As more news comes out about the "coup" in Honduras, I am inclined to give the benefit of the doubt to the current government that removed former President Zelaya from power.
Nobody disputes that Zelaya was trying to run an illegal referendum to allow himself to get re-elected President. The Honduran constitution does not allow a president to serve more than one term. As I understand it, that particular item in the constitution is not amendable in order to prevent the creation of a "President for Life" which is as big a problem in Latin American countries as military dictators.
Apparently, the Honduran courts and legislators decided that a president breaking the laws and trying to subvert their constitution and rule of law is someone no longer fit to hold office. They directed the military to arrest Zelaya and escort him out of the country. Perhaps, they should have just put him on trial, convicted him, and sent him to prison inside Honduras. The legislature elected an interim president to serve until after elections are held in November. This sounds more like a slightly disorderly removal from office for cause, and is definitely better than allowing Zelaya to establish a virtual dictatorship in order to maintain a facade of a legal, orderly process.
The day after our own Independence Day, we should respect the Honduran spirit of freedom that prompted members of their government to resist the tyrannical ambitions of their president and remove him from office. The world would be a better place if this happened more often.
Judging by the friends Zelaya keeps such as Ortega from Nicaragua, Castro from Cuba, and Chavez from Venezuela, we should not be seeking to return him to power. The last thing the United States needs is another Marxist dictator in our hemisphere.
As for the Organization of American States (OAS) putting pressure on Honduras, that is ridiculous for two reasons. First, the OAS does nothing when leftist dictators restrict civil rights, imprison people for political activity, and seize private property. This has become an issue for the OAS only because a leftist has been harmed. Second, the only country that has a major military and economic impact in the OAS is the United States, so US policy - or lack thereof - is a major driver of OAS policy.
It is obvious that Barak Obama has more support for anti-American dictators than for pro-American elected leaders. This has been made evident in the Middle East. Cuba, still under a dictatorship, is being admitted to the OAS. Chavez is greeted warmly by Obama. Also, the corrupt election and generally evil government in Iran has drawn only the mildest rebuke from Obama for rigging an election and gunning down protesters in the streets. The OAS would not be pressuring Honduras without support from the Obama administration, and Obama has not come out and said that a President of a republic trying to exceed his authority is not entitled to keep his office.
Apparently, Obama does not think that allowing left wing presidents who exceed their constitutional authority to be removed from office is a good precedent to set.
Nobody disputes that Zelaya was trying to run an illegal referendum to allow himself to get re-elected President. The Honduran constitution does not allow a president to serve more than one term. As I understand it, that particular item in the constitution is not amendable in order to prevent the creation of a "President for Life" which is as big a problem in Latin American countries as military dictators.
Apparently, the Honduran courts and legislators decided that a president breaking the laws and trying to subvert their constitution and rule of law is someone no longer fit to hold office. They directed the military to arrest Zelaya and escort him out of the country. Perhaps, they should have just put him on trial, convicted him, and sent him to prison inside Honduras. The legislature elected an interim president to serve until after elections are held in November. This sounds more like a slightly disorderly removal from office for cause, and is definitely better than allowing Zelaya to establish a virtual dictatorship in order to maintain a facade of a legal, orderly process.
The day after our own Independence Day, we should respect the Honduran spirit of freedom that prompted members of their government to resist the tyrannical ambitions of their president and remove him from office. The world would be a better place if this happened more often.
Judging by the friends Zelaya keeps such as Ortega from Nicaragua, Castro from Cuba, and Chavez from Venezuela, we should not be seeking to return him to power. The last thing the United States needs is another Marxist dictator in our hemisphere.
As for the Organization of American States (OAS) putting pressure on Honduras, that is ridiculous for two reasons. First, the OAS does nothing when leftist dictators restrict civil rights, imprison people for political activity, and seize private property. This has become an issue for the OAS only because a leftist has been harmed. Second, the only country that has a major military and economic impact in the OAS is the United States, so US policy - or lack thereof - is a major driver of OAS policy.
It is obvious that Barak Obama has more support for anti-American dictators than for pro-American elected leaders. This has been made evident in the Middle East. Cuba, still under a dictatorship, is being admitted to the OAS. Chavez is greeted warmly by Obama. Also, the corrupt election and generally evil government in Iran has drawn only the mildest rebuke from Obama for rigging an election and gunning down protesters in the streets. The OAS would not be pressuring Honduras without support from the Obama administration, and Obama has not come out and said that a President of a republic trying to exceed his authority is not entitled to keep his office.
Apparently, Obama does not think that allowing left wing presidents who exceed their constitutional authority to be removed from office is a good precedent to set.
Comments