As someone who has followed the Honduran crisis closely, I take issue with this statement:

"Yes, Zelaya is constitutionally barred from running but the inevitable chaos of the next few weeks could give him the opportunity to delay the vote or justify his own candidacy as a bid to restore national unity. Zelaya's desire to run again was, after all, what set this crisis in motion. "

Do you have any proof that Zelaya actually was trying to run in the election, beyond the paranoid rhetoric of his opponents and the spurious reporting of the US media? Zelaya (who I have serious problems with nonetheless) has been consistent in his denial of this. I've seen this claim repeated, but never, not ONCE, actually backed up by a fully contextualized quote / document from Zelaya or his administration.

Zelaya's goal was the creation of a Constitutional Assembly that would amend the pathetic 1982 Constitution (called "the worst in the world" by Oscar Arias) through popular referendum. Even if he was trying to run again, the process he was designing would have required that the June 28 poll show a plurality of support, that Congress approve the referendum process, that the referendum pass, that the Assembly voted to change term limits, and that the final amendments pass through yet another round of congressional approval and popular referendum. Only at that point would Zelaya be able to run for office again, but the whole scenario playing out would have been not only unlikely but also at least a couple of years away. And remember, this is IF Zelaya really was interested in another term as president.

To suggest that it was Zelaya's "desire to run again" that started the crisis is most likely false, but more importantly it's highly simplistic. Zelaya had done a lot to rankle the political establishment - creating economic alliances with Cuba and Venezuela, raising the minimum wage, courting feminist groups - even before the "Constituyente" was making headlines. To ignore these points of tensions as a factor in his ouster is in my opinion a disservice to serious political analysis. If FP genuinely believes the claims about re-election - which are indeed controversial - it owes it to us readers to provide the proof that they are legit.

That being said, I do share the cautious attitude you have towards this current "solution" that's been signed. Let's hope that Honduras' political establishment is wise enough to begin the process of changing the constitution after the election; if not, more crises await down the line.

Zelaya's goal was the creation of a Constitutional Assembly that would amend the pathetic 1982 Constitution (called "the worst in the world" by Oscar Arias) through popular referendum.

You mean the Constitution that's just so pathetic that they chose to amend it more than twenty times rather than simply throwing it out and doing another one? Don't make me laugh. They've had nearly three decades to throw out the Constitution and haven't done so.

And remember, this is IF Zelaya really was interested in another term as president.

He cared enough about that referendum to have his followers commit mob action to break into the governmental offices and illegally distribute the ballots for it. If he really weren't so interested in such a thing, why would he go to that much trouble?

"You mean the Constitution that's just so pathetic that they chose to amend it more than twenty times rather than simply throwing it out and doing another one? Don't make me laugh."

How many amendments has the US constitution had? The Honduran constitution is rather peculiar by our standards, for sure. Some of these peculiarities are hard to explain. Others are rooted in the history that preceded its creation, which might not be a bad topic for Brett to study before making such sweeping statements.

He cared enough about that referendum to have his followers commit mob action to break into the governmental offices and illegally distribute the ballots for it. If he really weren't so interested in such a thing, why would he go to that much trouble?
Burr Coffee Grinders

ComeOn!

"You mean the Constitution that's just so pathetic that they chose to amend it more than twenty times rather than simply throwing it out and doing another one? Don't make me laugh. They've had nearly three decades to throw out the Constitution and haven't done so."

You're conflating the two opposing camps into a single pronoun "they". There is no medium for the entire population of Honduras (the group ultimately at stake here) to "throw out" the constitution. I can accept that the political establishment in Honduras has not taken the opportunity to trash the document, but that's because it's not in their interest. Constitutions, almost by definition, protect the interests of those who write them. The 1982 Constitution was written by businessmen, military leaders, and figures in the political establishment (including, in a very minor role, Micheletti).

The reason that calls for a new constitution have gained so much momentum is precisely because it is only these groups - and the United States - that are well-served by the constitution. The document excludes right for women and indigenous groups, assumes a permanent "banana-republic" slave economy and all the attendant perks for the business sector, and is so riddled with legal contradictions that it's surprising this sort of crisis has not been commonplace (or perhaps just a testament to the continuity of control over the country exercised by elites). The excluded groups, the poor, and those who don't tolerate what essentially amounts to a colonial model of growth have all been seething for some time, but only now, a generation removed from the violent 1980's, is the intersection of courage and numbers great enough for them to challenge the established order.

Your logic would argue against women's suffrage in early 20th century America on the basis that "they've had over 100 years to change the law". This ignores that women had no leverage to change the law, just like the poor Hondurans have no leverage to change the constitution to better protect their rights. Indeed, women gained the right to vote because they organized and challenged the established order. The relationship between constituent rebellion and constitutions is what allows societies to evolves. Constitutions by themselves arrogantly assume their own infallibility.

"He cared enough about that referendum to have his followers commit mob action to break into the governmental offices and illegally distribute the ballots for it. If he really weren't so interested in such a thing, why would he go to that much trouble?"

The "mob-action" you speak of was indeed a challenge to the constituted powers. I wouldn't argue against that; the military establishment barked, but Zelaya and the social movements barked back. I'll raise three other points:

1) Another supreme example of Honduras' constitutional problems is the fact that the military controls elections. The June 28 poll amounted to an opinion poll. It was non-binding, and if Gallup data from the summer is to be believed, people would actually have voted DOWN the poll had it happened. It would not have created a scandal if political life was not so militarized in Honduras.

2) It seems as though you're more concerned about militant actions that threaten the established constitutional order than you are about military actions that actually inflict violence on the population. This Hobbesian sentiment should be dead in the 21st Century; I can accept that you feel this way, but it's disturbing nonetheless.

3) You did not even address my main point. I don't dispute that Zelaya was willing to take severe steps because he wanted the referendum. The point was that re-election wasn't really on his agenda as far as the Constituyente goes. Are you making the assumption that Zelaya only would have supported a Constitutional Assembly if it allowed him to extend term limits? Even if you are going to assume that Zelaya's interest in the Assembly was selfish, I think the stronger argument is that he always wanted to be remembered as the guy who pushed for the Assembly; to suggest it was about term limits or becoming president-for-life would be playing into the fears of Honduras' ruling class, not engaging in factual analysis.

Bret sounds like Goebbels: White becomes black, and a democratically elected president thrown out of office is not a coup!

You ask: Why did Zelaya work within the existing constitution? Do you mean that people who don't agree with a constitution should not work within that constitution and thus exclude themselves from influence?

Democracy is yet to arrive to Honduras where 10 families control the economy along with the US, the press is the hostage of power groups which supported the coup. A constitutional amendment could well be a first step

I live in Venezuela and I know what is to have a President who violates the constitution. Some people may believe that Honduras has a bad constitution, that few families control the economy and whatever, but it is their constitution and the rule of law passes through it. Zelaya broke the law and therefore he was called for trial by the Supreme Court. The same thing happened in Venezuela and President Carlos Andres Perez was ousted 1987). In Honduras the military team ordered to capture President Zelaya, believed that given the background, it would be safer to take him to a third country (Costa Rica)and avoid a possible blodshed (terrible mistake). And know the OAS and the whole world is pressuring Honduras, a tiny and peacefull country to accept back a dictator, supress the elected ( by congress) of the interinm president (Micheleti). If now, there is a real blodshed, those who pressed Honduras government to back up will be guilty for it ( as they are guilty for not paying attention timely to the Darfur case )

BJ's Restaurants links of london . Management might be tempted to belly up and drown cheap links of london their sorrows, links of london jewellery since the majority of this chain's 89 restaurants are in links of london jewelry deep-recession states like California, Arizona, links of london sale and Florida. links london But the company's homemade ales, links london jewelry Chicago-style pizza, link of london Olive Garden. links of london Charms More food for less money hits the sweet spot these days, links of london Charm which makes the family-style portions at this casual Italian chain a hit with diners. links of london Necklaces Olive Garden is a division of Darden Restaurants, links london Necklace which also operates Red Lobster, links of london Bracelets Longhorn Steakhouse, links london Bracelet and a few smaller chains. links of london Sweetie Bracelets Olive Garden has been the best performer of the bunch, links london Sweetie Bracelet with same-store sales down slightly but overall sales up, links of london Friendship Bracelets thanks to about 35 new outlets that have opened over the past year. links london Friendship Bracelet That helped boost overall earnings for the company by 15 percent in the most recent quarter links of london Sweetie Watches