Commentary from Manuel Criollo: Smart Diplomacy and the Honduran resistance

Last weekend, the Honduran political crisis entered a new stage when US diplomats brokered an agreement between the coup government led by Roberto Micheletti and the ousted President Manuel Zelaya. 4 months after the June 28th military coup that removed the left-leaning Zelaya from office, the agreement could return Zelaya to power--pending the approval of a Honduran Congress dominated by coup supporters. It will also set up elections at the end of this month to elect a new president. Is the agreement a victory for Zelaya and popular forces in Honduras and across Latin America or is it a triumph of a sophisticated strategy of US imperial manipulation? Manuel Criollo comments.

Overall, the settlement is a step forward for the social movements in Honduras and the Latin American Left. A "victory" perhaps is too overstated, but to call it a defeat is certainly a mis-assessment given time, place, and conditions.

Was the U.S. the puppet master behind the scenes from the beginning? A big yes. The Right wing of the Republicans and the gusanos from all of Latin America from the Bush era inside the U.S. had a hand in this coup--with support from the Clintonites. Obama refused to take a solid position, refused to call it a coup, and took months to put economic and diplomatic pressure. There are some who say that Obama is the same as Bush-or even more dangerous than Bush, they might argue, because the Left lets Obama off the hook too easily. I strongly disagree with this view. That is, I see a worldview that reduces world events to a morality play between good and evil in which we are always good, whoever we are, and everyone else is evil as a losing strategy-one that ignores that strategy, tactics, and most importantly united fronts have always been critical parts of the Left's tool box to win make advances and win. Given all that, we must understand that the real story here is the social movement on the ground in Honduras and the broad united front that has been built in the course of resistance.

There's no question that in attempting to broker an earlier deal, Oscar Arias, President of Costa Rica, functioned effectively as a US emissary, ensuring that the U.S. completely called the shots from behind the scenes. The current agreement has many problems, the biggest one being that the Honduran Congress-with a majority that supported the Coup itself--has to approve to the agreement. More importantly, the agreement requires that the Congress to vote to reinstate Zelaya - which some on the hard core Right in Honduras are saying won't happen. Yet another problem with the agreement is that it calls for national elections on November 29th. It is not clear how the Left or a candidate sympathetic to the Left can win with such short notice, given the social movement's intense focus on bringing down the coup regime rather than preparing for electoral battle.

Why did Zelaya agree to this? It's hard to say. One view is that he is betting that the "liberal" members of Congress will have to ask for support from the voters in the future and that those who refuse to reinstate Zelaya will face the consequence of losing their seat. I also think that the united front inside Honduras against the coup conspirators has grown. This in itself is huge. Even many business interests who supported Zelaya's ouster have had to change their position because the general strikes and the economic isolation of Honduras are all hurting business. So now, Honduran capitalist are forcing Roberto Micheletti and the coup conspirators into this agreement. The anti-coup movement knew that coup conspirators could not last economically.

But let's look at some important signs of progress. First, the unity of the Latin American governments forced Obama to concede that the de facto government was illegal and to publicly state that Zelaya was the legitimate president. (Did he waffle in doing so? Of course, but this is still important.) Obama also refused visas to coup government officials, and then went after "business friendly" coup supporters by also not granting them visas. Finally, the Rightwing Republicans were not strong enough to muster any real support to legitimate the coup while the Left of the Democratic Party--people like US Representatives Rául Grijalva (D-AZ) and Howard Berman (D-CA) were great on this issue.

More important even has been the role of the international community aside from the US. The coup was defeated in large part by Latin America and the world rejecting it. 192 UN member states countries from the U.N. and all countries from the historically pro-US Organization of American States demanded the unconditional reinstatement of Zelaya and that he be allowed to finish his term. Were these actions symbolic to a certain extent? Yes! But we live in a world capitalist system-even with continued trade relations with the US, it could not survive the pressure of isolation from the rest of the world market. Also, Brazil, which does not always stand up to the U.S., allowed Zelaya asylum in their consulate. The U.S. saw the limits on its own power and could not allow its henchmen to attack the Brazilian Consulate given that Brazil is a rising power in the region.

But the real story is the movement. -- a movement that by Central American standards is weak compared, for example, to El Salvador or Nicaragua or even Costa Rica. The broad united front against the coup has included middle class teachers and to certain extent government bureaucrats, doctors, workers, campesinos, indigenous people, Afro-Hondurans, women's groups, and Left formations. These forces were unified and many were ultimately radicalized by the experience. Reports from on the ground indicated collectively these forces had amazing political education, broad debates about where to go, and multi-day general strikes that brought things to a standstill.

Whatever international commentators say about the agreement, we would do well to take the lead from the Honduran popular resistance itself. We urge people to read the statement issued by the National Honduran Front of Resistance, which celebrates elements of the agreement and re-asserts the right of the Honduran people, despite what the agreement says, to form a constitutional assembly aimed at creating a more democratic system of government. Our primarily responsibility is continued solidarity with those leading the fight on the ground.

Manuel Criollo is an analyst of Latin American Affairs and Senior Organizer with the Labor/Community Strategy Center.

(Update: Second statement of the National Honduran Front of Resistance
on the implementation of the agreement can be found at:
http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/Article_57417.shtml)