A little over a year out from the coup of June 2009, Honduras remains in turmoil, the US's interests in the area remain unserved, and violent oppression is the order of the day. The US appears to be without an attractive foreign policy option. Our ham-handed attempts to have Manuel Zelaya reinstated gained us nothing, and lost us political capital in the region. However, the status quo under President Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo is unacceptable; human rights are trampled on a regular basis, and the government is, at best, unconcerned, and at worst, responsible. What the US needs to do is take a far subtler approach to our intervention in Latin American politics, and make the best of a government in Honduras that we may well be stuck with.
Quite simply put, there is no chance that our demand to have Zelaya reinstalled will ever be met. This is something that should have been recognized from the get-go. As a symbolic request, this was appropriate at the beginning of the 2009 Constitutional Crisis - a sitting head of state can not easily acknowledge a government formed after the military exile of an elected leader, no matter what the circumstances. However, the foreign policy agents of the United States were actually operating under the assumption that we could bully the coup government into recanting and allowing the leader they deposed back into power from 1,800 miles away. Simply ridiculous. It really is true that possession is nine tenths of the law, and once Zelaya was exiled and Micheletti installed, the former president was retired for good.
And it's not like we really should have wanted Zelaya back. He was a friend and supporter of Hugo Chavez, the perennial thorn in the US's side. He also attempted to subvert the Honduran Constitution by calling a national referendum on extending term limits, which are established in articles of the Constitution that the legislature can not amend (certain articles are made unamendable by Article 374). He was also, in my humble opinion, certifiably insane. Since his ouster, Zelaya has claimed that Israeli spies were poisoning his mind with radiation while he hid in the Brazilian embassy, and that the US orchestrated his removal from office, even as we clamored for his return. It would be highly unlikely that his return could be brought about even if he were a great and much beloved leader. That he was not only takes it further outside the realm of possibility.
On the other hand, current President Pepe Lobo is the greater of the two evils we face in this crisis, and we should want him gone. Entirely in his right mind, he has, depending on who you ask, either allowed his country to go to the dogs, or taken it there himself. Although he belongs to the conservative National Party, the opposition party to the Liberal Party of both Zelaya and interim President Roberto Michelletti, he has continued the reign of terror that Michelletti began.
Lobo was elected in a completely illegitimate election that the US and many European nations inexplicably decided to recognize. Outside reports and those from agencies on the ground like COFADEH (a human rights NGO formed by families of those who have recently disappeared in Honduras) indicate that intimidation, beatings, killings and disappearances were used against those who opposed the coup, including protestors in the street, journalists and popular union leaders. Whether Lobo had any hand in these particular offenses is debatable, but to recognize an election conducted in that kind of climate is absurd, and contrary to the democratic values we hold as Americans. Most of the nations of South America and many human rights groups have refused to recognized the Lobo government, partly or entirely for this reason.
If Lobo had made any efforts to stop this disturbingly familiar course of events, he could be tolerated by the international community until his single term expires in 2013. However, assassinations of journalists and activists have continued into his Presidency, and it is alleged by coup opponents, human rights groups and foreign journalists that his government is directly responsible. Even if this isn't the case, Lobo is directly responsible for maintaining law and order in his country, and providing for the safety of its citizens, which he has distinctly failed to do. He also maintained the closure of pro-Zelaya media outlets pending their appearances in court. Over 200,000 people marched on the capital city of Tegucigalpa just two weeks ago, on the anniversary of the coup, to protest Lobo's illegitimate rule. Finally, Lobo has created the Orwelle-esque Truth Commission to look into crimes committed during the coup, but not a single case has been prosecuted to date. As such, recognition of his government remains inconsistent with support for democratic values.
The question remains, what are the US, EU and other important, outside nations to do? The best option would be negotiating Lobo's resignation and a new set of elections. There had been some talk from Lobo that he would step down if Zelaya would also recuse himself from the election. Despite Zelaya's previous statements indicating his willingness to do exactly that, negotiations for such an agreement fell through. If this were to occur, it would be a great outcome from a US foreign policy standpoint. Barring such a windfall, the Honduran people would have to wait until 2013 to oust Lobo from office.
In either scenario, the US must immediately begin to work with the Lobo government to improve the human rights situation in Honduras. Restoration of all types of aid should be incremental, and entirely dependent on American or third party observation of improvement. All Constitutional rights would need to be restored to Honduran citizens as a condition for the US even coming to the bargaining table, and withdrawal of aid would have to be immediate if there were to be any backsliding on the government's part. Sanctions on luxury goods could be used to further squeeze the political and financial elites who run the country without harming ordinary citizens who depend upon humanitarian aid.
Whether elections occur in 2013 or sooner, the US and EU can not repeat their mistake of 2009, and must send observers to ensure that elections are legitimate and occur without intimidation and violence. There is no way to get an accurate picture of the conditions prior to and during an election without putting your own people on the ground, and how on earth can policymakers decide whether to recognize an elected leader without that knowledge?
If the US and others decide not to act, the situation in Honduras can only deteriorate. Lobo's support is rapidly deteriorating in the face of public outcry, and any confrontation between the government and the populace would result in far more killings. A government that emerged from that confrontation would face a massive legitimacy crisis of its own. Too, there are rumblings of another coup from military circles, and that would result in a royal SNAFU of epic proportions. The United States and other developed nations must act in concert with regional leaders like da Silva of Brazila and Arias of Costa Rica to remedy the human rights crisis in Honduras regardless of who is running the country and why.
Some Further Reading:
Real Clear World
UK Guardian
No comments:
Post a Comment