A victory for Zelaya in Foggy Bottom

Thu, 09/03/2009 - 4:42pm

As Laura Rozen reports today on The Cable, the State Department has announced it will cut aid to Honduras, contingent upon the return to office of ousted President Manuel Zelaya, with whom Secretary of State Hillary Clinton met today.

This might seem like a pretty standard move: military ousts government in coup -- U.S. cuts off funding. Far from it. Today's announcement comes after a long debate within Washington over exactly where to fall down on the issue -- one which I reported on early last month. On the one side are the majority of Latin American countries who have condemned Zelaya's ousting and called on the United States to do the same. But on the other side are the countless analysts and officials who point out that Zelaya was hardly a democrat. They claim that his ousting was not a coup but was in fact a product of Zelaya's own political mis-actions. The latter camp also argues that to side with Zelaya would be to hand a big victory to one of the Honduran leader's biggest allies in the region: Hugo Chávez of Venezuela. 

In short, the Zelaya question has come down to one of where Obama falls on the ideological debate in Latin America. If the administration backs Zelaya, as it looks to be doing, it will undoubtedly face criticism from Republican congressmen and senators who think defending U.S. interests in Latin America means standing firm against leftist leaders (like Zelaya) in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Nicaragua. But if Obama backed the now de facto government in place in Honduras, he would lose points from nearly all U.S. allies in Latin America -- not just Venezuela but others such as Argentina and Brazil as well.

The administration seems to be siding with the Latin American majority -- perhaps a nod to the idea that engagement with the region trumps ideological constraints.

But all this is to say nothing of the impact that the State Department's decision will have in Honduras, a country that stands to lose $22 million in U.S. aid and $200 million in funding from the Millennium Challenge Corporation. Honduras is also heavily dependent on the United States for trade, so Washington's words ring loud and forebodingly in Tegucigalpa. To say that the United States holds sway in Honduras would be a massive understatement. So revoking aid will put serious pressure on the de facto government, who was planning to hold elections later this fall to replace Zelaya.

This story is not over yet. And Washington will surely be a key player.

Photo: JEWEL SAMAD/AFP/Getty Images

Elizabeth Dickinson | Permalink | | Comments? Login or register


Advertisement

 

Huh?

by Shackelford on Thu, 09/03/2009 - 11:27pm

"In short, the Zelaya question has come down to one of where Obama falls on the ideological debate in Latin America." This case is nothing of the sort. What Zelaya was doing was expressly prohibited by the Honduran constitution, and his arrest was at the request of the nation's supreme court. How is this anything except a legal action? Why are so called progressives so eager to carry water for this man?

The effortless way to custom

by arco on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 1:13am

The effortless way to custom writing
is to visit essay writing, where you might find any custom paper
you want.

further to Shackelford 's comment

by kfirmena on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 7:23am

Zelaya's son appeared on a US Hispanic TV Network, boarding a plane with Guzman, the Mexican drug lord who was recently captured.
There have been questions of Zelaya's ties to suspected drug traffic originating from the Colombian, Venezuelan border.

I hope the state Department is just waiting for elections to take place in the fall, and have the case filed away a unresolved

Avoiding obvious hypocrisy

by Curious observer on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 8:22am

I suspect the administration's reasoning came down to this: It can't throw Zelaya under the bus for doing more or less the same thing Alvaro Uribe is doing in Colombia.

No, the cases aren't identical, but they're close enough to open Washington up to charges of blatant hypocrisy by assorted Latin American rabble-rousers. Forced to choose, Obama is siding with Uribe and the drug war-industrial complex.

One is following constitutional procedure

by Shackelford on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 10:38am

Curious observer,
It is nowhere near similar circumstances. Zelaya wasn't arrested for trying to extend his own term limits. The Honduran constitution has clearly outlined procedures for amendment, which Zelaya was flaunting, and attempting to run a popular referendum that is expressly forbidden by the constitution itself.

While I don't support Uribe's efforts to extend his term, he is at least following his country's rule of law. There is a mile of difference between the two cases.

Ms. Dickenson- I'm not sure I

by stacyx on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 11:05am

Ms. Dickenson-

I'm not sure I have the same interpretation- as someone who thinks the State Dept should take a harder stance against the coup government, this recent action by the State Dept seems to be little more than a slap on the wrist and despite yesterday and today's headlines, not all that much aid has really been cut off when one looks at the overall amount Honduras receives via USAID, MCC etc.

Yesterday, the State Dept simply made 20-30 million dollars in suspended funds, permanent and some of that is dependent upon the MCC approving the withholding of upwards of 11 million as part of that amount. In other words, no NEW funds have been withheld from the coup govt, despite MSM headlines to the contrary.

People keep saying that Honduras *possibly* stands to lose up to 200 million but nothing could be further from the truth at this stage- there is not the slightest inclination from the State Dept that the approx. 200 million will EVER be touched and of course, once again, it would depend, in part, on a determination (ie. vote) of the MCC. Given the State Dept's reluctance, both on and off the record, to discuss these OTHER funds which constitute the bulk of aid to Honduras, it's difficult to reach the conclusion that Honduras/Micheletti "better be careful or else..."

Given that the US suspended this approx. 20+ million (in addition to working on suspending Visas of Micheletti supporters) weeks ago and the response from the coup govt since then has essentially been, "big deal, keep your 20 million" it's difficult for me to see how exactly this is a) sending Micheletti any kind of "strong message" as the State Dept. keeps telling us and b) serves as any significant deterrent against other countries taking part in a coup d'etat to remove leaders they don't like because the entire world is watching the US drag it's feet with respect to declaring the coup a military coup and also watching the US continue to funnel significant amounts of money to the coup regime.

The US is "urging" democratic elections in Honduras but if Zelaya isn't allowed back in the country and the coup govt is allowed to get away with this, how exactly are the elections going to be untainted and what exactly, will the US do in response given how painfully hesitant it has been to take very vocal, firm action against the coup govt all along?

***************************
Secretary Clinton Blog

You're not answering the question

by Shackelford on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 11:48am

Stacyx,
How is it a coup if it was at the request of the country's Supreme Court? Zelaya was attempting to lengthen his term limits through illegal elections and not through the proper procedures for amending the constitution as laid out in the constitution. It was a blatent power grab, and if anyone is conducting a coup, it is Zelaya, and not the other two branches of his government, which were simply attempting to make him follow the rule of law.

You read me wrong

by Curious observer on Fri, 09/04/2009 - 12:43pm

Shackelford, I wasn't asserting equivalence between Zelaya and Uribe, only the perception among LatAm leftists that a stance against Zelaya by Washington would be hypocritical.

Clearly Team Obama is telling those folks "we hear you" in the interest of shutting them up (for a while, anyway) lest it get in the way of pursuing Plan Colombia into perpetuity.