Honduras and the democratic way to proceed

By Arturo Lopez Levy

The coup d’état in Honduras has generated unanimous international repudiation. All the regional organizations of the Americas from the Central American Integration System (SICA) to the Rio Group have condemned the uprising. The General Assembly of the United Nations and the Organization of American States were categorical: the overthrow of President Zelaya is an interruption of the constitutional order and should be reversed.

The Inter-American Democratic Charter must be improved so that the OAS can immediately respond to alterations of constitutional order. The Secretary General of the OAS should have authority to mediate preventively or bring disputes, such as the one that caused this rupture between president Zelaya and the Honduran Supreme Court, to the attention of the Permanent Council in hopes of preventing conflicts from escalating.

Nevertheless, the Inter-American Democratic Charter is clear about military coups: they are unacceptable.

The fourth ballot and the coup d’etat

In recent days, some commentators on the Honduran crisis have tried to justify the coup and have recommended that President Obama go along with it, thus ruining the goodwill that he enjoys in the region.

In the Wall Street Journal, Mary Anastasia O’ Grady claimed that the true democrats are the soldiers who woke Zelaya up on Sunday and threatened to kill him if he used his cell phone. O’Grady should read the coup colonel Herbert Inestroza’s explanation of how the military leadership unilaterally decided to expel President Zelaya. “The Honduran soldiers that defeated subversion in the 80’s,” Inestroza said, “cannot live under a leftist government.” O’Grady would need a Zen Master to explain how that logic is compatible with representative democracy. Soldiers do not have any authority to choose presidents or dictate ideological orientation.

Carlos Alberto Montaner told El Nuevo Herald that what happened in Honduras wasn’t “exactly a coup.” The military faked the president’s resignation letter just to have fun. The armored car at the presidential palace and the soldiers in the airport are just decoration. [F]ollowers of the deposed president were murdered. If it walks like a coup, and ducks like a coup. It is…

O’Grady and Montaner place the responsibility for the coup on Zelaya for forcing his reelection through a referendum. That story has way too many holes in it.

Montaner and O’Grady are right to oppose presidential reelections, especially for unlimited terms as it only amplifies autocracy and corruption. In Mexico, the Latin-American country that has maintained one-term limits most consistently since 1917, the majority consider presidential one term limits to be the most important achievement of the revolution.

Nevertheless, Montaner and O’Grady are veiling their support for an actual coup behind the potential dilemma of a fourth ballot. First of all, the ballot did not even mention presidential reelection. Instead the non-binding consultation would have surveyed support for a constituent assembly, without making any changes in law. Montaner omits the fact that Zelaya clarified in the UN that his reelection is impossible in Honduras, and that if changes in term limits were part of the constitutional reform, it would only benefit his successors. Montaner and O’Grady can speculate, but the facts are indisputable: the ballot did not say what they claim.

Second, if Zelaya ignored the balance of powers, it is a matter to be resolved legally. Nothing in the constitution authorizes the removal of the president by the military, regardless of the opinions of the Christian churches, the traditional parties, the congress or the Supreme Court — to quote the list used by Carlos Alberto Montaner to justify the coup. If Zelaya committed — as his opponents claim — 18 violations, the constitution calls for him to be brought to trial, not to be deported to Costa Rica while suppressing his supporters.

Third, if, as Montaner states, Zelaya was an unpopular president at the end of his mandate, the coup demonstrates that stupidity mixed with initiative is fatal. The coup in this small country is the perfect chance for the OAS to apply the Inter-American Charter and demonstrate to colonels like Ineztrosa that the era of the sabers is over. Zelaya has been transformed from being an unpopular president to the victim of a coup.

To justify complicity, Montaner introduced his thesis of the “a posteriori humanitarian coup d’etat.”  According to the logic of which the coup should be respected in order to avoid a “blood bath,” a phrase used first by Hugo Chávez in his program “Alo’ Presidente.” The arguments of Montaner and Chávez regarding the passion of the coup’s supporters or opponents are irrelevant to its constitutionality. Zelaya was elected for a presidential term that ends in January of 2010. Unless he is removed from office by constitutional means, he must finish his term. Not a day more, not a day less.

Montaner measures the coup’s popular support by the sharpness of its bayonets. If there is a “blood bath” those who violated the constitution will be entirely responsible. It shouldn’t be necessary; President Oscar Arias from Costa Rica is acting as a mediator between the two sides of the conflict. Honduras is very vulnerable to an international embargo. If the United States, the European Union and the international Financial Institutions cut all foreign aid to Tegucigalpa, the illegitimate government would realistically renounce its expectations of staying in power until January.

The fourth power:

In his latest book, Senator Gary Hart emphasized the importance of the U.S. becoming the so-called “fourth power” or the power of U.S. democratic principles. According to Hart, the U.S. is weakened when, pursuing short-term goals, it supports violations of constitutional rights, representative democracy and other American values that are appealing to the world.

Following this logic, President Obama has not pursued O’Grady and Montaner’s self destructive suggestion to be a democrat on Tuesday and Thursday, and support coups on Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Obama has reiterated that democracies are strengthened by practicing what they preach. That policy, in contrast to Bush’s support for the coup attempt against Chávez in 2002, which damaged the U.S. reputation in the Americas, promotes U.S. values and reinforces its “fourth power”.

The White House has categorically denied any link to the coup in Honduras, and has reinforced the OAS multilateral efforts to restore constitutionality. The Cuban-born U.S. ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens has announced that the U.S. will only recognize Zelaya as president. Without U.S. support, the junta becomes more desperate each day, abolishing constitutional guarantees, attacking national and international press such as CNN, Telesur and the Associated Press, and using tear gas and water trucks against the people. Finally, the junta pulled out of the OAS, anticipating their expulsion, and murdered at least two people at the Tegucigalpa airport.

Support democracy means more than just defeating the coup. The OAS must adopt early warning mechanisms to prevent polarizations like the one that developed in Honduras under Zelaya. Referendums are not substitutes for seeking compromise via institutions and the separation of powers. Like the Brazilian President Lula Da Silva said, participatory democracy must complement, not suffocate representative democracy.

But all in due time. What must be done first is to reinstate the president of Honduras Manuel Zelaya, elected by the Honduran people and the only one with whom a legitimate dialogue is possible. It is the democratic way to proceed.

Arturo Lopez Levy is a lecturer and PhD Candidate at the Josef Korbel School of International Studies of the University of Denver.

Translated by Dawn Gable.