A banner voices opposition to the coup in Honduras.

International politics have never been far from the surface of the presidential crisis in Honduras.

– What was the role of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez in supporting ousted Honduran president Manuel Zelaya?

– Was the mediator in the case Costa Rican President Oscar Arias truly neutral? Or did he have advance warning that Zelaya would be deposed and then sent into exile in his pajamas to Costa Rica?

– And what is the full agenda of U.S. policymakers, who don’t like Chavez, but overtly support Zelaya as the constitutional president of Honduras?

Zelaya is vowing to march back into the country overland through Nicaragua this weekend. He hopped into an SUV in Managua on Thursday and drove himself north to the border, urging supporters to meet him there. Zelaya and his interim successor, Roberto Micheletti, have not budged on their mutual demands despite the mediation of Arias.

One new wrinkle in the story is the revelation that Lanny Davis, a longtime ally of Bill and Hillary Clinton, was working with Honduran businessmen who opposed Zelaya and promoting his ouster. Davis has been talking up the coup in Congress.

Davis’ role in the Honduran case was described in a report by Roberto Lovato at the online magazine, American Prospect.

Robert White, a former U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, now president of the Washington-based Center for International Policy, an independent think-tank in Washington, discussed the case with
Lovato.

“If you want to understand who the real power behind the [Honduran] coup is,” White told Lovato, “you need to find out who’s paying Lanny Davis.”

Davis was White House counsel to President Clinton from 1996-1998, and worked with Hillary Clinton on her unsuccessful presidential bid. He has been making the rounds in Congress, promoting the idea that the Honduran coup was justified and playing down widespread reports of repression and curbs on the news media.

Lovato also interviewed Davis:

“My clients represent the CEAL, the [Honduras Chapter of] Business Council of Latin America,” Davis said when reached at his office last Thursday. “I do not represent the government and do not talk to President [Roberto] Micheletti. My main contacts are Camilo Atala and Jorge Canahuati. I’m proud to represent businessmen who are committed to the rule of law.” Atala, Canahuati, and other families that own the corporate interests represented by Davis and the CEAL are at the top of an economic pyramid in which 62 percent of the population lives in poverty, according to the World Bank.”

White and those who oppose Micheletti and the coup said that the underlying problem is that a small class of businessmen in Honduras don’t recognize or care about that larger context — the vast majority of Hondurans are abjectly poor and have suffered while an oligarchic minority has thrived.

Coups, White told Lovato, “happen because very wealthy people want them and help to make them happen, people who are used to seeing the country as a money machine and suddenly see social legislation on behalf of the poor as a threat to their interests. The average wage of a worker in free trade zones is 77 cents per hour.”

One of Zelaya’s cardinal sins, critics of the coup charge, was that he was a dissident member of the wealthy business class, and converted to social-minded pursuits only after he was elected to office.

Davis and other opponents say that Zelaya had been in the process of creating an official coup, subverting the constitution and attempting to maintain himself in office much the same way as Chavez has seized absolute power in Venezuela.

Again, the bottom line, what does this all mean to the suffering, malnourished Honduran majority? They watch politicians come and go from squalid slums and never see life getting any better at all.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user pablo.cardozo under a Creative Commons license.

One of Allan McDonald’s cartoons, courtesy of the artist.

Political upheaval continues in Honduras, after liberal leader Manuel Zelaya was ousted in a military coup in late June.

The military has clamped down on pro-Zelaya channels in the country and blocked the signal of Telesur, a left-leaning television network based in Venezuela.

Ask your questions on media battles in Honduras for our online radio show on Tuesday, July 14.

Honduran political cartoonist Allan McDonald, who had published several cartoons in support of Zelaya, was arrested and detained by the Honduran Armed Forces, who destroyed his materials and cartoons. He joined Worldfocus to describe his experience, and the interview is translated from Spanish below.

Worldfocus: Why did they arrest you and can you describe what happened?

Allan McDonald: Fui detenido en circunstancias complejas, yo me encontraba en mi casa, había dejado la puerta abierta para que entrara un poco de luz, pues se había cortabo la electricidad, y eran ya altas horas de la noche, casi 2 de la mañana, algo así, no recuerdo la hora exacta, porque no sabia donde verla, entro la policia, y dijo que me detenían por que había violado el estado de sitio, que yo tenia la casa con puertas abiertas, esta bien les dije, pero estaba con una nina pequena, asique no podia dejarla, estaba solo.

Así que ellos me dijeron que la dejara con un vecino pero no quise despertar a nadie, menos a esa hora, así que me llave conmigo, no se a donde me llevaron, todo Honduras no había luz, supongo que por la estructura del edificio era un hotel, y alli permaneci 5 horas, no hubo maltratos a nadie.

I was arrested under complex circumstances. They found me in my house. I had left the door open for a little light, but they had cut the electricity and it was already very late at night, almost 2:00 in the morning, something like that (I do not remember exactly because I couldn’t see). The police entered and said they were going to arrest me because I had violated curfew and had left the doors open. Well, I told them that’s fine, but I was with a small girl, and I could not leave her alone.

They told me to leave her with a neighbor but I did not want to wake anyone, especially at that hour, so I brought her with me. I didn’t know where they were taking me, all of Honduras was dark. I thought from the structure of the building that it might be a hotel. I was there for five hours and they didn’t harm anyone.

Political cartoonist Allan McDonald was detained by Honduran armed forces and told he violated curfew.

Worldfocus: What prompted your release?

Allan McDonald: En la detención, tuvo acceso un diplomático, solo el pudo tener eses acceso porque era extranjero y tenia que avisar a sus embajada, era un Venezolano y el aviso, le pedí un mensaje y me cedió su computadora personal y así pude escribirle a una periodista que de inmediato alerto la comunidad internacional, Amnistia Internacional logro la liberación de todos, casi alas 5 de la mañana, o mas tarde, quizá 6 a.m.

In detention, I had access to a diplomat. I only could have this access because he was a foreigner and had to advise his embassy. He was Venezuelan and he said that I could use his personal computer and I was able to write a journalist and immediately alert the international community. Amnesty International won the freedom of everyone. This was at 5:00 in the morning, or even later, maybe 6:00 a.m.

Worldfocus: Is media free and open in Honduras? How is the current government treating journalists?

Allan McDonald: No existe en este momento ninguna libertad de prensa, también existe la autocensura, y al acomodamiento de la prensa frente a los hechos, antes de este golpre ya la prensa estaba polarizada frente a Zelaya, los medios callaron siempre la verdad en este asunto, hay videos e imágenes manipuladas por los medios.

At this moment, freedom of the press does not exist. There are self-censorship and some inaccuracies when it comes to the facts. Before this coup, the press was already polarized and set against Zelaya. The media always silenced the truth in this matter, and manipulated videos and images.

Worldfocus: Where are people getting their information?

Allan McDonald: Esta batalla contra la censura y contra la dictadura y la desinformación se esta librando desde Google, desde allí la genta se informa, otro media sin censura fueron los mesanjitos vía celular, que acá en Honduras todo el mundo tiene uno, mas no todos tiene acceso al Internet.

This battle against censorship and against dictatorship and disinformation is freed by Google. It is here the people get informed. Other media without censorship were cell phone messages. Here in Honduras, everyone has one, but not everyone has access to the Internet.

A cartoon by Allan McDonald paints a dim picture of Honduran democracy.

Worldfocus: What is your opinion about the situation in Honduras? How should the crisis be resolved?

Allan McDonald: El Departamento de Estado hizo o correcto, aca esta totalmente dividido, entre ricos y pobres, no hay ideologías, es lucha de clases, pero los pactos deben ser en us país neutral tal como U.S. hizo, dándole espacio a Costa Rica, creo que alli esta la luz al final del túnel, sin embargo el propio Micheletti desde ahora se opone al regreso de Zelaya, eso va contra lo manifestado de U.S. y su deseo de arreglar este asunto ya demasiado espinoso. Esta es la primera vez que me alegro que intervenga Estados Unidos a un país.

The State Department did right. Here it is completely divided between rich and poor — not between ideologies. This is a class struggle. But it should be resolved by a neutral country, like the U.S. did by asking Costa Rica to take over negotiations. I believe that there is a light at the end of the tunnel, but Micheletti is going to oppose the return of Zelaya, which goes against the declaration of the U.S. and the desire to fix this already too-thorny matter. This is the first time that I am happy the United States intervened in a country.

Worldfocus: Has public opinion at large swayed in favor of or against Zelaya?

Allan McDonald: Si, y es fácil saberlo, sino fuera asi, no habría tanta censura, hasta las cadenas internacionales como CNN les cortan su senal desde acá, ponen cadenas para que nadie se da cuenta que dice el mundo, ahora la población no esta en las calles por Zelaya, sino por la barbarie que hacen, suprimir garantias individuales, toques de queda, censura, y balas, ya el ejercito abre fuego y ya hay 2 victimas comprobadas y centenares de detenidos y amanazados, la prensa no dice nada.

Yes, and it is easy to know — if there wasn’t so much censorship, since even international stations like CNN are cut off from the public. Now, the population isn’t in the streets for Zelaya, but for the barbarism that they do, to suppress individual rights. The curfews, censorship and bullets…already, they have opened fire and already two have been killed (this has been verified), and hundreds of people have been arrested and threatened, and the press does not say anything.

Translated by Katie Combs and Ivette Feliciano.

Honduras is one of the poorest countries in the Western Hemisphere.

Most police around the world will tell you that they’re always wary about getting into the middle of a domestic dispute. It can be a no-win situation, and everybody ends up hating the cops.

Case in point, how to deal with the Honduras crisis — so far, the United States appears to have steered clear of getting stuck. The Obama administration has been listening to both sides and endorsed the entry of a neutral non-U.S. mediator, Oscar Arias, the Costa Rican president and Nobel Peace Prize winner.

Most important, the two sides in Honduras — Manuel Zelaya, the deposed president, and his old friend and former ally, Roberto Micheletti — have agreed to the mediation. This is a complicated domestic matter, seated in rivalries and seething questions about power, influence, economic interest and the long-term welfare of a desperately poor country.

Zelaya and Micheletti hold steadfastly to their positions — the deposed president said his return to office is not negotiable, and Micheletti is equally adamant against him returning to power.

But they will be talking with Arias’ help this week, instead of fighting at the borders.

Ideologues of various stripes — from The National Review to the halls of power in Venezuela, where President Hugo Chavez holds forth — are looking in from the outside and bloviating about what is best of Honduras.

Chavez’s government Web site, “Gobierno En Linea,” said that the coup plotters were attempted murders and should be dealt with accordingly:

[...] it was an attack directly against the head of state [Zelaya], by which the coup members and those responsible for the military coup should be taken to court and judged for the crime of attempted murder.

[..] atentó directamente contra la vida del Jefe de Estado, motivo por el que los golpistas y responsables del golpe militar deben ser llevados a una corte y juzgados por el delito de homicidio frustrado.

Most governments and publications in the hemisphere and beyond were saying more mildly that the coup was illegal and Zelaya had to be returned to power. However, the National Review, the voice of conservatives in the United States, defended the coup on grounds that Zelaya would have turned Honduras into “a satellite” of Chavez’s Venezuelan revolution:

It was an affirmation of democracy and the rule of law, both of which the president had flouted. If anything, it was a counter-coup, the real coup having been attempted by Zelaya.

The resolution has to lie somewhere in between the extremes, and here’s hoping that one group — the millions of desperately poor people in Honduras — will somehow benefit in the end.

Those were the sentiments of Arias as he went into the round of mediation:

Those of us who seek to protect democracies in this hemisphere have no time to waste. I urge all leaders in the Americas to see the Honduran crisis for what it is: an urgent call for the profound social and institutional changes our region has delayed for far too long.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user living water international under a Creative Commons license.

Earlier in the week, there was a violent clash at the airport in Tegucigalpa when a plane carrying Zelaya was turned away. Competing protests have rocked the capital city.

Sandra Cuffe is an independent Canadian journalist currently in Tegucigalpa. On Monday, the day after the standoff at the airport, she joined Worldfocus to discuss the mood at the riots, the impact on daily life in Honduras and the range of possible outcomes.

Below, view a slideshow from recent protests, also by Sandra Cuffe:

Worldfocus also spoke with Greg Weeks, an associate professor of political science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte and the editor of the journal The Latin Americanist, about the implications of the recent coup.

Worldfocus: What provoked the coup and did it come as a surprise?

Greg Weeks: The precise timing of the coup was provoked by President Zelaya attempting to go through with the vote about a constitutional commission even though the Supreme Court, Congress, and the armed forces had told him it was unconstitutional. The coup occurred on the Sunday of the scheduled vote.

Conflict between Zelaya and other major political actors in Honduras was long-standing and sometimes bitter. It was well known that Congress was working on formal accusations against Zelaya, and he had publicly criticized the idea of what he called a “technical coup.” Nonetheless, few observers expected a full military coup.

Worldfocus: Has public opinion swayed in either direction in Honduras? Did Hondurans support the referendum?

Greg Weeks: We know that Zelaya was unpopular at the time of the coup (with an approval rating of approximately 30 percent) but we do not know the levels of national support for his forced removal. Both sides claim massive support, but at least for now it is not possible to know for sure.

It is safe to say, though, that a majority of Hondurans did not support the referendum and he likely would have lost it.

Worldfocus: International reaction has been swift, with many (including the U.S. and Organization of American States) urging Zelaya’s return. Has this had any effect?

Greg Weeks: Yes, it put Micheletti and other coup supporters immediately on the defensive and quickly started to pinch the country economically. Plus, the fact that governments as ideologically distant as Colombia and Venezuela were united on this issue made it more difficult for anyone to claim there was ideological bias.

Worldfocus: What are Hugo Chavez’s interests?

Greg Weeks: His primary interest is having another regional ally like Zelaya remain in power. But he and other leftist presidents also have a strong interest in ensuring that other would-be coup makers get the message that international opinion is firmly against such actions (which, of course, is ironic given Chávez’s own background as a coup leader).

Worldfocus: And what of U.S. interests, and the possibility that the U.S. may cut off aid?

Greg Weeks: The U.S. has very little concrete at stake in this crisis, but it is the first Latin American crisis for President Obama, so he is interested in ensuring that his rhetoric of support for democracy and dialogue is taken seriously.

A full cut-off of aid would be a last ditch effort and is the main “stick” the United States wields. As a result, I think it is the least likely policy option, and would be used only if every single other possibility had been exhausted.

Worldfocus: In your opinion, how will the current stalemate end?

Greg Weeks: This crisis has been fluid and unpredictable, so I can’t really say much for certain. I do tend to think that there will be some sort of negotiated solution. There will be massive pressure, both from outside Honduras and inside (as the cutoff of aid from various sources squeezes the economy) for Micheletti to negotiate. Meanwhile, Zelaya knows that negotiation is the only way he can return to the country without invasion — which no one supports, despite Chávez’s comments on the topic.

Christopher Sabatini, the senior director of policy at the Council of the Americas, joins Martin Savidge to discuss the political situation in Honduras and the role of the U.S.

Honduras’ sharply divided population has been engaged in competing protests since a military coup ousted President Manuel Zelaya.

Diplomats are still struggling to help Honduras out of a political mess that only seems to grow deeper by the day. On Sunday, there was a violent clash at the airport in the capital city of Tegucigalpa when a plane carrying the ousted and exiled leader, Manuel Zelaya, was turned away.

Worldfocus contributing blogger John Donaghy is a volunteer with the Catholic diocese of Santa Rosa de Copán who blogs at “Hermano Juancito.” On Sunday, he wrote to describe the tense climate in Honduras.

It’s been quite an eighth day for us here in Honduras.

In the early Church, the day of Christ’ resurrection was thought of as the eighth day, the day on which all is brought to completion. But Honduras did not see much resurrection today. [...]

Much of today has been spent talking with people, looking for information on the Internet, and corresponding with people by e-mail. It has been a great consolation to receive notes from friends through e-mail or Facebook. It has been even more moving to receive notes from people I don’t know who have come across my blog and write — many times wishing me “Stay safe.” I feel as if I am experiencing some of the “globalization of solidarity” — something we in Honduras deeply need.

While waiting for news I turned on the radio (since I don’t have a television). About 2:00 pm, regular programming was interrupted. The de facto president Roberto Micheletti and some of his advisers had a press conference which was broadcast on all the TV and radio stations. They call it a cadena and is broadcast by the government. The first statement was that that Nicaraguan troops were massing toward the border with Honduras. When questioned about details, no number or place was given and it was finally acknowledged that there were “small groups of Nicaraguan troops.” The de facto president admitted that the troops could be acting without authorization of their commanders. But it was also called a “psychological invasion.” [...]

This press conference was repeated again on a national broadcast at 4:25. Though most stations were running it, the local Catholic radio station announced that since it was a repeat they would continue with broadcasting religious music instead of the repeat broadcast. One small courageous act.

Surfing the radio dial on Radio America later, I heard another national rebroadcast of the Cardinal’s statement from [Saturday] with words from another religious leader.

This feels a lot like fear mongering.

I must mention that acting president Micheletti mentioned that he had sent a letter to the Organization of American States suggesting dialogue but when asked what would be the issue for the dialogue an aide gave an ambiguous reply. It was reported that a U.S. official said it was unclear what was the purpose of the proposed dialogue. Dialogue would be good – but it needs to include a wide consultation.

About 5:00 pm I was listening to the Catholic Radio station which reported that Zelaya’s plane was circling the Tegcigalpa airport. This sounded a little strange at first because a government official had earlier reported that Zelaya had landed in El Salvador. But I listened, even as I read e-mail reports from some one in the Caribbean. I called the Franciscan sisters who lived down the street and went to watch the television coverage.

The plane was circling with Zelaya and Father Miguel D’Escoto, the Nicaraguan Maryknoll priest who is General Secretary of the General Assembly of the United Nations. Three army vehicles on the runway were joined by a helicopter, preventing the landing. Eventually the plane went on to Nicaragua as a fueling point, before going to El Salvador to meet up with the presidents of Argentina, Paraguay, and Ecuador who were waiting for him there.

Zelaya is still outside the country, for better or worse.

To read more, see the original post.

The views expressed by contributing bloggers do not reflect the views of Worldfocus or its partners.

Photo courtesy of Flickr user egmb757lover under a Creative Commons license.

They discuss the U.S. offensive in Afghanistan, the American pullback in Iraq and unrest in Honduras following a military coup.

A woman holds a copy of the Honduran constitution and flag at a protest.

While governments around the hemisphere (including Cuba and the United States) support the return of Honduras’ ousted president, José Manuel Zelaya, we have an opportunity to focus on a country rarely mentioned in the news.

In the 1980s, the United States was deeply involved in Honduran military and political affairs — the Reagan administration saw the country as the frontline in fighting a supposed communist march through Central America that would end up at the Texas border.

While the United States mounted counterinsurgencies against the Sandinistas in Nicaragua, and looked the other way when death squads marauded in El Salvador, Honduras was an American base camp.

There are those who mistakenly claim that the United States — billions of dollars spent, tens of thousands of deaths later — somehow helped “win” the Central American wars. In fact, the nations settled their differences themselves after the United States backed off.

The United States backed far off in fact, and Honduras was left poor as ever — one of the poorest of the poor in Latin America. A majority of the country’s seven million people live on far less than $100 a month; illiteracy, hunger and disease are endemic. A report by the World Bank in 2006 said that despite economic growth, a majority of Hondurans received no benefit.

My then-colleague at the Washington Post, Marcela Sanchez, reported two years ago that corruption was a major factor:

According to a U.S.-funded public opinion poll, the percentage of Hondurans who believe the government is combating corruption declined from 40 percent in 2004 to 26.6 percent in 2006.
Juan Ferrera, coordinator for Honduras’ National Anti-Corruption Council, said in an interview from Tegucigalpa that corruption is creating such public disenchantment that Hondurans may even “put aside democratic options.”

In a cauldron like that, are elections enough? A Honduran friend of mine said this week that left-wing or right-wing, it hasn’t seemed to matter. “They kind of just keep themselves in power and steal some more!”

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user giggey under a Creative Commons license.

Many world leaders, from U.S. President Barack Obama to President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela, called for Zelaya’s reinstatement. This marks the first Central American coup since the Cold War.

Christopher Sabatini, the senior director of policy for the Council of the Americas, joins Martin Savidge to analyze the consequences of the military coup.

Bellow, bloggers in Honduras react to the coup.

A blogger from Santa Rosa de Copán, Honduras, is fearful what the coup may bring:

I fear we have gone from bad to worse. At least Zelaya seemed to speak out for the poor. As one priest said this morning, despite all his errors and his vanity, Zelaya was the first major leader in many years to offer people a little bit of openness to the needs of the poor. The priest said he is not supporting the person Zelaya, but the cause of the poor. Micheletti is closely tied with the economic powers to be. An indication of his position is his support of privatization of water in his own district.

Another blogger from Honduras disagrees, stating that Zelaya is to blame:

[...] Zelaya has been trying to usurp the authority of the other two branches of government with his actions of the last few weeks. If anyone was trying to overthrow the government, it was him.

A Peace Corps volunteer takes a neutral stance, pointing to the difficulty in choosing a side:

[...] many countries are around the world are denouncing the coup by the military and the U.S. government is stating it’s against democracy. In my opinion, it is very difficult to take a stance on this. President Zelaya was motivated a lot by legacy along with his buddies in Venezuela, Cuba and Bolivia. There were a lot of manipulation and alternate motives during his presidency. However, the way his own government took him out of power is not the way to do things.

Ousted Honduran President José Manuel Zelaya.

What’s your take on democracy? Time to think about it a bit after reading this front-page headline in the New York Times today:

Honduran Army Ousts President Allied to Chavez

The elected president of Honduras, José Manuel Zelaya, was deposed on Sunday by that country’s armed forces, one of the first military coups in Latin America in more than a decade.

Part of the answer lies in our own prejudices and subliminal responses to the words. If Zelaya is an ally of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, should we be happy, unhappy or neutral? And in terms of democratic principles, should the United States be supporting the deposed president or pleased that his absolutist policies have been derailed?

Zelaya won the Honduran presidency in a tight — but fair — election more than three years ago, and, like Chavez, was trying to tinker with rules that bar presidents from serving more than one term. Chavez, who was also elected by a popular majority, has progressively gathered up power, weakening his country’s legislative and judicial branches. Using various populist techniques and the bully pulpit of the presidents, Chavez has won approval for his actions through national referendums.

For his part, Zelaya was trundled off to the airport on Sunday, and declared from Costa Rica, still in his pajamas, that his ouster was illegal: “I am the president of Honduras.”

The United States, governments throughout the hemisphere and Europe have condemned the coup and say they support Zelaya’s return to office. That hasn’t stopped Chavez from decrying “oligarchs” who should be opposed by force.

One last question: Has U.S. policy been steadfast in supporting election results? Answer: No. Consider the case of Guatemala in 1954, when the CIA engineered the overthrow of a democratically-elected government deemed to be leaning the wrong direction; Chile in 1973, when the United States applied economic sanctions, and U.S. officials supported and aided a coup against the democratically elected president, Salvador Allende, a Socialist. Or further afield, but more recently, when Hamas won democratic elections in Palestine in 2006, the United States sided with Israel and imposed economic sanctions.

Are there limits to supporting the will of the people? Or is the pragmatic solution in dealing with foreign policy questions more complicated than a knee-jerk ideological response? Consider this, then, a vote for critical thinking.

- Peter Eisner

Photo courtesy of Flickr user Presidencia de la República del Ecuador under a Creative Commons license.