Posted on 07/10/2009 4:06:05 AM PDT by don-o
IS HONDURAS more important than Iran is to Washinton? Does a military putsch in a small Central American republic rate more attention than a stolen election and cry for freedom from the biggest, and a well-advanced, country in the Middle East?
Honduras gets the nod on these outlandish questions. President Barack Obama has set his heart on change in Washington’s relations with Latin America, and Honduras is his first test of purpose.
Mr. Obama is not personally involved in the diplomatic game now nearing the climax. He had a summit in Moscow this week and the G8 summit in Italy on his schedule. Honduras he entrusted to the care of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, parked safely at her Foggy Bottom desk.
It made some sense. Ms. Clinton had broken an elbow and instead of being at Mr. Obama’s side in Moscow and L’Aquila, Italy, site of the world’s annual power-elite gab fest, she was stuck in Washington — Honduras and its deposed president, Manuel Zelaya, on her plate.
Honduran soldiers plucked the pyjamas-clad dignitary from his bed in the wee hours of Sunday, June 28, and put him on a plane to exile in Costa Rica. Mr. Zelaya’s sin was that he wanted to stay in office longer than the Honduran constitution allowed.
In a way, then, the putsch was morally far more acceptable than Mr. Zelaya’s attempted presidency for life. His removal was sanctioned by the Honduran supreme court and parliament, and the soldiers were entitled to think their act was legal — a putsch to stop a more heinous putsch.
But in Mr. Obama’s eyes, what happened in Honduras broke Latin America’s still fragile "thou shalt not putsch" commandment and threatened his declared policy of cultivating friend and foe alike.
Preserving democracy is a noble task and governments the world over support the no-putsch principle. And here is my nutty question: If Mr. Obama propelled himself to vigorous diplomatic action in Honduras, can he get away with doing nearly nothing in Iran? Rulers of the Islamic Republic of Iran had just putsched 80 million Iranians when they stole the presidential election. Iranians had been robbed of their votes and the hope of more freedom — a hope so strong they could taste it.
Now note the difference in treatment. The United States, Canada and just about every other country had plenty of wind to condemn the putsch in Honduras. But for the Iranian putsch, the U.S. and most of the world lost their voice. There were notable exceptions, President Nicolas Sarkozy of France, for instance, and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. But by and large, there is silence from Mr. Obama.
Though the estimated 40 million hand-marked ballots could not possibly have been counted in the 120 minutes that elapsed between the closing of the last polling booths and the declared landslide victory for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, much of the Western media treated the results as factual; and Mr. Obama opined there was no essential difference between the declared winner and Mir Hossein Mousavi, the opposition candidate.
Eventually, Mr. Obama found critical words — but the effect was a day late and a dollar short. And even so, Washington insiders say, he had to be prodded by Hillary Clinton, a more realistic foreign policy hand than her "Realpolitik" boss in the White House.
Behrooz Behbudi, PhD, a Canadian entrepreneur from Vancouver, spends part of his time in Washington. Active in the Council for a Democratic Iran, he doesn’t hide his disappointment with Mr. Obama’s take on Iran.
Barack Obama "is an attorney" and attornyes believe they can always make a deal, he said in a telephone conversation Tuesday evening. He seeks a commitment by Iranian’s religious rulers and their loud mouthpiece, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, to abandon their drive for nuclear weapons. But even if he gets his piece of paper, Mr. Behbudi says, it will be worthless because they will cheat and lie as always.
Mr. Behbudi is the key man in the Iranian Diaspora’s mounting publicity and lobbying campaign in Washington. He launched it with "It’s Democracy, Stupid!" paid messages in major American newspapers and says he’ll put a television station on the air in September.
The West "strongly and vigorously" supported the Solidarity movement in Poland and striving for freedom in Central Asia and the Caucasus," the first message published June 21 reads, "yet where are those voices of support for the people of Iran now?"
Good question. The liberals, the unions, the public intellectuals, the pious bishops, the U.S. Congress are silent now. But if Honduras is worth the candle, surely so is Iran
ping
Obama sides with Zelaya precisely because Constitutional usurpation is his goal, as well. Remember, Zero thinks it’s a document of negative rights.
Absolutely right. Obama's support for Zelaya should be a warning about his desires for the US.
Eventually, Mr. Obama found critical words — but the effect was a day late and a dollar short. And even so, Washington insiders say, he had to be prodded by Hillary Clinton, a more realistic foreign policy hand than her "Realpolitik" boss in the White House.
He sees that the "negative rights" doctrine in the Constitution as something to be overcome. Negative rights are what you have based on the absense of interference by government. Think of the wording of the first amendment (Congress shall make no law...) or the second (... shall not be infringed). Obama wants to change it to a doctrine of positive rights (You have the right to health care, you have the right to housing, etc.) without mentioning that giving you all that free stuff interfers with the rights of others who may not want to just give it to you.
Only.........it was NOT a “putsch”. It was ordered by the legitimate powers of the country against an illegitimate over reacher
“”Obama sides with Zelaya precisely because Constitutional usurpation is his goal, as well. Remember, Zero thinks it?s a document of negative rights.”
Absolutely right. Obama’s support for Zelaya should be a warning about his desires for the US. “
Radicals never build anything, they merely destroy what is there......right Obama??
From the title, I thought this WAS going to be about the USA.
Here's the audio (from 2001): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFf7DU9ywQ4
This author doesn't start out very well. He is either supremely ignorant of the Honduran situation or putsching propaganda. He carries that error throughout the article.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.