Honduras elects a new president. What now?

[Sam_Stone]

And what’s the alternative?

[BrainGlutton]

@Sam_Stone

And what’s the alternative?

A constituent assembly to write a new constitution. That’s what the people really want, here. Lobo could smooth things over immensely if he would agree to that, not right away but at some point in his term.

[smiling_bandit]

I am greatl;y amused by how specifically certain board lefties seem about Honduran politics, despite having no knewledge of the country, its law, or its people. I suppose being a leftist is good enough to override all those things.

[BrainGlutton]

@smiling_bandit

I am greatl;y amused by how specifically certain board lefties seem about Honduran politics, despite having no knewledge of the country, its law, or its people. I suppose being a leftist is good enough to override all those things.

A statement that would have exactly the same validity if you substituted “righties” and “rightist.” We’re all in the same boat here. But just because we rely on media sources and the Intertubes for info doesn’t mean we can’t, or shouldn’t, form opinions.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

For instance:

Why do you support sanctions on Honduras but not Cuba?

Castro also gained power through force and what’s more he’s anti-American along with Chavez. This has happened anyways so why complicate matters?

[BrainGlutton]

@Curtis LeMay

For instance:

Why do you support sanctions on Honduras but not Cuba?

I’m undecided whether I support sanctions on Honduras at this point. If there is some possible political change in a democratic direction on the horizon, and if sanctions could provide effective pressure to speed it, then yes. For instance, during much of this constitutional crisis it did appear the coup regime could be toppled and Zelaya restored with sufficient outside pressure. At this point, however, I doubt sanctions would have any such effect.

We know sanctions will never destabilize Castro’s regime in Cuba, because we have had an embargo on Cuba since 1960 and it has never perceptibly weakened the regime one little bit. We might as well lift the embargo. If we want things to change there, giving the Cubans more exposure to the outside world, via commerce and tourism and free communication with relatives abroad, is probably the best way. Let them get just a little more prosperous and they will find themselves wanting more, and demanding more. OTOH, I doubt Communism will fall in Cuba in the all-or-nothing way it fell in Eastern Europe and the USSR. The people, if eventually given a free democratic choice, are probably going to want some form of socialism.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@BrainGlutton

I’m undecided whether I support sanctions on Honduras at this point. If there is some possible political change in a democratic direction on the horizon, and if sanctions could provide effective pressure to speed it, then yes. For instance, during much of this constitutional crisis it did appear the coup regime could be toppled and Zelaya restored with sufficient outside pressure. At this point, however, I doubt sanctions would have any such effect.

And what if Zelaya had been restored and become another Hugo Chavez?

I don’t know about you but if the people of an another country decides to do something that benefits the USA and we actively fight it that’s incredibly foolish.

[adaher]

Zelaya was removed improperly, but Congress and the court did have the right to remove him. They just shouldn’t have called on the army until they’d completed the impeachment process, and then only if Zelaya refused to step down.

But Congress was duly elected. And I note a non-ideological double standard here: when a President just dissolves the legislature, it’s not considered a coup, even though a legislature has just as much, if not more, democratic legitimacy than a President. But if the Congress gets rid of a President, it’s called a coup. Even though his VP of the same party took over, and even though all legal procedures were followed except for the unfortunate premature use of the army to enforce Zelaya’s ouster.

But all that being said, it’s over. A new President has been duly elected, with greater turnout than Zelaya got. It’s time to move on. Zelaya had no claim on power of any sort after January anyway.

[BrainGlutton]

@Curtis LeMay

And what if Zelaya had been restored and become another Hugo Chavez?

Have you been paying no attention at all? Coup or no coup, restoration or no restoration, there was no conceivable set of circumstances in which Zelaya would even have had chance to run for a second term in office. Not even if his planned nonbinding poll on whether to hold a referendum on constitutional changes (including abolishing presidential term limits, but many more important things) had gone forward as scheduled and been approved.

@Curtis LeMay

I don’t know about you but if the people of an another country decides to do something that benefits the USA and we actively fight it that’s incredibly foolish.

:rolleyes:

1. It was a coup, not a revolution. The people of Honduras had nothing to do with it.

2. The coup did not benefit the USA in any way.

3. If Zelaya, or some other Honduran leader, were to become “another Hugo Chavez,” that would not hurt the USA in any way.

4. Better by any means another Chavez in the Western Hemisphere than another Pinochet.

[smiling_bandit]

@BrainGlutton

A statement that would have exactly the same validity if you substituted “righties” and “rightist.” We’re all in the same boat here. But just because we rely on media sources and the Intertubes for info doesn’t mean we can’t, or shouldn’t, form opinions.

BG, you of all people have no such excuse. You form all your opinions from the lefty talking points of the day. Whatever is favored by the “Left but not quite Communist” you immediately snatch up and proclaim as unmitigated truth and are imtermittently backed up by oddles of biased, poorly-researched “citations” which I long since stoppped bothering to read.

I knew very little of Honduras. I chose to study the problem from neutral sources. try it sometime.

[BrainGlutton]

@smiling_bandit

BG, you of all people have no such excuse. You form all your opinions from the lefty talking points of the day. Whatever is favored by the “Left but not quite Communist” you immediately snatch up and proclaim as unmitigated truth and are imtermittently backed up by oddles of biased, poorly-researched “citations” which I long since stoppped bothering to read.

I knew very little of Honduras. I chose to study the problem from neutral sources. try it sometime.

:dubious: You will notice all my links in the OP are to what any reasonable person would consider “neutral sources” – Wikipedia, mainstream newspapers, etc.

However, so as not to disappoint you, here’s In These Times’ take on the election.

TEGUCIGALPA, HONDURAS—The de facto government in Honduras named Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo to be the new Honduras’ new head of state Sunday, after a controversial election that many local and international human rights experts had denounced as constitutionally illegal. The result of the ballot vote also remains unrecognized by most nations of the world.

“There’s no way you can have free and fair elections when there’s this kind of oppression going on,” said Karen Spring, who was in the capital of Tegucigalpa to monitor elections for Rights Action, a Connecticut-based human rights organization. “Democracy is a process. But in Honduras there’s been martial law for months… And all that time people were being shot and killed and beaten.”

<snip>

In the five months since the putsch, COFADEH [the Committee for Disappeared Persons in Honduras] has confirmed thousands of illegal detentions and beatings. Authorities have shown a willingness to use live rounds against peaceful demonstrators, and thirty-two members of the resistance have been killed since the coup, including, most recently, a retired teacher and well-known resistance organizer. Just a few days before the elections Gradis Espinal, 56, was forced into a marked police patrol car in broad daylight in front of several witnesses. The outspoken educator’s body was found the next day, just a few miles to the northeast, in a barrio called Las Casitas on the outskirts of the capital.

<snip>

Voter turnout discrepancies arouse suspicion

Because Zelaya and the resistance movement were calling on Honduran citizens to abstain from the elections, there was a great deal of speculation going into the voting about what percentage of the 4.5 million Hondurans eligible to vote would turn out for the polls. During the last presidential vote, in 2005, only 55 percent of the electorate participated.

According to Felix Molina, a Honduran political journalist who hosts a popular radio talk show on a station called Radio Global, the rate of abstention in Honduran presidential elections has been dropping steadily for the last 27 years, ever since the first elections held under the current constitution, which was authored by a U.S. backed military dictatorship in 1982. “Abstention has gone up every year,” Molina said. “So why would they think that this year—just a few months after a very unpopular military coup—there would be a larger turnout than [the last elections]? I just can’t believe that’s possible.”

But it must seem more than possible to the Supreme Electoral Tribune (EST) of Honduras, who reported a 61.3 percent turnout. Consequently, CNN and Fox News both ran with this figure on election night. Critics accuse the EST of deliberately fudging their projection data in the hours after the election, by reporting only the results from wealthy areas around the capital, where voter turnout is traditionally much higher.

A nongovernmental observation group, Hagamaos Democracia, did a random statistical sampling that showed a much lower nationwide figure: 47.6 percent. Other irregularities in the way the EST handled the elections have also raised suspicions. The cell phone-based voter corroboration system “malfunctioned,” causing hours-long delays in tallying the votes.

“The putschists wish to legitimize the coup, and so they have a real incentive to manipulate the facts,” said Andres Pavon, president of the Committee for the Defense of Human Rights in Honduras (CODEH), another prominent activist organization,” said Pavon. “They have everything to gain if participation tops abstention.”

[BrainGlutton]

Meanwhile, the Honduran Congress votes against letting Zelaya return to office for the remaining month or so of his term – rejecting the U.S.-brokered Tegucigalpa/San Jose accord.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@BrainGlutton

Have you been paying no attention at all? Coup or no coup, restoration or no restoration, there was no conceivable set of circumstances in which Zelaya would even have had chance to run for a second term in office. Not even if his planned nonbinding poll on whether to hold a referendum on constitutional changes (including abolishing presidential term limits, but many more important things) had gone forward as scheduled and been approved.

Zelaya might like Putin have installed a puppet to run for President in the next election and be “Chief Adviser” or some equivalent position.

:rolleyes:

1. It was a coup, not a revolution. The people of Honduras had nothing to do with it.

Other than the Zelayaistas most haven’t been actively fighting the coup either. As for the polls of the people of Honduras:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honduras_coup

 view • talk • edit  Polling organization:

Dates of polling:
MOE and sample size:
CID-Gallup[85]
30 June - 4 July
+/- 2.8% (1204 households) COIMER & OP[86][87]
Aug. 23-29
+/- 4% (1,470 households) Greenberg Quinlan Rosner[88]
Oct. 9-13
+/- 3.9% (621 individuals)
Favor Zelaya’s ouster as it occurred? Yes 41%/No 46%/NR 13% Yes 17.4%/No 52.7%/NR 29.9% Yes 38%/No 60%/NR 3%
Zelaya’s actions justified his removal in some form? Yes 41%/No 28%/NR 31%
Favor constitutional convention to resolve crisis? Yes 54%/No 43%/NR 11%
Favorable opinion of Zelaya? Favorable 46%/Unfavorable 44% Favorable 44.7%/Unfavorable 25.7%/“Regular” 22.1%/NR 7.5% Warm 37%/Cool 39% (Personal opinion)
Approve 67%/Disapprove 31% (Government actions)
Favorable opinion of Micheletti? Favorable 30%/Unfavorable 49% Favorable 16.2%/Unfavorable 56.5%/“Regular” 17.1%/NR 10.2% Warm 28%/Cool 57% (personal opinion)
Approve 48%/Disapprove 50% (Government actions)
Zelaya should be restored? Yes 51.6%/No 33%/NR 15.4% Yes 46%/No 52%/NR 2% (Full powers)
Yes 49%/No 50%/NR 1% (Limited powers)
Elections should go forward even if crisis unresolved? Yes 66.4%/No 23.8%/NR 2.9% Legitimate 54%/Illegitimate 42%/NR 4%

While in August a slight majority of Hondurans supported Zelaya’s return by October the opinion had in general turned against Chavez and most supported this new election.

2. The coup did not benefit the USA in any way.

The new Honduran government is far more friendlier to us rather than Venezuela and Bolivia.

3. If Zelaya, or some other Honduran leader, were to become “another Hugo Chavez,” that would not hurt the USA in any way.

Hurt trade and American economy and also a limited domino effect in Latin America of more Chavezists gaining power we already have two (Chavez and Evo Moreles of Bolivia).

4. Better by any means another Chavez in the Western Hemisphere than another Pinochet.

Your claim is far more absurd than me saying that Zelaya would be another Chavez. Micheletti would not have been another Pinochet.

[Diceman]

All this whining about Honduras’ election is really just a smokescreen to draw attention away from Zelaya himself. When happened, basically, is this: Zelaya was ousted by the Honduran government because they were afraid that he was trying to change the constitution so he could be President-for-Life. Given that Hugo Chavez just did exactly that, and that Zelaya had apparently fallen into Chavez’ orbit, I would say that this was not an unreasonable fear on the government’s part.

The claims that the election is invalid are especially retarded, because Honduras has regular elections, just like the United States does. It wasn’t some P.R. stunt dreamed up last month. And in any event, Zelaya’s name was never even on the ballot, because he is constitutionally prohibited from seeking re-election. Plus, since his own party has turned against him, there isn’t really anybody who can be considered his successor. The question of whether the election was fair or not isn’t even relevant, because there isn’t any way the election could have benefitted Zelaya in the first place!

What’s going to happen is: Chavez and his fellow communists will declare Zelaya to be president-in-exile, but the practical effects of this will be nill. After his term ends in January, he’ll rapidly fade into obscurity. He’ll end up living out his life in some other country.

[GIGObuster]

@Diceman

All this whining about Honduras’ election is really just a smokescreen to draw attention away from Zelaya himself. When happened, basically, is this: Zelaya was ousted by the Honduran government because they were afraid that he was trying to change the constitution so he could be President-for-Life. Given that Hugo Chavez just did exactly that, and that Zelaya had apparently fallen into Chavez’ orbit, I would say that this was not an unreasonable fear on the government’s part.

Nope, it was unreasonable, with what army could Zelaya do that? Even though the polls showed that the majority was opposed to the coup, it was not a strong opposition.

@Diceman

The claims that the election is invalid are especially retarded, because Honduras has regular elections, just like the United States does. It wasn’t some P.R. stunt dreamed up last month. And in any event, Zelaya’s name was never even on the ballot, because he is constitutionally prohibited from seeking re-election. Plus, since his own party has turned against him, there isn’t really anybody who can be considered his successor. The question of whether the election was fair or not isn’t even relevant, because there isn’t any way the election could have benefitted Zelaya in the first place!

It is invalid because it was done under a government made by a coup. And at the same time all opposition media was closed and their stations invaded by the police and army.

@Diceman

What’s going to happen is: Chavez and his fellow communists will declare Zelaya to be president-in-exile, but the practical effects of this will be nill. After his term ends in January, he’ll rapidly fade into obscurity. He’ll end up living out his life in some other country.

http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/news/index_en.htm

Declaration by the Presidency on behalf of the European Union
on the situation in Honduras after the elections
The European Union reiterates its condemnation of the violation of constitutional order in
Honduras that took place on 28 June 2009. The European Union has since the beginning of
the crisis called for a peaceful negotiated solution to the political crisis and has taken steps
with other international partners to bring this about.
The European Union regrets that the Tegucigalpa/San José Accord has not been fully
implemented ahead of the elections on 29 November, leading to an electoral process under
abnormal circumstances. However, the European Union sees the elections as a significant
step forward in solving the crisis in Honduras. In this regard, the European Union awaits
the outcome of the deliberations of the Honduran Congress scheduled for 2 December
2009.
The EU calls upon all actors to seek a dialogue in order to reach national reconciliation and
to re-establish constitutional and democratic order in the country, and expects them to
assume their full responsibility in this regard. Furthermore, the European Union demands
that all actors promote and respect the rule of law, good governance and human rights.

Of course the elections are important, but if they (at this time the idiots in the Honduras congress still think it is a good idea to spit on the deal that was made) are not followed by any concession to the crime that was committed, it is clear that the option I mentioned is more likely:

Support the new government, but make targeted sanctions to any persons or organizations that were involved in the coup, that is the Pinochet treatment: Step out of Honduras and you will be in jail and your business overseas will suffer, if not by the governments that condemned the action, the people that do know that democracy is very important will do it with boycotts.

[GIGObuster]

@Curtis LeMay

Your claim is far more absurd than me saying that Zelaya would be another Chavez. Micheletti would not have been another Pinochet.

After seeing the people protesting rounded up in an stadium? No, no similarities here.

Suspending the constitution? No, no similarities.

http://www.quixote.org/content/micheletti-suspends-honduran-constitutional-guarantees-45-days

What I can educated say is that there was overwhelming pressure to say to Micheletti to bug off. IMHO this guy is a monumental idiot for not allowing even a symbolic defeat for his side, but thankfully I think that it was pressure from even the USA that convinced the bastard to step down and allow the elections. Still tainted IMHO, but we should concentrate on punishing the coup organizers and not the Honduran people.

[Martin_Hyde]

From the perspective of the United States the only thing to be done is to lift any and all sanctions we have against Honduras; I’m not actually sure if we have any active at the moment. Honduras is an extremely poor country and I see no legitimate reason at this juncture to subject its people to unnecessary hardship.

Zelaya is gone, Micheletti’s party lost the election (Zelaya and Micheletti were in the same party), and a new guy is in. The new guy probably wouldn’t have won if all this hadn’t happened, and since there apparently was no form of independent election monitoring force on the ground any reports about the election are essentially unreliable from either side.

The best we can hope for now is the current guy has enough legitimacy to get Honduras to its next election and then at that point we can hopefully get more stability in the Honduran political system. If the people of Honduras want a new constitution they’ll have to go about it using whatever machinations are appropriate in Honduras. It definitely shouldn’t be the policy of any outside government to attempt to force a constitutional convention on another country.

[Qin_Shi_Huangdi]

@GIGObuster

After seeing the people protesting rounded up in an stadium? No, no similarities here.

Suspending the constitution? No, no similarities.

http://www.quixote.org/content/micheletti-suspends-honduran-constitutional-guarantees-45-days

What I can educated say is that there was overwhelming pressure to say to Micheletti to bug off. IMHO this guy is a monumental idiot for not allowing even a symbolic defeat for his side, but thankfully I think that it was pressure from even the USA that convinced the bastard to step down and allow the elections. Still tainted IMHO, but we should concentrate on punishing the coup organizers and not the Honduran people.

Has he tortured anyone and killed hundreds like Pinochet? I agree Micheletti’s methods are authoritarian but he ain’t a Pinochet unless Zelaya is a Chavez or a Castro.

[SteveG1]

@Aji_de_Gallina

I defer to the Honduran congress and supreme court in all Honduran legal issues. If they say it’s legal, it is.

Agree.
They said it was legal, and they did it. As I understand it, any actions taken by the army, were directed by the congress and court, so yes it was legal. The “ex” president was refusing to step down according to law. if I remember. The government decided not to allow that.

So, based on that, it was legal, it is an internal matter, solved relatively peaceably.

[GIGObuster]

@SteveG1

Agree.
They said it was legal, and they did it. As I understand it, any actions taken by the army, were directed by the congress and court, so yes it was legal.

No, nowhere you can find that they ordered the army to **expel **Zelaya from the country, it was a move only done to facilitate the appointment of a leader backed by the army and the reactionary politicians.

The second big illegal move was made then the non-unanimous congress (it was a lie that it was an unanimous decision) accepted a false letter of resignation from Zelaya so then they could vote to appoint Micheletti.

@SteveG1

The “ex” president was refusing to step down according to law. if I remember. The government decided not to allow that.

That is incorrect.

@SteveG1

So, based on that, it was legal, it is an internal matter, solved relatively peaceably.

There were coups in other nations that were even more peaceful, but they are still coups.

INSULZA: “RETURN OF HONDURAS TO OAS WILL BE POSSIBLE ONLY WHEN THE OUTCOME OF...

The Secretary General of the Organization of American States (OAS), José Miguel Insulza, today stated during a special session of the Permanent Council held to analyze the political situation in Honduras that the agreements reached in relation to the following points are still fully in force: the condemnation of the illegitimate removal of Constitutional President José Manuel Zelaya that was unequivocally qualified as a coup d’état; the demand for the reestablishment of constitutional order in Honduras that includes explicitly the return of President Zelaya to his authorities; the total rejection of the de facto regime and its actions; the suspension of the State of Honduras from its participation in the OAS, in strict appliance of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and the diplomatic steps taken to fulfill our purposes.

Insulza also stated that “we all want a prompt return of Honduras, a founding member of the OAS, to the heart of the Organization. But that will only be possible when this country reaches a true restoration of its democratic regime and the outcome of the coup of June 28 has been overcome.”

Referring to the recent elections of November 29, the head of the largest hemispheric body warned that “an election does not erase, on its own, the forced deposition of the constitutional President, his expulsion from the country and his seclusion, even today, under precarious conditions in the enclosed Embassy of a sister country.”

Alluding to Porfirio Lobo, Insulza stressed that it is he who “can bring to an end the persecution of José Manuel Zelaya, break clearly and publicly from what happened in these months, fully reestablish the respect for human rights and public liberties, and summon all democratic forces to a great National Accord.”

Once again, the past election does help, but there is still a lot that the the current regime and the new administration need to do.

It is still clear to me if international pressure had not been applied even worse actions by the current regime would had taken place, pressure is still needed so as to discourage more coups in the future and to allow the new president to break clearly and publicly from the reprehensible actions of the army and congress.