Honduran Crisis Reveals Obama's Skewed View of Democratic Processes
President Álvaro Uribe of Colombia is coming to Washington out of favor with President Obama. Despite the heroic job Uribe has done in cutting the FARC narco-terrorist organization down to size, rescuing hostages, combating crime in Colombian cities and reducing political violence, the American administration is unhappy that the very popular, pro-American, pro-free-trade president is considering how to run for a third term in a country with two-term limits.
This is the background to the removal of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya on Sunday. President Obama pronounced himself "deeply concerned" and Secretary Clinton said the president's arrest should be condemned. Hugo Chávez, Raúl Castro and Cristina Kirchner joined them in short order. Too fast; too pat.
Honduras has been stable since the early 1980s, mainly because the institutions of government were operating within the law represented by the constitution, the supreme court and the attorney general. Zelaya tried to overrule them all and paid.
Zelaya, a vocal ally of Chávez, had been pushing a public "referendum" to change the Honduran constitution to permit a president more than one term, although the constitution itself bars changes to some of its clauses - including the ban on multiple presidential terms. The Honduran supreme court had ruled the referendum illegal, a position supported by the country's attorney general and members of Zelaya's own political party. The Honduran Army refused the president's order to deliver ballot boxes for the vote. When it was clear that Zelaya intended to go ahead with the illegal referendum, the supreme court issued an order for the army to arrest him.
Zelaya's arrest cannot be seen as separate from the Venezuelan referenda that produced "constitutional changes" that gave Hugo Chávez more and longer presidential terms, making him the "legal" dictator of Venezuela with powers greater than any of his predecessors. The full-scale nationalization of industry and intimidation of labor leaders and whatever media has not been shut down or nationalized has made Chávez internally untouchable for at least the next 10 years, short of a popular overthrow. This is not democracy - nor is a Honduran referendum held over the objection of its supreme court.
And Venezuela's co-opting of democratic norms cannot be seen as separate from Iran's flagrant manipulation of the vote there. Countries with only the outer form of democratic elections and outer form of citizen participation have been exposed as dictatorships. Zelaya's just didn't get as far as he would have liked. Had he "won" the referendum Sunday, he would have been in a position to run for another (currently illegal) term in November's presidential election. He says he had no intention of running, but it's hard to believe he thwarted the rest of the governmental apparatus just to set up some possible unknown future Honduran president to run for a second term some other day.
The supreme court stepped in to prevent the illegal referendum. The army obeyed the court. The Honduran congress voted to oust Zelaya and has sworn in congressional leader Roberto Micheletti to serve the remainder of Zelaya's term. Micheletti belongs to Zelaya's Liberal Party, but opposed the president in the referendum.
This is really "inside baseball." It is Hondurans in a crisis of legitimate governance that has to be settled by Hondurans. President Obama should give the Honduran supreme court, attorney general, army and congress at least as much benefit of the doubt as he has given the mullahs who stole the Iranian election - and tell everyone else to stay out.
Instead, Mr. Obama is treating Honduras like a banana republic - assuming the worst of the military and the best of a ruler who shares his personal political proclivities.
|
No comments:
Post a Comment