Obama sides with Chavez, Castro against Honduran democracy
Examiner Editorial
July 2, 2009
Okay, let's get this straight: According to President Obama, the U.S. must at all costs avoid even the slightest appearance of meddling in the internal affairs of Iran. But it's quite all right for the U.S. to join a declared enemy like Hugo Chavez to support another wannabe strong man like now-former Honduran President Manuel Zelaya? If this is the "policy of engagement" that is required to repair America's image around the world, we ought not be surprised when foreign leaders conclude the U.S. has no consistent, coherent policy abroad, and then act accordingly. When they do, it will be to advance their interests, not those of the U.S. For some, like Chavez, it could be an opportunity to do serious and possibly irreversible damage to America's legitimate overseas interests.
To be sure, the Honduran situation is an unusual one. At first glance, it looks like a return to the lamentable cycle of democracy followed by military coup that plagued Latin America for so long. But it doesn't require much inquiry to see the reality behind the headlines: Honduras is a remarkable demonstration of a democratic country acting legitimately and constitutionally to protect itself against a domestic threat aided by a hostile foreign power. Here are the essential facts of the Honduran "coup:" The Honduran constitution limits the president to one four-year term and establishes a process for amendment via a national referendum called by the Congress. But Zelaya demanded a rump referendum to enable him to seek re-election. In response, Honduras' attorney general and courts warned Zelaya to back off. Zelaya instead pressed forward, using illegal ballots shipped in from, guess where, Venezuela to stage an illegal referendum. That prompted the Honduran Supreme Court to rule the Zelaya referendum unconstitutional and to order the military not to participate in the voting process. Zelaya persisted, was arrested by the military, as he had been warned he would be, and went into exile.
Here is where the Honduran example departs from the conventional wisdom: Instead of suspending the constitution and assuming power for themselves, the generals supported the Congress, which in an emergency session declared its own top leader as Zelaya's interim successor and affirmed the election in November of a permanent successor. These actions were also affirmed by the Honduran Supreme Court. In other words, as was said over and over here after Watergate, "the system worked." So why is Obama - and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton - siding with Chavez and two of his America-hating buddies, Cuba's Fidel Castro and Nicaragua's Daniel Ortega, against an intact democracy?
