Advertisement

National Latino Congreso on Hondurian Coup

4:25 pm By la Macha · honduras

1 Jul 2009

soagradI think that the following is written by more conservative members of the NLC–although I may be (and probably am) wrong. Honestly, I don’t keep up too much on individual goings on of the members of Congress.

But either way, these people presented an opinion with concrete solutions–and again, I am finding myself feeling conflicted.

National Latino Congreso

June 29, 2009

Statement of the Conveners of the National Latino Congreso (NLC) on the Illegal Military Coup in Honduras,

We, the undersigned Conveners of the National Latino Congreso, commend President Barack Obama for his timely condemnation of the illegal and unconstitutional removal of the democratically elected President of the Republic of Honduras Manuel Zelaya on June 27, 2009.

We urge President Obama to instruct the State Department to officially declare that the Honduran military and its allies have staged a coup against the constitutionally elected President of Honduras (Manuel Zelaya).

Such a declaration will automatically trigger a suspension of US economic aid to the Honduran government.

We urge President Obama, and the Congressional leadership (Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, US Senate Majority Leader and U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the US House of Representatives) to further undertake the following actions:

1) Suspend all US military aid to Honduras (including closing the US
military base);
2) Suspend Honduras from CAFTA membership (Central America Free Trade Agreement); and

3) Suspend Congressional funding (from the National Endowment for
Democracy*) for all Honduran civic groups that supported the coup.

We further call on the Congressional Hispanic Caucus to join with us in
opposing the military coup. Latin America has made great progress in rooting out the culture of military coups in the last 10-15 years and as US Latinos we cannot stand by silent in the face of such a brutal and illegal attempt to contravene our Hemisphere’s march towards more just and democratic societies.

Signed,

Antonio Gonzalez, President, William C. Velasquez Institute (WCVI)

Oscar Chacon, Executive Director, National Alliance of Latin American and Caribbean Communities (NALACC)

Nativo V. Lopez, National President, Mexican American Political Association
(MAPA)

Ok, so if Zelaya really was democratically elected (and especially in Latin America, we all know how contested the words “democratically elected” really are), then yeah, this coup is total bullshit.

But then–economic sanctions. Ugh. I have yet to see a case where economic sanctions have done nothing more than through a country into complete chaos while simultaneously starving and disempowering the most marginalized people in that country.

Oh, and suspending a country from one of the nafta/cafta/peruvian/globalization treaties is a punishment? Really?

Then there’s this part:

Honduran civic groups that supported the coup

And I can’t help but think, can somebody define “civic” for me? As in, what is it code word for? Indigenous peoples that are working to reclaim their own lands? Rich formerly Spaniard elites that are pissed that *they* don’t own the lands? Drug lords?

And then finally, there’s this:

Latin America has made great progress in rooting out the culture of military coups in the last 10-15 years

And we have to again go back to the question of *who* is funding and coordinating the vast majority of military coups in Latin America? It’s surely not people from within Latin America–although, of course, there are vast groups of people that *benefit* from those military interventions/coups. No, the vast majority of military coups in Latin American can be traced back to the U.S. So, why do we not want this coup to happen, then? Because now all of a sudden we’re leaders in social justice and human rights?

It’s all very confusing.

Post to Twitter

8 Responses to National Latino Congreso on Hondurian Coup

Avatar

Marc

July 2nd, 2009 at 4:45 am

Everyone keeps using the word “illegal” when talking of what happened in Honduras, and understand the passions involved given the history of Central America, but has anyone actually checked what the actual Honduran laws entail?

Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution, which forbids any former chief executive from being re-elected President, states that any citizen who proposes reforming this law, and any others who support such a person directly or indirectly, are to immediately “cease carrying out” any public office.[13] The Constitution, however, establishes no process for impeaching or removing a president.

Further more Article 42, Section 5 of the Constitution states that citizenship is lost for “inciting, promoting or supporting the continuation or the reelection of the President of the Republic.” Again,Honduran presidents are only allowed one term in office.

Does this mean Zelaya could be legally removed for his unconstitutional actions from office and possibly deported? If so why is this then being labeled a coup?

Avatar

Maegan la Mala

July 2nd, 2009 at 5:40 am

So my question would be that no attempt can ever ever be made to the constitution according to the constitution? Just seems like that sore of provision is asking for trouble.

So because there is no process established, getting rid of a president using military force is ok? Still seems rather “coup” like to me

Avatar

Marc

July 2nd, 2009 at 6:15 am

A referendum can be called for a change to the constitution (so yes it can be changed), but that takes 2/3 of the National Congress and Zelaya lost that vote.

The Supreme Court then said he could not single-handedly hold a referendum without the approval of congress.

Zelaya and a mob then raided the warehouse where ballots were being guarded by the National Police. They took the ballots by force and tried to have a referendum anyway. The Supreme Court ordered the military not to assist in the referendum.

Are these the actions of a democratic president?
He disobeyed the National Congress, Supreme, Court, Electoral Commission, and the Human Rights Commissioner.

The Attorney General that Zelaya himself appointed ordered his arrest.

His own political party (Liberal Party) turned against him, and a member of his own political party is now the acting president in line with succession as the VP resigned in Dec. 2008. A civilian is in charge of the government.

Avatar

la Macha

July 2nd, 2009 at 8:27 am

Hm. but then you could go the other way, marc, and ask if the congress and constitutions are the actions of “democratically elected” ideals. so, it’s not like it’s unusual to hear of white/spanish elite using “constitution” and “elections” and “democratic ideals” to continue reigns of violence and terror on “the people” (who are generally indigenous and mestizo). Just look at the shit that Chavez and Morales have had to deal with within their own countries. WHich is not to say that chavez and morales are sweet innocent angels, just rather instead to say that I think I rarely take arguments over who is more “democratically inclined” seriously when it comes to Latin America.

Nothing about the dominating rule of law in a former colonial outpost is “democratic” at all–how could it be when the system of colonialism (which is why 9/10s of latin america was settled to begin with, as opposed to the u.s. which was settled to be a “new home” for europeans), insists on a strict heirarchy of power that puts “colonizer” at the top and “resource” next with “people who can get the resource” at the bottom?

That system didn’t just disappear over night–and maybe (I have NO clue, just asking), the reason Honduras has the “serve only one term” thing in their constitution is to act as a sort of way to ensure that “social justice” types never have long enough to enact any real change?

Who knows.

Just saying that I think it’s more complicated than simply “who is more democratic” you know?

Avatar

Marc

July 2nd, 2009 at 8:43 am

I thought the one term rule was brought in to prevent the rule of dictators?

Uruguay and Chile have governments fighting for social justice and no one is flaunting the law.

So are individuals now supposed to declare themselves the saviors and say that only what they think can be made social justice?

Last I checked, Zelaya was a rich and I mean very rich “blanco”. Can it not be that perhaps he is playing to the “social justice” movement for his own reasons rather than really fighting for social justice.

I’m not saying military force was correct… an arrest by the national police would have left a better image, but that doesn’t mean he was in the right. He claims to be fighting for democratic ideals, yet flaunts democratic institutions.

Avatar

Maegan La Mala

July 2nd, 2009 at 2:37 pm

Speaking specifically about the situation in Chile specifically, because it is what I know a little about, so called socialist governments have created a huge gap between the classes in Chile, not to mention the discrimination against Indigenous communities , so fighting for social justice is relative.

Avatar

Marc

July 2nd, 2009 at 3:33 pm

Social justice is always relative… but that entails not having double standards regarding the law and being pragmatic in one’s solutions to help the poor. It also means having leaders that respect all citizens under the constitution they swore an oath to uphold and not choosing which laws they prefer to create out of thin air.

Dictators create laws out of thin air and that’s what led to the injustices in the first place. I also don’t trust those who capitalized on the system that made them rich and then declare themselves defenders of the poor when they need the extra votes. Zelaya took advantage of the desperate for his own personal power gains.

Avatar

Marc

July 2nd, 2009 at 4:25 pm

Zelaya made his money destroying the forests which the indigenous all over Latin America are fighting to protect.

Hola!

VivirLatino is a daily publication published by Mamita Mala Media, dedicated to featuring all the latest politics, culture, entertainment of interest to the diverse Latin@ diaspora.

About | Advertise with us | Contact | Twitter

VivirLatino on Facebook


blog advertising is good for you

blog advertising is good for you
  • Ana L. Flores: I was very excited when you decided to join us. I really wanted your voice there as it would add dep [...]
  • Maegan La Mala: Hola Juliana and thanks for commenting. There is a dearth in activist/critical thinking Latino blogg [...]
  • Julio Ricardo Varela: Good for you for asking. I got goose bumps just reading this and yes, yes, yes, to it all. Thank you [...]
  • julianabritto: The sense that I get is that you might feel a little frustrated at the dearth in activist bloggers? [...]
  • Maegan La Mala: Hola Ray and thank you for commenting. You are spot on when you say that both parties will exploit u [...]

Get our RSS Feed!