Skip to content

President Obama’s Credibility on the Line in Honduras by Mark Weisbrot

November 4, 2009

President Obama’s Credibility on the Line in Honduras

By Mark Weisbrot

This column was published by The Guardian Unlimited on November 4, 2009. If anyone wants to reprint it, please include a link to the original.

Last Friday an agreement was  reached between the de facto regime in Honduras– which took power in a military coup on June 28th — and the elected president Mel Zelaya, for the restoration of democracy there.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, in announcing what she called an “historic agreement, said: “I cannot think of another example of a country in Latin America that…overcame such a crisis through negotiation and dialogue.” Hopefully this will turn out to be true.

But the ink was barely dry on the accord when leaders of the coup regime indicated that they had no intention of honoring it. Some of them clearly saw the agreement as just another delaying tactic. They have talked of postponing congressional approval of the accord until after the November 29th elections, or even voting not to restore Zelaya.

If the Honduran congress delays or rejects the restoration of Zelaya, they will be violating the clear intent of the accord. The agreement states: “The decision the National Congress adopts should establish a basis for achieving the social peace, political tranquility and democratic governability the society requires and the country needs.” This and other language makes it clear that the negotiators – who have the ability to deliver the votes in Congress – agreed on Zelaya’s restoration.

Furthermore, justice delayed here is justice denied: two-thirds of the legally allowed campaign period has already lapsed, under conditions of dictatorship that made free election campaigning impossible.

The Obama administration has itself been divided on what to do about the military overthrow of democracy in Honduras. Hence the mixed signals and vacillation from the very beginning, when the first statement from the White House failed to even condemn the coup.  

Those in the Administration who think they can now wash their hands of the accord, and let the coup leaders turn their back on it had better think twice. The Obama team has embarrassed itself enough by having to be pressured — by the rest of the hemisphere — to tell the coup government that Washington would not recognize the November 29 elections without prior restoration of Zelaya. Just a few weeks earlier, the Obama administration had blocked the Organization of American States from passing a resolution to this effect.

But now Washington’s credibility is really on the line: the Obama team brokered this accord, and got a commitment from the coup leaders. If they go back on it, how much with the Obama administration’s word be worth on anything else? Everyone knows that Washington has the ability to force the coup regime to comply: there are billions of dollars of its assets in the U.S. that could be frozen or seized; seventy percent of the country’s exports go to the U.S. The coup regime has no international legitimacy and no standing to challenge the United States under international treaties, for any economic sanctions that might be invoked.

The Obama administration never used the effective tools at its disposal. Instead it dithered for months, finally cutting off a fraction of its aid to the coup government and revoking some visas. The administration refused to even declare that a military coup had taken place, since this would have required more cuts in foreign assistance. Most tellingly, Washington refused to denounce the massive human rights violations committed by the dictatorship. These included police beatings, illegal detention of thousands, closing of independent radio and television, suspension of civil rights and even some political murders. The crimes were denounced by all major human rights organizations, inside and outside of Honduras — and many governments – but the Obama administration maintained a deafening silence.

Based on the recent past, the coup leaders – one of whom was forced to resign his post as foreign minister after calling President Obama “a plantation Negro” and other racial epithets – might think they can safely ignore the agreement. But the rest of the hemisphere, and the Honduran people – who have courageously resisted the coup from day one – will not let them get away with it. No one will recognize the November elections if Zelaya is not restored promptly.

Last night, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon told CNN en Espanol that the United States plans to recognize the November 29 elections whether or not President Zelaya is restored. This would definitely put Washington on a collision course with the rest of the hemisphere, including Brazil. Furthermore, according to diplomats close to the negotiations, both Shannon and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had given assurances that the October 30th accord would bring Zelaya back to the presidency.

Shannon’s statement to CNN prompted a letter from President Zelaya to Hillary Clinton, asking whether the U.S. government had changed its position on the coup d’etat in Honduras.

President Obama now has a choice: he can force the coup regime to honor the accord, or lose further credibility among governments in the hemisphere and the world.




Mark Weisbrot is co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research, in Washington, D.C. He is also president of Just Foreign Policy.

View our latest:
Op-eds & Columns
Data Bytes

Please consider making a donation to CEPR. In addition to foundations, we rely on people like you to support our work.

The Center for Economic and Policy Research is an independent, nonpartisan think tank that was established to promote democratic debate on the most important economic and social issues that affect people’s lives. CEPR’s Advisory Board includes Nobel Laureate economists Robert Solow and Joseph Stiglitz; Janet Gornick, Professor at the CUNY Graduate Center and Director of the Luxembourg Income Study; Richard Freeman, Professor of Economics at Harvard University; and Eileen Appelbaum, Professor and Director of the Center for Women and Work at Rutgers University.

Center for Economic and Policy Research, 1611 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 400, Washington, DC 20009
Phone: (202) 293-5380, Fax: (202) 588-1356

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: