News on the failed coup in Honduras

Yesterday evening Zelaya summoned one of Micheletti’s negotiators, Arturo Corrales, who later described the talks as positive and fruitful but without offering any details other than that three or four alternate end games are being investigated. It seems that Zelaya himself realizes that restitution is not an option, and has resigned to the necessity of finding another way out of his self-inflicted de facto imprisonment in the Brazilian embassy.

Zelaya was deposed on June 28th after having attempted a coup d’état, and was replaced by Micheletti. Zelaya claims, following Chávez’ lead, that it was Micheletti who carried out a coup, a military coup at that, even though Micheletti was never a military but the speaker of the parliament. He was appointed interim president by the Congress in accordance with the constitutional succession order.

Earlier yesterday Micheletti had offered a compromise proposal that included letting both the Supreme Court and the Congress offer their opinion on Zelaya’s desired reinstatement as president. Both bodies voted to depose him, unanimously and almost unanimously, respectively. The Supreme Court issued the arrest warrant based on which the military acted on June 28. The Zelaya negotiators called the proposal “provocative” and refused to show up at the table.

The countries that have an allegiance to Hugo Chávez, de facto dictator of Venezuela, demand Zelaya’s reinstatement. They support terrorists in Honduras who started their promised sabotages last Sunday by removing the bolts that held a large and strategic high power tower in San Pedro Sula, causing wide-spread traffic chaos and loss of electricity in the national grid.

9 thoughts on “News on the failed coup in Honduras”

  1. The EU Presidency under the leadership of Sweden is making very unfortunate statement about the situation in Honduras. I suspect the Swedish government has not done its own analysis, but is relying on the biased position of the OAS. I suggest you all contact Reinfeldt, Bildt and others on the EU website to make sure they have a balanced view, e.g. the article in The Washington Post by Baker or the analysis by the Library of Congress.

    1. When getting this comment I called the Swedish foreign department to ask. They have not issued any statement since September about Honduras. So, I don’t know what you are referring to.

    2. It may well be correct that their latest official statement is the statement from September 30; see the website of the Swedish EU Presidency:

      The statements I was referring to in my note have appeared in several places as news quotes: for example on October 13:

      At a meeting of representatives of the European Union’s 27 member countries, the Swedish president asked the Spanish government to “start preparing a list of government members of Roberto Micheletti, who could be the target of sanctions”.

      Having no diplomatic representation here, Sweden believes that Spain protects Sweden’s interests in Honduras.

      The Spanish government has already banned ten members of the Honduran government from entering their country. Among those banned are the ministers of Defense, the Interior, and Finance.

      The European Union is determined to “maintain pressure” until a political solution is reached for the crisis in Honduras. Thus, the 27 member countries also studied whether “to give legitimacy to the elections scheduled in late November.”

      I suspect that Arias and others have good connections in Sweden partly through the Nobel Prize and various other organizations. I also suspect that the version of events that have become the official story is the one from the OAS, and I suspect that many of the Europeans failed to do their own analysis.

      There are obviously (to me) two principled issues involved, first the right of a sovereign country to follow its own constitution without interference (the official Swedish statement seems to obfuscate on this), and second the rights of citizens, in this case Zelaya not to be deported.

      I thought Jim Baker summarized a viable, pragmatic and principled solution in his Washington Post article.

      Sanctioning Honduras is simply irresponsible, threatening to not support or acknowledge the November elections borders on the criminal. The election is the solution.

    3. Ulf … fick di vidare information från utrikesdepartementet? Jag såg just en rapport att John Kerry försöker få Library of Congress ta tillbaka sin rapport. Helt i stil! Thomas

    4. Har inte kontaktat UD igen. Jag tror den ansvarige där är väl förtrogen med problematiken, men som Palme brukade säga, “politik är det möjligas konst”. Pga vad som hände i denna kris, som för övrigt började på allvar den 25 juni och inte den 28 juni som omvärlden gärna vill hävda, så är det politiskt möjliga i Honduras oförenligt med det politiskt möjliga i omvärlden.

      Själv tror jag dock att med tiden juridiska beslut i Honduras och i internationella domstolar (dit Honduras har vänt sig med besvär) kommer att avgöra frågan. Det viktiga är därför att Honduras regering att hela tiden bara gör det rätta, för så länge de håller sig till lagen så kommer de att kunna vinna på domstolars framtida beslut till deras fördel. Redan har vi ju sett att den spanske domaren som brukar ta sig an mål om krigsförbrytelser har förklarat att det inte ens är meningsfullt att inleda en undersökning mot Honduras nuvarande president. There is no case, så att säga.

    5. Domstolar tar sin tid. Folkomröstningen ȁr kritisk. Så lȁnge Zelaya ȁr margainaliserad och inte blir återinsatt, löser sig väl krisen över tid som du säger.

Comments are closed.