The Real Banana Republic

On the morning of June 29, the president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, was abruptly rousted out of bed by soldiers who had rushed the presidential palace, and was put on a plane headed to Costa Rica. This effectively put into motion what the world immediately deemed a military coup and unanimously condemned as a threat to democracy. But while the world and institutions like the Organization of American States seem rather eager to jump to conclusions about the illegality of the deposition of Zelaya, let's back up and take a look at the tensions that led to such an ultimatum.

Previously, Zelaya had attempted to push a referendum seeking to amend the Constitution's limit of a single four-year presidential term. A revision would most pointedly allow Zelaya to extend his own presidential stay for an additional four more years. Given Honduras' past history of military coups and dictatorships, the Constitutional clause providing for the single term is understandably stringent. Furthermore, Zelaya has stirred signficant concern over the years for his dangerously chummy relationship with Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, who himself has campaigned to transform Venezuelan society along severely socialist lines and in 2007 publicly sought to change Venezuela's Constitution to allow for his lifetime presidential reelection. Chavez has been in power since 1998.

Additionally, Zelaya has done a rather sub-par job as the Honduran Chief of State, and quite frankly, sub-par is a diplomatic term for mind-bogglingly inadequate. His campaign platform included promises to crack down on gang violence, which has instead surged under his mismanagement. He has implemented measures like doubling the minimum wage; his means of demonstrating care for the poor, though in reality, such economic "aid" effectively increased unemployment to unaffordable rates in one of Latin America's poorest countries. His general lack of education, culture, and common sense have inspired consistent conduct considered embarrassing on international grounds and most critically, on the home front. I think it is safe to say that the majority of Hondurans who understand the implications of Zelaya's ignorance and lacking abilities oppose him and rightfully so.

Returning back to Zelaya's bid for revision, the Honduran Supreme Court rejected the referendum on the grounds of unconstitutionality, and Congress consequently followed suit shortly thereafter. Clearly unhappy with the results and further indignant at the army's refusal to help organize a vote, Zelaya fired armed forces commander General Romeo Vasquez. The Supreme Court quickly reinstated the General after determining the firing to be illegal. The tensions continued to escalate until the army physically removed Zelaya from office, an act which was actually ordered by the Supreme Court. After Congress formally removed Zelaya from the presidency, it named congressional leader Roberto Micheletti as the replacement for the deposed president.

The flurry of media attention has garnered Zelaya the irony of broad-scoping international support thanks to the premises of 'democracy,' including Honduras' revoked membership by the OAS and unanimous condemnation by the UN. Curiously, the United States has shown a very measured reaction, offering words against the 'coup' but stopping short of any particularly strong actions. The U.S. has notably not withdrawn its ambassador unlike the EU and countries belonging to ALBA.

On July 5, Zelaya attempted unsuccessfully to return to Honduras, all the while, stirring dramatic demonstrations throughout the capital and hypocritically quoting the unconstitutionality of his exile. His efforts were foiled as the army blocked off the runway in Tegucigalpa. The new government (really, the same government aside from the difference of Micheletti as president as the Supreme Court and Congress have remained unaltered; this is also where arguments against labeling the movement a coup may stem), in its isolation, has stood firm, vowing to arrest Zelaya for the illegality of his actions.

The situation to date is at a standstill with the opposing parties of the conflict respectively resolute in their convictions. Costa Rica president and Nobel Peace Prize winner Ricardo Arias has been named the mediator for peace talks. The first round of discussion failed as the deadlocked camps refused to budge. Micheletti holds to his promise that should Zelaya return, he will be arrested and punished for his actions. Zelaya, meanwhile, says he will accept nothing less than his complete reinstatement. In this second round of talks, signs of movement are emerging, slight as they may be. Arias is urging both sides to agree to a seven-point compromise that includes reinstating Zelaya as president and general amnesty for political offenses. Per New York Times, "although Mr. Aria's plan would restore Mr. Zelaya, it would also sharply curtail his powers and focus much of the country's political energy on an early presidential election [originally set for November]."

Pragmatically speaking, there is no easy solution to the complicated situation. Rarely does a simple coverall exist. As much I am loathe to think of Zelaya back in Honduras as acting president, his reinstatement seems the most realistic course of action at this point. With the unequivocal support of the international world behind Zelaya, Honduras is spiraling into continual isolation. Isolation can have deadly effects.

Regardless of the quibbles between the de facto government and Zelaya, and all other qualifying politics, ultimately, it is the poor who suffer. The Obama administration alone has cut $16.5 million in military aid since the coup and is threatening to cut $180 million more in development aid. In a country where 70% of the population lives in poverty, the people of Honduras need all the aid they can get. To qualify for aid, a degree of stability is required. The necessity of a stable, internationally-recognized and supported government is essential for the survival of this small country. It looks to be that Zelaya coming back, if anything very temporarily, is the best solution for the time being. From there, we look forward to see what the upcoming presidential elections produce and what the new president bodes for Honduras' future.

My hopes are that qualifying political prowess will be honed, priorities realigned, and greater awareness of the intricacies of government will be spread throughout Honduras. May the political elite be cognizant of those who suffer as a result of their actions and may the general public be equally educated on the palpable difficulties of addressing multi-faceted conflict complications. Politics and real life leave no welcome place for naivete. The current situation wreaking havoc in Honduras is just another stark reminder of such reality.