In a previous post, I mentioned Mexico in 1936 and Argentina in 1945 as possible parallels for what the Honduran military was thinking when it exiled President Zelaya instead of simply arresting him. Steven Taylor mentions a third parallel, a cautionary tale: Colombia in 1953.
He raises a good point: breaking the law in order to save it is always risky and often stupid. But the specific parallel doesn't apply. General Gustavo Rojas Pinilla took power in 1953 and established a dictatorship that lasted four years; Roberto Micheletti ascended to the interim presidency with a vote of Congress and seems to be waiting until the November election to hand over power to either Elvin Santos or Porfirio Lobo.
In other words, the typical historical parallels really don't apply in this situation. An inability to recognize that is the main reason why the OAS is botching the diplomacy. (As opposed to the U.S., which is playing it very well ... but very much in the national interests of the United States and nothing else.) They keep seeing Pinochet when what they've really got is an unelected Liberal government marking time until they can hand over to an elected government ... preferably also Liberal. If the OAS diplomats can recognize that, then they can get inside the other guy's head (and his decision loop) and start brokering compromises that will allow everyone to win.
But I have my doubts that insisting on constitutional purity and making absolute demands will accomplish anything. Demanding that some soldiers be punished, or agreeing that Zelaya should be tried while remaining titular president, those could get somewhere. But so far that isn't the tack the OAS is taking.
See also my comment and Steven's response here. The short version below the fold.
Continue reading "An admonition to Micheletti supporters and an admonition to his opponents" »




Recent Comments