Why Honduras Matters

Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya (Agencia Brasil)
Honduras is the original “Banana Republic.” If this coup doesn’t go away soon, it will once more be a Banana Republic.
The American writer O. Henry coined the term in an early 1900s book of interlinked short stories called Cabbages and Kings, set in a fictional Central American country named Anchuria.
Anchuria is Honduras—a backwater bedeviled by incompetent governments and thick with political conspiracies.
Honduras, from its very beginnings as a Spanish colony, was a laboratory for political skullduggery and state-sponsored murder. Founded as a colony by men ostensibly loyal to Hernán Cortés, the conquistador of Mexico, it quickly became a quagmire.
In the mid 1520s, word reached Cortés in Mexico that his subordinate Capt. Olid, sent to colonize Honduras, had staged a rebellion and declared Honduras an independent kingdom—arguably the first sovereign political entity in the Americas.
Cortés promptly organized an expedition to smash Capt. Olid’s upstart government, but by the time Cortés had slogged through hundreds of miles of jaguar-infested jungle, Olid already had been stabbed to death. A soldier loyal to Cortés, a certain Las Casas, had escaped from prison and dispatched Olid in a bloody duel.
Nearly 500 years later, Honduras is still repeating this history of tropical instability. On Sunday, word raced around the world that democratically elected left-leaning president Manuel Zelaya had been deposed in a military coup. A longtime legislator and local entrepreneur of Italian descent, Roberto Micheletti, was selected to replace him.
It seems like a flashback, improbable, that a coup would occur now in Central America. After all, Honduras has been democratic for over 25 years. Is this Latin America’s last coup?
Perhaps in future history books current de-facto President Micheletti will be regarded as the last Capt. Olid, the last politician to grab power by force in Honduras. Or maybe history will repeat itself again and again, and Honduras will continue its cycle of politics dictated by blade and bullet.
Sociologically it’s primed for instability. Honduras has one of the worst unemployment rates in the world: about 30 percent. Economic inequality is dramatic: the wealthiest 10 percent of the population control over 40 percent of the wealth. Two out of five workers labor in agriculture: mostly coffee and bananas, unreliable commodity crops dependent on prices set by traders in wealthy countries.
It’s a combustible mix of statistics, and yet geopolitically Honduras is a lynchpin. It borders a trio of nations with a bloody history: Nicaragua, El Salvador, and Guatemala. All these countries were Cold War battlefields. And Honduras became a staging ground for revolutionaries and counter-revolutionaries. Meanwhile, CIA station chiefs in the capital Tegucigalpa acted as de-facto National Security Advisers to brutal pro-U.S. governments.
Honduras matters because it is the keystone country in Central America. If the U.S. and other international actors so much as tolerate the coup that brought Micheletti to power, the die will be cast.
If Micheletti is not forced out by international pressure, and Zelaya reinstated as soon as possible, neighboring governments will be put on notice: the whims of military leaders and backroom politicking might at any time usher them out of power at the end of a gun.
Fortunately, the Organization of American States has given Micheletti 72 hours to step down, and the United States, France, Spain– as well as all of Latin America– have refused to recognize his post-coup government.
When Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was taken from his house by soldiers and put on a plane to Costa Rica, he was still in pajamas.
In a single day—his country’s democracy regressed to the wearing of diapers.

Post Your Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment
T/S Members
Log in with your True/Slant account.
















This article is on the Slant side of this site. You are way off on this one. Zelaya, a Chavez puppet, was acting illegally, in violation of the constitution he was sworn to protect. In order to make himself el Presidente for life, he was pushing an illegal referendum with ballots illegally printed in Venezuela and distributed illegally to polling stations. Catch the drift? Zelaya was trying to subvert the constitution. The Supreme Court, military and congress acted to protect the constitution they were sworn to uphold. The reason Chavez, Castro and Obama are all outraged is that they all have done or are trying to subvert the constitutions they were sworn to uphold in order to shore up their egotistical drive for power. Get it right.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124640649700876791.html
In what ways is that editorial factually incorrect? Or is the allegation that the Supreme Court of Honduras somehow in the pocket of the military, along with the Congress, as well as his own party?
Or was the ‘coup’ just an error of style, an unpleasant and premature reaction, where the ‘correct’ way to go should have been via congressional impeachment proceedings or official arrest during normal business hours?
Thanks for the second, thoughtful comment … I think it’s the latter argument, which I am going to post about today. While the Supreme Court had indeed ruled against the ballot the deposed president wished to press forward with, a crisis of this sort, pitting two branches of the government against the presidency, does not justify the response of a coup.
Imagine if, in the 19th Century, the U.S. Supreme court and the military had deposed President Andrew Jackson after he defied the court’s rulings (which he did). Perhaps U.S. history may have turned out differently?
The correct way to deal with the crisis would have been a political solution. Perhaps it would have taken time, but that’s the only way to maintain the integrity of a democracy. Now, with the coup, 25 years of continuous Honduran democracy have been undone.