Fausta's Blog

American and Latin American Politics, Society, and Culture

By

Zelaya will continue to change the Constitution upon his return

Via commenter Einar,

Zelaya dice que cambiará de estrategia pero que seguirá con proyecto para instalar Constituyente (Zelaya says he’ll change strategy but will continue project to install a Constitutent Assembly).

The brief article at Honduras’s Proceso Digital reports that Zelaya declared “in order not to contradict the Arias Plan, we will change strategy but the reform will go on.”

Not surprisingly, Honduran rulers insist Zelaya cannot be president.

Share

Comments

  1. How can you possibly accept him back. He did all he could to wreak havoc before he was expelled. He (Zelaya) makes it clear that he’s not about to moderate when he comes back. It would be a DISASTER to have him back.

    And for whatever reason, Hugo Lorens, the U.S. Ambassador is clearly compromised. He should be Recalled, and Replaced.

  2. And here I was, supporting the San Jose Accords…
    That clown should be arrested, tried and incinerated.

  3. From your own coverage, and from the overview from etonomic, it seems as though the man is no longer a citizen of Honduras. How could he possibly be PotH? Especially after the Honduran Constitution *expressly* forbids *any* effort to do exactly what he’s done?

  5. The comment by Eduardo of “That clown should be arrested, tried and incinerated,” can only be taken as irony considering that some of Zelaya’s loudest supporters from other countries usually follow a slightly different path. Arrest, incineration then trial.

  7. Yes, Bill, we have trials. We also have running water and a flat place where giant metal birds can nest.

  9. People who believe that if Zelaya retakes the presidency again[over my dead body] and he will give up his Venezuelan backed intentions are sooooo naive….and why in the world would the US ambassador from Honduras takes his time to go all the way up to Nicaragua to visit Zelaya? Isn`t there a US ambassador stationed in Nicaragua?

  10. I am sharing with you my letter to members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and selected others. Thank you for your continued interest and support in the Honduran crisis. Lloyd Davidson

    The Honorable Bob Corker
    Senate Foreign Relations Committee
    United States Senate
    Washington, D.C. 20510

    Dear Senator Corker:
    I am a U.S. citizen originally from Knoxville, Tn. that has been a resident in Honduras for over 25 years. I would like to give an insider’s observations on the current political crisis in this country. I have been involved in businesses throughout my time here employing an average of 85-100 Hondurans and thus have interactions at all levels of the society. I am a veteran, having served five years as an officer on U.S. Coast Guard ships in the early 1970’s.
    I am deeply concerned that our country has acted precipitously and quite wrongly in its “knee-jerk” condemnation of Honduran actions to defend their democracy. That Mel Zelaya was recklessly attempting to overthrow the rule of law here and impose an illegal extension of his term in office was not lost on any of us within the country. It was viewed as a play straight from the Hugo Chavez playbook and financed in large part by Venezuelan funds. This was not a precipitous event but one that had been foreseen and openly discussed in the local press for almost two years and that had gained huge momentum in recent months. Had the OAS {or perhaps the U.S. embassy} chosen to challenge Mr. Zelaya’s obvious intentions at a power grab then the current situation could have been avoided or controlled in the eyes of resident North Americans. I have spoken with {several hundred} the present government acted with total justification, within the legal parameters of their constitution, and with an incredible amount of professionalism and concern for public safety. The removal of Mr. Zelaya from the country {admitted to be an illegal act by the military itself} was deemed necessary to prevent bloodshed and to remove a focal point for subsequent Chavez-financed chaos. It was in my opinion a sensible move and has to date been successful in preventing violence.
    I am sure you have access to the Honduran constitution’s legal arguments for the change of power and the arguments of Ambassador Hugo Llorens against what transpired so I won’t waste your time repeating that. Instead I would like to make several observations from the standpoint of one living and working among Hondurans and present for the entire event that I feel have not been addressed or poorly communicated in the media. I have been part of a group of U.S. residents that in the last 10 days has spoken with Ambassador Llorens, high officials in the Honduran foreign ministry, the vice-president of the committee that framed the Honduran constitution, and visiting U.S. Congressmen Connie Mack and Brian Bilbray.

    1. While Mel Zelaya’s clearly unconstitutional vote for an eventual constituent assembly has been portrayed in the media as a simple poll with potential consequences down the road, it was understood here to be the actual, pivotal destabilizing event that would result in a quick destitution of both Congress and the Supreme Court. Within 24-48 hours Zelaya would have taken control of the country justified by “the will of the people”, paid for by Venezuelan petro/narco dollars, and as we now know certified by “election results” in place well before the actual vote occurred. This opinion was shared from the street vendor to the store owner to the upper levels of the present administration and by all foreign residents. For Zelaya to arrogantly fly in the face of popular opinion, repeated warnings to desist from the Attorney General and Supreme Court, the almost unanimous will of the Congress dominated by his own Liberal Party, the refusal of the military to participate illegally in the balloting process, pleadings from Catholic Cardenal Oscar Rodriguez together with the country’s evangelical leaders {truly unprecedented cooperation}, and opposition from both the National Electoral Commission and the country’s Human Rights Commissioner he had a clear intention to kidnap the Honduran democracy and extend his term. It was understood on the ground to be Chavez’s methodical undermining of democratic principles switched to “fast forward” by a rapidly developing megalomaniac.

    2. The strong Honduran reaction to Mr. Zelaya’s takeover attempt is startling to many outside the country as is the high level of resolve expressed by the new government in opposing his return. This is “not the first rodeo” for Honduras. They had a front row seat for more that a decade as Daniel Ortega and the Sandinistas imposed their will on Nicaragua and thoroughly destroyed the country’s economy in the process. Mr. Zelaya’s ever closer ties to Mr. Ortega {who is now again destroying Nicaragua} and to Hugo Chavez provided a very disturbing sense of “: déjà vu” that united a broad cross section of society against the plans. “Better months of hardship now than no future under socialism” is heard in conversations daily- and they mean it. The Hondurans understood exactly what was at stake here and acted resolutely to defend their democracy and way of life. It is a sad commentary that doing so has made them international pariahs and brought unprecedented condemnation and pressure from a country whose name used to be synonymous with democracy- that would b e ours.

    3. The international community and media have in adopting the mantra of “Mel Zelaya’s return to power” managed to ignore conveniently his steadily increasing abuses of that power, unprecedented acts of corruption in his administration, and skyrocketing levels of crime throughout the nation. He was not governing, he was plundering. He was carrying a traditionally conservative country rapidly to the left, and with his new friends in ALBA planning to remain in power indefinitely. Zelaya for instance refused to submit a budget to the Congress last September and had autocratically disbursed funds without accountability. This we now know included over L. 150,000,000 to popularize and conduct his illegal referendum. Caught on videotape was the removal of L. 40,000,000, in cash brought out of the Central Bank in a shopping cart two days before “the vote”. The Honduran media managed to monitor it all, the Honduran people suffered the consequences, but somehow Mr. Insulza of the OAS and the ambassadors of his member countries {ours included} and those of the European Union conveniently ignored Zelaya’s excesses. When the completely predictable reaction occurred in the country their immediate screams of surprise and condemnation rang quite hollow here.

    4. There is a high level of confusion within the country about the reaction of the international community especially that of “our friend the U.S.” As an American, I am asked constantly why our country condemns them for protecting their democracy. They are truly baffled. This question runs from street level to high in the foreign ministry and usually includes a comment like “for years you tell us to strengthen our justice system, enforce accountability, and follow the rule of law- when we do you blame us”. Hondurans have rightfully felt themselves to have a special friendship with our country. They provided a platform and support for our efforts to contain the Sandinistas in the 1980’s, quickly sent troops to Iraq when asked, and still host a major U.S. Air Force base critical to drug interdiction. U.S. Investment developed much of this country, we are their main trading partner, and the largest single element of their economy is money sent home by the 700,000+ Hondurans working in the States. Most here have family ties among us. They are surrounded now by leftist regimes and clearly understand the serious blow their actions have delivered to the expansionist program of Hugo Chavez. They are stunned, as are the U.S. citizens living here, to find themselves isolated and our government standing shoulder to shoulder with the likes of Chavez, Ortega, Morales, Correa, the Castro boys, and Mr, Insulza while seemingly allowing them to set the dialog. The refusal of the international community to even hear their side of the story after years of ignoring the threats is incomprehensible to them. I strongly feel we owe these good people, our long term allies, more than knee-jerk obeisance to regional “political correctness” formulated by countries whose leaders in truth despise us. They were complicit in promoting every illegal and unconstitutional act of Mel Zelaya.
    In my opinion the leaders of the interim government of Honduras are honorable and serious people from across the political spectrum dedicated to picking up the pieces Zelaya scattered. They have rescued their democracy and are now working to strengthen it. They have been very open and transparent about their stand {the transfer of power was broadcast live on CNN en Espanol for instance}. They invite international inspection on the ground but receive only televised posturing. Their focus is to address the economic difficulties and to conduct a well monitored election in Nov. between the candidates selected in the primaries last Nov.. To reinsert Mel Zelaya, a legally deposed president by Honduran law, with the attendant return to corruption and foreign financed violence is both irresponsible and naïve. It would put at risk the very elections that in a few months will resolve the issue in a democratic process that most of the loudest critics would themselves never tolerate.
    When a people, particularly a long term ally, take a stand so independent and with such conviction as this defense of democratic principles it behooves us to at least listen and perhaps even investigate the details before denouncing them. Is “dialog without preconditions” reserved only for those who threaten us while we are ready to politically and economically pistol-whip our friends for defending themselves from an existential threat . Honduras deserves far more from the United States than rubber- stamping self-serving protests and acting to enforce the threats of the regional martinets terrified at the implications of this small country’s courageous stand.

    Respectfully yours,

    Lloyd Davidson

  11. Wonderful letter, Mr. Davidson.

    My wife and I lived in West Texas for 30 years before retiring to Honduras 14 years ago. Your observations are spot on.

    The situation was so absurd, and in my view, dangerous before Zelaya’s removal that I was afraid we’d be living in Chavismo by now due to Zelaya’s complete disregard for Constitutional Government. I’m sure you know we have “advisers” from Cuba, Venezuela, and Ecuador working here, even now. The velocity and quantity of leftist activities was accelerating ever more rapidly. Personally, I thanked God when he was removed. I would not have believed it could be done without a lot of people being killed.

    Zelaya won’t give up on his insurrection. We need friends.

    The US Ambassador Hugo Lorens actions were so absurd with the Zelaya Ortega meeting in Managua yesterday that it’s hard to imagine the man being useful in further diplomatic services of any kind in Latin America.