Latin America is facing a regional crisis unseen since the early 1990's. President Manuel Zelaya of Honduras was seized from his executive mansion on June 26 by Honduran military, and forcibly exiled to Costa Rica. Believing that they were acting to protect democracy legislators incited a political crisis that isolates their country and implicated the United States. Contrary to this, the United States condemned this coup immediately. The United States is acting appropriately to the Honduran Coup, and it proves to be a good opportunity to promote its commitment to democracy and freedom of speech.
Trust of American democracy has a ways to go before being respected in Latin America. This wariness is not unfounded. The root of the doubt can be traced back to 2002 when the United States backed a failed coup against Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez. The United States credibility was damaged at a time when United States forces were battling for democracy in Afghanistan. Although Chavez was an active adversary of President Bush, and a dominant figure in Latin American resistance of America, he remained to be elected by democratic process, and thus a product of democracy. This current crisis in Honduras is an excellent opportunity for the United States to reiterate its dedication to democracy and portray its want of democracy for Latin America. While Zelaya did provoke the Honduran congress by trying to amend the constitution to lengthen presidents terms, he was democratically elected. The United States should challenge the coup and the legitimacy of the congress's actions based on the fact that it should have gone through the government. The words and the actions of the United States stress that they are reacting to the flagrant violation of Honduran Democracy, and thus they are justified and acting appropriately.
Note: Jordan and I have switched teams, so I am on Team 2 now.
ReplyDeleteThe examples above are great, and of course political advisors would take these things into account before taking a stance on an issue like this. However, this proves that the United States did not have truth and justice in mind when choosing to support Mr. Zelaya and rejecting the coup, but instead decided to do so to further political agenda.
Also, if the president undemocratically gave himself another term in office, then obviously drastic measures had to be taken in order to right the situation. It is for this reason that the coup was not violating democracy, but rather preserving it. In this case, the ends did justify the means, even if the situation could have been handled better by the Hondurans.
It is my opinion that in choosing its current position on the Honduran Coup, the U.S. Government has placed agenda and self-interest above the rule of law and moral justice. Observe a few possible reasons why:
1. As Cara stated, there is serious incentive for making up for the support of the failed Venezuelan coup.
2. At a time that our country looks pretty ugly to the rest of the world and Central/South America in particular, it speaks of kindness that we would stand behind a poor ousted President who was kidnapped and exiled and is now in danger living in the Brazilian Embassy.
3. Honduras' leading trading partner is, indeed, the United States (70% of their exports and 52% of their imports). Two-way trade between the countries totaled $7.4 billion in 2006. At a time of economic recession, of course the U.S. would rather support a more stable Honduras under an official president.
4. And lastly, consider this:
"U.S. investors account for nearly two-thirds of the foreign direct investment (FDI) in Honduras. The stock of U.S. direct investment in Honduras in 2005 was $402 million, up from $339 million in 2004. The overall flow of FDI into Honduras in 2005 totaled $568 million, $196 million of which was spent in the maquila sector."
(http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/1922.htm)
Clearly, there are other factors at play here. The United States should probably just stay out of other country's internal affairs in the first place, but when there are incentives like these, of course they would choose a side that might benefit them. The point is that truth and justice are more important than political and economic gain. Sadly, our government does not have the former in mind.
I happen to disagree with Cara in that Mr. Zelaya was legally 'kicked out' and that he was trying to be an 'eternal president'. As for the U.S. stepping in, I think they should keep their noses out of other countries business.
ReplyDeleteIf I lived in Honduras I wouldn't want a president like Mr.Zelaya either.
Oh, how I wish I were on team 2! But since I'm not, I guess I'll have to write according to my preassigned "bias".
ReplyDeleteI do believe the Honduran military acted too rashly in expelling Mr. Zelaya. They should have at least given him a fair trial. My main question is, Couldn't the Supreme Court have prevented the aforementioned amendment from being passed? Were they just not paying attention, or does their government not work the same way ours does? Or did the amendment not actually get passed?
President Zelaya may have been elected democratically, but his alleged actions were contrary to democracy. Merriam-Websters Online Dictionary defines democracy as "a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation." The United States government is acting inappropriately to the Honduran Coop by condemning the People's reaction to an attempt to overthrow democracy.
ReplyDeleteWhen President Zelaya attempted to change the Honduran Constitution in order to allow him to remain in office, the people stood up for their rights. The Supreme Court declared his actions to be unconstitutional. The military was sent to arrest him. Mr. Zelaya was then sent out of the country, which brought outrage across the world.
Now the Obama administration is threatening to refuse acknowledgement of the legitimacy of the upcoming Honduran elections if Mr. Zelaya is not reinstated as President. However, according to the Honduran government, this would jepordize the country. Also, the election process is separate from the government control, reducing the risk of "fixed" elections.
The U.S. was founded on the principles of democracy and freedom. We should partner with Honduras in their attempt to keep democracy, not condemn them.
P.S. Here is a great link that I found of an intervew with Senator Jim DeMint after his recent trip to Honduras. It was very intriguing.
http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=JimsJournal.Detail&Blog_ID=30ecc522-d488-0a5d-d5d2-05b9d9118e4a
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that Hugo Chavez should be banned as president? Do you think that he makes a good president? I think it is a good thing that Hugo Chavez wasn't banned and that he is still the Venezuelen president.
ReplyDeleteWhat we as group are looking at is a situation were both sides have violated some rule that is part of being a democratic nation.
ReplyDeleteThe President violated the election process by giving himself another term as president. this is a simple violation of what his job was and seems to be in total self interest, but the situation gets more complicated because the military planed to remove the convicted president from the country. this adds a new problem to what is happening in Honduras. both sides have good reasons for there beliefs but have both caused additional problems to the situation by there actions. just like the coup in Venezuela the government is acting in a manor so that they can gain the most from the situation, as well as the president and all the foreign parties.
through giving back Manuel Zelaya power may be the quickest way to solve the problem, it will not stop him from trying to have more power.
but if he does not come back into power then we are faced with another election or military control over the country. The situation is very fragile and we must scrutinize moves on both sides. at this time I think that the removal of the president will help stabilize what Honduras intentions are in its role in central america.
Kalo.
I had a very long, thoughtful post written out, but my computer just lost it... I'll give the cliff notes version
ReplyDeleteMany people have different opinions on what the purpose of our government entails, but I think we would all agree that the government should be held accountable to the principles that founded America. Holding to that policy, the US has traditionally involved itself in conflicts for the purpose of promoting democracy and freedom around the globe.
The Declaration of Independence, arguably the document that is the sole lender of guidelines for the american way of life states
'We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.'
This historical document clearly states that when a government fails to give its people those unalienable rights its their right and privilage to institute a new government. Therefore, the US government should not support repressive leaders such as President Zelaya. Policies like this are the very policies that go against every principle that this country was founded on. Its for this reason that our government should not oppose a coup that is upholding the system of government that the Declaration calls for.
Amen! Great comment 007dancer. I completely agree.
ReplyDeleteCara, your post was amazing. I could certainly see the debater in it!
Thanks Carmen!
ReplyDeleteCara, I agree with her! that was amazing!
Mary
I am not a very deep thinker like everyone else here, so I am going to try to put my thoughts into words as best as I can.
ReplyDeleteI believe the United States is doing the right thing. By cutting off economic aid to the country, Pres. Obama is handling the situation very well. Supporters of Zelaya are planning protest against elections which are to be held Nov. 29. Many countries, including the United States, are saying that they will not recgonize the elections if Zelaya is not reinstated. I think the United States are acting correctly by honoring democracy. Pres. Zelaya was elected by the people, and for the military to "kick him out" (for a lack of better words) changed the democracy they had into a hoplarchy. Therefore the U.S. is acting out of the good of democracy.
Well, I guess that's it...
Emilie