The Other 9/11 Has Returned to Stalk Latin America
The ghost of the other, deadlier 9/11 has returned to stalk Latin America. On Sunday morning, a battalion of soldiers rammed their way into the Presidential Palace in Honduras. They surrounded the bed where the democratically elected president, Manuel Zelaya, was sleeping, and jabbed their machine guns to his chest. They ordered him to get up and marched him onto a military plane. They dumped him in his pyjamas on a landing strip in Costa Rica and told him never to return to the country that freely chose him as their head of state.
Back home, the generals locked down the phone networks, the internet, and international TV channels, and announced their people were in charge now. Only sweet, empty music plays on the radio. Government ministers have been arrested and beaten. If you leave your home after 9pm, the population have been told, you risk being shot. Tanks and tear-gas are ranged against the protesters who have thronged onto the streets.
For the people of Latin America, this is a replay of their September 11th. On that day in Chile in 1973, Salvador Allende -- a peaceful democratic socialist who was steadily redistributing wealth to the poor majority -- was bombed from office and forced to commit suicide. He was replaced by a self-described "fascist," General Augusto Pinochet, who went on to "disappear" tens of thousands of innocent people. The coup was plotted in Washington D.C., by Henry Kissinger.
The official excuse for killing Chilean democracy was that Allende was a "communist." He was not. In fact, he was killed because he was threatening the interests of US and Chilean mega-corporations by shifting the country's wealth and land from them to its own people. When Salvador Allende's widow died last week, she seemed like a symbol from another age -- and then, a few days later, the coup came back.
Honduras is a small country in Central America with only seven million inhabitants, but it has been embarked on a programme of growing democracy of its own. In 2005, Zelaya ran promising to help the country's poor majority -- and he kept his word. He increased the minimum wage by 60 percent, saying sweatshops were no longer acceptable and "the rich must pay their share."
The tiny elite at the top -- who own 45 percent of the country's wealth -- are horrified. They are used to having Honduras run by them, for them.
But this wave of redistributing wealth to the population is washing over Latin America. In the barrios and favelas, I have seen how shanty-towns made out of mud and rusted tin now have doctors and teachers and subsidised supermarkets for the first time, because they elected leaders who have turned the spigot of oil money in their direction. In Venezuela, for example, the poorest half of the country has seen their incomes soar by 130 percent after inflation since they chose Hugo Chavez as their president, according to studies cited by the Nobel Prize-winning US economist Joseph Stiglitz. Infant mortality -- the number of dead babies -- has plummeted.
No wonder so many Latin American countries are inspired by this example: the notion that Chavez has to "bribe" or "brain-wash" people like Zelaya is bizarre.
It was always inevitable that the people at the top would fight back to preserve their unearned privilege. In 2002, the Venezuelan oligarchy conspired with the Bush administration in the kidnapping of Hugo Chavez. It was only a massive democratic uprising of the people that forced his return. Now they have tried the same in Honduras.
Yet the military-business nexus have invented a propaganda-excuse that is being eagerly repeated by dupes across the Western world. The generals claim they have toppled the democratically elected leader and arrested his ministers to save democracy.
Here's how it happened. Honduras has a constitution that was drawn up in 1982, by the oligarchy, under supervision from the outgoing military dictatorship. It states that the president can only serve only one term, while the military remains permanent and "independent" -- in order to ensure they remain the real power in the land.
Zelaya believed this was a block on democracy, and proposed a referendum to see if the people wanted to elect a constituent assembly to draw up a new constitution. It could curtail the power of the military, and perhaps allow the president to run for re-election. The Supreme Court, however, ruled that it is unconstitutional to hold a binding referendum within a year of a presidential election. So Zelaya proposed holding a non-binding referendum instead, just to gauge public opinion. This was perfectly legal. The military -- terrified of the verdict of the people -- then marched in with their guns.
The hypocrisy in Latin America about term limits is almost comic. When left-wingers like Chavez and Zelaya try -- democratically -- to repeal term limits, they are described as "dictators." Yet when right-wingers like President Alvaro Uribe in Colombia do exactly the same thing, the same people applaud him as "bold" and "brilliant."
But there has been progress since the days of 1973, or even 2002. The coups against Allende and Chavez were eagerly backed by the C.I.A. and White House. But this time, Barack Obama has said: "We believe the coup was not legal and that President Zelaya remains the president of Honduras." He called the coup "a terrible precedent".
His reaction hasn't been perfect: unlike France and Spain, he hasn't withdrawn the US Ambassador yet. He supports the International Monetary Fund and World Bank, which are vast brakes on Latin American democracy, and he bad-mouths Chavez while arming the genuinely abusive Colombian government. But it is a vast improvement on Bush and McCain, who would have been mistily chorusing "We are all Honduran Generals now."
The ugliest face of the Latin American oligarchy is now standing alone against the world, showing its contempt for democracy and for its own people. They are fighting to preserve the old continent where all the wealth goes to them at the end of a machine gun. I have seen the price for this: I have lived in the rubbish dumps of the continent, filled with dark-skinned scavenging children, while a few miles away there are suburbs that look like Beverley Hills strewn with white mansions and armed guards.
This weekend, Zelaya will return to the country that elected him, flanked by the presidents of Argentina and the Organisation of American States, to take his rightful place. Whether he succeeds or fails will tell us the children of the rubbish dumps have reason to hope -- and whether the smoke from the deadliest 9/11 has finally cleared.
Johann Hari is a writer for the Independent. To read more of his articles, click here . You can email him at johann -at- johannhari.com
To read Johann's interview with Hugo Chavez, click here.
To read Johann Hari's latest article for Slate magazine - about the life and death of the Asian babe - click here.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Although it's a bit late, I'd like to see the writer explain who these "same people" are that are for term limits in one case and against in another. I'm all for term limits in all cases. I think we need 1-term limits here in the US as most 2nd terms become swamped by fighting, personal attacks, controversy, malfeasance. But for congress as well. The difference between Colombia and Honduras is that Colombia wants to change the law legally and because there is massive agreement that Uribe is an unmatched force in changing Colombia for the better. But *should* they? Probably not. Let someone else step into the mantle. Uribe has massively wounded FARC and while the job is not done, someone else *can* continue the fight. Perhaps this is driven out of fear that someone else *won't*. In Honduras, the congress and supreme court was against it, most of the people are against it and Zelaya is one of the few for it. Going with the prevailing winds is one thing. Going against them, alone, is quite another. There was little to no support for Zelaya's second term or his attempts at changing the constitution. If there is any one person that can do the job of Uribe, there are thousands that can do the job of Zelaya. There is no doubt most Hondurans realize this.
It's inevitable. There will be democracy all over the Americas, even in the U.S. The members of the oligarchies could go out and find the best selling book, "Who Moved My Cheese?" and make the transition a whole lot easier on themselves.
"So Zelaya proposed holding a non-binding referendum instead, just to gauge public opinion. This was perfectly legal. The military -- terrified of the verdict of the people -- then marched in with their guns."
Didn't you skip the part where the Supreme Court ruled the "nonbinding" referendum was also illegal and ordered the ballots confiscated. Subsequently, Zelaya gathered up a large group of supporters and forcibly "recovered" the ballots by overrunning an air force base. Then he issued orders that all government employees MUST participate - and attempted to compel the military commander to do likewise. When the military commander refused, Zelaya tried to remove him which was also blocked by the supreme court.
I really don't know the whole truth, or the reality of Honduran law ... but it seems to me this account just omits any facts that don't match the desired frame.
"""""The tiny elite at the top -- who own 45 percent of the country's wealth -- are horrified. They are used to having Honduras run by them, for them.""""" This reads like wall street, big pharma, banks and insurance and others to me!
I can promise you that the people in Chile will not trust many of you in the future.
This is another classic example of capitalism (preferably unregulated) vs Socialism.
Countries that FEAR democracy, FEAR referendums.
When was the last time we Americans voted on a nationa referendum?
Get the point?
Obama has been brilliant in the geo-political chess game unfolding in LatAm. On one side, is the greatest geo-political chess player of LatAm (Castro) and on the otherside a brilliant young president who understands the third world. His measured response in immediately condemning the coup took the wind out Castro and Chavez's sail.
I've been to LatAm 70 times in the past 14 years. Castro and Chavez are heros. The Oligarchies do exist as they do here in the US. The US is runned by 400 families. LatAm probably has another 400 families. There has been much intermarriage with wealthy American and European families. So this is not just a rich LatAm problem. The World Bank and the IMF also contributed to this problem with their awful policies.
But the answer to LatAm poverty is Capitalism not communism. Castro destroyed Cuba, so Cuba cannot be the model. The people want clean water, education, health care and Liberty. Hopefully, Obama can lead them there without them resorting to communism.
Like him or not, this guy was democratically elected and the United States should not support the right wing goons who took over.
His same party is in charge; not the "right" as you mentioned.
Both Liberal and Nationalist parties - the two main revolving parties in power for over a century in this country - are mostly controlled by the same large oligarchical, land-owning families. Just as there are evil and corrupt people who claim they voted "Democrat" or claim they voted for Obama. Dirty tricks have become a little more sophisticated in modern times, that's all. But no one's fooled, sorry.
Latin America has suffered several years now of "Revolutions" that progressively have instituted a modernized version of a totallitarian state such as Cuba. From a formal standpoint, these are "democracies", but in reality, these are authoritrian regimes if not full-blown dictatorships like the one in lead by Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.
Democracies need to defend themselves from these actions. There is no democratic system of government that has survived - or even been created - by the pure poetic desires of their proponents. Democracies need to aggressively act to maintain themselves, and protect themselves from the advance of politically engineered viruses such as the "bolivarian revolution".
Curiously, the author never recognizes the wave of violence that Venezuelans suffer on a daily basis, where near 4,000 citizens are kidnapped per year, or where over 14,000 fall dead every year under the violence and crime that has not been controlled by Chavez, but instead promoted by his government.
Over 100,000 have died in Venezuela in the last 10 years by the street violence alone. That speaks for itself, and should simply make all these paid supporters of regimes such as Chavez' seem what they are: mercenaries of the pen.
pr.op.agan.da, nothing more.
That Allende committed suicide, that I will never accept. When the criminals entered guns blazing into La Moneda killing everyone. Then it was claimed that Allende was cornered and that he committed suicide.
Here's a question for all of you who seem to think that removing Zelaya was illegal even though he was sent packing because of his crimes against the Constitution of Honduras.
What would Obama and the White House say if Kim Jun IL of North Korea and Amadenejad of Iran were thrown out of office for similar crimes? After all, both of these men were "elected" by the people. What is the difference between throwing Zelaya out and these two? Per Obama, if all were democratically elected (elections by the people), then they all deserve to stay in office. Would Obama also say they deserved to stay in power because they were duly elected?
What do you think about this scenario?
That's an easy one: Kim Jun Il and Amadenejad were not democratically elected by their people.
To be fair, Amadenejad was brought to power in an election that was one of the most progressive in the middle east, but that isn't saying much because the region doesn't have a good democratic base. It was a sham election just like the last one.
And Kim simply inherited the throne of heaven from his dad.
So, if the militaries of these countries tossed out these guys, I am sure the Obama administration would be cautious because they would have to see if the new un-democratic leader was any better than the old one.
The case is totally different in Honduras. As the story states, Zelaya was ousted because he was attempting to get the constitution amended to allow for exactly the same thing we have in the US - a two term executive. And he was doing it through legal means.
Zelaya WAS elected by the people. This is recognized by all the governments in the world ...in case you can´t seem or don´t want to understand.
Oh, I know Zelaya was elected by the people but he was ousted for crimes against the Constitution and the Honduran constitution so states. But Amadenejad was elected by the people even if some think the election stank; the people still elected him. So he is a duly elected democratic President. I guess it's all moot anyway; those other two are still in power. But my point was why Obama would condemn Honduras' following the law as it is written, but possibly not for the pres of Iran. I'm truly sorry that you folks seem to think Zelaya didn't do anything wrong; he did. In Honduras, you cannot run twice and you can't cook the polls to do so. They took this very serious as everyone can see.
I do want you to know that the parades and peace marches throughout Honduras in support of his ouster were breathtaking to see. Signs and flags from all countries were everywhere. My favorite sign was this: Honduras: The Little Country That Could. Slowly, news videos are starting to surface in the States with proof that Honduras' Supreme Court followed the law. You can accept it or not, but living here I got to see all of the facts that you have.
Have a great 4th!
Here is a question for a question most muddled islandsox.
Where is the similarity between the practice of the Revolutionary Guard conducting all elections in Iran and the military in Honduras doing the same thing there. My answer is that it provides each organization the ability to fix the vote for their respective masters. The Revolutionary Guard is the enforcement branch of the Iranian theocratic police state, and the Honduran military has the potential of becoming the enforcement branch of a Honduran oligarchic police state. They've been there before.
What have you to gain by supporting a military coup in Honduras against an elected president and the placement by one fired commander of an Italo-Honduran as a puppet in his stead? Are you part of that small percentage of the 30% of the population that is not impoverished that is the oligarchy that runs the country and owns everything in it. Wasn't Zelaya part of that club too until he did the unforgivable and went populist and nativist?
Castro, Lula, Obama,Chavez, Evo, rules de region.
It beyond doubt that Zelaya was trying to usurp power.
It is beyond doubt that both Supreme Court and Congress ousted him out of power.
It is beyond question that military overreacted. As usual.
Let him come back and serve the reminder of his term on a promise to never run for President again.
That would be a Solomonic decision.
"It beyond doubt that Zelaya was trying to usurp power."
No, it is NOT. What is clear to me is that the supreme court was desperately acting to protect existing power centers now in place.
A "democracy" that does not allow its people to judge the validity of its constitution is no democracy at all.
And at the end of the day there is no sound reason to act against a president calling for a non-binding referrendum, unconstitutional or not.
just one more example of what John Perkins let everybody know in "Confessions of an Economic Hitman"
The George Washington University in Washington D.C., has great historical archives relating to the Chile plotting years. That can be found here:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB255/index.htm
That being said, I think, this article does a "Very Poor Job", in comparing and contrasting any relations between early 1970's Chile, with what is going on in Honduras.
Remember El Salvador?, where the tiny elite at the top -- who owned 99 percent of the country's wealth and land, were horrified in 1979 by what happened in Nicaragua, Thus an insurgency began and a 12 year Civil War in El Salvador, and true true, hellish deaths and destruction that many people still cannot fathom to this day. The list goes on in Central America - including Guatemala.
PLEASE CHECK IT OUT! El Mazote massacre; The Atlatl Battalion , armed and directed by CIA , attacked and murdered over two hundred persons , mostly women and children in a high mountain villiage in El Salvador. investigated by Dr Snow, forensic anthropologist.
WHERE IS THE CIA, MARINES AND UNITED FRUIT COMPANY WHEN YOU NEED THEM!
Right, Sept 11th 1973 Chile may not be the closest example to what has happened now in Honduras. I think the author chose that example because of the rhetorical punch of the event being a "Sept 11th", meaning a horrible occasion.
Excellent article MR. Hari. A a Central American (Costa Rica), I can only say how depressing it is to witness the events in Honduras. I have travelled through the region extensively and have also lived and worked in the US and Europe. For a citizen of any highly developed nation to understand the poverty, ignorance and corruption in LAtin america is UNFATHOMABLE. Yes many people in Honduras support the coup, they support it without fully knowing the manipulation by the elite-controlled media, the Catholic and -evangelical churches who naturally, side with the ruling class and who offer salvation and rewards...maybe not of this Earth but "true" salvation in heaven. Yes theyre affraid of "communisim, socialism" and any other term´which they don´t fully comprehend but nevertheless sounds evil to them because that is what they have been told to fear. Yet they must work for hunger wages...immigrate to other countries, usually illegally, suffer discrimination, exploitation etc. Yes many defend the very ruling class who don´t and never will alleviate their suffering .All this out of crushing ignorance. There is a double standard towards LA, counties like Holland or Denmark have for decades invested in the social and educational well being of all their citizens. If you do that in LA you´re labeled an evil communist.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
