The Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was awoken from his bed Sunday morning at approximately 1:00 am by the sound of gunfire on his residency grounds. Mr. Zelaya and his family were captured and then driven to a military airport and exiled to Costa Rica. In a new conference with Tela Sur, Zelaya said that he doesn't believe it was regular soldiers who kidnapped him. "I have been the victim of a kidnapping carried out by a group of Honduran soldiers. I don't think the Army is supporting this sort of action. I think this is a vicious plot planned by elites. Elites who only want to keep the country isolated and in extreme poverty."
Mr. Zelaya had credited President Obama with keeping him in power after what appeared to be a failed coup the week before. This may need to be repeated as it is possibly the most relevant piece of information in this story. A leftist president in Latin American credited the president of the United States for KEEPING him power. If this is indeed true, then this demonstrates increasing complexity in efforts to reform the regions antiquated political structures and the continued collaboration of powerful counter-insurgency elements allied with regional elites.
At the root of this crisis is the continued existence of the disparity between the region's elites and the vast majority of the population living in poverty. A response across Latin America has been the growth of a leftist movement that is personified by Chavez of Venezuela. The bloc’s socialist ideology and strong populist rhetoric has elites around the hemisphere concerned about a new threat to their traditional parasitic relationship to society. Their frequent use of undemocratic techniques they justify by the long history of US meddling has many progressive observers concerned.
This confrontation has been symbolized by Zelaya’s executive decree PCM-05-2009, calling for a national referendum to take place no later than June 28. The purpose of the non-binding plebiscite was to poll the population to see if there is support to install a forth balloting box, during the next presidential election, to elect a new Constituent Assembly.
The Honduran constitution, the sixteenth since independence from Spain was completed on January 11, 1982, by a seventy-one-seat Constituent Assembly that had been elected on April 20, 1980, under the military junta of Policarpo Paz García. The Constituent Assembly was dominated by Honduras's two major political parties. The constitution, which contains 375 articles, can be amended by a two-thirds majority vote in congress. However, there are eight “firm articles” which cannot be amended. These articles define the allowed political structure of the country, term limits and presidential succession. Furthermore, Article 375 of the constitution states that the social contract cannot be terminated by an unauthorized individual or body and that anyone wishing to nullify the constitution is subject to criminal penalties. All Honduran citizens share the duty of defend the constitution against efforts to terminate it.
It is felt by many that the Honduran constitution solidifies the privilege of elites while limiting the participation of the majority of the population in the “democratic” process. Central America has been stuck in the mud of colonial social relations for centuries with little transformation of race or class relations.
It is therefore of little surprise that Zelaya’s drive to reform the constitution has been meet with popular support from across Central America while rising the ire of the entrenched elites. When mixed with his increase in the minimum wage and drive towards empowering the indigenous minority, his administration seems to have pushed the political envelope beyond the limits the system will allow.
A significant question concerning Zelaya and other populist Latin American presidents, especially those that run as conservatives and have a conversion in office, is the vision and sincerity of their populist reforms. There is concern that Zelaya’s effort to reform the constitution has more to do with his desire to manipulate the process and extend his term in office as has been done by Chávez in Venezuela, Evo Morales in Bolivia, and Rafael Correa in Ecuador.
Banking on this concern, an orchestrated attack has been unleashed against Mr. Zelaya by the ruling political elites and the private media of Honduras to categorize his non-binding plebiscite as an illegal attempt to modify the constitution. The criticism that this was a manipulation on his part to maintain power is difficult to support considering that the purpose of the poll was to ask the population if they wanted to vote on the idea during the next presidential election in which he is not a candidate.
Therefore, it seems clear that the real issue is the empowerment and participation of the “people” in the process. As with much of Central American politics, it is not as much the impact of a particular event as the fanatical need to limit all possible alternative models or advances. The poor must be kept in their place at all cost. If not, a sea of peasants and indigenous people will demand land reform in a region with the worst wealth and land distribution.
According to reports from grass-roots organizations in Honduras, there continues a state of martial law in the country. Leaders have been killed or disappeared, independent media has been censored, international news programs have been blocked while a concerted propaganda campaign has been unleashed in support of the coup.
Taken in conjunction with the events last month in Guatemala around the murder of the attorney Rodrigo Rosenberg, we can see the orchestration of high tech organizing techniques married with old school gangster tactics. In what can only be called brilliant moves to confuse and distract, the agents of the elites have been framing their actions in progressive terms. "NO MORE VIOLENCE" read the signs of students from Guatemala’s ultra right wing schools as they protested to bring down President Colom. Facebook and other online campaigns sprang up with amazing, if not unbelievable speed, to call for an end of injustice in Guatemala. Within hours of the Honduran coup, blogs and media sites were full of posts in perfect English from “regular” Hondurans approving of the coup. Rather than addressing the power issues at the roots of the conflict, the right is taking the moral high ground declaring their defense of democracy from another would be tyrant. It is never made clear how a non-binding referendum that would not have any impact until he leaves office qualifies.
What is interesting in these events is the apparent lack of participation from Washington in efforts to destabilize these regimes. If this is indeed the case, we are witnessing independent actors utilizing intelligence techniques for the protection and promotion of their own interest. A sort of privatization of the covert political operations pioneered by US entities in the late twentieth century. Reading and analyzing the spread of information over the last few months, it also appears that not only the web but progressive political agendas are tools being appropriated for the manufacturing of consent and fabrication of pressure.
Observers across Central America are watching the events unfolding in Honduras today as a gauge to the strength of democracy in the region and the power of the elites to adapt to changing circumstances to maintain their grasp on the levers of power.
Posts
