According to press reports, so far the mediation of Costa Rican President Arias, encouraged by Secretary of State Clinton, has not produced any change in the refusal of the coup regime in Honduras to allow Honduras' democratically elected President Zelaya to resume his office. That's not surprising: the strategy of the de facto regime seems to be to try to run out the clock on Zelaya's term, as long as they can.
That's why it makes sense for the U.S., working together with the governments in the region, to continue to ratchet up pressure on the coup regime. Indeed, as Reuters reported:
On the eve of Thursday's talks, the U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa said Washington had suspended $16.5 million in military assistance programs to Honduras, and added an additional $180 million in U.S. aid could also be at risk.
One lever that the U.S. government has not publicly discussed using is trade sanctions. Simply beginning the discussion would increase pressure on the coup regime to stand down.
Trade agreements to which the U.S. and Honduras are signatory are unlikely to present any obstacle, because the coup regime in Honduras has no standing to press any claims on behalf of Honduras in any international body. No government in the world, including the United States, recognizes the coup regime as the legitimate government of Honduras. If anyone in Honduras wanted to press a claim, they would need the approval of President Zelaya.
Indeed, there is a powerful and recent precedent for ignoring any attempt by the coup regime to represent Honduras in any international body: that's what the members of the Organization of American States -- including the U.S. -- did last Saturday, when coup regime tried to withdraw Honduras from the OAS.
The OAS had given the coup regime a Saturday deadline for allowing the reinstatement of President Zelaya, or the OAS would suspend Honduras from membership. The coup regime tried to pre-empt the suspension by announcing Honduras' withdrawal from the OAS. The coup regime's announcement was ignored, and the OAS suspended Honduras.
So, if the U.S. imposed trade sanctions on the coup regime, and the coup regime tried to complain, the U.S. could simply ignore it, as it ignored the coup regime's complaint on Saturday. No government in the world, or international body, would take the coup regime's side; there is no government in the world that recognizes the coup regime as the legitimate government of Honduras.
Of course, the actual use of trade sanctions would raise justified concerns about who they will hurt, and the Obama Administration can -- and I'm sure they would -- take this into account when deploying this lever. The choices aren't "no trade sanctions" or "embargo." The Obama Administration could target imports or exports that would send a strong signal to the coup regime and its supporters in Honduras' economic elite that they will pay an increasing price for intransigence, while avoiding imports and exports that would significantly affect poor Hondurans.
Merely starting the discussion will increase the pressure on the coup regime -- so let the discussion begin. If the Obama Administration would simply announce that they are studying the possibility of trade sanctions, that would be a big step forward.
When Zelaya, last week, visited the Dominican Republic and its president at first I thought "what's up with that?"
Then I remembered that the Dominican Republic is part of the Central America Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA, which sometimes is called DR-CAFTA for that reason).
Zelaya has also visited the other member countries in these two weeks: Guatemala, El Salvador, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica. The DR visit was telling in that he likely also has CAFTA in mind as a tool to use here.
" On June 25th Zelaya issued a decree ordering all government employees to take part in the “Public Opinion Poll to convene a National Constitutional Assembly” , Decree PCM-020. The decree was published on Saturday on the official newspaper. With this event, Mister Zelaya triggered a constitutional protection that automatically removed him from office.
Constitutional assemblies are convened to write new constitutions. In Honduras, you have 365 articles that can be changed by Congress. When Zelaya published that decree to regulate an “opinion poll” about the possibility of convening a national assembly he acted against the unchangeable articles of the constitution that deal with the prohibition of reelecting a president and of extending his term. His actions showed intent.
That intent is sanctioned with the immediate removal of those involved in the action as stated in Article 239 of the Constitution which reads: “No citizen that has already served as head of the Executive Branch can be President or Vice-President. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those that support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in their functions and will be unable to hold any public office for a period of 10 years.” Notice that the rule speaks about intent and that it also says immediately –as in instant, as in no trial required, as in no impeachment needed."
Furthermore, if your argument is true, the coup "president" Roberto Micheletti would have violated it back in 1985 when he proposed the same.
There's a lot of disinformation coming out of the pro-coup side that has to be filed in the "big lie" category. Repeating such yarns over and over again do not make them true.
With all due respect please open your mind up and consider the facts. Everything was legal (arresting Zelaya), except taking him out of the country. This decision was taken because if Zelaya had remained arrested in Honduran territory bloodshed would probably have resulted.
Please refer to two cases that provided Hondurans with fear of this bloodshed:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124744094880829815.html
Next time you propose something as hurtful as TRADE sanctions, please make sure you there is no evidence to the contrary that what you call a coup is that and not something MUCH more complex like Zelaya's ouster was.
Asking for Zelaya's reinstatement would be asking for Hondurans to IGNORE their Constitution.
I really would like to know in what way this is not similar to what happened in Haiti, with the ouster of President Aristide.
"to provide professional education and training to eligible persons of the nations of the Western Hemisphere within the context of the democratic principles set forth in the Charter of the Organization of American States." Its "mission also includes fostering mutual knowledge, transparency, confidence, and cooperation by promoting democratic values; respect for human rights; and an understanding of U.S. customs and traditions. Specific subjects set by Congress include leadership development; counterdrug; peacekeeping; democratic sustainment; resource management; and disaster preparedness and relief planning. In every course offered, eight hours of democracy and human rights instruction is mandatory."
They should immediately extradite ex-President back to Honduras and place him in jail as per Supreme Court order to stand trial for treason.
At this point he is a suspected felon who must be placed in detention.
Most people don't know that his own party voted him out and an orderly and lawful succession has occurred. By the way, the new President, Micheletti is a leftist. He is the liberal leader of Congress.
Now if only U.S. could v'e done this facing Bush/Cheney constitutional violations.
Learn yankee.
But seriously, I find it the height of arrogance that foreign politicians trust this power grasping autocrat over the will of the people expressed by the Congress, Supreme Court, Attorney General and the Honduran Constitution.
Fact: Attorney General, Supreme Court, Congress and HIS OWN PARTY found Zelaya in serious violation of Honduran law and the Constitution.
The ONLY wrong thing done was to exile Zelaya, instead of imprisoning as per the Supreme Court order.
International politicians should become better acquainted with the case, instead of trusting CNN.
1 - Mel Zelaya?
or
2 - The institutions (including their elected, appointed, and civil servants) as defined by the Honduran constitution?
From what I can see, we (UN, OAS, Obama Administration) are supporting ONE MAN against the institutions of the Honduran government as defined by their CONSTITUTION. If we could force the Hondurans (by hook or by crook) to discard their current constitution and restore Zelaya to power would we have done right by the Honduran nation?
It is true that President Zelaya was democratically elected. It is also true that the members of the Honduran Legislature were democratically elected. The Honduran Supreme court was elected by the legislature. The constitution places limits on the actions of the President, and defines the conditions under which he should be removed. Should the President have unlimited power? Will that provide the most liberty and security to the Honduran people? --- No. We should support the legitimate government of Honduras as defined by the Honduran Constitution.
Zelaya ordered the General of the Joint Chiefs of the Army to distribute the election materials. The General stated he would not do so in violation of a court order; Zelaya fired him and ignored a Court ordered he be reinstated.
Zelaya stated he intended to continue in his course and the Court issued a warrant for his arrest.
After Zelaya was arrested, the constitutional successor was sworn in.
This brings me to my real concern with our position on Honduras. If we demand Honduras take Zelaya back as president despite Honduran law, we are stating that Honduran laws are not laws, but guidelines. That is, they are only laws until enough pressure can be applied to break them. This is an argument that "might makes right" and is contrary to our constitution's principle of "natural law." It will have been determined that Honduran laws are breakable by those with enough force (for Chavez, , for Zelaya, US pressure).
http://www.miamiherald.com/1506/story/1125872.html
It is analogous to the passengers in a car driven by a drunk driver dropping him off in a lot marked "No Tresspassing" and driving off (sober). The police pick up the drunk, chase down the car, and not only want them to take the drunk back in the car, but they want him to drive as well!
"So. When Honduras holds elections in November; are they still subject to these sanctions?"
Hopefully not - because hopefully the coup regime will be gone by then.
Existing US law says that when US aid is suspended under the Foreign Assistance Act due to a coup, it can be reinstated when the President certfies that a democratically elected government has taken power.
Also this atrocity is another sign the 'Last Empire' is finally losing control of it's Protectorates and new/old Colonies. American citizen's need apply as much complaint in recognition of destabelization by US-Corp-elite in this part of the world, such as Columbia being the last South American stronghold, and remind the US-Gov even Columbia are bringing their Death Squad "School of Assassins" to trial.