Honduras Coup: Soldiers kidnap VZ, Cuba, Nicaragua envoys

Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff

Postby John Schröder » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:33 pm

http://quotha.net/node/111

A Primer on Honduran Politics, by Rodolfo Pastor Fasquelle
Thu, 07/09/2009 - 21:13 — AP

[Note: this excellent and brief summary of the context of the coup should be read in conjunction with the previous post, my hurried and thus somewhat choppy translation of Pastor Fasquelle's passionate open letter to those responsible for the coup, titled after Émile Zola's famous J'accuse]

For the recent coup in Honduras to begin to make sense to an American public, readers require knowledge of a broader context, of political and historic circumstances surrounding the situation. Even with such background information, it is difficult to trace the multiple links that pull these events into a coherent picture.

Some of the players are evident, for example, the interamerican rightist coalition that connects CIA diehards with Cuban exile fanatics and rightist politicians in Latin American countries has been tremendously worried over the last couple of years with the advance of socially progressive politics in the region. Right wingers have attempted to put widely differing experiences and models in the same sack, making no distinction between Chile’s socialist President Bachelet and Venezuela’s Chavez, between Argentinian President Kirchner and Bolivia’s indigenous coca defender Evo Morales, Correa of Ecuador and, on the other hand Brazil’s Lula with whom the former is fighting, or between the left leaning presidents of Central American countries, as if there were none, for example, between President Zelaya, a rich landowner from the traditionalist Liberal Party --who has simply insisted on the need to address inequalities and respond to severe poverty-- and, on the other hand, Daniel Ortega, an avowed Marxist Leninist.

There are other common threads or denominators, such as the increasing pressure of fundamentalist christians (both Catholic and Protestant) in politics and on the state. (Clearly The Assault on Reason of former Vice President Al Gore analyses a similar thread in American politics). So that when President Zelaya vetoed a law which intended to prohibit the use of birth control pills, the clergy reacted with a vengeance. Americans should also be familiar with the lobbying of corporate interests in Congress and executive offices, especially by oil and pharmaceutical conglomerates, the communications industry and seekers of tax havens and exemptions. I know a couple of New York republicans who hate the democrats who tax them in order to finance public health services.

Yet, Honduran politics must be difficult to understand for an American reader. How, for example, can one explain to this public that in what Hondurans call “democracy” today, seven party bosses determine the totality of the electoral options (from President of the country to local officers) and no one can participate without their patronage. Or how to explain that our congressmen have no geographically determined constituency, as American congressmen from a given district, and therefore are not really answerable to anyone but the bosses who put them on the ballot. Or how can one explain that until three months ago there was no way one could ask the Honduran electorate if it agreed with legal reforms of different sorts. Because ours is only a “representative democracy” according to the constitution! A reglamentary constitution, with almost four hundred articles that regulate rigidly every aspect of national life, make no provision for change and which have, therefore, had to be reformed in more than one third of their contents, yet lacks guarantees. So Indian groups and African descendants have no rights over their lands, which belong to the nation. And no one can personally accuse any other party for any wrong suffered, but has to rely on public attorneys and their disposition to process! Really. I am serious.

And when we have obtained, through public opinion pressure profound reforms, passed with all votes in favor, applauded by international organizations, for example prohibiting the President of Congress (which gets a disproportionate part of the budget for its political activity) from aspiring immediately to the Presidency of the Republic, in order to limit his advantage with public funding, the incumbent has gone to the Supreme Court, which Congress also elects every seven years (and had to elect this year) and gets a sentence saying the said provision violates his constitutional right to be elected to office!! It’s for real.

So that when, based on the new Law of Citizen’s Participation passed on the first day of his term, President M. Zelaya proposed consulting the electorate through a nationwide poll on the need to convene a new constituent assembly to reform this perverse system, its beneficiaries began a prolonged war to stop him, accusing him wanting to become a dictator.

Or how do you explain to the American electorate that in Honduras where we have had in the last two centuries hundreds of revolutions and coups d’etat, military commanders really can invoke a judicial sentence ruling that poll to be unconstitutional (because it is a direct consultation) in order to disobey an executive order, an order of their Commander-in-Chief to transport the materials for the poll, to rebel, and can, after being discharged from their posts, attack the President’s home with machine guns at five o’clock in the morning of last Sunday and kidnap him pointblank and fly him out of the country, and convene Congress, a couple of hours later that day, and proclaim there has been no coup and that the legal successor is the President of Congress. I am not sure I understand that myself and I was born and bred in Honduras.
User avatar
John Schröder
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Germany
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby John Schröder » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:38 pm

http://www.borev.net/2009/07/titulares_ ... ty_53.html

The Honduran coup regime's latest reasoning for overthrowing democracy: it was to save lives (???)

After a fun-filled tenure of one week, bigmouth racist coup leader Enrique Ortez has been fired.

Sure the Washington Post loves them some right wing juntas, but even they have some questions when it comes to media repression.

Two weeks into this stupid coup and the U.S. has taken the bold step of "undertaking a comprehensive review" of its funding to Honduras.

US academics: "Each day that the illegal coup regime remains in office further jeopardizes the capacity for Honduras to enjoy free and fair elections in November."
User avatar
John Schröder
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Germany
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby John Schröder » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:45 pm

http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/node/256

Honduras' Coup Regime: Poster Child for Trade Sanctions
Submitted by robert naiman on 10 July 2009 - 11:31am

According to press reports, so far the mediation of Costa Rican President Arias, encouraged by Secretary of State Clinton, has not produced any change in the refusal of the coup regime in Honduras to allow Honduras' democratically elected President Zelaya to resume his office. That's not surprising: the strategy of the de facto regime is seems to be to try to run out the clock on Zelaya's term, as long as they can.

That's why it makes sense for the U.S., working together with the governments in the region, to continue to ratchet up pressure on the coup regime. Indeed, as Reuters reported:

On the eve of Thursday's talks, the U.S. Embassy in Tegucigalpa said Washington had suspended $16.5 million in military assistance programs to Honduras, and added an additional $180 million in U.S. aid could also be at risk.


One lever that the U.S. government has not publicly discussed using is trade sanctions. Simply beginning the discussion would increase pressure on the coup regime to stand down.

Trade agreements to which the U.S. and Honduras are signatory are unlikely to present any obstacle, because the coup regime in Honduras has no standing to press any claims on behalf of Honduras in any international body. No government in the world, including the United States, recognizes the coup regime as the legitimate government of Honduras. If anyone in Honduras wanted to press a claim, they would need the approval of President Zelaya.

Indeed, there is a powerful and recent precedent for ignoring any attempt by the coup regime to represent Honduras in any international body: that's what the members of the Organization of American States - including the U.S. - did last Saturday, when coup regime tried to withdraw Honduras from the OAS.

The OAS had given the coup regime a Saturday deadline for allowing the reinstatement of President Zelaya, or the OAS would suspend Honduras from membership. The coup regime tried to pre-empt the suspension by announcing Honduras' withdrawal from the OAS. The coup regime's announcement was ignored, and the OAS suspended Honduras.

So, if the U.S. imposed trade sanctions on the coup regime, and the coup regime tried to complain, the U.S. could simply ignore it, as it ignored the coup regime's complaint on Saturday. No government in the world, or international body, would take the coup regime's side; there is no government in the world that recognizes the coup regime as the legitimate government of Honduras.

Of course, the actual use of trade sanctions would raise justified concerns about who they will hurt, and the Obama Administration can - and I'm sure they would - take this into account when deploying this lever. The choices aren't "no trade sanctions" or "embargo." The Obama Administration could target imports or exports that would send a strong signal to the coup regime and its supporters in Honduras' economic elite that they will pay an increasing price for intransigence, while avoiding imports and exports that would significantly affect poor Hondurans.

Merely starting the discussion will increase the pressure on the coup regime - so let the discussion begin. If the Obama Administration would simply announce that they are studying the possibility of trade sanctions, that would be a big step forward.
User avatar
John Schröder
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Germany
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby John Schröder » Fri Jul 10, 2009 8:53 pm

http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefie ... backs-coup

Honduras Newspaper Impressed that Daughter of Pinochet Backs Coup

By Al Giordano

Image

Here in the newsroom, we wondered if the website of the daily El Heraldo in Honduras (part of the same newspaper chain as La Prensa, which now enjoys the infamy of having photoshopped the blood out of the iconic photo of assassinated teenager Isis Obed Murillo) had been hacked by creative coup opponents.

But, apparently not: the newspaper (part of the Inter American Press Association) published a story yesterday titled: Pinochet's Daughter: "Zelaya Attempted a Coup."

I don't know what is weirder: that a pro-coup newspaper would think that quoting the daughter of the Chilean military general, Augusto Pinochet, somehow adds to its already bombastic portrayal of a military coup as a legal or "constitutional" action, or that Ms. Lucia Pinochet Hiriart (in the photo, above) has a constituency among the coup-defenders to the extent that she would be making public statements in praise of it, and those statements would somehow be newsworthy.

It was her father, the disgraced General Pinochet, who fomented the bloody 1973 military coup against the elected government of President Salvador Allende in Chile, which launched a dark era of similar authoritarian coups in countries throughout Latin America.

But there she is, Ms. Pinochet, instructing the Honduran people:

"The one that wanted to cause a coup was (elected Honduran President Manuel) Zelaya... Right now, he's the victim, but he is no victim...."


No, it's not parody. Rather, it's instructive of the state of mind of the coup defenders. (You can see it in repeated online comments on Twitter and elsewhere attacking Organization of American States chairman Jose Miguel Insulza because he was part of the elected Allende government before Allende was assassinated by Pinochet's forces.) They see the Pinochet coup of 36 years ago as a heroic act, and long for the bad old days when they could simply stamp out democratic will by rounding all dissenters into a stadium and assassinating more than 3,000 in a single week, which is what happened after September 11, 1973 in Santiago de Chile.

It is another proof positive that they are trying to start that ball rolling all over again throughout the hemisphere. And it demonstrates exactly why not a single government in América or in the entire world recognizes their illegitimate regime.

Update: And so it not be forgotten...

The 1973 coup d'etat in Chile, just like today in Honduras, was "justified" through a series of legaloid arguments that it was "constitutional" and such. Here's a typical piece of right-wing revisionist history with that spin.

Of course, what the world saw after that coup was successful was the Pinochet military coup regime proceed to violate every single one of the laws that its supporters had accused Allende of breaking, only more violently and on a much more massive scale than even what they had alleged (but not proved). And the same is occurring today.
User avatar
John Schröder
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Germany
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby John Schröder » Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:01 pm

http://counterpunch.org/ross07102009.html

Latin America Asks: Are the Gorillas Back?

After the Honduran Coup

By JOHN ROSS

Mexico City.

The June 28th coup d'etat in Honduras that toppled leftist president Mel Zelaya sends us back to the bad old days of the "gorillas" - generals and strongmen who overthrew each other with reckless abandon and the tacit complicity of Washington.

Perched on a hillside in the Mexican outback, we would tune in to these "golpes de estado", as they are termed in Latin America, on our Zenith Transoceanic short wave. First, a harried announcer would report rumors of troop movement and the imposition of a "toque de queda" (curfew.) Hours of dead air (and probably dead announcers) would follow and then the martial music would strike up, endless tape loops of military marches and national anthems. Within a few days, the stations would be back up as if nothing had happened. Only the names of the generals who ruled the roost had changed.

Guatemala was the Central American republic par excelencia for such "golpes." Perhaps the most memorable was the overthrow of General Jacobo Arbenz by Alan Dulles's CIA in 1954 after Arbenz sought to expropriate and distribute unused United Fruit land. Like Mel Zelaya, the general was shaken rudely awake by soldiers and booted out of the country in his underwear.

Coups in Guatemala continued unabated throughout the 1970s and '80s. General Efrain Rios Montt, the first Evangelical dictator in Latin America, who had come to power in a coup himself, was overthrown in 1983 by the equally bloodthirsty Romeo Lucas, a much-decorated general. In 1993, the Guatemalan military brought down civilian president Jorge Elias Serrano, the last gasp of the Gorillas until Zelaya was deposed last week. It has been 15 years since the generals had risen in arms in Central America.

Zelaya's overthrow has stimulated generalized revulsion throughout the world. The Organization of American States, the General Assembly of the United Nations, the European Union, virtually every regional organization in the Western Hemisphere, and the presidents of 33 Latin American republics have condemned the Honduran Gorillas - yet U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton can't quite get her plumped-up lips around the word "coup", preferring to describe the low-jinx in Tegucigalpa as an "interruption of democracy" or some such euphemistic flapdoodle.

One wonders what descriptives Hillary would have deployed if she and Bill had been aroused from a deep snooze in the White House master bedroom on a Sunday morning by gun-toting troops and put on the first plane for Ottawa in their pajamas?

Why is Clinton so reluctant to label the Honduran military coup a coup? Because such nomenclature automatically triggers a U.S. aid cut-off through which Washington subsidizes the very same Honduran gorillas who facilitated Zelaya's overthrow - $66 million of U.S. taxpayers' money is programmed for 2010 to this end. Unlike Washington, both the World Bank and the InterAmerican Development Bank have suspended payouts to the coup plotters.

The U.S. works in cozy cahoots with the Honduran military. Honduras sent a contingent to Iraq as part of George Bush's Coalition of the Willing. Coup leader Romeo Orlando Vazquez and at least two other officers who participated in Zelaya's overthrow are School of Americas' graduates - according to School of Americas' Watch, the "coup school", as it is called by opponents, once produced two generals who returned to Honduras and overthrew each other. Nearly a thousand Honduran officers were trained in the U.S. under the IMET program in 2005-06, the last year for which numbers are available. The Pentagon calculates that the camaraderie between U.S. and Honduran military officers developed during such training enlists valuable collaborators for a generation. In fact, these U.S.-trained assets threatened to scramble U.S. super light F5 fighter jets to prevent Zelaya from landing in Tegucigalpa a week after the coup.

In collaboration with the gorillas, Washington maintains an advance airbase in the country at Soto Cano (formerly Palmarola) with 500 troops under the direction of the U.S. South Command on the ground at all times on the pretext of fighting the War on Drugs and Terrorism.

Gregorio Seltzer, the late great historian of U.S. imperialism in Latin America, described Honduras as "a county for rent" and from the 1920s on, United Fruit rented this impoverished nation of 7.2 million, transforming Honduras into the quintessential Banana Republic. During the 1980s with revolutions raging in neighboring El Salvador and Nicaragua, the CIA rented Honduras as a platform for counter-insurgency. The Nicaraguan Contras' supply lines began at Palmarola. More discreet intelligence operations were housed at Puerto Castilla where suspected insurgents were reportedly tortured, dismembered, and fed to the crocodiles.

The nerve center for U.S. counter-insurgency in Honduras was Washington's embassy in Tegucigalpa, then under the thumb of the notorious John Negroponte, known throughout the Americas as the gringos' "pro-consul". Negroponte, of course, went on to become George Bush's Intelligence capo de tutti capos. Events in Honduras suggest that he is still pushing buttons.

Latin American leftists often refer to the Central American country as "The U.S.S. Honduras." Perpetual susceptibility to manipulation by Washington was perhaps best encapsulated by former president Jose Azcona (1986-90): "we are too small and too poor to afford the luxury of dignity."

Honduras is in fact the second poorest country in Latin America, a few degrees behind Haiti where the poor eat mud cakes for lunch. Things went from "Guatemala to Guatapejor" as they say in Central America ("from bad to worse") in the wake of Hurricane Mitch, which leveled the region in October 1998. Hundreds of thousands of jobless refugees took to the roads headed for El Norte to escape the devastation of their homelands. Nearly a million Hondurans are thought to have made it to the U.S., a seventh of the nation's population. Many poured into New Orleans, a traditional landing spot for Hondurans, where they found slave labor employment in the Katrina clean up. Remittances from relatives working in the U.S. are Hondurans' chief source of revenues.

Meanwhile back on the homefront, violence driven by unemployed youth holds the country in thrall. Over 30,000 Mara Salvatrucha gang members have turned the streets of Tegoosh and San Pedro Sula into an inferno. 86 perished in a Mara-induced prison riot in 2003 under Zelaya's predecessor Ricardo Maduro, one of the most deadly prison uprisings in Latin America annals, and 28 women and children were mowed down in a hail of gunfire when the Maras attacked a San Pedro Sula city bus in 2004.

The scion of a prosperous cattle ranching family from the north of the country with ties to the gorilla class, Mel Zelaya is an unlikely champion of the poor - during the anti-guerrilla campaigns of the 1980s, human rights workers claim that suspects were burnt alive in bread ovens on one of the family's haciendas. Backed by the Catholic Church and the oligarchy, Zelaya won high office in 2006 as the candidate of the right-wing Liberal Party - Honduras has two hegemonic parties, the Liberals and the Nationals, which take turns repressing the populace.

An early advocate of CAFTA, the Central American Free Trade Agreement that annexes the economies of the region to Washington, Zelaya beat back protests by labor unions, farmers' organizations such as Via Campesina, and the left Bloque Popular. During 36 months in office, Mel Zelaya navigated through two general strikes and 771 social conflicts, according to data assembled by Mexican columnist (La Jornada) Luis Hernandez Navarro who contends that the president's flipflops did not inspire much enthusiasm for him on the Honduran left, despite his increasingly radical pronouncements, a flaw that proved fatal. With congress and the military bitterly opposed to Zelaya's leftwards tack, the Honduran president's room for maneuvering was undercut by mistrust from down below.

Cheap oil was apparently what first attracted Zelaya to Hugo Chavez and the new Latin Left. Under the San Jose Pact, Venezuela distributes low-priced petroleum to Central American and Caribbean governments (including Cuba) and Honduras was an eager beneficiary.

In recent years, Mel Zelaya has been a frequent guest of Comandante Chavez, appearing side by side up on the podiums with Big Hugo, Ecuador's Rafael Correa, Bolivia's Evo Morales, Daniel Ortega and Raul Castro, and his government has joined the ALBA, Chavez's Bolivarian alternative to CAFTA and NAFTA.

Mel Zelaya's swing to the left did not much please the highly venal oligarchy that controls the Honduran Congress. Obligated to Washington via commercial and military pacts, the impresarios and gorillas who comprise that less-than-august body did their duty and tossed out their Chavez-loving president. In the words of Samuel Zemurray, owner of the United Fruit predecessor in another century: "I can buy the Honduran legislature for less than I can buy a mule."

Mel Zelaya's forcible removal from power was set in motion by a proposed popular consultation asking voters whether or not they favored rewriting the Honduran constitution, a document that heavily serves the interests of the oligarchy. If the yes vote carried, the measure would have been placed on the upcoming November 29h ballot.

At this writing, a week into the coup, it appears that those elections are on hold. All civil liberties have been suspended by the gorilla government of Roberto Micheletti and a witch-hunt of "communists" and foreigners instigated - the military urges citizens to report suspicious types speaking in "foreign accents" and dozens of purported Nicaraguans and Venezuelans have been arrested. Micheletti and his goons have sworn out an Interpol arrest warrant for Zelaya alleging drug dealing among other criminal acts.

Although Zelaya's proposed constitutional reform was multi-faceted and included such items as agrarian reform (anathema to the oligarchy), CNN and the New York Times et al fixated on the Honduran president's intentions to write “re-election” into the nation's Magna Carta. Similarly, presidential re-election has been incorporated in constitutional reforms recently passed in Venezuela, Ecuador, and Bolivia.

But reforming constitutions to allow for re-election is not just the property of the left. Having rewritten Colombia's constitution twice, right-wing president Alvaro Uribe is now looking at a third term in office. Indeed, the U.S. electoral process is motored by the possibility of presidential re-election.

U.S. involvement in the Honduran coup remains veiled but clearly Washington had prior knowledge that Mel Zelaya's overthrow was in the wings. For Barack Obama who, like Zelaya, aspires to re-election, the Honduras uproar represents his baptism in Latin American upheaval. Informed of Zelaya's ousting while hosting Colombia's Uribe at the White House, El Baracko stumbled through a sparsely worded condemnation. In response, the gorillas' new foreign minister Enrique Ortez called Obama "a negrito (black boy) who knows nothing."

Perhaps the U.S. president would not have been so constrained in his comments had he perused the volume gifted him by Hugo Chavez during a recent Latin American summit. Eduardo Galeano's "The Open Veins of Latin America" chronicles centuries of U.S. intervention in the Americas in precise detail. Nonetheless, Obama's chief spokesperson Robert Gibbs characterized the book as "a work of fiction."

The key question for Latin America is whether Honduras is a nostalgic aberration or a whiff of what's in the wind for newly left regimes throughout the hemisphere? Certainly, the Honduran scenario must excite the current generation of the gorilla class. But making a coup is mostly a function of the strength of alliances between the military and the oligarchy and how closely their interests coincide. Coup-making in Latin America in 2009 is also very site-specific.

In Bolivia, for example, a nation that suffered 193 violent changes of government between liberation from Spain in 1835 and 1981 when civil rule was restored (the two presidents prior to Evo Morales were overthrown by popular rebellion), threats by right-wing, white landowners in the lowland "media luna" provinces to secede from this dirt-poor Andean nation have had faint scratch with the military, largely a highland Indian army.

Similarly, although Venezuela has an active right-wing oligarchy that appears to be active in the Honduras "golpe", the military was neutralized by the short-lived 2002 coup to unseat Hugo Chavez engineered out of the U.S. Caracas embassy by Bush henchman Otto Reich, that was foiled when a million citizens descended on the presidential palace to demand the return of the kidnapped Chavez, himself a failed coup plotter.

In the southern cone, Argentina has a resurgent right-wing but the military remains so discredited by the memory of the 1976-79 "dirty war" in which 30,000 leftists were thrown to their death from airplanes into the Atlantic Ocean that a coup remains out of sync with reality. Ditto in Chile where a new Pinochet will not emerge any time soon.

In other newly left countries like Ecuador (where the army has sometimes sided with the left) and Paraguay, now governed by the former liberation bishop Fernando Lugo, father of at least two, the military is unpredictable and the emergence of civil society serves to counterbalance residual right-wing sympathies.

Perhaps the most likely proscenium for a Honduras-like "golpe" remains coup-prone Guatemala where military gorillas thrive, right-wing death squads enjoy unbridled impunity, and the civil society is weak. History, in fact, points in this direction - Alvaro Colum is the first president to be elected from a left-wing party since Jacobo Arbenz who, 55 years ago, was forced to flee Guatemala in his underwear.

John Ross will present "Iraqigirl" (Haymarket Books) at Modern Times in San Francisco July 30th. Ross developed and edited the new volume, a coming-of-age diary of an Iraqi teenager growing up under U.S. occupation that has been called "An Anne Frank for our times." He can be reached at: johnross@igc.org
User avatar
John Schröder
 
Posts: 491
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 3:01 pm
Location: Germany
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby geogeo » Fri Jul 10, 2009 11:32 pm

the latter article is ill-informed. In the 1975 Horconesxx/Santa Claraxxx massacre two priestsx and those who accompanied them in their vehicle were kidnapped, tortured, and died; to hide the evidence, their bodies were burned in bread ovens, dumped down a deep well, and the well was filled in. One of the missing was a university student, and eventually university students showed up dressed as locals, and discovered the truth, Two months after the massacre, the bodies were unearthed. This was on Mel's father's ranch. The same day they were kidnapped (while not attempting to join a natiowide protest march), campesino activators were gunned down in broad daylight inside the Santaxxx Claraxxx peasant rights center; school children were brought to play outside to mask the sound of the gunshots. It was one of the signal transition events between the failure of land reform and the implantation of the Southeast Asia model into Central Americaupon the failure of the former.

As for the prison 'riots', there were two, one in San Pedro and one in Ceiba. In both cases, those responsible were non-gang members, prisoners who basically run the place, and evidence suggests that the real planners were the COBRA, the supposedly now defunct special forces unit. Also, several of the major mara-caused bus massacres, along with the heads on the park benches, were done by agents of the extreme right--at teh same time (1998-2005) several THOUSAND people were murdered in the country, with bullets to the back of the head. This social cleansing has NOT been ignored, but once the (male) leader of Casa Alianza was entrapped (soliciting sex from a 19-year-old boy prostitute) , the major force for clarity was destroyed; Covenant House's files went offline, and only COFADEH and a few other groups seemed to care any more.

Here's a new poll article:

A new CID-Gallup poll indicated that Hondurans were split on the coup, with a slight majority appearing to oppose it.

Forty-six percent said they disagreed with Zelaya's ouster and 41 percent said they approved of it, according to the face-to-face survey of 1,204 Hondurans in the days following the ouster. Another 13 percent declined to answer.

They were about evenly divided on Zelaya himself, with 31 percent saying they had a positive image of him and 32 percent negative. That was close to findings of a similar poll four months ago in which positive views outpaced negative by 4 percentage points.

The pollsters said the survey, conducted in 16 of Honduras' 18 provinces from June 30 to July 4, had a margin of error of 2.8 percentage points.

Link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090711/ap_on_re_la_am_ca/lt_honduras_coup_201

Well! Which 2 provinces weren't surveyed, I wonder? 46 vs 41 , with 2.8 points of error? And I wonder how deep into the countryside they went to ask??
as below so above
geogeo
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:51 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Deja vu: Latin America and the new Cold War

Postby geogeo » Sun Jul 12, 2009 3:33 pm

Maybe someone will read this and we can re-title the thread. First, from Narconews: http://narcosphere.narconews.com/thefield/it%E2%80%99s-still-military-coup-honduras. Al does a better job that the academic, I agree, and I think Fidel has it right too. But let's take it a step farther.

all this, you understand, is strictly hypothetical. NWO apologists cover your eyes! this is fanciful, you understand--i did not have sex with that country!

What if the globalists' , given the failure of Neoliberal economics and the ever-increasing number of pissed-off poor, realized that Democracy was not working in Latin America, because people kept voting in Socialists? Hell, not even the globalists--just the US corporatacracy--take your pick, this is a supple fancy--understood that the old order was slipping away. What if a 'firebrand' and avowed Freemason was picked and groomed to lead the next Revolution of the 'Left' so as to create a new theater and a new strategy of tension? Remember how many major revolutions were backed by the Freemasons--particularly relevant, the French, American, Mexican, and the original Bolivarian--hell, we're talking about the very independence of Latin America and the rise of the Liberal landholding class.

Chavez is a polarizing figure and often a clown, who says just the right things to get poeple going. I've see the country, and the 'Revolution' there is about what USAID achieves in any of its client states. But he serves, with the ever-protected Fidel in the background, to polarize the hemisphere, and the hwole thing reads like a trashy script.

Anyway, it is completely ludicrous to suggest that dark and powerful forces might wish for a new Cold War, or that they ever would have made comments relevant to this during the now-faded Russian crisis. Far be it from this author to suggest that the War on Terror hasn't 'caught', whereas Socialism is clearly a good bogeyman, and easy for those who need a culprit for the economic crisis. And who could even imagine that John Negroponte and allied forces would dearly love to get back to the Central America they know so well. Gonna need a civil war to do so! The far right is playing its part, admirably, and has contractors lined up, salivating.

But first, you need another clown, someone whose family has very deep ties to the CIA. No, not Michelettixx, I mean the deposed president. How could this even be suggested? It's ridiculous! You mean, the president whose home town is right next to one of the main clandestine military bases of the Cold War, the place without which Iran-Contra wouldn't have been possible. You fools, Garry Webb committed suicide--he didn;t know what he was talking about! The president who got himself elected thanks to Greenberg and Associates--you know, the same guys who got Clinton into office.

What if you have the 'liberal' wing working one side and the 'far right' wing the other. Get the president back into the country and you've got something splendiferous! Don't get him back, and you've set a new precedent. If he goes back then a meltdown will ensue, and possibly the need for UN troops.

Or, leave out a complicit 'Left', and you then have a pitiful protests movement whose adherent possess more guns than anything, but have been persuaded to be 'nonviolent.''Nothing more useful than a citizenry armed to the teeth that believes that if they don't use weapons, their cause will be won. Boy those Frenchies had it wrong! Not to mention the Americans--bad, bad George!

Just saying.
as below so above
geogeo
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:51 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby StarmanSkye » Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:47 pm

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=14247
Honduras Coup Just Tip of Iceberg: Who Is Next?

The traditional right wing power sectors of Central America and South America are in panic. The single argument in their speeches and strategies is: "we have to stop the election of a "Chavez" or an "Evo Morales" in our country." They have expressed their hatred to the Alba leaders very eloquently.

The virtues of the ALBA leaders are as questionable as the right wingers in power. Who will in the end be more beneficial for their countries, we have to wait and see the results.

Lula in Brazil and Michelle Bachelet in Chile are a good example of positive accomplishments of the New Leftist movements.

In Central America the situation is different; the deep polarization of the people of these countries (except Costa Rica) is a consequence of the proxy war fought in the region during the cold war. Massacres, abuses of power, genocide, and totalitarian governments are still fresh in the memories of the people who suffered the consequences of these wars.

The fragile democracies that started to appear after the cold war was officially over are still mostly only a democracy by name, not a solid government system that works according to the law.

The fragile democratic civil institutions and justice sectors are far from being the strongholds of these democracies.

Laws can be passed, but are not necessarily respected. Guatemala has a very recent example in passing the law of postulation of magistrates by Congress. The new law was necessary to clean out the justice system from corrupt magistrates and judges.

The first sector who twisted the law by declaring one word unconstitutional were the Rectors of the Universities in Guatemala, the representatives of the academia. The brought the case to the Constitutional Court of Guatemala and the Court ruled in their favor.

This is not exactly an encouraging example of how the laws work in Guatemala and who has the power to change the law for their convenience.

In short, since the election of President Colom in Guatemala, Daniel Ortega in Nicaragua, Honduras President Zelaya´s enthusiasm for ALBA and the recent election of Funes in El Salvador has put the right wing traditional power sectors in the region into total panic.

They are like bulls that are seeing the red cape of the torero. What does the bull do: the bull charges.

The first serious attempt to put Alvaro Colom of Guatemala out of power was in May 2009, using the Rosenberg scandal - it didn't work because the international community paid attention and quickly signaled: don't even think about a coup, we will not support you. Very reluctantly the right wing opposition retreated back into their trenches and are now looking for other options.

The Honduran right wing power elite must have paid close attention to what happened in Guatemala and came up with a supposedly legal - coup strategy to get Zelaya out of power, thinking: the international community will not be able to stop us if there are some quasi- legal arguments.

Knowing how the Congress and Supreme Courts work in the Central American countries, you can pretty much fabricate any law and get the Supreme Court or Constitutional Courts to rule according to certain interests. The justice systems are very fragile and corrupt, they are basically for sale.

Unanimously the UN, European Union, USA, OAS and SICA have declared that the new government in Honduras is not legal and that Zelaya has to return. We consider that ALBA should not get involved and we deplore any military treat or involvment.

The "not recognized" Honduran government says: we don't care what the World thinks is legal and democratic, we do as we please.

This is a new strategy: not considering the views of the UN, European Union, USA, OAS and SICA all together.

Now the question is: what effect will the behavior of the Honduran "illegal government" have on El Salvador, Nicaragua and Guatemala.

Costa Rica is stable, Panama just elected a representative of the traditional right wing power sector, and these two countries will stay calm.

The signals coming from the "not recognized" Honduran government could encourage their friends in Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua to imitate their behavior.

In Guatemala about 12 right wing columnists have already publicly written and stated their support for the "brave and courageous" Hondurenans who deposed Zelaya and encouraged them to defy the international community and stay the course, no matter what the cost. Several radio commentators have done the same.

Will we wake up to a coup in Guatemala and El Salvador soon? It is more than possible. If you turn on your radio or TV in Guatemala and you hear marimba music and nothing else, you will know.
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Thu Jul 16, 2009 7:42 pm

Washington behind the Honduras coup: Here is the evidence
Repression intensifies


By Eva Golinger
Global Research, July 15, 2009
www.chavezcode.com - 2009-07-13


The US Department of State had prior knowledge of the coup. The Department of State and the US Congress funded and advised the actors and organisations in Honduras that participated in the coup. The Pentagon trained, schooled, commanded, funded and armed the Honduran armed forces that perpetrated the coup and that continue to repress the people of Honduras by force.

The US military presence in Honduras, that occupies the Soto Cano (Palmerola) military base, authorised the coup d’etat through its tacit complicity and refusal to withdraw its support of the Honduran military involved in the coup. The US ambassador in Tegucigalpa, Hugo Llorens, coordinated the removal from power of President Manuel Zelaya, together with Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon y John Negroponte, who presently works as an advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

From the first day the coup occurred, Washington has referred to “both parties” involved and the necessity for “dialogue” to restore constitutional order, legitimising the coup leaders by regarding them as equal players instead of criminal violators of human rights and democratic principles. The Department of State has refused to legally classify the events in Honduras as a “coup d’etat”, nor has it suspended or frozen its economic aid or commerce to Honduras, and has taken no measures to effectively pressure the de facto regime.

Washington manipulated the Organization of American States (OAS) in order to buy time, therefore allowing the coup regime to consolidate and weaken the possibility of President Zelaya’s immediate return to power, as part of a strategy still in place that simply seeks to legitimate the de facto regime and wear down the Honduran people that still resist the coup. Secretary of State Clinton and her spokesmen stopped speaking of President Zelaya’s return to power after they designated Costa Rica's president Oscar Arias as the “mediator” between the coup regime and the constitutional government; and now the State Department refers to the dictator that illegally took power during the coup, Roberto Micheletti, as the “interim caretaker president”.

The strategy of “negotiating” with the coup regime was imposed by the Obama administration as a way of discrediting President Zelaya – blaming him for provoking the coup – and legitimising the coup leaders. Members of the US Congress – Democrats and Republicans – organised a visit of representatives from the coup regime in Honduras to Washington, receiving them with honors in different arenas in the US capital. Despite the fact that originally it was Republican Senator John McCain who coordinated the visit of the coup regime representatives to Washington through a lobby firm connected to his office, The Cormac Group, now, the illegal regime is being representated by top notch lobbyist and Clinton attorney Lanny Davis, who is using his pull and influence in Washington to achieve overall acceptance – cross party lines – of the coup regime in Honduras. Otto Reich and a Venezuelan named Robert Carmona-Borjas, known for his role as attorney for the dictator Pedro Carmona during the April 2002 coup d’etat in Venezuela, aided in preparing the groundwork for the coup against President Zelaya in Honduras.

The team designated from Washington to design and help prepare the coup in Honduras also included a group of US ambassadors recently named in Central America, experts in destabilising efforts against the Cuban revolution, and Adolfo Franco, ex administrator for USAID’s Cuba “transition to democracy” program. No one doubts that the fingerprints of Washington are all over the coup d’etat against President Manuel Zelaya that began on June 28. Many analysts, writers, activists and even presidents, have denounced this role. Nevertheless, the majority coincide in excusing the Obama Administration from any responsibility in the Honduran coup, blaming instead the lingering remains of the Bush-Cheney era and the war hawks that still pace the halls of the White House. The evidence demonstrates that while it is certain that the usual suspects who perpetrate coups and destabilisation activities in Latin America are involved, ample proof exists confirming the direct role of the new administration in Washington in the Honduran coup.

The Department of State

The new form of diplomacy of the United States, known as “smart power”, has played a principal role before, during and after the coup in Honduras. During a press briefing on July 1, spokespeople for the Department of State admitted to having prior knowledge of the coup in Honduras, clarifying that US diplomats had been meeting with the groups and actors planning the coup to encourage a different “solution” to their discontent with President Zelaya.[i] The State Department also confirmed that two high level representatives from the Department, which included Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Craig Kelley, were in Honduras the week prior to the coup and maintained meetings with the civilian and military groups that later participated in the illegal overthrow of a democratically elected president. They state their mission was to “urge against” the coup, but evidently such verbal pressure was insufficient to discourage the actors involved in the coup, particularly considering the actions manifested by Washington contradicted those harsh words.

On the day of the coup, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton published a statement regarding the situation in Honduras. Despite the fact that governments around the world were quickly condemning the actions as a coup d’etat, Clinton’s statement did not recognise the events in Honduras as a “coup d’etat” and also did not call for the return of President Zelaya to power. Curiously, Clinton’s statements from day one have referred to “all parties” of situation, legitimising the coup leaders and somehow placing blame – publicly – on President Mel Zelaya for provoking his own overthrow: “The action taken against Honduran President Mel Zelaya violates the precepts of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and thus should be condemned by all. We call on all parties in Honduras to respect the constitutional order and the rule of law, to reaffirm their democratic vocation, and to commit themselves to resolve political disputes peacefully and through dialogue. Honduras must embrace the very principles of democracy we reaffirmed at the OAS meeting it hosted less than one month ago.”[ii]

And ever since, despite different references to a “coup” having occurred in Honduras, the Department of State has refused to legally classify what took place as a coup d’etat. By doing so, the US government would be obligated to suspend economic, diplomatic and military aid to Honduras, which apparently they are unwilling to do, since such a measure would substantially affect US interests in the Central American nation and the region. On July 1, the spokesmen for the State Department explained their wavering on the coup question: “In regard to the coup itself, I think it would just – it would be best to say that this was a coordinated effort between the military and some civilian political actors. Obviously, the military was the entity that conducted the forcible removal of the president and has acted as the securer of public order during this process. But for the coup to become more than an insurrection or a rebellion, you have to have an effort to transfer power. And in that regard, the congress – the congress’s decision to swear in its president, Micheletti, as the president of Honduras indicates that the congress and key members of that congress played an important role in this coup.”[iii]

This position of ambiguity, that condemns the events in Honduras as a violation of constitutional order but doesn’t go as far as classifying the situation as a coup d’etat and also doesn’t call for the reinstatement of President Zelaya to the presidency, was ratified again after the meeting held between Secretary of State Clinton and President Zelaya on July 7. Clinton made the following statement, “I just finished a productive meeting with President Zelaya. We discussed the events of the past nine days and the road ahead. I reiterated to him that the United States supports the restoration of the democratic constitutional order in Honduras. We continue to support regional efforts through the OAS to bring about a peaceful resolution that is consistent with the terms of the Inter-American Democratic Charter…We call upon all parties to refrain from acts of violence and to seek a peaceful, constitutional, and lasting solution to the serious divisions in Honduras through dialogue. To that end, we have been working with a number of our partners in the hemisphere to create a negotiation, a dialogue that could lead to a peaceful resolution of this situation.”[iv]

Now it was clear, after this meeting, that Washington would no longer consider Zelaya’s return to the presidency as a necessary solution but rather would lobby for a “negotiation” with the coup regime, that in the end, favours US interests. Sources that were present at the Organisation of American States (OAS) meetings that took place after the coup affirm that the presence of a high-level US delegation intensified the pressure against other States to urge for a “negotiated” solution that didn’t necessarily imply the return to power of President Zelaya.

This method of circumventing the main issue, manipulating the outcome and attempting to appear as though one position has been assumed when in reality, actions demonstrate the contrary, forms part of the new Obama doctrine of “smart power”, which purports to achieve imperialist objectives without demonising the government. “Smart Power” is “the capacity to combine ‘hard power’ with ‘soft power’ to achieve a victorious strategy. ‘Smart Power’ strategically uses diplomacy, persuasion, capacity building, military power and economic and political influence, in an effective way with a political and social legitimacy.” Essentially, it’s a mix of military force with all forms of diplomacy, with an emphasis in the use of “democracy promotion” as a principal tactic to strongy influence the destiny of societies, instead of a military invasion. [Note: Beware that “smart power” places an emphasis on the use of agencies like USAID and National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to do the ‘dirty work’ of silently penetrating and infiltrating civil society organisations in order to promote a US agenda. This explains Obama’s call for an additional $320 million in “democracy promotion” funds for the 2010 budget just for use in Latin America. This is substantially a higher sum than the quantity requested and used in Latin America for “democracy promotion” by the Bush administration in its 8 years of government combined.]

The ambassador

Journalist Jean-Guy Allard has revealed the origens of the current US ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens[v]. Per Allard, Hugo Llorens, a Cuban national from birth who arrived in the United States as part of Operation Peter Pan, is “a specialist in terrorism… In 2002, George W. Bush’s White House strategically placed the astute Llorens as Director of Andean Affairs at the National Security Council in Washington, D.C., which converted him into the principle advisor to the President on Venezuela. The coup d’etat in 2002 against Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez occured during Llorens’ tenure, who was working together with Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Otto Reich, and the very controversial Elliot Abrams. In July 2008, Llorens was named Ambassador to Honduras.”

On June 4, 2009, just weeks before the coup d’etat against President Zelaya, Ambassador Llorens declared to the Honduran press that “...One can’t violate the Constitution in order to create another Constitution, because if one doesn’t respect the Constitution, then we all live under the law of the jungle.”[vi] Those declarations were made in reference to the national opinion survey on the possibility of convening a constitutional convention during 2010, that would have taken place on June 28th if the coup d’etat against President Zelaya hadn’t occured. The commentaries made by Llorens evidence not only his position against the survey, but also his interference in the internal affairs of Honduras.

But Llorens wasn’t alone in the region. After his nomination as US Ambassador in Honduras – position that he was assigned to due to the urgent necessity to neutralise the growing presence of leftist governments in the region and impede the regional potency of ALBA - several other US ambassadors were also named in neighboring nations, all experts in destabilising the Cuban revolution and executing psychological warfare.

The diplomat Robert Blau arrived first to the US embassy in El Salvador, on July 2, 2008, named as second in command. In January 2009, Blau became the Charge d’Affairs at the Embassy. Before arriving to El Salvador, Blau was subdirector of Cuban affairs at the Department of State in Washington, after working for two years at the US Interests Section in Havana, Cuba, as a Political Counselor. His work with Cuban dissidents was so successful that Blau was honored with the Department of State James Clement Dunn Award for Excellence. Llorens and Blau were old friends, after working together as part of Otto Reich’s team in the State Department.

Soon after, Stephen McFarland was named as US Ambassador in Guatemala, on August 5, 2008. McFarland, a graduate of the National War College in the US, similar to Hugo Llorens and Robert Blau, and also a former member of Combat Team Number 2 of the US Marines in Iraq, was the second in command at the US embassy in Venezuela during William Brownfield’s tenure. Brownfield is known for achieving a substantial increase in State Department funding and strategic support for the Venezuelan opposition. After Venezuela, McFarland was sent to the US Embassy in Paraguay to oversee the construction of the large US military base in that country that borders Bolivia. McFarland was also Director of Cuban Affairs at the State Department and his resumé claims he is an expert in “democratic transitions, human rights and security matters.”

Ambassador Robert Callahan arrived to Managua, Nicaragua, also at the beginning of August. Callahan has worked at the US embassies in La Paz, Bolivia, and San José, Costa Rica, and was a distinguished professor at the National War College. In 2004, he was sent to Iraq as press attaché at the US Embassy in Baghdad. Upon his return, he established the press and propaganda office at the newly created Directorate of National Intelligence (DNI) in Washington, which today is the most powerful entity in the US intelligence community.

Together, these ambassadors – experts in coup d’etats, destabilisation and propaganda – prepared the terrain for the coup against President Zelaya in Honduras.

Funding the coup leaders

Just one month before the coup against President Zelaya occured, a coalition of different organisations, business associations, political parties, high level members of the Catholic Church and private media outlets, was formed in opposition to Zelaya’s policies. The coalition was called the “Democratic Civil Union of Honduras”. It’s only objective was to oust President Zelaya from power in order to impede the future possibility of a constitutional convention to reform the constitution, which would allow the people a voice and a role in their political process.

The “Democratic Civil Union of Honduras” is composed of organisations including the National Anticorruption Council, the Archbishop of Tegucigalpa, Honduran Council of Private Enterprise (COHEP), Council of University Deans, Workers' Federation of Honduras (CTH), National Convergence Forum, National Federation of Commerce and Industry of Honduras (FEDECAMARA), Association of Communication Media (AMC), the Group Peace & Democracy and the student group Generation for Change.

The majority of these organisations have been the beneficiaries of the more than $50 million annually disbursed by USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) for “democracy promotion” in Honduras. In fact, a USAID report regarding its funding and work with COHEP, described how the “low profile maintained by USAID in this project helped ensure the credibility of COHEP as a Honduran organisation and not an arm of USAID.” Which basically means that COHEP is, actually, an arm of USAID.

The spokespeople for the Democratic Civil Union of Honduras representing, according to them, “civil society”, declared to the Honduran press on June 23rd – five days before the coup took place against President Zelaya – that they “trust the armed forces will comply with their responsibility to defend the Constitution, the Law, peace and democracy.” When the coup took place on June 28th, they were the first to immediately claim that a coup had not occured, but rather “democracy had been saved” from the hands of President Zelaya, whose crime was to attempt to give voice and visibility to the people. Representing the biased middle and upperclasses, the Democratic Civil Union has qualified Zelaya’s supporters as “hoards”.

The International Republican Institute (IRI), entity that receives funding from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED), received more than $1.2 million in 2009 to work with political groups in Honduras. IRI’s work has been dedicated to supporting “think tanks” and “pressure groups” to influence political parties and “support initiatives to implement political positions during the campaigns in 2009.” This is a clear example of intervention in the internal politics of Honduras and evidence of NED and IRI funding to those groups involved in the coup.

The Washington lobby

Republican Senator John McCain, ex US presidential candidate, helped coordinate the visit of a coup regime delegation to Washington last week. McCain is well known for his opposition to governments in Venezuela, Bolivia and other countries in the region considered “anti-imperialist”. McCain also maintains very close ties to the Cuban exile community in Miami. McCain is also Chairman of the Board of the International Republican Institute (IRI) that has funded the coup participants in Honduras. McCain offered the services of a lobby firm in Washington, closely tied to him, the Cormac Group, that organised a press conference for the coup regime delegation at the National Press Club on June 7th. McCain also helped set up several meetings in Congress with the traditional Cuban-American representatives and those general “Chávez-haters”, such as Connie Mack, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Mel Martinez.

But beyond the Republican connection to the Honduran coup regime, there is a even more damning link to the current Democrat administration in Washington. Lawyer Lanny Davis was hired by the Business Council of Latin America (CEAL) to lobby in favour of the coup regime and convince the powers in Washington to accept and recognise the de facto government in Honduras. Lanny Davis was special counsel to ex President Bill Clinton from 1996-1998 and he is a close friend and advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Davis is organising a diplomatic offensive and public relations blitz in favour of the coup regime, including the strategic placement of advertisements in important US media that seek to legitimise the de facto Honduran government, and he is organising meetings and hearings with members of Congress, the State Department and the White House. CEAL represents the conservative business community in Latin America, including those that have promoted and participated in previous attempts to oust democratic governments via coup d’etats and/or other forms of sabotage. For example, the Venezuelan representative of CEAL is Marcel Granier, president of RCTV, the television station that heavily participated in the 2002 coup against President Chávez and that consistently has violated Venezuelan law in order to promote its political agenda.

As part of this offensive, Lanny Davis arranged a special hearing before the House Foreign Relations Committee, attended by high level members of Congress and overseen by Democrat Elliot Engel (congressman from New York). Testimonies were given at the hearing by representatives of the coup regime from Honduras and others who have supported the coup – directly and indirectly – such as Michael Shifter from the InterAmerican Dialogue, Guillermo Pérez-Cadalso, ex Honduran foreign minister and supreme court judge, and the infamous Otto Reich, a Cuban-American well known for his role in the majority of destabilisation activities against leftist and progressive governments in Latin America throughout the eighties. Reich, who was named Special Advisor on Latin America to President George W. Bush, also played a key role in the 2002 coup against President Chávez. As a result of this hearing, the US Congress is currently trying to pass a resolution that recognises the coup regime in Honduras as a legitimate government.

Another consequence of Lanny Davis’ lobbying efforts was the meeting arranged in the Council of the Americas Washington office on June 9th. This event included the participation of Jim Swigert, Director of Programs in Latin America and the Caribbean for the National Democratic Institute (NDI), entity that receives its funding from NED and USAID, Cris Arcos, former US ambassador to Honduras, and Adolfo Franco, ex USAID Administrator for Latin America and the Caribbean, and the director of the “transition to democracy” program for Cuba. These three characters are working as advisors to the Obama administration on the Honduran crisis. Franco, who was previously advisor on foreign policy to John McCain during his presidential campaign in 2008, has been accused of corruption for his mismanagement of USAID funds destined for the Cuba “democracy” program. Franco diverted a large quantity of these funds, totaling over $40 million, to groups such as the Committee for a Free Cuba and the Institute for Cuban Studies in Miami, without adhering to a transparent process of funds disbursement.

Negroponte and Reich, again

Many analysts and specialists on Latin American have speculated on the role of former ambassador to Honduras John Negroponte, who directed the paramilitary forces and death squads known as the “Contra” against leftist movements in Central America during the 1980s. Negroponte held various high level positions during the Bush administration, including US Ambassador to Iraq, US Ambassador to the United Nations, National Director of Intelligence and lastly, subsecretary of state, second only to Condoleezza Rice. After leaving the Department of State in January 2009, Negroponte entered the private sector, as is custom amongst former top government officials. He was offered a job as vice-president at the most influential and powerful consulting firm in Washington, McLarty Associates. Negroponte accepted the job. McLarty Associates was founded by Thomas “Mack” McLarty, former chief of staff for President Bill Clinton and also Clinton’s Special Envoy to Latin America. Since the end of the Clinton administration, McLarty has managed the most powerful strategic consulting firm in Washington, which until just last year, was called Kissinger-McLarty Associates due to the merging of Thomas McLarty and Henry Kissinger. This partnership clearly evidenced the bi-partisan unions that truly craft the most important policies in Washington.

In his new role, John Negroponte presently works as advisor to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Remember, the current US ambassador to Honduras, Hugo Llorens, has worked closely under Negroponte’s domain during the majority of his career. So it would not be a far jump to consider that John Negroponte, expert in crushing leftist movements in Central America, has played a role in the current coup against President Zelaya in Honduras.

Otto Reich has also been investing his energy during the last couple of years in a campaign against President Zelaya. The Honduran president actually threatened to sue Reich for defamation in April 2009, after Reich accused President Zelaya of stealing $100 million from the state-owned telecommunications company, Hondutel. These accustations were never backed by evidence, and the truth was revealed soon after that explained Reich’s interest in Hondutel. Through his consulting and lobbying firm, Otto Reich Associates, the Cuban-American was representing a multinational corporation that was pushing for the privatisation of Hondutel, a move that Zelaya opposed. With President Zelaya out of the picture now, Reich is able to pursue the multi-million dollar deal.

Reich also co-founded an organisation in Washington named Arcadia Foundation[vii] together with a Venezuelan, Robert Carmona-Borjas, a lawyer specialised in military law who is linked to the April 2002 coup d’etat in Venezuela, per his own resumé. Robert Carmona-Borjas was in the Miraflores presidential palace in Caracas, Venezuela, together with the dictator Pedro Carmona, on the days of the coup, from April 11-12, 2002, and escaped, together with Carmona, when the palace was retaken by the presidential guard and constitutional order was restored. He later fled to the United States after he was brought up on charges for his role in the coup d’etat in Venezuela, and became a university professor at George Washington University in Washington, DC (nice to see the warm welcome coup leaders and violators of democracy receive in the United States). Since last year, Reich and Carmona-Borjas have been conducting a campaign against President Zelaya, accusing him of corruption and limiting private property rights. Through the Arcadia Foundation, they created a series of video clips that have been shown in different media, attempted to portray Zelaya as a corrupt president who violates the basic rights of the Honduran people.[viii]

Carmona-Borjas has travelled frequently to Honduras during the last few months, and even held public meetings where the coup against Zelaya was discussed openly. At one encounter where Carmona-Borjas was present, Honduran Public Defender Ramón Custodia, who was involved in the coup d’etat, declared to the press that “coups are a possibility and can occur in any political environment”. After the coup took place, Robert Carmona-Borjas appeared at a rally in support of the de facto regime, on July 3, and received the honors and applause from the coup leaders who declared him “an important actor” that “helped make possible” the removal from power of President Zelaya and the installation of the dictator Roberto Micheletti as de facto president.[ix]

Military power

The United States maintains a large military presence in Honduras in the Soto Cano (Palmerola) base, located about 50 miles from the capital, Tegucigalpa, that has been actively operating since 1981, when it was heavily occupied by the US Ronald Reagan Administration and used for its operations in Central America.

During the eighties, Soto Cano was used by Colonel Oliver North as a base of operations of the “Contra”, the paramilitary forces trained, armed and funded by the CIA, and charged with executing warfare against all leftist movements in Central America, with particular focus on the neighbouring Sandinista government in Nicaragua. From Soto Cano, the “Contra” launched terrorist attacks, psychological warfare (overseen by Otto Reich’s Office for Public Diplomacy), death squads and special covert missions that resulted in the assassination of tens of thousands of farmers and civilians, thousands of disappeared, tortured, wounded and terrorised all throughout the region.

John Negroponte, US ambassador at the time in Honduras, together with Oliver North and Otto Reich, directed and oversaw these dirty operations. They later became involved in the Iran-Contra scandal once the US Congress cut the funding for the paramilitary groups and death squads used by the Reagan Administration to neutralise the leftist movements in the region, and the Negroponte-North-Reich team sold arms to Iran to continue funding their covert operations.

The Soto Cano base houses the US Joint Task Force-Bravo military group, composed of members from the army, air force, joint security forces and the First Batallion Regiment 228 of the US Air Force. The current total presence of US forces on the base numbers approximately 600, and includes 18 combat planes, UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters and CH-47 Chinook helicopters, used for special warfare operations. The Honduran Aviation Academy is also located on the Soto Cano base. More than 650 Honduran and US citizens also live inside the base installations.

The Honduran constitution does not legally permit the presence of foreign military in the country. A “handshake” agreement was made between Washington and Honduras authorising the “semi-permanent” important and strategic presence of hundreds – at times thousands – of US military personnel on the base. The agreement was made in 1954, in exchange for the multimillion dollar aid the US provides to the Honduran armed forces, which ranges from training programs, arms and military equipment and joint exercises and operations that take place on the ground in Honduras. The base was first employed by the US military and CIA to launch the coup d’etat against Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954.

Each year, Washington authorises hundreds of millions of dollars in military and economic aid to Honduras, which is the third-poorest country in the western hemisphere, after Haiti and Nicaragua. This “exchange” securing the US military presence in the Central American nation can be terminated at any time by the Honduran government, without much notice.

On May 31, 2008, President Manuel Zelaya announced that Soto Cano (Palmerola) would be converted into an international civilian airport. The construction of the airport terminal would be financed with a fund from the Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas (ALBA – of which Bolivia, Cuba, Ecuador, Dominique, Honduras, Nicaragua, St. Vicents, Antigua and Barbados and Venezuela are members). This obviously was a huge threat to the future US military presence in Honduras.

The two generals that have participated in key roles in the coup against President Zelaya are both graduates of the US School of the Americas, famous for training dictators, torturers and repressors in Latin America, and they maintain very close ties with the US military forces based in Honduras. The Commander of the Honduran Air Force General Luis Javier Prince Suazo studied in the famous School of the Americas in 1996. The Head of the Honduran High Military Command, General Romeo Vásquez, who was fired by President Zelaya on June 24, 2009, for disobeying the president’s orders, and later appeared as the principal actor in the military coup just days later, is also a graduate of the School of the Americas. These two high level military officers also maintain close contact with the Pentagon and the Southern Command.

The US Ambassador in Honduras through September 2008, when Hugo Llorens was appointed to the position, Charles Ford, was transferred from Honduras to the Southern Command in Florida and charged with providing “strategic advising” to the Pentagon about Latin America, a position he holds today.

The Honduran military are funded, trained, schooled and commanded by the US military. They have been indoctrinated with the anti-leftist, anti-socialist, pro-empire mentality since the beginning of the Cold War. The Generals and high level officers involved in the coup in Honduras have publicly stated that they were “obligated” to remove President Zelaya from power because of the “threat” he posed with his “leftist” ideology and alignment to socialist nations in the region such as Venezuela and Cuba. Per one Honduran colonel, “'We fought the subversive movements here and we were the only country that did not have a fratricidal war like the others…It would be difficult for us, with our training, to have a relationship with a leftist government. That's impossible. I personally would have retired, because my thinking, my principles, would not have allowed me to participate in that.''.[x]

All of the above evidence – and certainly more to come in the future – proves the undeniable role of Washington in the coup d’etat aginst President Zelaya in Honduras.



The url address of this article is: www.globalresearch.ca/PrintArticle.php?articleId=14390
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby American Dream » Fri Jul 17, 2009 12:40 pm

http://www.counterpunch.org/kozloff07172009.html

Chiquita in Latin America
By NIKOLAS KOZLOFF



When the Honduran military overthrew the democratically elected government of Manuel Zelaya two weeks ago there might have been a sigh of relief in the corporate board rooms of Chiquita banana. Earlier this year the Cincinnati-based fruit company joined Dole in criticizing the government in Tegucigalpa which had raised the minimum wage by 60%. Chiquita complained that the new regulations would cut into company profits, requiring the firm to spend more on costs than in Costa Rica: 20 cents more to produce a crate of pineapple and ten cents more to produce a crate of bananas to be exact. In all, Chiquita fretted that it would lose millions under Zelaya’s labor reforms since the company produced around 8 million crates of pineapple and 22 million crates of bananas per year.

When the minimum wage decree came down Chiquita sought help and appealed to the Honduran National Business Council, known by its Spanish acronym COHEP. Like Chiquita, COHEP was unhappy about Zelaya’s minimum wage measure. Amílcar Bulnes, the group’s president, argued that if the government went forward with the minimum wage increase employers would be forced to let workers go, thus increasing unemployment in the country. The most important business organization in Honduras, COHEP groups 60 trade associations and chambers of commerce representing every sector of the Honduran economy. According to its own Web site, COHEP is the political and technical arm of the Honduran private sector, supports trade agreements and provides “critical support for the democratic system.”

The international community should not impose economic sanctions against the coup regime in Tegucigalpa, COHEP argues, because this would worsen Honduras’ social problems. In its new role as the mouthpiece for Honduras’ poor, COHEP declares that Honduras has already suffered from earthquakes, torrential rains and the global financial crisis. Before punishing the coup regime with punitive measures, COHEP argues, the United Nations and the Organization of American States should send observer teams to Honduras to investigate how sanctions might affect 70% of Hondurans who live in poverty. Bulnes meanwhile has voiced his support for the coup regime of Roberto Micheletti and argues that the political conditions in Honduras are not propitious for Zelaya’s return from exile.

Chiquita: From Arbenz to Bananagate

It’s not surprising that Chiquita would seek out and ally itself to socially and politically backward forces in Honduras. Colsiba, the coordinating body of banana plantation workers in Latin America, says the fruit company has failed to supply its workers with necessary protective gear and has dragged its feet when it comes to signing collective labor agreements in Nicaragua, Guatemala and Honduras.

Colsiba compares the infernal labor conditions on Chiquita plantations to concentration camps. It’s an inflammatory comparison yet may contain a degree of truth. Women working on Chiquita’s plantations in Central America work from 6:30 a.m. until 7 at night, their hands burning up inside rubber gloves. Some workers are as young as 14. Central American banana workers have sought damages against Chiquita for exposing them in the field to DBCP, a dangerous pesticide which causes sterility, cancer and birth defects in children.

Chiquita, formerly known as United Fruit Company and United Brands, has had a long and sordid political history in Central America. Led by Sam “The Banana Man” Zemurray, United Fruit got into the banana business at the turn of the twentieth century. Zemurray once remarked famously, “In Honduras, a mule costs more than a member of parliament.” By the 1920s United Fruit controlled 650,000 acres of the best land in Honduras, almost one quarter of all the arable land in the country. What’s more, the company controlled important roads and railways.

In Honduras the fruit companies spread their influence into every area of life including politics and the military. For such tactics they acquired the name los pulpos (the octopuses, from the way they spread their tentacles). Those who did not play ball with the corporations were frequently found face down on the plantations. In 1904 humorist O. Henry coined the term “Banana Republic” to refer to the notorious United Fruit Company and its actions in Honduras.

In Guatemala, United Fruit supported the CIA-backed 1954 military coup against President Jacobo Arbenz, a reformer who had carried out a land reform package. Arbenz’ overthrow led to more than thirty years of unrest and civil war in Guatemala. Later in 1961, United Fruit lent its ships to CIA-backed Cuban exiles who sought to overthrow Fidel Castro at the Bay of Pigs.

In 1972, United Fruit (now renamed United Brands) propelled Honduran General Oswaldo López Arellano to power. The dictator was forced to step down later however after the infamous “Bananagate” scandal which involved United Brands bribes to Arellano. A federal grand jury accused United Brands of bribing Arellano with $1.25 million, with the carrot of another $1.25 million later if the military man agreed to reduce fruit export taxes. During Bananagate, United Brands’ President fell from a New York City skyscraper in an apparent suicide.

Go-Go Clinton Years and Colombia

In Colombia United Fruit also set up shop and during its operations in the South American country developed a no less checkered profile. In 1928, 3,000 workers went on strike against the company to demand better pay and working conditions. At first the company refused to negotiate but later gave in on some minor points, declaring the other demands “illegal” or “impossible.” When the strikers refused to disperse the military fired on the banana workers, killing scores.

You might think that Chiquita would have reconsidered its labor policies after that but in the late 1990s the company began to ally itself with insidious forces, specifically right wing paramilitaries. Chiquita paid off the men to the tune of more than a million dollars. In its own defense, the company declared that it was merely paying protection money to the paramilitaries.

In 2007, Chiquita paid $25 million to settle a Justice Department investigation into the payments. Chiquita was the first company in U.S. history to be convicted of financial dealings with a designated terrorist organization.

In a lawsuit launched against Chiquita victims of the paramilitary violence claimed the firm abetted atrocities including terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity. A lawyer for the plaintiffs said that Chiquita’s relationship with the paramilitaries “was about acquiring every aspect of banana distribution and sale through a reign of terror.”

Back in Washington, D.C. Charles Lindner, Chiquita’s CEO, was busy courting the White House. Lindner had been a big donor to the GOP but switched sides and began to lavish cash on the Democrats and Bill Clinton. Clinton repaid Linder by becoming a key military backer of the government of Andrés Pastrana which presided over the proliferation of right wing death squads. At the time the U.S. was pursuing its corporately-friendly free trade agenda in Latin America, a strategy carried out by Clinton’s old boyhood friend Thomas “Mack” McLarty. At the White House, McLarty served as Chief of Staff and Special Envoy to Latin America. He’s an intriguing figure who I’ll come back to in a moment.

The Holder-Chiquita Connection

Given Chiquita’s underhanded record in Central America and Colombia it’s not a surprise that the company later sought to ally itself with COHEP in Honduras. In addition to lobbying business associations in Honduras however Chiquita also cultivated relationships with high powered law firms in Washington. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Chiquita has paid out $70,000 in lobbying fees to Covington and Burling over the past three years.

Covington is a powerful law firm which advises multinational corporations. Eric Holder, the current Attorney General, a co-chair of the Obama campaign and former Deputy Attorney General under Bill Clinton was up until recently a partner at the firm. At Covington, Holder defended Chiquita as lead counsel in its case with the Justice Department. From his perch at the elegant new Covington headquarters located near the New York Times building in Manhattan, Holder prepped Fernando Aguirre, Chiquita’s CEO, for an interview with 60 Minutes dealing with Colombian death squads.

Holder had the fruit company plead guilty to one count of “engaging in transactions with a specially designated global terrorist organization.” But the lawyer, who was taking in a hefty salary at Covington to the tune of more than $2 million, brokered a sweetheart deal in which Chiquita only paid a $25 million fine over five years. Outrageously however, not one of the six company officials who approved the payments received any jail time.

The Curious Case of Covington

Look a little deeper and you’ll find that not only does Covington represent Chiquita but also serves as a kind of nexus for the political right intent on pushing a hawkish foreign policy in Latin America. Covington has pursued an important strategic alliance with Kissinger (of Chile, 1973 fame) and McLarty Associates (yes, the same Mack McLarty from Clinton-time), a well known international consulting and strategic advisory firm.

From 1974 to 1981 John Bolton served as an associate at Covington. As U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations under George Bush, Bolton was a fierce critic of leftists in Latin America such as Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez. Furthermore, just recently John Negroponte became Covington’s Vice Chairman. Negroponte is a former Deputy Secretary of State, Director of National Intelligence and U.S. Representative to the United Nations.

As U.S. Ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985, Negroponte played a significant role in assisting the U.S.-backed Contra rebels intent on overthrowing the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua. Human rights groups have criticized Negroponte for ignoring human rights abuses committed by Honduran death squads which were funded and partially trained by the Central Intelligence Agency. Indeed, when Negroponte served as ambassador his building in Tegucigalpa became one of the largest nerve centers of the CIA in Latin America with a tenfold increase in personnel.

While there’s no evidence linking Chiquita to the recent coup in Honduras, there’s enough of a confluence of suspicious characters and political heavyweights here to warrant further investigation. From COHEP to Covington to Holder to Negroponte to McLarty, Chiquita has sought out friends in high places, friends who had no love for the progressive labor policies of the Zelaya regime in Tegucigalpa.



Nikolas Kozloff is the author of Revolution! South America and the Rise of the New Left (Palgrave-Macmillan, 2008) Follow his blog at senorchichero.blogspot.com
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby ShinShinKid » Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:01 pm

Honduras was, and continues to be, the original "Banana Republic".
After all, if you want to look at the root of US involvement in Central America, United Fruit will suffice. The octopus is back, baby!
Most people are not aware of this, but the US had already fought a war in Nicaragua before the advent of Iran-Contra. The US was looking into using Nicaragua as the original canal, not Panama. [Caveat: Ollie North tried to establish a clandestine landing strip in Costa Rica (The jewel of Latin America, BTW), only to met with strict denial. ]
Don't kid yourselves, our last armed foray, Panama, was real.
US corporate interests are so tied into the basic institutions of economy in these countries, any threat will be met with serious force (read: coups, death squads, structural attacks). Sometimes, it's enough to remove large amounts of capital from the economies of these countries. That's what I believe the corporations have begun to do. It throws things into a tumult. The leaders that get elected to change things no longer have the access to money that the old school power players had.
On edit, I wanted to say that this lack of funds makes the population unstable and pushes a "conservative mood" upon the public, where people are "wishing for the good old days".
User avatar
ShinShinKid
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2007 9:25 pm
Location: Home
Blog: View Blog (26)

Postby StarmanSkye » Fri Jul 17, 2009 1:22 pm

http://axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/A ... 6272.shtml

Honduras: a new screenplay by the CIA and associates ( 2) Print This ShareThisBy Stella Calloni in Argentina, translated by Karla Jacobs in Nicaragua
Tortilla con Sal
Thursday, Jul 9, 2009


The June 28th coup d'etat in Honduras against the government of President Manuel Zelaya (who emerged from the Liberal Party but formed independent positions rejecting impositions such as the Free Trade Agreement, joining the Latin American integration project ALBA and forming alliances with popular organizations) is and forever will be one of the biggest exercises of media terrorism, among other destabilization models. But behind the coup there are many important messages that require analysis.

The Organization of American States (OAS) was slow to act. Representatives of the OAS should have been in Honduras on June 26th as President Zelaya had requested. It is true that, in light of Latin American insistence, the organization opposed the coup on strong terms, terms that even involved the General Secretary Jose Miguel Insulza personally handing over the text of an ultimatum to the usurper government. Some sectors, however, express doubts as to the OAS' commitment to this position due to the sluggish pace of action.

Analyzing the coup itself, except for a few additional twists, there is hardly anything to differentiate it from all the other US actions of intervention in Latin America during the 20th century and the first decade of the 21st century.

Openly, CNN has done everything possible to legitimize the coup. The attempt to do so has been blatant and clumsy. During the first day of the coup, which began with the extremely violent kidnapping of the President who was subsequently expelled to Costa Rica as part of the illegal operation, one self-evidently monitored by the US military bases in Honduras, CNN tried all day to blame President Zelaya for events with the presentation of a series of interviews.

The question, in general terms, was "don't you think that President Zelaya is to blame for having tried to carry out this consultation that was rejected by so many?" Most of the people who were asked this type of question responded in support of Zelaya and against the coup. As a result, the first action failed. But the propaganda continued in other forms.

The supposed "objectivity" with which messages from viewers are received and read out - the majority of which always favour the positions of the hegemonic discourse of the company - is false. For a start messages opposed to CNN's position are discarded, while the fact that the majority of Hondurans do not have access to Internet and that thousands of others, in the face of the repression imposed by the usurper government, are fleeing or are already in clandestinity, is not mentioned.

What is more, CNN contradicts itself. Zelaya had proposed a non-binding consultation for June 28th in which the electorate could express whether or not they supported the inclusion of a fourth ballot in the general elections in November in order to vote for or against the installation of a Constituent Assembly.

If the coup leaders thought, like CNN argued on July 4th, that Zelaya only had 30% of the vote, then why didn't they allow the vote to take place and Zelaya's proposal to be rejected? Was a brutal coup necessary to impede the consultation if the outcome, according to CNN, would not favour the president, and if a new opportunity for these matters to be discussed (the November general elections) would present itself shortly?

If the president had only minimum support, why not wait a few hours to witness his defeat at the ballot box? Why carry out a pre-dawn raid of his house, kidnap him and impose a coup that inevitably implies State terrorism?

As part of this attempt at the application of simple reasoning, it is apt to mention another part of the equation concealed by CNN: the region's history, which is not offered as context. The colonial occupation of the region by the US during the 20th century, from which the terrible term "Banana Republic" emerged in reference to the Central American nations, is not mentioned.

The people of Central America have a long history of resistence to US colonialism. The total number of victims of the resistence to dictatorships imposed by Washington during most of the 20th century is nearly 400,000. Considering that in Guatemala alone 90,000 people were "disappeared" and over 100,000 were killed, add to that the disappearences and murders during the Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua and the millitary dictatorship in El Salvdaor and those that resulted from the under cover US war against the people of Nicaragua in the 80s and there is no exageration in this figure.

If the coup in Honduras is not evaluated within the terms of this reality, it is impossible to understand the danger that the current situation signifies for Latin America and why the only solution is the restitution of President Zelaya.

Democratically elected presidents were frequently overthrown as a result of invasions and interventions between the 1950s and the 1980s. At the end of the 1990s, and even more so during the first few years of the 21st century, the emergence of new leaders free of the ideological straightjacket imposed by the Cold War, provoked other failed coup attempts like the one in Venezuela in April 2002 against President Hugo Chavez and the supposedly "civic" attempts (with paramilitary support behind them) like the one that aimed to overthrow Evo Morales in September 2008.

The coup d'etats and velvet revolutions feed off each other in the imperative task of destabilizing governments. These destabilization attempts rely on the support of the National Endowment Foundation (NED) and the US Agency for International Development (USAID) - in other words the CIA which was also responsible for the war against Nicaragua and the invasion of Panama in 1989 among other "memorable" operations in the Central American region.

In 1983 the Argentinian journalist and investigator, Gregorio Selser, wrote the book "Honduras: rented out Republic" published in Mexico the same year. In the book Selser denounced the complicity of Honduran political leaders with the long term occupation by the fruit companies and other multinationals and the US military intervention.

Marking his respect for the people of Honduras, a people subjected to the infamy of dictatorships and congressional powers that constantly betray them, Selser demonstrates, citing documents in evidence, that Honduras is a country that has been used by Washington as a platform for regional agression since the time when the fruit companies imposed one government after another.

For this reason it is impossible to have a truthful discussion about what is happening in Honduras today without mentioning the presence of US millitary bases. The concealment of this factor is part of the coup.

The fact that the antecedents of everything that happened in the region when US millitary aid propped up Central American dictators are not mentioned is not an act of common "forgetfulness." It is a well documented fact that the invasion that overthrew the legitimate President of Guatemala, Jacobo Arbenz, in 1954 and the millitary operations against El Salvador and Nicaragua in the 1980s were coordinated from US military bases in Honduras.

During those years some of the most powerful radar systems available were installed in the millitary bases in Honduras. One of the most established is Pamerola where the US has the strategic runway measuring over 2.6km long which facilitates the entrance into the country of equipment for attack and as many troops as are required.

But Palmerola is not the only millitary site in Honduras where the US can locate troops for "rapid response" actions against any country in the region. With its high technology equipment, the US can monitor an extensive territory, including the Caribbean, from its bases in Honduras.

During the fateful decade of the 80s, in a secret session behind the backs of the Honduran people 44 Liberal Party deputies and 34 National Party deputies agreed to move ahead with the creation of the Regional Training Centre (CREM). It was in this centre that Salvadoran soldiers, who went on to murder and "dissappear" the populations of entire towns, were trained. Soldiers from other countries ruled by dictators were also trained at this centre.

In recent years, US soldiers trained mercenaries for the Iraq war in and around Palmerola, just a few kilometres from the border with Nicaragua.

The Honduran people has been imprisoned in the spider's web of Cold War counterinsurgencies, with US millitary installations that were and are used to attack other nations.

The Honduran Supreme Court of Justice is an institution that was introduced by the country's former "viceroy" John Dimitri Negroponte, who never lost touch with his millitary, business and political subordinates after his time as US Ambassador in the 1980s. During this period, Negroponte was effectively a government in the shadows.

The lead up to the current situation in Honduras was instigated as a result of Negroponte's trip to the Central American nation a year ago when he was deputy secretary of State for George W. Bush's administration. It was after a number of meetings Negroponte held with the current presidente de facto, Roberto Micheletti and with members of the Supreme Court that preparations for the coup were intensified under the supervision of the US Embassy in Tegucigalpa (which evidently acted alongside the coup leaders all along). It is essential also to point out the participation of Israeli intelligence (which accompanies similar actions in other countries in the region) as an important partner in the Honduran coup preparations.

For Honduran social organizations, and for the majority of nations in the world, the only possible solution to the crisis is the restitution of Manuel Zelaya as President of Honduras. This, of course, has generated internal contradictions in the US.

But there is another essential point: in this coup in Honduras (which is supported by the Catholic Church hierarchy and as part of which media outlets are being closed down, thousands of people are being murdered, persecuted and repressed, including journalists, while blatant acts of State terrorism are taking place) new methods are being tested out.

Indeed, the brutality demonstrated by the military was destined to provoke the shock and condemnation of all of Latin America. The disrespect and disregard with which coup leaders have treated international institutions like the OAS and the UN indicates that they have assumed the disparaging attitude with which former president Bush treated the same institutions.

One of the most callous effects of Bush's time in the White House is the extent to which international institutions were discredited and debilitated when he invaded Iraq imposing extremely grave violations of human rights on the world. The frightful symbols of this grave episode were and are Guantanamo and the secret jails located across the globe.

There is another aspect of the Honduran coup about which little has been said. This coup is not just a repetition of old coup models with the active participation of the oligarchical power (models so old that this 2009 version is almost inconceivable). This model has involved extremely provocative ingredients, as if it was designed in order to present President Barack Obama with a fait accompli. This makes going back to the pre-coup situation very difficult without activating what is already being proposed inside the country: the fulfillment of certain demands by the hawks.

The coup leaders and their supporters are alluding to the new president's "weaknesses." One is reminded of the hawks treatment of former president James Carter during the period in which he had disagreements with Central American dictators. This strategy is a well known mafia trick.

In this case certain figures, spokesmen for the hawks, are wheeled out. One of them is no less than former deputy secretary Roger Noriega himself, an active participant of the UnoAmerica Foundation, the new Frankenstein of the NED and USAID.

This "foundation" was created in Colombia at the end of 2008, although "militants" were carrying out actions in different countries before that. Among the recuits of the foundation's leaders are former millitary officials of the old dictatorships and representatives of the most extreme right wing and neo nazist sectors of Latin America. The millitants commit themselves to supporting actions throughout Latin America, beyond the borders of their own nations, in the same way dictators used to coordinate actions in the counterinsurgent Operation Condor.

This makes it clear that there is a lot more behind the Honduran coup. It is an extraordinary trial-run and the corporate framework of the Honduran coup leaders, who say that they are "ready to resist," works because there is plenty of money behind them. Just like there was plenty of money behind the failed corporate oil lock-out coup in Venezuela, and behind the transport bosses in Chile all those years ago, and the Bolivia coup leaders.

This coup has grave implications in so many different directions. So Latin America has to act as a retaining wall. Any door left ajar will be seen as a "weakness" by the hawks - the ones who never went away - who ignore and defy all international regulations.

The coup in Honduras, a nation under military occupation, is a harsh test for the continent. But the message spoken by a renewed Latin America is solid and precise, and the world has given its verdict.

For Europe this is a throwback to the times of the Monroe Doctrine. They are saying that America is for the Americans (North Americans) just a few days before the old continent signs a treaty with the Central American sub-region.
StarmanSkye
 
Posts: 2670
Joined: Thu Nov 03, 2005 11:32 pm
Location: State of Jefferson
Blog: View Blog (0)

The CIA's Ghosts of Tegucigalpa

Postby American Dream » Fri Jul 17, 2009 3:34 pm

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2009/071409a.html

The CIA's Ghosts of Tegucigalpa

By Jerry Meldon
July 14, 2009

Billy Joya, security adviser to Honduras’s post-coup-d’etat President Roberto Micheletti, offered the following explanation for the armed forces’ June 28 insurrection ousting democratically elected President Manuel Zelaya:


Joya said Zelaya had been following the same “Marxist-Leninist strategy” for tightening his grip on power that Chilean President Salvador Allende had in 1973 when Gen. Augusto Pinochet toppled Allende.

At least, Joya is right about this much: The assault on Honduras’s fragile democracy was reminiscent of Pinochet’s 1973 putsch. But Joya’s justification says more about where he and Micheletti are coming from than it does about Zelaya, whose real offense was to run afoul of the Honduran oligarchs.

The Organization of American States and United Nations have condemned the coup and demanded Zelaya’s reinstatement. But the Obama administration has been characteristically cautious, expressing displeasure and suspending military ties, but stopping short of economic sanctions that might lead to some second thoughts among the coup leaders.

Does the White House’s chariness reflect fear that a reinstated Zelaya might take some revenge by releasing records revealing Reagan-era CIA collaboration with brutal Honduran generals and their drug kingpin partners?

Does Obama prefer, as he does regarding George W. Bush’s disastrous presidency, to never look backwards even when the history involves serious crimes?

Pleasing the Putschists

Obama's disinterest in history would please Micheletti and his fellow putschists, not least Billy Joya, who in the early 1980s was a captain in Battalion 3-16, a brutal Honduran intelligence unit that was trained and equipped by the CIA.

A 1995 Baltimore Sun investigation of Reagan-era crimes documented the battalion’s use of shock and suffocation devices and its murder of 184 victims. The U.S. Embassy knew what was going on, but continued to work closely with Battalion 3-16’s leaders.

The CIA got into bed with homicidal uniformed Hondurans because the Agency - Washington’s primary tool for achieving goals antithetical to American values - has always operated that way.

Indeed, the story of how Nazi-like tactics spread across Latin America and other parts of the world can be traced back to the days just after World War II. Washington – in the name of “fighting communism” – recruited fugitive Nazi war criminals like SS Capt. Klaus Barbie, the Gestapo chief of Lyon, France, who escaped across so-called “rat lines” to South America and helped organize right-wing intelligence services.

In those years, the newly formed CIA embraced not only ex-Nazis but their methods. Nazi war criminals smuggled to South America taught Nazi torture techniques to the region's intelligence services.

“Butcher of Lyon” Barbie did it in Bolivia. SS Col. Walter Rauff, developer of mobile gas vans and answerable for some 90,000 deaths during World War II, did likewise in Chile for Gen. Augusto Pinochet.

The Carter-Reagan Divide

Breaking with this collaboration in the late 1970s, President Jimmy Carter embargoed arms sales to South America’s more flagrant human rights violators. However, when Carter left the Oval Office, the old ways returned with a vengeance under Ronald Reagan.

Even before the 1980 election, members of the ruling elite in Guatemala – where death squads had been operating with impunity for decades – were confident that Reagan’s victory would revive Washington’s holy war against communism.

They were confident because two pillars of the American far right, Maj. Gen. John Singlaub, commander of U.S. forces in South Korea until Carter sacked him for insubordination, and retired Gen. Daniel Graham, a former senior official at the CIA who advised the Reagan campaign, had assured them.

As if to underscore the message, the Republicans invited Guatemalan Mario Sandoval Alarcon, “Godfather” of Central American death squads, to Reagan’s inaugural ball.

In the years that followed Guatemala’s bloodbath would get even bloodier where more than 100,000 would die. Ditto for El Salvador, where some 75,000 lives would be snuffed out as the CIA helped another right-wing military crush peasant and labor uprisings.

In Nicaragua, the Reagan administration would go on the offensive because leftist Sandinista guerrillas had defeated the ruthless and corrupt Somoza dynasty in 1979, some 43 years after Washington had installed it.

Determined not to let Nicaragua become another Cuba, the Reagan administration went to work countering the revolution by reorganizing the remnants of the Somoza dictatorship’s National Guard, which was blamed for slaughtering some 50,000 Nicaraguans in 1978 and 1979.

In the early 1980s, Reagan hailed this ragtag army as “freedom fighters.” To the rest of the world, they were the “contras” and were widely regarded as drug-tainted terrorists. (In a private conversation with senior CIA officer Duane “Dewey” Clarridge, even Reagan accepted some of that reality, calling the contras “vandals.”)

Death-Squad Veterans

Right-wing Argentine intelligence units and the CIA began whipping the contras into shape in Honduras, which had the misfortune of bordering Guatemala, El Salvador and Nicaragua – the three hot spots for Reagan’s determination to draw a line against leftist gains in the region.

Honduras would trade in its traditional “Banana Republic” moniker for “Pentagon Republic.”

In establishing the contra operation, the CIA collaborated with Argentine instructors whose prior work had included organizing a “dirty war” that had tortured and killed tens of thousands of dissidents in Argentina.

On March 17, 1981, President Reagan hosted Gen. Roberto Viola of Argentina, who was about to be sworn in as president. Extending the general his best wishes, Reagan promised Viola that he would lift the embargo that Jimmy Carter had imposed on U.S. arms sales to Buenos Aires.

Though Argentina’s hand in training the contras is well known, its broader role in the CIA’s Central America “counterinsurgency” operations is not as well appreciated, nor is the price Hondurans paid for the fact that the Honduran Army officers with whom the CIA worked most closely made the murderous Argentines their role models.

Initially, the Argentine dirty warriors taught Honduran soldiers and the contras how repression was handled in Buenos Aires, including, torture, high-profile assassinations and “disappearances,” the secret murder of political targets.

According to J. Patrice McSherry, author of Predatory States, “Some of the Argentine officers involved were key Condor figures … Condor was extended to Central America.”

What was Condor?

In Operation Condor, South American intelligence teams joined forces to operate across borders to kidnap and assassinate their countries’ political exiles, essentially denying them safe haven anywhere in the world.

That explained how corpses of Bolivian refugees would turn up in Buenos Aires garbage dumps in August 1974. One month later, in that same city, a car bombing claimed the lives of Chilean Gen. Carlos Prats and his wife. Prats had opposed the 1973 coup d’etat led by Gen. Pinochet that overthrew Chile’s progressive president, Salvador Allende.

Despite release of historical documents about this right-wing international terror campaign, the mainstream U.S. media has devoted little attention to Operation Condor, in part it would seem because of the background roles of respected American leaders such as former CIA Director George H.W. Bush and ex-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger.

A 1978 State Department document, discovered by Prof. McSherry in 2001, provides evidence that the U.S. government facilitated communication among the intelligence chiefs who were collaborating in Operation Condor.

In the document, a cable from U.S. Ambassador to Paraguay Robert E. White to Secretary of State Cyrus Vance says Washington’s link to Condor might be exposed by an ongoing investigation into the Sept. 21, 1976, assassination of former Chilean foreign minister Orlando Letelier and his American colleague Ronni Moffitt in broad daylight in Washington, D.C.

Letelier, like Prats, had been an outspoken critic of Chilean strongman Pinochet. And like Prats, Letelier was murdered in a car bombing that Pinochet’s intelligence agency, DINA, had assigned to Michael V. Townley, an American expatriate closely linked to CIA-trained anti-Castro Cuban exiles and European neo-fascist terrorists.

Notably, George H.W. Bush was CIA director at the time of the Letelier murder and Agency informants had attended a meeting three months earlier at which the terror operations were discussed. Bush then helped stonewall the ensuing FBI investigation. [For details, see Robert Parry’s Secrecy & Privilege.]

Disrupting the Peace

Prior to the Argentines’ arrival in Honduras, the country had enjoyed relative peace, isolated from the violence across the country’s borders with Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. Soon, however, the Honduran police and armed forces would begin their own murderous campaign against a tiny group of domestic guerrillas and their suspected sympathizers.

In 1979, Honduran chief of police Amilcar Zelaya Rodriguez formed the secret Grupo de los 14, a goon squad that specialized in the disappearance and torture of state enemies. After President Reagan and Vice President Bush took office in 1981, the violence in Honduras escalated.

Gen. Gustavo Alvarez Martinez assumed control of Grupo de los 14. In Inside the League: The Shocking Expose of How Terrorists, Nazis, and Latin American Death Squads have Infiltrated the World Anti-Communist League, Scott and Jon Lee Anderson characterized the Honduran officer as follows:

“General Alvarez did not invent Honduran paramilitary squads, but he was the man who streamlined them, integrated them into the armed forces, and allowed them to conduct a dirty war.”

A vitriolic anticommunist who graduated from Argentina’s Colegio Militar in 1961, Alvarez would maintain contact with his instructors there, most notably Jorge Rafael Videla, who would head the Argentine junta during the Argentine dirty war’s bloodiest period.

In addition, Alvarez received advanced training at Fort Benning, Georgia; Fort Bragg, North Carolina; and Fort Gulick in the Panama Canal Zone, where he attended the School of the Americas, known to critics as the “School of the Assassins.”

With his ambition, ruthlessness and sleaziness, Alvarez was just the man the CIA was looking for. Alvarez had Grupo de los 14’s members undergo counterinsurgency training by U.S., Argentine and Chilean instructors. The group expanded over time and was renamed Batallion 3-16.

One of the group’s instructors, Ciga Correa, had been a member of the Argentine Anti-Communist Alliance (“Triple-A”), a death squad that operated on the front lines of Argentina’s dirty war. One of his Triple-A missions was the 1974 Operation Condor assassination of Gen. Prats.

In an offshoot of Operation Condor, Correa joined an Argentine unit in Guatemala City that targeted suspected Argentine guerrillas who had fled to Guatemala, El Salvador and Honduras.

Under the tutelage of Correa and his associates, Alvarez’s thugs kidnapped, tortured, murdered and “disappeared” Honduran guerrillas and their supporters, whose numbers had swelled following the Sandinista triumph next door in Nicaragua.

Flash Forward to 2001

In 2001, Society of Helpers Sister Laetitia Bordes read that President George W. Bush planned to nominate John D. Negroponte to be U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations. At the time, she recalled a face-to-face meeting in 1982 with Negroponte in his office as U.S. Ambassador to Honduras.

She had made the journey to ask a nagging question: What had happened to 32 women who had fled to Honduras to escape El Salvador’s death squads in the months following the March 24, 1980, assassination of Archbishop Oscar Romero in San Salvador?

Sometime after arriving in Honduras, the women had been forcibly taken from their living quarters and shoved into vans, never to be seen again. Negroponte, who had worked closely with Gen. Alvarez, dissembled, disavowing knowledge of the women’s whereabouts and insisting that the U.S. Embassy kept its hands out of Honduran government affairs.

Twelve years after that encounter, Sister Laetitia realized that Negroponte had lied to her. She read a Honduran Human Rights Commission report on the torture and disappearance of political prisoners. It specifically mentioned Negroponte’s complicity in human rights violations.

In 1996, Sister Laetitia read a Baltimore Sun interview with Jack Binns, Negroponte’s predecessor in Tegucigalpa. Binns recalled that a group of Salvadorans, including the women about whose whereabouts Sister Laetitia had inquired, had been captured on April 22, 1981, tortured by members of the Honduran Secret Police, placed aboard Salvadoran military helicopters and, after taking off, thrown out of the helicopters.

Binns added that U.S. authorities had been informed about the incident.

The Honduran government eventually recognized 184 disappearances in that era: 39 Nicaraguans, 28 Salvadorans, five Costa Ricans, four Guatemalans, one American, one Ecuadoran, one Venezuelan and 105 Hondurans. Human rights organizations believe the numbers were considerably higher.

(Ultimately, President George W. Bush selected Negroponte for a string of important assignments: U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Ambassador to Iraq, the nation’s first “Intelligence Czar” and, finally, in 2007, Deputy Secretary of State.)

Military Turmoil

In early 1982, Honduran President Roberto Suazo Cordova promoted Negroponte’s sidekick, Grupo de los 14 leader Gustavo Alvarez Martinez, to the rank of general. Before the year was over, Alvarez had decimated Honduras’s tiny guerrilla movement and was promoted to Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.

The appointment bred resentment in more senior officers – and as Hondurans grew fed up with their country’s exploitation by Washington as a base for the Nicaraguan contras, the resentment among Gen. Alvarez’s enemies grew.

The boil burst in March 1984, when Honduran Air Force commander Gen. Walter Lopez Reyes spearheaded an internal military coup that drove Alvarez into exile in the United States. The violence in Honduras soon tapered off.

CIA Tegucigalpa station chief Donald Winters, who had asked Alvarez to be the godfather to his adopted daughter, was reassigned elsewhere.

Meanwhile, the contras – a brutal and ineffective fighting force – were becoming a headache for the White House. Reports of the CIA mining of Nicaragua’s harbors and a CIA training manual that sanctioned the assassination of civilians undermined support for Ronald Reagan’s Central American proxy wars.

Anticipating congressional cutoff of funding for the contras, the White House convened a National Security Planning Group meeting on June 25, 1984. The meeting was marked by heated debate about whether seeking third-country support for the contras would expose President Reagan to impeachment.

Vice President Bush asserted that soliciting the contra aid would be lawful unless the United States promised to give the third parties something in return. Nonetheless, Reagan personally approved, with Bush’s active involvement, special aid for Honduras as an implicit quid pro quo for helping the contras.

According to the minutes of a Feb. 7, 1985, meeting of high-level Reagan administration officials, which were released at the later trial of Reagan’s point man for the contras, Lt. Col. Oliver North, the “principals agreed … to provide several enticements in exchange for … continued support” of the contras.

Twelve days after the meeting, Reagan released millions of dollars in economic aid to Honduras.

The Drug Connection

The Reagan administration also did what it could to protect its Honduran friends who ran afoul of the law.

On Nov. 1, 1984, the FBI arrested eight men in Miami and charged them with plotting to overthrow the Honduran government and assassinate President Suazo. The alleged aim of the scheme, which was financed by $40 million in cocaine profits, was to reinstate Gen. Alvarez as Chairman of Honduras’s Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The Honduran government asked Washington to hand over Alvarez, but he remained safe within U.S. borders, even benefiting from a $50,000 Pentagon contract for a six-month study of “low-intensity conflict” in Central America.

Alvarez also reportedly spent time as the house guest in Miami of international arms trader Gerard Latchinian, one of the richest men in Honduras, where he was known as the “ambassador of death.” Latchinian got 30 years in prison for his role in the drug-financed coup/assassination plot.

What made the stench even worse was Washington’s treatment of Alvarez’s chum, Gen. Jose Bueso-Rosa. Bueso had served as Army Chief of Staff and was an avid supporter of the contras until Alvarez’s March 1984 ouster – following which Bueso was demoted to military attaché in Santiago, Chile.

For his role in the assassination plot, Bueso turned himself in to federal authorities in Miami. In June 1986, he pleaded guilty to two federal counts of “traveling in furtherance of a conspiracy to plan an assassination” and was sentenced to five years at a minimum security prison.

The light sentence must have been related to Oliver North’s appeals to State and Justice Department officials for intervention on Bueso’s behalf. Two U.S. government officials, one serving and one retired, testified as character witnesses at Bueso’s sentencing hearing, and the Reagan administration submitted an appeal for leniency that read in part:

“General Bueso-Rosa has always been a valuable ally to the United States. As chief of staff of Honduras’s armed forces he immeasurably furthered U.S. national interests in Central America. He is primarily responsible for the initial success of the American military preserve in Honduras. For this service he was awarded the Legion of Merit by the President of the United States, the highest award that can be presented to a foreign military officer.” [See Scott and Marshall’s Cocaine Politics.]

Reagan also had awarded the Legion of Merit to Gen. Alvarez.

‘Lenient’ Sentence

The presiding judge decided that the additional information trumped the Justice Department’s description of the assassination conspiracy as “the most significant case of narco-terrorism yet discovered.” A senior Justice Department official called the five-year sentence meted out to Bueso “lenient.”

But it wasn’t lenient enough for Oliver North. As authors Peter Dale Scott and Jonathan Marshall reported, North sent a note to his then boss, National Security Adviser John Poindexter, saying there remained one “problem.”

The general was the man with whom North and three other senior U.S. officials had “worked out arrangements” for contra support, and Bueso had entered a guilty plea on the assumption that he would be given time at a minimum security prison “for a short period [days or weeks] and then walk free.”

“Our major concern,” North wrote, “is that when Bueso finds out what is really happening to him, he will break his longstanding silence about the [contras} and other sensitive operations.” [Emphasis added.]

North and some of his colleagues were therefore going to “cabal quietly … to look into options: pardon, clemency, deportation, reduced sentence. Objective is to keep Bueso from feeling like he was lied to in legal process and start spilling the beans.”

Poindexter reassured North: “You may advise all concerned that the President will want to be as helpful as possible to settle this matter.” In the end, the Justice Department blocked clemency or deportation, and Bueso-Rosa served his time and kept his mouth shut.

But the late 1984 timing of Bueso’s drug-financed assassination plot suggests that it may have been one of those other sensitive operations that Oliver North cagily referred to in his note to Poindexter. The Honduran general’s drug/assassination conspiracy may have been part of the Reagan administration’s elaborate plans to sustain the contras.

A revitalized Honduran connection would have guaranteed Tegucigalpa's crucial support. The coup’s failure led to Plan B: economic leverage with President Suazo. And because a congressional ban on aiding the contras, known as the Boland Amendment, made that impeachable, it became a top priority to conceal Reagan’s and Bush’s roles.

The Bush family name was further protected by President George H.W. Bush’s Christmas Eve 1992 pardons to six key Iran-Contra defendants, including former Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger. To save his own skin, Weinberger was expected to incriminate Bush in the Iran-Contra cover-up.

Bill Clinton’s opposition to the Iran-Contra investigation when he assumed the presidency in 1993 also helped spare Bush from having to answer a new round of questions from special prosecutor Lawrence E. Walsh.

Walsh’s truncated investigation had touched on – but failed to pursue – the contra-cocaine aspect of the Iran-Contra Affair, of which the Bueso-Rosa/Latchinian conspiracy was just the tip of a narcotics-filled iceberg.

Consortiumnews.com’s Robert Parry, the late Gary Webb and others – with no help, indeed with resistance from the New York Times, Washington Post and Los Angeles Times – have painstakingly established that the contras were the beneficiaries of and in some cases in cahoots with drug traffickers. [For details, see Parry’s Lost History.]

Digging Deeper

So let’s delve a bit further into the Honduran Connection.

A 1983 US Customs report noted that the Honduran cargo firm SETCO Air was headed by Juan Ramon Matta Ballesteros, a Class I DEA violator in partnership with “American businessmen who are … smuggling narcotics into the United States.”

Six years later, the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Terrorism, Narcotics and International Operations, headed by John Kerry, D-Massachusetts, issued a multi-volume report, “Drugs, Law Enforcement and Foreign Policy.”

The report noted, among other sensational findings, that SETCO Air was “the principal company used by the Contras in Honduras to transport supplies and personnel for the FDN [Nicaraguan Democratic Force], carrying at least a million rounds of ammunition, food, uniforms and other military supplies for the Contras from 1983 to 1985.”

In other words, unfazed by the 1983 Customs report that had identified Matta Ballestero as a Class I violator – which meant drug kingpin, top of the food chain – the Reagan administration retained his airline for another two years as the contra’s chief mover of supplies.

Yet what makes Matta’s case special is just how far Washington would go to keep him in business. In 1970, Matta marked himself as a big-time trafficker when he was arrested at Dulles Airport outside Washington for importing 54 pounds of cocaine. But he was sentenced to five years at a minimum security prison, and a year later he tiptoed out the door and didn’t come back.

By 1973, the DEA considered Matta important enough to entrap in a sting operation. But either the narcs blew it or someone told them not to try.

Two years later, the DEA learned that Matta had teamed up with Mexican drug kingpin Miguel Angel Felix Gallardo, a tonnage supplier to El Norte with Colombian and Peruvian connections. The partnership would make Matta a billionaire.

A 1978 DEA intelligence report cited by James Mills in his penetrating study, The Underground Empire, noted that Matta had financed a coup d’etat in his native Honduras that was led by his partner, Gen. Policarpo Paz Garcia.

Transfer Point

Even before that coup, Honduras had been the transfer point for half a billion dollars worth of northbound drugs. In the three years following the coup, Matta Ballesteros and President Paz Garcia made Honduras an even bigger cocaine trafficking center.

As Scott and Marshall note in Cocaine Politics, when these events unfolded, Jimmy Carter was in the White House and it was his administration that overlooked Matta Ballesteros’s behind-the-scenes role in Honduran politics.

However, unlike the Carter administration, the incoming Reagan team didn’t simply turn a blind eye. It found Honduras’s corruption an ideal environment for nourishing the contra war.

Matta’s number one Honduran government enabler after President Paz was Col. Leonidas Torres Arias, the head of military intelligence and a key figure in making the necessary arrangements for opening contra training camps.

In August 1981, Col. Torres met secretly in Guatemala City with Argentine intelligence officer Mario Davico, the CIA’s Duane “Dewey” Clarridge, Honduran Gen. Alvarez Martinez and President Paz Garcia.

A tripartite agreement emerged for waging the contra war on Nicaragua. Argentine intelligence would handle organization, administration and training; the CIA would supply the funds; and Honduras would provide the territory for operational bases.

At the time, Davico was second in command of Argentine Army Intelligence and a graduate of the U.S. Army’s School of the Americas. He would soon relocate to Honduras to teach Alvarez’s Batallion 3-16 the Argentine “dirty war” techniques of arbitrary detention, torture, extrajudicial executions and disposal of cadavers.

All three Hondurans – Torres Arias, Alvarez Martinez and Paz Garcia – were considered to be in the pockets of the drug lords. As Scott and Marshall put it: “The CIA relied totally on the cocaine-trafficking military in Honduras to back its plans to overthrow the Sandinista regime in Nicaragua.”

But concerns about drug trafficking did little to dissuade the Reagan administration from teaming up with the Honduran military. That, however, meant that the CIA and Drug Enforcement Administration would be operating at cross purposes.

The DEA agent in charge of its recently opened Tegucigalpa office, Thomas Zepeda, had documented the complicity of Col. Torres Arias and other high-ranking Honduran officers in Matta Ballesteros’s drug operations.

But DEA needed the Honduran military’s assistance to arrest Torres and his cronies, and the CIA needed them to support the contras. To avoid a showdown with the CIA, the DEA’s Zepeda proposed that a grand jury be empanelled to investigate corruption in the Honduran armed forces.

But the CIA nixed the idea, no doubt to protect its collaborators. As one high-level diplomat later noted: “Without the support of the Honduran military there would have been no such thing as the contras. It’s that simple … So they got rid of the DEA station.”

The DEA Tegucigalpa station was shut down - in June 1983, just as the CIA station was doubling in size - in a naked move to preclude a serious drug investigation. That same month, Customs asked Zepeda to investigate Matta’s airline, SETCO, which would soon be flying supplies to the contras.

Brutal Murder

But the worst was still to come. Shortly after noon on Feb. 7, 1985, DEA undercover agent Enrique (Kiki) Camarena walked out of the U.S. consulate in Guadalajara, Mexico for a lunch date with his wife.

Two Jalisco state policemen, two hired killers and a drug lord’s lieutenant drove up alongside, told Camarena “the commandante wants to see you,” and shoved him into their car. They sped to a house that was owned by drug kingpin Rafael Caro Quintero.

Camarena was questioned and tortured there for the next 30 hours. His interrogator, a captured tape would reveal, was a commander in the Federal Security Directorate (DFS), Mexico’s FBI. One month later, Camarena’s mutilated body was discovered next to that of his Mexican pilot.

First it was assumed that the motive for the murders had been raids Camarena had led on vast marijuana plantations, which had cost Cara Quintero and his partners an estimated $5 billion. But the interrogation, it turned out, focused on what Camarena knew about corruption in Mexico’s political hierarchy.

That would explain why the men who attended the meeting at which Camarena’s abduction reportedly included future Mexico City police chief Javier Garcia Paniagua, and Manuel Ibarra Herrera, the former head of Mexico’s Federal Judicial Police.

That same year, Newsweek would describe another attendee as the “boss of bosses of Mexico’s cocaine industry,” a man whose organization was believed to supply “perhaps one third of all the cocaine consumed in the United States.”

A DEA agent described the man as “the kind of individual who would be a decision maker of last resort. He is at the same level as the rulers of Medellin and Cali cartels.” That man was Juan Ramon Matta Ballesteros, and at the planning meeting he reportedly announced “we will soon have the identity” of the DEA agent and he will be silenced.

Matta Ballesteros kept his promise. Camarena was silenced. The method, a forensic specialist determined, was the application of a Phillips-head screwdriver to the skull.

Hair sample analysis would establish Matta’s presence at the silencing. But it was only in 1990 that federal prosecutors in Los Angeles would finally put Matta away for life for cocaine trafficking, racketeering and conspiracy.

Significantly, a witness in the Camarena murder case told the DEA that the CIA had trained Nicaraguan contras on a ranch near Veracruz that was owned by Rafael Caro Quintero, the same drug kingpin who owned the house outside Guadalajara where Enrique Camarena was murdered.

Matta would be arrested in 1986 in Colombia. But he bought his way out of jail with a $2 million bribe and made his way back home to Honduras. That same year, which was three years after Customs had identified Matta as both a Class I DEA violator and the owner of SETCO Air – and after Matta had become a prime suspect in the Camarena murder - the State Department renewed SETCO’s contract to supply the contras.

For two more years Matta would live in luxury in Hondruas, seemingly unconcerned by any prospect of arrest since he still had many friends in high places. His generosity would endear him with Honduras’s abjectly poor masses. They called him Honduras’s “Robin Hood.”

But in March 1988, after the Iran-Contra scandal had devastated political support for the contra war in Washington, a truce was declared in Nicaragua. That eliminated Washington’s use for Honduras, and its need for drug kingpins like Matta and his partner, Mexican drug kingpin Felix Gallardo, who once told a DEA informant that he was “protected” because his drug profits were bankrolling the contras.

Only then were Felix Gallardo and Matta Ballesteros arrested and flown to the United States.

Belated Probe

When CIA Inspector General Frederick Hitz belatedly investigated the contra-cocaine connection in the late 1990s, he documented the depth of CIA knowledge of drug traffickers and money-launderers connected to the contra war – and explained the key reason for protecting these criminals.

According to Hitz’s report, the CIA had “one overriding priority: to oust the Sandinista government. … [CIA officers] were determined that the various difficulties they encountered not be allowed to prevent effective implementation of the contra program.”

One CIA field officer explained, “The focus was to get the job done, get the support and win the war.”

The CIA's manipulation of Honduran politics in pursuit of that goal was another part of the contra war’s legacy.

Besides the drug lords, other key players also ran afoul of the law or met their own rough justice.

The Argentine military junta self-imploded in the wake of the disastrous 1982 war with Great Britain over the Falklands/Malvinas islands, leading to a restoration of civilian rule and a judgment by an Argentine court denouncing the military government for genocide and other crimes against humanity.

Reagan’s guest, Gen. Viola, was sentenced to 17 years in prison.

Honduran Gen. Alvarez Martinez returned to Honduras in 1987 and was silenced by an assassin on Jan. 25, 1989.

The CIA's Clarridge was indicted for perjury and lying to Congress in the Iran-Contra scandal but was pardoned by President George H.W. Bush on Christmas Eve 1992.

But the ghosts of Tegucigalpa continue to hover over Honduran politics. As Hondurans protest the ouster of President Manuel Zelaya, many believe that Washington encouraged and supported the coup. Can anyone blame them?

They haven’t forgotten that during the Reagan era, the CIA and Argentine dirty warriors ran roughshod over their country. They also know that Roberto Micheletti’s security adviser, Billy Joya, was a member of one of those Reagan-era death squads.

They know, too, that Zelaya had been bucking Honduras’s powerful upper class with reforms like a 60 percent minimum wage increase and rejecting Washington’s “free trade” policies. Zelaya also challenged U.S. foreign policy by befriending Cuba’s Fidel Castro and Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez.

However badly President Barack Obama may want to look forward not backwards, Washington’s unacknowledged crimes of the past few decades keep intruding on the present.



Jerry Meldon is an Associate Professor in the Chemical and Biological Engineering Department at Tufts University, Medford, Massachusetts. Dedicated to the memory of Penny Lernoux.
American Dream
 
Posts: 19946
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2007 4:56 pm
Location: Planet Earth
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby Sounder » Fri Jul 17, 2009 5:37 pm

It's not surprising how minor and twisted this story is in the MSM. Thanks for keeping this thread going John and AD.


The people of Central America have a long history of resistence to US colonialism. The total number of victims of the resistence to dictatorships imposed by Washington during most of the 20th century is nearly 400,000. Considering that in Guatemala alone 90,000 people were "disappeared" and over 100,000 were killed, add to that the disappearences and murders during the Somoza dictatorship in Nicaragua and the millitary dictatorship in El Salvdaor and those that resulted from the under cover US war against the people of Nicaragua in the 80s and there is no exageration in this figure.

If the coup in Honduras is not evaluated within the terms of this reality, it is impossible to understand the danger that the current situation signifies for Latin America and why the only solution is the restitution of President Zelaya.
All these things will continue as long as coercion remains a central element of our mentality.
Sounder
 
Posts: 4054
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 8:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Postby geogeo » Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:27 pm

Unfortunately or fortunately, if the coup leaders don't back down, Zelaya's certain return via the Moskitia and into his home department of Olancho, probably over this weekend, will spark massive civil unrest and possibly civil war. But, unlike in the past, ordinary Hondurans are armed to to the teeth, and there is no possible way that the Honduran military and police, without help from the US or at least from private contractors, can prevail against them.

Anything that Zelaya tries to do will be blamed on Nicaragua and Venezuela in any case, and at some point the US will have to pick 'guess which?' side.

At best, Honduras could FINALLY have an authentic revolution, even if it gets messy.
as below so above
geogeo
 
Posts: 615
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 9:51 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 22 guests