17, 1972, five men were arrested after secretly entering the Democratic National Committee offices to steal documents and bug phones.
A later investigation proved that those “plumbers,” as they became known, were part of a political espionage team linked to President Nixon, who was seeking strategic information against his opponents during an electoral campaign, That investigation opened the way to a process against the American President called impeachment, a word that means an impediment or political obstruction, even though its original meaning is to flush, to redden. This figure of speech in Anglo-Saxon law was born in the 14th century when the English Parliament accused the King of squandering public money and shamed him, causing him to redden.
A head of State challenged by impeachment must face a vote of Congress that can cause him to lose his office.
In U.S. history, three presidents have submitted to this process: Andrew Johnson (1868), the mentioned Richard Nixon (1972) and Bill Clinton (1998-1999), the latter for his scandalous affair with his young secretary Monica Lewinski. Johnson and Clinton were acquitted, but not Nixon - who chose to resign before his imminent deposal by Congress.
The present day situation in Honduras
In Honduras something similar happened. The impeachment process against ex-President José Manuel Zelaya started a week before he was deposed, soon after he triggered an institutional crisis by repeatedly violating the Constitution and challenging judicial decisions issued by the Congress of that Central-American nation.
Zelaya was already moving toward despotism in 2008 as his relation with Hugo Chaves became closer. He began to execute the methodology of a gradual coup d’État that had already been exported by the Venezuela president to several Latin American republics. This system included persecution of the free media and implementation of an illegal procedure to change the Constitution in order to keep himself in power.
The fuse that set off the crisis was Zelaya’s plan to hold a popular referendum last Sunday, June 28, that called for a vote on the dissolving of Congress and the installation of a Constituent Assembly to allow for his presidential reelection.
Even though the Supreme Electoral Court of Honduras considered the referendum unconstitutional, Zelaya ordered the Army to distribute 15,000 ballot-boxes for the referendum. This order was not obeyed by the military since it violated the sentence of the due authority.
Next, José Manuel Zelaya dismissed the military Commander, General Romeo Vasquez. In response, the Supreme Court commanded Vasquez to be reinstated in his functions and the ballot-boxes to be kept inside the military headquarters. Zelaya counter-ordered his sympathizers to invade the headquarters, take the ballot-boxes and set them up for the referendum.
A multi-party commission named by Congress to investigate the President concluded that Zelaya had violated Honduran law. That commission asked Congress to declare him unfit to govern and begin a legal process of impeachment.
It is necessary to stress that the juridical basis for such an impeachment is in the Honduran Constitution, which establishes in article 239:
“Any citizen who has already served as head of the Executive Branch cannot be President or Vice-President again. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those who support such violation directly or indirectly, must immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.”
One sees, therefore, that the Honduran Congress took action to prevent a coup d’État by Zelaya against the democratic institution of the country. It voted unanimously to depose José Manuel Zelaya and named as the new head of country the president of the Congress, Roberto Micheletti, to whom this responsibility normally would fall according to the Constitution. That congressional decision was duly supported by the Supreme Court. This is how Congress carried out the legal impeachment of Zelaya.
Adding to the tense political picture was the fact that, authorized by Zelaya, Venezuelan and Nicaraguan military forces were present in Honduras posted close to the Congress. This means that when the Honduras military took action, they were also proceeding in defense of their sovereignty.
As expected, this democratic counter-coup against Zelaya caused a hysterical reaction in Hugo Chavez and his allies of ‘21st century Socialism.’ They called for an emergency meeting in their ALBA group - Bolivarian Alternative for Latin America - a new version of the Warsaw Pact. There they offered harbor to their deposed disciple and threatened to invade Honduras to reinstall him in power.
At this meeting, where Presidents Raul Castro (Cuba) and Daniel Ortega (Nicaragua) were present, statements were issued in favor of what those “moral authorities” consider to be democracy in Honduras, that is to say, only under Zelaya’s rule. Consequently, they condemned the decision of the Honduran Congress as a “coup d’État.”
Another quick reaction responding to the alarm sounded by Chavez came from the Secretary General of the American Organization of States (OAS) José Miguel Insulza, who everyone knows owes his position to the diplomatic maneuverings of Hugo Chavez.
What is lamentable is that, in addition to these expected moves of Chavez’ chess pieces, came the unexpected reaction of Barack Obama’s administration and European governments, who expressed incomprehension over the situation in Honduras. Perhaps this is due to manipulation of information or confusion about the present day situation of Latin American governments which is quite different from past epochs.
I conclude with my initial question: Would the United States have accepted the orders of foreign sympathizers of Richard Nixon who would demand that he be reinstated as president?
People in other countries are ignorant about the situation in Honduras. My blood boils when I hear radio reporters trying to depict how “unconstitutional” the situation is.. Wait a minute? When in Canada the prime minister does not represent people’s interest the opposition party has the right to claim “vote of no confidence” and remove the person elected from power. So when a president does something unconstitutional like in Honduras, what are we supposed to do? To bring him/her back (like was done with Chavez after a couple of days removed from power) and let him continue stealing from the country?. Does everyone in the world remember that Chavez tried to kill the elected president “Carlos Andres Perez” in a military coup many years ago? Do you? Because I still have the image imprinted in my brain from the TV broadcast showing army tanks trying to get into the white house breaking walls and literally haunting the president to kill him.. Does anyone remember that? Does anyone remember the promises of Chavez saying he wanted to eradicate corruption if he was elected president?
Again, I applaud and give my respect to people in Honduras..
First of all, Mr Zelaya was not even thinking by himself, it was Hugo Chavez all along. And if Mel didn´t give a damn about his people, because he didn´t and doesn´t, much less Hugo Chavez.
This is a game of power, and in this game the "people" are necessary to get what is intended by one person, or a small group of people... in this case Hugo Chavez through Mel Zelaya.
Yes, we have been played before by all the other governments that have been in power. But name me one country that hasn´t? If you think that other governments don't have corruption in their system, come on... you talk about ignorance!!
Power corrupts people. Not only honduran people. All of them. And please, you can not believe that Hugo Chavez and Mel Zelaya really give a damn about the people in this country!! You simply can't be that naive!
Hopefuly and thankfully, now we will have more governments in our future, and you will see the story repeated. Corruption will always be there unfortunately. It's sad, but true. Wether we like it or not. People would have to stop being people in order for corruption to cease. Perhaps with time we will learn to be LESS corrupt, hopefully, but it will always be there. You better start living reality.
Corruption is not only a disease that has gotten to the core of our governments, it's very well injected into our blood. If not, just look at our police, or any governmental institution... how many times have you had to pay even L.50 to get anything done! Like an ID card, a passport. Sometimes it's impossible to get through without a "contact" or a little help. And who is charging... the president? No. It's the people in the bottom, the ones that live in the poorer neighborhoods. They are as corrupt as the ones on the top. Only each of them will "charge" a different fee. But they are all as corrupt as each other, there is no difference between how much you are stealing, the fact is that you ARE stealing.
So corruption, my friend, is not from an ELITE class as you suppose, it's a disease that has infected MOST of our society.
I do recommend you see the movie NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN, if you pay attention, you might understand what happens when money gets in the way. Go to the end of the movie, when the 2 kids are trying to help the guy out because he's hurt. Once money gets in the way, they stop caring about the guy and start fighting for the money. So after that, if you still think Mel Zelaya and Hugo Chavez cared about the people... then so be it.
If there is a coup d’état, must be made by the people to all branches of power! That’s the only one I will ever recognize!
Corruption runs deep in the Honduran congress, Supreme Court and Military. For the first time a president comes along that represents the people and fights for the people.
The referendum’s sole purpose was to collect the general consensus of the people, since the people does not trust either of the ruling branches. For years they have violated the constitution, human rights and betrayed the trust of those they swore to protect and sold themselves to the wealthy elite.
The constitution will only be effective when the people’s best interest is the only priority. If the military acted in the best interest of the constitution, then they fail to exile congress and the Supreme Court! So, if everyone violated the constitution then, we go back to what Mr. Zelaya was trying to do in the first place; have the people rule and dictate their own future!
And for any of those who think that the Honduran people should fix this crime themselves, must remember that, the US has been the instigator, creator and main exporter of coup d’états in the whole American hemisphere!
Talk about Convenient ignorance/hypocrisy!!!
I am quite anxious to see the response eventually reached by Obama. At the rate democracy is breaking down in the U.S. it would not be far fetched to see a similar situation play out in about 7 1/2 years when Obama reaches his own term limit.
I don't recall Richard Nixon or Bill Clinton being removed by the 82nd Airborne and flown to Canada.
The rule of law and the sanctity of the constitution must be respected and legal means sought and applied to resolve internal conflict whether its Honduras or the US
Thank You