In the 1960’s and 1970’s Latin America was known for its wavering democratic stability and for violent or repressive dictatorships that reigned in 15 of 21 countries.¹ In several cases, the United States was called out as an instigator and covert supporter of these coups and dictators. 

Democratically elected governments have slowly become the norm again for Latin America; often resulting in leftist leaders being elected to power. 

Manuel Zelaya

There was an abrupt and surprising break from this re-emerging precedence when the Honduran military entered the home of democratically elected president Manuel Zelaya on June 28, 2009.  Zelaya was removed from the presidential residence and flown to Costa Rica in the middle of the night.  He was then replaced by an interim government headed by Roberto Michiletti.² Michiletti is a Zelaya oppositionist who condemns the president for misappropriations of power, specifically citing the president’s referendum to change the Honduran Constitution despite court rulings against it.

Background

Honduras is a democratic republic in the middle of Central America that gained independence from Spain in 1821.  It is a Spanish-speaking country bordered by Nicaragua, Guatemala and El Salvador.  The country’s modern history is intertwined with the U.S.-Latin American policies of the 1960’s and 1970’s.  Honduras was used as a base camp for CIA training of coup fighters, and many Honduran soldiers were trained at the controversial School of the Americas. 

This is not the first time that Honduras has endured a military coup.  In 1963, a similar attack was mounted on the government leading to a military authoritarian regime that lasted until 1981.  Michiletti’s takeover, however, is the first successful coup in Latin America since the end of the Cold War.

Roberto Micheletti has accused Zelaya of 18 counts of treason and refusal to implement 80 laws passed by the Honduran Congress since 2006.³  Disapproval surfaced because of Zelaya’s move to implement more socialist policies in Honduras.  Upper class Hondurans, like Michiletti, see Zelaya as a puppet of Venezuela’s President Chavez.  The tipping point for the government and army came when Zelaya tried to have a public vote to change constitutional term limits, possibly to allow for his re-election.⁴

What Has Happened Since Zelaya Left

Roberto Michiletti has taken command of the army and was sworn-in as the official president by Parliament and the Supreme Court in Honduras.  There have been massive protests by both supporters, and opponents of Michiletti, but he has refused to step down and will not negotiate until “things calm down.”⁵  

On July 6, 2009 Zelaya made his first attempt to re-enter the country, flying in from Venezuela with the presidents of Ecuador, Paraguay, Argentina, the UN General Assembly and the secretary-general of the Organization of American States (OAS).  Michiletti made the claim that the ousted president would not be allowed to enter Honduran airspace, but Zelaya attempted to land as a show of his power and rights as a Honduran citizen.  All runways in the Tegucigalpa airport were blocked by soldiers now loyal to Michiletti.⁶  

This act by Zelaya also led to the bloodiest day since the coup on June 28th because protesters who stormed the airport fences were fired upon by soldiers.  At least one man was killed and 30 others injured in the struggle to quell the protesters.   In the end, Zelaya was unable to land, but promised in interviews with Telesur, the leftist Venezuelan television channel, to try again soon.⁷

International Response

The international response to the Honduran crisis has been somewhat of a surprise, especially the United States’ response to Michiletti.  Much of Latin America, the U.S. and the EU called for an immediate re-instatement of President Zelaya saying the coup was “illegal” and set the “terrible precedent” for maturing Latin American democracies.⁸  

In similar power struggles or military coup d’etats the international response has been a request for the government to call immediate elections.  Because the international community has taken the more unprecedented approach of supporting the return of Zelaya to power, they must be willing to come down hard economically on Honduras to hurt Michiletti.

Some Latin American experts say economic sanctions are the most feasible method to end the military-backed government.  This is the line taken by more active members of the OAS, like Nicaragua and Venezuela.  The United States and Canada, on the other hand, are more willing to open negotiations with Zelaya’s ousters. 

Several countries have withdrawn their ambassadors, and the Honduras’s border countries have halted cross-border commerce for the time being.⁹ The OAS has suspended Honduras’s membership until the democratically elected president is restored to power.  Michiletti, in response, promises that Zelaya will not finish out his term as president, which was to end in January.¹⁰  

Michiletti commented that he was willing to negotiate with the OAS, but the organization has taken a hard line against contact with him.¹¹ Beginning July 7, 2009 the OAS officially allowed communication to take place between diplomats and the de facto government. 

The United States, having significant power to sanction Honduras, met with Zelaya after several days of silence on the matter.  Secretary of State, Hilary Clinton, returned from the first meeting with Zelaya with a promise of negotiations between Michiletti and Zelaya.¹²   These negotiations seem promising for a possible reconciliation of the issues that began the coup, as both parties have publicly stated their desire now to negotiate face to face.  It does not, however, mean the re-instatement of the Zelaya government.  Secretary of State Clinton was sure not allude to such a possibility in her announcement of the talks.¹³

Negotiations that have occurred between the de facto leader and ousted leader are a positive sign even though little progress has been made so far.  There is confidence the use of Oscar Arias Sanchez, president of Costa Rica, as mediator will help move the talks forward quickly.  He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1987 for his peace negotiations in Central America, and began setting the stage for these negotiations when it was clear the OAS’s stance toward Michiletti was further hardening each side’s resolve.

What It Means For Latin America

This coup is a step back from the progress that much of Central America has made since the late 1980’s and early 1990’s to bring democratic reform to previously oppressive governments.  It is demonstrably problematic because there are democratic measures that could have been taken to end Zelaya’s presidency.  Impeachment is a democratic institution by the OAS and the Honduran Constitution as an appropriate response to leaders who do not act in accordance with the nation’s laws. 

Zelaya has the majority of global leaders to back him in his efforts to return to power, but that does not signify an end to the coup.  The military supports Michiletti, which puts Zelaya at a huge disadvantage when trying to regain power and legitimacy in Honduras.  Many of the Hondurans are glad to see Zelaya gone.  The protests that have occurred since the coup have been equally large in favor and against the new interim government.  If Zelaya has little popular support in the nation to return the backing of world leaders will not help in the long run.

Even though negotiations may not mean Zelaya will stay in power, the agreement to meet suggests democratic progress has been made since the days of dictators.  Zelaya’s acceptance of new elections, rather than re-instatement, will be critical to peace in Honduras if this is the solution that comes to the table in the next days

Bringing calm back to Honduras is more crucial to the public than which politician is chosen to lead a corrupted system.¹⁴  Citizens have already been threatened, hurt and even killed by soldiers, so the legitimacy of either government or an end to unrest will come with lessened military presence in the streets.  Hondurans and other Central Americans have already endured military dictators, so a return to this type of situation will be loudly decried by many.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/compartuser/3693910209/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/36569061@N04/3682687307/