September 22, 2009 11:13 AM

Obama Should Support Honduras Coup

By
CBSNews
(National Review Online)  Written by John R. Thomson.

Beware the coup d'état. They often cause more problems than they solve and are never totally peaceful; indeed, they typically trigger bloodshed either during or after the event.

So what should be our view of Sunday's ouster of Honduran president Manuel Zelaya? We should support it.

The automatic response condemning President Zelaya's removal by many political leaders in the region reveals the appalling degree to which they have ceased defending democracy. As Roberto Micheletti, chosen by the Honduran Congress to complete Zelaya's term, observed, "What was done here was a democratic act. Our constitution continues to be relevant, our democracy continues to live."

This was not the usual whitewash coming from the usual coup leader. Interim president Micheletti was president of the Honduran Congress and is a member, as was Zelaya, of the ruling Liberal party. Micheletti, the Congress, and the Supreme Court are all committed to national elections scheduled for November 29. Those who know Roberto Micheletti confirm that he has no intention of staying in power beyond the end of the current presidential term.

As retired career diplomat George Landau - the former U.S. ambassador to Chile, Paraguay, and Venezuela - observes, "This was not a military coup. The military blocked an attempted civilian coup by Manuel Zelaya, as he defied Honduras's Supreme Court, its Congress, and his own political party. Instead of calling for his reinstatement in office, we should congratulate the Honduran government on removing the president peacefully.

"So far, Washington and most of the world have missed what is happening in Tegucigalpa. This was a power play by Hugo Chávez and his ALBA colleagues. ['ALBA' is a leftist bloc led by Venezuela. Zelaya made Honduras a member in 2008.] We are faced with a battle between democracy and leftist autocrats who have manipulated themselves into permanent power in their countries and want to add Honduras to the list."

What happened in Honduras was not a standard coup. The Supreme Court ordered the army to remove Zelaya from office. The Congress, albeit after his detention and exile, voted unanimously for his removal and confirmed his constitutionally mandated successor to fill the remainder of his term in office.

Prior to his exile, Zelaya had insisted on a referendum to allow for his reelection in direct violation of the Honduran constitution. In other words, he set out to perpetuate himself in office. Roger Noriega, a former Bush administration official and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, puts it clearly: "Zelaya brushed aside every other institution of the state in insisting on a referendum that would benefit his selfish interests."

Shredding constitutional prohibitions to presidential reelection has become a popular political ploy in several Latin American countries in recent years. To date, leftist regimes in Bolivia, Ecuador, and Venezuela have scrapped constitutional presidential term limits, each time using extralegal ploys to do so. Most recently, Washington's best friend in the region, Álvaro Uribe of Colombia, has sought a constitutional change to extend his presidency for a third term, but so far he is working within the law.

Supporters call such moves vital for their nation's peace and well-being; opponents say they reflect presidential hubris and greed. Call the penchant to scrap presidential term limits what you will: The efforts have clearly negated each and every country's constitution.

In the case of Honduras, President Zelaya stood alone among political, legal, economic, media, and military leaders. Backed by a noisy rabble and funded by Venezuela's ever-meddling autocrat, Hugo Chávez, Zelaya's campaign was seen as a way to reverse the defeat of the pro-Chávez candidate in Panama's recent presidential election.

The ballots for Sunday's suspended referendum were actually prepared in Venezuela. On Saturday, Zelaya made an abortive effort to storm and steal the ballots from the Honduran military base where they were stored.

President Obama's statement that Manuel Zelaya "remains the president of Honduras" is his latest foreign-policy gaffe. So far, the U.S. position, reiterated by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, is largely the same as that of such governments as Argentina, Cuba, Ecuador, and Venezuela - none of them supporters of democracy and the rule of law.


It is unfortunately understandable that the Organization of American States (OAS) should roundly condemn Zelaya's removal from office. Under the leadership of Secretary General José Miguel Insulza, the OAS has moved steadily toward embracing the autocratic Left. In its recent annual meeting, held (perhaps prophetically) in Tegucigalpa, the Honduran capital, Insulza and Zelaya collaborated to end the organization's suspension of Cuba, despite that country's blatant disregard of basic OAS charter support for democracy and human rights.

That United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon should stand in support of Zelaya and call for an emergency meeting of the General Assembly underscores once again how feckless the world body has become.

Not one informed Honduran - including members of the media - has opposed Manuel Zelaya's removal from office. While many regretted the need to do so, all said the move was both legal and necessary, a position supported by Honduran attorney general Luis Alberto Rubí, who had threatened to prosecute Zelaya if he actually held some form of referendum.

American John Park, the former Anglican archdeacon of Honduras and a resident of the Central American country for more than 17 years, summarized the situation succinctly: "What has happened can be called democracy in action. It was not a military coup, but just as a U.S. court may order the arrest of a citizen, the Honduran army acted on the orders of the Supreme Court to arrest a citizen who . . . was flouting the law and the constitution."

Manuel Zelaya's attempt to perpetuate himself in power was a naked bid to join the ranks of leftist Latin autocrats. Despite his claims to the contrary, he sought to undermine his country's constitution in a manner made notorious by his mentor and financier Hugo Chávez. Just as cynical and hypocritical has been reaction of "world leaders," most notably senior Obama administration figures.

From Caracas, Roberto Bottome, the founder of Veneconomia - which for 30 years has been the country's leading economic, political, and social analytical group - observed, "The knee-jerkers who have called for Zelaya to be restored as president of Honduras could have taken the time to find out what was really happening. Perhaps, just perhaps, they might have reacted differently once they learned it was Zelaya who was violating his country's law and the constitution while all Honduran institutions, including the Supreme Court and Congress, had acted in strict observance of those laws and that Constitution.

"Zelaya defied the laws and constitution of his country. He was barred by the constitution - and the Courts - from holding a referendum on any subject in the six months prior to an election. Even so, he pressed ahead with his proposal for a referendum on a constitutional convention that would have allowed him to succeed himself as president."

Let's hope that someone at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue or the State Department will recognize that Manuel Zelaya's return to office would be an endorsement of chicanery, not a victory for democracy, and that Zelaya's reinstallation as president would be seen as a major victory for Chávez and his cohorts.
By John R. Thomson
Reprinted with permission from National Review Online

National Review Online
Add a Comment See all 91 Comments
by Mercury73 July 8, 2009 12:17 PM EDT
As many may recall the Deomcrats stopped Ronald Reagan from helping democracy in Latin America. They supported the communist. Ollie North did an (illegal) end round on the Dems. Eventually the people voted for freedom. Since they have voted in the communist. But they did get to VOTE.
Reply to this comment
by angelonieves July 6, 2009 7:01 PM EDT
Este mensaje te lo manda:angelo [w2nqs@comcast.net]

Por favore Omar lo escucho todos los dias, io estoy muy de acuerdo con muchas cosas del Taliban. Bueno hoy he tratado de mandarle a Enrique y Joe pero sus correos me han sido devueltos. por favor si me lo envia se lo agradecere. Gracias y demoles a Hunduras su apoyo. Ayer aparecieron en las fotos de hunduras cubanos y nicaraguenses con una camiseta con El Che guevara. Que le parece. Y si se acuerdan que dijo que era christiano y con el crucifijo en sus manos, bueno Este novo senor quiere tratar la incredivilidad de ese pueblo. Apollemos a Hunduras., mio espanol no es muy bueno escolto a todos por su ayuda. angelo


Omar Moynelo - Con Luisa Fernanda en "El Arańazo"
Omar ahora con la bella Luisa Fernanda, en ?El Arańazo? todas las tardes de 4 a 7 pm por La Kalle 98.3.
Reply to this comment
by angelonieves July 6, 2009 6:51 PM EDT
We all hope Mrs. Cllinton, changes her opinion about Hunduras, I hope she will be able to understand really what was going on. I have never made a comment before and for over 50 years, but my father was in the intelengency before Castro got in the goverment, was a lot of data where showing the effort to take over of all south america. Today he has Chaves, who is the dicipule and have the money. Now they can take over aws what is really doing now. Mrs Cllinton we have to stop Chavez and they group. You must understand what really happened in Hunduras have been a motion against the cumunist in south america.
We ask Mrs. Clinton help to became a Democratic goverment in Hunduras, if you looks some of the pictures, cubans Nicaraguences and venezolanos are today in Hunduras to kill and made a caos so the new goverment been taking off. I can belive we are making the same mistakes as 50 years ago. Please Mrs. Cllinton if you willing to have a personal discusion I will be glad to do so. I pray to the Lord to support you and give you the power with our support to said NO to Zelaya. Zelaya comment as Fidel try to used the same filosofic of they are Christian, but we all know what is behiend. I hope some one can send you my comments and for you to made the right dicession. Sorry I am sick and I lost how to made better comments.
angelo
Reply to this comment
by piBen11 July 7, 2009 2:58 AM EDT
Can you scare us any more than this? Castro, Chavez, Zelaya are coming to take over USA, lets get our guns and blow them out of the world. Nonesense!It must be a neo. Why can't you see that due process was not followed by the Hondurans who kicked Mr Zelaya out of office? Think, think people!!
by rocketjl July 5, 2009 10:42 AM EDT
I trust our institutions, even though we have a lot of self-serving nuts in office. My biggest concern is that some of my suspicions about President Obama are beginning to surface. Though he has done some borderline things since he got into office, this position makes me think that I really should not trust him, any of those he has put around him, nor any of the 'pie-in-the-sky' claims he makes.
Reply to this comment
by Aberantman July 5, 2009 12:29 AM EDT
The point here is... The Rule of Law did not prevail. If Zelaya broke the law, as the Honduran congress and courts say he did, the chief legal authority should have him arrested. Or the congress should impeach him. He should stand trial for his crimes in a court of law and the public provided with evidence of his crimes - and he with a vigorous defense.

Rather than arrest or impeachment, he was deposed and exiled... this is not a democratic process.

It is not a matter of guilt; nor if he is a good administrator or not; or if he is ?right wing? or ?left wing? politically. It is a question of due process - of which he was denied. That is the issue.

In a broader sense, Obama, and many other democratic governments are indeed obliged to object on these grounds alone. Left unchallenged, this type of behavior returns us to the hypocritical and deceitful practices of Viet Nam, Iran, the Cold War and Iraq. Wherein the overthrow or disposition of any leader that did not suit our national interests was seen as acceptable ? without regard to form of government ? democratic or otherwise.
Reply to this comment
by piBen11 July 7, 2009 2:52 AM EDT
I concur totally. You are the only reasonably thoughtful one I have come accross
by beachbug1vw July 4, 2009 10:20 PM EDT
One of our own Democrats introduced a Bill in the House of Rep on Jan 29, 2009 to change our Constitution to end the two terms our own President can hold!
Don't worry, Obama and his Robots already have plans to follow the lead of Chavez!
Reply to this comment
by azure13 July 4, 2009 2:04 PM EDT
To hell with Honduras. We need to worry about the U.S.A.

Some of you people on these boards seem to think that our president should run every country. You same people go on and on about having small government. Quite the oxymoron.

We need to concentrate on home.
Reply to this comment
by Ceres6 July 4, 2009 7:53 PM EDT
I am sure you consider yourself the undisputable American Rambo in the new millennium. You wake up singing the National Anthem. Your pajama, jacket, jeans, shirt, eyeglasses, socks, shoes, and belt have the U.S. flag. And every few minutes, you say to yourself how a great American you are. After you exercise, it is amazing the incredible amount of patriotism coming out of every pore in your body. It is true, people like you will send millions of Honduran people to hell, and if they become slaves of the tyrant Hugo Chavez, it is not important.
by fred-mertz July 4, 2009 1:51 PM EDT
"Call the penchant to scrap presidential term limits what you will: The efforts have clearly negated each and every country?s constitution." -- Thomson

If scrapping term limits "negated each and every country's constitution", why the hell didn't Thomson object when Dubya illegally wiretapped every american citizen, squashed free speech by creating "free speech zones" (cages to prevent protesters from begin able to "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"), lied to Congress and the People to get approval to launch an illegal war which killed almost 5,000 US soldiers, etc., etc. ?
Reply to this comment
by beachbug1vw July 4, 2009 10:28 PM EDT
Obama still has protest free zones and if you don't believe it, just ask Congressman Lewis and the muslim congressman from Minnesota. They were arrested 2 months ago because they crossed out of their caged area in DC when protesting for Health Care for all Americans and ALL Illegals Immigrants and any criminal that can manage to sneak into our country!
And, Obama just announced they will continue the Wire Tap program and are meeting with AT&T to be the lead TeleCom company to do it!
by jschmidt27 July 5, 2009 2:21 PM EDT
your old accusations are getting pretty tiresome. You have no evidence at all to support anything. And the Homeland Security and patriot act seems to have protected your --- very well the last 8 years. So you might want to get a new tune, such as something about Obama's war against business in the US, or his lackluster condemnation of Iran but his strong condemnation of the suppossed coup in Honduras. It seems he is supporting the wrong govts. Many of us are tired already of his appology tour, his big govt proposals that will bankrupt the US and his disregard for stockholders and bondholders as evidenced by the GM and Chrysler bankruptcy. So find another song, I don't have a violin that small.
by fred-mertz July 4, 2009 1:51 PM EDT
"Call the penchant to scrap presidential term limits what you will: The efforts have clearly negated each and every country?s constitution." -- Thomson

If scrapping term limits "negated each and every country's constitution", why the hell didn't Thomson object when Dubya illegally wiretapped every american citizen, squashed free speech by creating "free speech zones" (cages to prevent protesters from begin able to "peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"), lied to Congress and the People to get approval to launch an illegal war which killed almost 5,000 US soldiers, etc., etc. ?
Reply to this comment
by ffoulkes-2009 July 4, 2009 10:42 PM EDT
Fred...You can't find a legitimate argument on the present situation, so you keep falling back on Bush. Bush is gone. Deal with the here and now. Here and now, Honduras did what needed done to protect their Constitution.
by Ceres6 July 4, 2009 1:15 PM EDT
Thirty years ago, President Jimmy Carter made some terrible decisions involving the countries of Nicaragua and Iran. For that reason, many Americans considered him a weak person, and decided to elect Ronald Reagan, a Republican. I hope today we don't have a similar situation. The position taken so far by the Obama Administration about the Honduran crises, is one of weakness. Not to support the brave actions of the Honduran people, which prevented the country to become a pawn of the tyrant Hugo Chavez, through the puppet of Manuel Zelaya, is just perplexing.

After 30 years, Americans are still paying the price of the decisions taken 30 years ago. If Honduras becomes a dictatorship, I have no doubt that what happened to Mr. Carter will also happen to Mr. Obama.
Reply to this comment
by USSAmerikan July 4, 2009 2:20 PM EDT
Obama could become the next Carter if he continues at this pace. Ignorance and adherence to leftist principles led Carter to support the overthrow of the Shah, the fall of Afghanistan (we are still paying with American blood for that on with American blood). In fact, one could argue the point that without Carter's weakness, we would not be dealing with the prospect of a nuclear Iran or with 9-11.
See all 91 Comments
.
Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook