Military Coup in Honduras: Is It against Obama Too?

Dr. Wim Dierckxsens = (Holanda).- Dr. Antonio Jarquin T (Nicaragua)= .- Dr Paulo Nakatani (Brasil) Dr. Paulo Campanario (Brasil).- Dr. Reinaldo Carcanholo (Brasil).-<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> Dr. Remy Herrera (Francia)

= &nb= sp; = &nb= sp; = July 12 – 2009 = www.observatoriodelacrisis.o= rg

Two events, three contexts, the answer, two premises, two questions, two consequences and five conclusions and actions.

Event 1

Honduras (Central America): A country of 7.5 million people; one of the smallest and poorest countries in Latin America (poverty rate is= 60 %). Known as "Banana Republic" because it was absolutely controll= ed by the American "United Fruit Company". Located in its territory is a US military base, the “Soto Cano” (Palmer= ola) base (1), used previously by t= he United States to launch open and secret military operations against other countries. Honduras has= a history of military coups supported up by the USA.

Manuel Zelaya= , the democratically elected president: His house = is assaulted by soldiers in the dawn of June 28th, 2009. The president is violently kidnapped wearing pyjamas. He is taken in an airplane out of his country and left in the runway of the international airport of Costa Rica. = A de facto government settles. It st= ops all energy, communication, radio and television services. It imposes restrictions to free mobilization and rights. The unarmed population is mobilized to oppose the coup. The army represses, shoots, kills or hurts ma= ny unarmed citizens which are peacefully protesting. There are several violati= ons of the human rights. The defeated president states: “My "crimes" are: a.- To promote a consultation or poll to the population asking = if they would like to vote in the next November presidential elections about t= he review “yes” or “no” of the Constitution of the Republic and b.- To promote sl= ight social reforms. Later, the aggressors charge the president with other crimes that they never presented according to the state of right in this country. = The accomplices of the army are a group of political and rich businessmen. The country was paralyzed by the popular movement. The aggressors were isolated= by the international community.

Event 2

Latin America= : Historically governed by military dictatorships = and coups d’état lead by different American governments. The regio= n moves toward installation of democratic governments in recent decades; most of th= em progressive with different left, centre and right tendencies. Decades of bloodbath, tortures, death squads, guerrillas and wars are left behind, and there are slow democratic advances and installation of civil governments; t= he soldiers being returned to the barracks and subordinated to civilian control. <= /o:p>

Three contexts:

1. – One theory is that the coup is limited = to Honduras without any support, planning, or intervention by foreign forces. = However, “No Latin American government believes this”.

2. - The coup is against the democratic advances of all Latin American countries by striking at one of the weakest links in the chain of nations that are building democracy in the continent, with the aim= of establishing military control or changing the nature of the civilian administrations and reversing democratic advances. Hence the unanimous condemnation of the coup by all the governments of the region= .

3. - If this ‘experiment’ succeeds it could spread to other countries and regions. At a time of serious crisis and world economic collapse centred on the United States, anything is possible. That is the reason why there has been imm= ediate and universal rejection of the coup both regionally and internationally (2).

The response<= span lang=3DEN-GB style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times = New Roman","serif"; mso-ansi-language:EN-GB'>:

Within 24 hours of the coup, the presidents and fo= reign ministers of 34 Latin American states met, condemned it and demanded the re= instatement of the ousted president in organisations including such as the Central-Amer= ican Integration System (SICA in Spanish), RIO Group, Union of South-American Nations (UNASUR in Spanish), CARICOM (Caribbean Community) OAS (USA and Can= ada included). This was subsequently supported by the 192 member states of the = United Nations (2). There was an unparalleled historical event coming from governm= ents of diverse tendencies and from all regions of the world. Judging by the universality and speed of the reaction, it seems that first Latin Americans= and then all countries in the world, even developed countries, considered the c= oup in Honduras an experimental laboratory of secret forces that could be exten= ded to their own countries. Nazism and fascism are still in the collective memory. If allowed to succeed= , the Honduras coup could be the beginning of a neo-fascist wave against world democracy. =

Two premises    =

1. - In Latin America, it is unthi= nkable that the cou= p in Honduras could have occurred without support from the United States<= span lang=3DEN-GB style=3D'font-size:12.0pt;line-height:115%;font-family:"Times = New Roman","serif"; mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-farea= st-language: ES-NI'> military, intelligence or political apparatus. Even = more unthinkable is the idea that without U.S. support the illegal regime could = have so far resisted unanimous international and national pressure, to the point= of killing people, violating human rights or violently attacking a peaceful and defenceless rally. The unanimous and historical convergence of condemnation by all left, centre and right governments of the OAS and even more, of the 192 countries of the UN confirm so.

2. - The whole international community and in particular U.S. President Obama and Mrs. Clinton, the secretary of State, h= ave rejected the coup and soldier’s insubordination in Honduras. They have agreed that President Zelaya remains the legitimate president of Honduras. Besides, they have joined the world protest that demands Honduran president’s reinstatement and for the Generals and accomplices to be charged for their crimes. <= /span>

Two embarrassing questio= ns:

1. - Did President Obama and Secretary Hillary Clinton have prior knowledge of the c= oup and of the possible participation of civilians or of the military, political and intelligence structures from the USA? ... Did the president approve the operation as Ken= nedy approved the B= ay of Pigs invasion in Cuba? (3).... Did the American diplomats and soldiers in Honduras known about the impending coup? ... Did they take par= t in it or were informed?

2. If the US Americans = at any level knew about the coup beforehand, why did they not take steps to prevent it, to be consistent with the statements of President Obama and Sec= retary Clinton during the Vth Summit of the Americas Presidents in Trinidad and To= bago in April?

If the answer is "Yes, Obama and Clinton had prior knowledge&qu= ot;, then the international community was deceived and the Vth Summit of= the Americas was a ruse to pacify Latin American opinion, while the United Stat= es was preparing a clandestine political and military operation in Hondu= ras. This = is not just a coup in Honduras: it is a coup against all Latin American countr= ies; a military-political operation intended to reverse the progress made throug= h peaceful and democratic means underway in the whole continent. It threatens all civi= lian governments, whether of the left, the centre or the right. Nevertheless, ma= ny governments in Latin America are prepared to give President Obama the benef= it of doubt and prefer to think that this operation was prepared behind his ba= ck.

However, if the answer is "No", President Obama had no pri= or knowledge”, this would mean that there was illegal intervention within the USA of sinister forces in the political, military or intelligence apparatus, usurp= ing or commanding the powers and privileges of the U.S. President with respect = to the conduct of U.S. foreign policy, by attacking other democratic state such as Honduras,= a friend of USA, without the approval of the president (given the public denunciation of the coup of President Obama and Secretary Clinton). Worse still, this would imply the presence in the official state apparatus of the U.S. of subalterns --civil, military diplomatic or in intelligence-- insubordination to the President of the United States.

In either case, a serious violation of international and of U.S. law would have occurred. An investigation from the same "U.S. establishment" should be called for to determine guilt and correspondi= ng punishment, and to restore to the President Obama the power he acquired from the people of the United States in democratic elections. The same is necess= ary with President Zelaya in Honduras.

Consequences<= /span>

1. - It is, therefore, of the utmost importance to clear up this case. If there was U.S. involvement but President Obama was unaware of it, then there was a militar= y insubordination and a coup in Honduras and a kind insubordination or/and coup d̵= 7;état in the USA against President Obama; or even worse, a coup fro= m an alternative force or government in the shadows of that country, a for= ce with access to its military apparatus and maybe to its conventional weapons= and weapons of mass destruction. Such an alternative force would have the means to overthrow or blackmail any government in the world, or to imp= ose a new era of world neo-fascism control from the shadows: a situation that i= s a very serious danger for the international security.

2. – As a consequence, we would have: soldiers’ insubordination in Honduras, insubordination in USA and to = the presidential authority of two democratic governments whose presidents were elected by the people: a coup in Honduras and something similar that is in process in USA.

Five conclusions

1. <= /span>President Zelaya should be restored immediately and unconditionally = and those responsible for the coup should be punished. There should be no dialo= gue or mediation with the “de facto government” except for t= he purpose of carrying the OAS’s decision expressed by the clear mandate to its Secretary General Insulza. What is unacceptable is further delay, weakening, deviation or reversal of the OAS and UN decision. The international communi= ty must also demand that United States carry out an immediate, exhaustive and public investigation and determination of the involvement of U.S. civilians= or officials in the coup, or whether they encouraged or participated or even h= ad prior knowledge of it.

2. -= The events in Honduras= and the delay in implementing the demand of the entire Latin American and Carib= bean region to re-establish the constitutional order in that country, point to the need to consider the r= emoval of all U.S. military bases in the region, which are dangerous for its incip= ient democracies. This can be discussed in the framework of the RIO GROUP o= r of the OAS. =

3. -. A new= era of mutual respect should be promoted between the civilian/democratic governments of Latin America and the United States. Military dictatorships, open or sec= ret coups d’état, authoritarianisms, and manipulation of the rule = of law and of democracy should be proscribed.= Governments should be firm but prudent in their behaviour and their rhetoric in order to avoid unnecessary confrontation and conflicts. Re-e= lections or ‘continuism’ should be avoided where they are not supported = by the majority of the population expressed in a clean and transparent manner;= for they provide a pretext for destabilization and foreign intervention a= imed at reversing the democratic advances made in the region.

4. - Apart from what the Honduran citizens internally decide, those responsible for the coup and their accomplices should be internationally prosecuted and punishe= d by the world community. They = have jeopardised the other democracies in the continent and in the world, creati= ng a dangerous precedent that goes far beyond Honduras. The crimes committed are unacceptable and they should be held to account in whatever country to which they travel. They have damaged the vital security of other nations, above a= ll in Latin America and the Caribbean; and their exemplary punishment is imperati= ve to prevent coups d’état all over the world.

5. The unequal confrontation between Honduran civil society and the military is further demonstration that the people are defenceless in the fa= ce of coups d’état, military uprisings or authoritarian governmen= ts. A preventive, self-defence strategy should aim at strengthening civil socie= ty organizations and international solidarity so as to be able to act effectiv= ely in a crisis. This will discourage the willingness to infringe democracy, the institutional order and the state of rights and strengthen democratic governments against coups, authoritarianism and militarism. The defence also goes throughout the integration of Latin American and the Caribbean. What is behind the effort to impose a new era of d= ictatorships is the foreign control of the rich Latin American resources. We have entered a new era in the battle for Latin America, one which requires struggle on various fronts and in the most diverse scenarios.

Note: Readers are asked to circul= ate this document to other individuals, organizations and governments. It may be fre= ely reproduced with attribution to its original source www.observatoriodelacrisis.org.

             =             &nb= sp;_______________________________________________=

(1). - In the “José Soto Cano&q= uot; base is located the combined task force called "BRAVO", composed = of army’s troops, security and air force, and 1st battalion regiment No = 228 of the American aviation. It has 600 American troops, 18 HU-60, Black Hawk,= and CH-47 Chinook combat air units. The President of Honduras announced in May = 31^st, 2008, that it would be used for commercial flights and construction of a ci= vil facility financed with funds of the Bolivarian Alternatives for the Americas (ALBA). The oil reserve of the Patuka River was discussed with the ALBA. Th= is is the same area offered to the USA by a previous government (Maduro) to bu= ild another US military base in the Mosquitia area. In January 2009 President Zelaya sent a personal letter to President Obama complaining about interven= tionism and demanding that the new Administration respect the principle of non intervention. The head of the Air Force of Honduras, General PRICE SUAZO, studied and majored in the School of The Americas (<= st1:place w:st=3D"on">USA), in 1995. The General Ro= meo Vásquez, Chief of the Army and head of the coup is also graduated in= the same school, in the ‘80s. In the same years, OTTO REICH (Cuban member= of the Cuban- American National Foundation), Former vice-secretary of state for Latin America in the G.W. Bush Administration, OLIVER NORTH (Iran-Contras scandal), and JOHN DIMITRI NEGROPONTE (Ambassador of the USA and now in the= US State Department), all used the military base of PALMEROLA as a launching platform for destabilization of Nicaragua and the war of the ‘80s aga= inst this country. They are guilty of the killing of 70 thousand Nicaraguans and they are considered by Hondurans, the operators of the American military co= up in this country. OTTO REICH agreed with the coup in the American congress s= howing its responsibility and implication. Republican Senator JOHN McCain coordina= ted the reception of the representatives of the Honduran Coup D’ét= at in the US congress. (Read the US la= wyer Eva Golinger’s denunciation of the coup in ARGENPRESS.info- July 13th)

(2) After the coup in Honduras and follow= ing the same format, a judge presented accusations against president Evo Morale= s in Bolivia and then in the OAS.

(3) The invasion into the Bay of Pigs in = Cuba forced this country to get extra continental protection to defend its sovereignty. The consequence was the “Missile crisis in Cuba” w= hen the world was close to a thermonuclear war.