Cynics like me will tell you that it really doesn't matter that much who's in the White House, but I'd wager to say that the Honduran coupsters and their opposition would tell you different.
Ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya met senior US officials on the sidelines of an Organization of American States meeting, on the eve of his departure Wednesday for Panama, US officials said.
The White House and the State Department said that the deposed leader met late Tuesday with Tom Shannon, US assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs and Dan Restrepo, the top Latin America advisor on the national security council.
"Shannon reiterated the US commitment to seeing a return to the constitutional order in Honduras," a US official said, of the meeting on the fringes of the OAS in Washington.
At the White House, spokesman Robert Gibbs noted the 72-hour deadline imposed by the OAS for Zelaya's reinstatement following a coup on Sunday.
The U.S. Ambassador to Honduras has announced our refusal to recognize any other government of Honduras: "we refuse to recognize any Government of Honduras other than the constitutionally legitimate government of President Zelaya."
RA: Yes, there are battalions placed in strategic zones across the country that don't allow protesters to travel, protesters against the coup. In the region of Quebracho, in the eastern part of the country, the military shot out the tires of eleven buses heading for Tegucigalpa.
They are recruiting young people, ages 12-30 for military service. We don't know what the purpose is, but they are inciting people saying there could be a war. They are also calling out reservists and persons retired from the armed forces... This is the situation we are seeing now.
There are some individuals from the military who want to talk to the popular movement but there is a decision on the part of the social movements that as long as constitutional order and democratic process is not reinstated, we cannot support or dialogue with people who form part of the coup in Honduras.
LC: There have been reports that some battalions have broken with the coup: Is this true? What is the position of the army?
RA: There are battalions that are refusing to repress the population and basically are against the coup, but they're not saying this publicly. We believe that it isn't the whole army that is against the people of Honduras, but the military command (Estado Mayor), in complicity with the groups holding de facto power who have carried out the coup. These are the sectors that oppose democratization and citizen participation in the country.
Andrew Sullivan has been running reports from Honduran supporters of the coup. Al Giordano claims these reports are coming from the oligarchy. More from Al in the full entry:
Andrew Sullivan has asked aloud for English-writing bloggers from Honduras to send him their reports. Sadly, what he’ll likely get is a mountain of the upper-class “oligarch diaspora” propaganda from those that are the overwhelming majority of that small minority of folks that speak English in or around Honduras. With the state of siege underway in Honduras, they’re making up every falsehood possible to defend an indefensible coup d’etat. We've beat these types when they've tried it before: reason and fact will prevail again. An all-out information war has exploded on the Internet. So if you’re able to translate important reports from Spanish and send them to Andrew, the very widely read blogger who does have good in him, maybe you can help unspin the propaganda. CC me on your missives if you like.
A lot of it will be from Honduran equivalents of disgraced professional simulator Francisco Toro, the Venezuelan 2002 coup supporter who wrote a decrepitly dishonest essay published by The New Republic today about Honduras. The cockroaches are coming out of the woodwork. Sunlight, now as ever, will be our disinfectant! In 2003, when Narco News was exposing Toro’s undisclosed conflicts-of-interest as a member of the Venezuelan opposition while writing for the New York Times, he abruptly resigned after just one month as a Timesman. Now that there’s a coup to support in Honduras, he’s baaaaaack. Memo to The New Republic: Did Toro disclose his history of undisclosed conflicts of interest when submitting that embarrassingly pro-coup screed?
Today in Honduras, various important things happened. The illegitimate “president,” Roberto Micheletti, convened a rally (see photo above) where he stood side by side with the military general that led the violent coup. So much for the spin that the generals handed over the reins to civilian authorities: the coup has expanded their power vastly. The pro-coup event generated a decent sized – but not all that impressive considering all the power at its command - crowd. Employees of pro-coup businesses were forced to attend, and bussed in. Anyone who saw it on TV could tell it was not grassroots, but Astroturf: they had clean little Honduran flags and very few homemade signs. And compare the lily white gang on that stage with any other photo of the Honduran population! It was the "escualidos" all over again, Honduras chapter.
Meanwhile, watch this video of what his troops were doing to the media while he launched his campaign to deny that he had committed a coup:
most reports have stated that Manuel Zelaya was ousted from his country’s presidency after he tried to carry out a non-binding referendum to extend his term in office. But this is not completely accurate. Such presentation of “facts” merely contributes to legitimizing the propaganda, which is being employed by the coup-makers in Honduras to justify their actions. This interpretation is widespread in US-American liberal environments, especially after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the coup is unacceptable, but that “all parties have a responsibility to address the underlying problems that led to [Sunday]’s events.” However, President Zelaya cannot be held responsible for this flagrant violation of the Honduran democratic institutions that he has tried to expand. This is what has actually happened:
The Honduran Supreme Court of Justice, Attorney General, National Congress, Armed Forces and Supreme Electoral Tribunal have all falsely accused Manuel Zelaya of attempting a referendum to extend his term in office.
According to Honduran law, this attempt would be illegal. Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution clearly states that persons, who have served as presidents, cannot be presidential candidates again. The same article also states that public officials who breach this article, as well as those that help them, directly or indirectly, will automatically lose their immunity and are subject to persecution by law. Additionally, articles 374 and 5 of the Honduran Constitution of 1982 (with amendments of 2005), clearly state that: “it is not possible to reform the Constitution regarding matters about the form of government, presidential periods, re-election and Honduran territory”, and that “reforms to article 374 of this Constitution are not subject to referendum.”
Nevertheless, this is far from what President Zelaya attempted to do in Honduras the past Sunday and which the Honduran political/military elites disliked so much. President Zelaya intended to perform a non-binding public consultation, about the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly. To do this, he invoked article 5 of the Honduran “Civil Participation Act” of 2006. According to this act, all public functionaries can perform non-binding public consultations to inquire what the population thinks about policy measures. This act was approved by the National Congress and it was not contested by the Supreme Court of Justice, when it was published in the Official Paper of 2006. That is, until the president of the republic employed it in a manner that was not amicable to the interests of the members of these institutions.
Furthermore, the Honduran Constitution says nothing against the conformation of an elected National Constituent Assembly, with the mandate to draw up a completely new constitution, which the Honduran public would need to approve. Such a popular participatory process would bypass the current liberal democratic one specified in article 373 of the current constitution, in which the National Congress has to approve with 2/3 of the votes, any reform to the 1982 Constitution, excluding reforms to articles 239 and 374. This means that a perfectly legal National Constituent Assembly would have a greater mandate and fewer limitations than the National Congress, because such a National Constituent Assembly would not be reforming the Constitution, but re-writing it. The National Constituent Assembly’s mandate would come directly from the Honduran people, who would have to approve the new draft for a constitution, unlike constitutional amendments that only need 2/3 of the votes in Congress. This popular constitution would be more democratic and it would contrast with the current 1982 Constitution, which was the product of a context characterized by counter-insurgency policies supported by the US-government, civil façade military governments and undemocratic policies. In opposition to other legal systems in the Central American region that (directly or indirectly) participated in the civil wars of the 1980s, the Honduran one has not been deeply affected by peace agreements and a subsequent reformation of the role played by the Armed Forces.