DEPT OF STATE AGREES WITH COUP REGIME IN HONDURAS THAT "NO COUP D'ETAT" HAS TAKEN PLACE

[Joanne98]

The State Department finally concluded 3 weeks of ambiguity on its determination of whether or not a coup d'etat has taken place in Honduras. Despite the United Nations, European Union, Organization of American States and every Latin American nation clearly condemning the events as a coup d'etat, the United States government has today stated it doesn't consider a coup has taken place. The Obama administration joins only with the coup regime and its supporters (other coup leaders and/or executors of coups) in that determination.

Here is the statement made today by Phillip Crowley, spokesman for the Department of State:

"QUESTION: Have you ruled this as a coup d'état there legally --

MR. CROWLEY: No."


Crowley also made this statement, which appears to be a not-so-veiled attempt to tell President Zelaya and any other head of state overthrown by US allies that they better have learned their lesson: Washington will back (fund, support, design) coups against governments that align themselves with Venezuela. Breathe deep. And please do remember, this is Obama's State Department, not Bush's. Here it is:


"QUESTION: Coming back to Honduras, we’re getting some reports out of the region that there might be some sort of rift now between Zelaya and the Venezuelan Government. Is that Washington’s understanding? And if so, is that something that can be leveraged as these negotiations move on? To put it another way, is Chavez out of the way, and does that make Washington happy?

MR. CROWLEY: (Laughter.) We certainly think that if we were choosing a model government and a model leader for countries of the region to follow, that the current leadership in Venezuela would not be a particular model. If that is the lesson that President Zelaya has learned from this episode, that would be a good lesson.

QUESTION: When you say that the Venezuelan Government is – should not be an example of government for any leader --

MR. CROWLEY: I’m a believer in understatement.

QUESTION: Can you say that again? (Laughter.) It’s like – it’s justifying, sort of, the coup d’état, because if any government try to follow the socialist Government of Venezuela, then it’s fair, then, that somebody can try to make it – you know, defeat the government or something like that? Can you explain a little bit where we’re – what was your statement about Venezuela?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I think, as we have talked about and as the Secretary has said in recent days, we have, on the one hand, restored our Ambassador to Venezuela. There are a number of issues that we want to discuss with the Venezuelan Government.

On the other side of the coin, we have concerns about the government of President Chavez, not only what he’s done in terms of his own country – his intimidation of news media, for example, the steps he has taken to restrict participation and debate within his country. And we’re also concerned about unhelpful steps that he’s taken with some of this neighbors, and interference that we’ve seen Venezuela – with respect to relations with other countries, whether it’s Honduras on the one hand, or whether it’s Colombia on the other. And when we’ve had issues with President Chavez, we have always made those clear."

Full text here.

http://www.chavezcode.com/2009/07/dept-of-state-agrees-with-coup-regime.html

[dixiegrrrrl]

1. I Love the distinction between a "legal" and "illegal" coup d'état.

but of course we would not recognize it happened.
We have not admitted to our own in this country.

[billyoc]

2. We'll see what they say after Hillary's golpistas are lined up and shot.

This is not going to work out the way they think it will.

[bertman]

3. This attitude better change and fast. Otherwise, I will IMMEDIATELY begin working to

see that President Obama is a one-term President. This is corporatism at its worst.

[timeforpeace]

12. Over little Honduras? It, and Zelaya, are not worth giving up on President Obama.

[peacetalksforall]

14. Not worth giving up on Obama. I hope you are kidding. We're talking about going

into another U.S. led coup in the Western Hemisphere. We're talking about a continuation of the hit-man who works for the corporations and the White House. We're talking about another era of belittling and cheating and keeping the people in poverty. We're in effect talking about perpetuating the Cuban mafia of political intelligence and terrorism in our congress and intelligence departments and everywhere else in government - because that's the make up of the people who are doing the dirty work. We're talking about ignoring legal elections. We're talking about perpetuating the Rice, Powell, Kissinger style of State Dept that has NO RESPECT for the people of the country and in fact - disappears them and assassinates others.

How can we talk against the coups in our country from the Cheney executive orders and the worry we put into fear of marital law in our country - than just flip the importance of this?

Did you forget the sarcasm signal or did I miss it?

[bertman]

18. Thank you for expressing my thoughts precisely, peacetalksforall. nt

[peacetalksforall]

4. I'll wait a few hours more for Obama or Clinton to say the same thing. If they

do, then we have been given a very early signal of where they are headed.

It's Tuesday morning, the 21st of July. I assume this exchange was yesterday, the 20th - six months since the Inauguration.

If either one of them say the same thing then it will make all the other stuff that I haven't liked fall into place. It means we are still on the same tracks with the same destination as Cheney and the barons.

Locally,in this hemisphere, it means that economic hit men still have jobs, Otto Reich still has a job at the CIA. And as we learned through the news from outside the country, over the weekend, Negroponte is still working - as an adviser to Clinton. And we learned which corporations are involved, and we learned about the importance of our major military base in Honduras.

For a nation that is quick to throw up embargoes, Honduras is safe from the U.S. In effect, we are not at war with the OAS, EU, and many, many more entities.

Everyone, please read. There is plenty of background information in the newspapers outside the U.S. Here's one and some content. Pharmas want the coup. Obama and Clinton want the coup. Pharmas and other corporations + Clinton and Obama? True? We can't have Honduras competing with the pharmas. What does that mean for Mexico and Canada? AT%T, Time Warner, etc.

I hope, I desperately hope it's not true.

"Financial backing for the coup is identified by some as coming from the pharmaceutical industry, which fears Mr Zelaya's plans to produce generic drugs and distribute them cheaply to the impoverished majority in Honduras, who lack all but the most primitive health facilities. Others point to big companies in the telecommunications industry opposed to Hondutel, Honduras's state-owned provider. Parallels are being made with ITT, the US telecommunications company that offered the Nixon government funds for the successful overthrow of President Salvador Allende of Chile in 1973.

A key figure is Robert Carmona-Borjas, a Venezuelan active against Mr Chavez in 2002, who later fled to the US. He runs the Washington-based Arcadia, which calls itself "an innovative 'next generation' anti-corruption organisation". Its website carries three video clips alleging, without evidence, that Mr Zelaya, his associates and Hondutel are deeply corrupt. Behind Arcadia are the US-funded National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the International Republican Institute (IRI), the well-funded overseas arm of the Republican Party. Currently active among the Uighurs of western China, the NED has this year funnelled $1.2m (£740,000) for "political activity" in Honduras.

The focus of attention in the campaign against Mr Zelaya is now on the office of Senator John McCain, the defeated US presidential candidate, who is chairman of the IRI, takes an interest in telecoms affairs in the US Congress and has benefited handsomely from campaign contributions from US telecoms companies – which are said to have funded the abortive 2002 coup against Mr Chavez.

Mr McCain's former legislative counsel, John Timmons, arranged the visit of Micheletti supporters to Washington on 7 July where they met journalists at the National Press Club "to clarify any misunderstandings about Honduras's constitutional process and ... the preservation of the country's democratic institutions".

Meanwhile, within the US administration, difficulties in co-ordination have emerged between the State Department and the White House, with the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, issuing a low-key condemnation of the coup which was quickly superseded by stronger words from Mr Obama. The President called for Mr Zelaya's reinstatement, which Mrs Clinton had failed to demand.

The conservative-minded Mrs Clinton retains John Negroponte, an ambassador to Honduras under Ronald Reagan, as an adviser. He also represented George W Bush at the UN and in Baghdad. Democratic Senator Chris Dodd attacked Mr Negroponte in 2001 for drawing a veil over atrocities committed in Tegucigalpa, the Honduran capital, by military forces trained by the US. Mr Dodd claimed that the forces had been "linked to death squad activities such as killings, disappearances and other human rights abuses"."

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/democr...

[Billy Burnett]

5. How disappointing to find that the Obama admin is the same as previous admins.

New boss - same as the old boss.


Nikolas Kozloff: Who's Behind Honduras Destabilization?
http://blog.buzzflash.com/contributors/2021

by Nikolas Kozloff

Behind the recent pressure campaign against the Zelaya regime in Honduras lurks a shadowy world of right wing foundations, lobbying groups, and anti-Chávez figures. This tangled web of Washington, D.C. interests includes the Arcadia Foundation, a mysterious figure named Robert Carmona Borjas, and former State Department official Otto Reich. What do all these organizations and characters have in common? In one way or another, they are all tied back to Senator John McCain (R-AZ).

According to the Mexican newspaper La Jornada, Venezuelan lawyer Robert-Carmona Borjas helped to draft some of the infamous anti-constitutional "Carmona decrees" after Hugo Chávez was overthrown in the April 2002 military coup. After Chávez was returned to power, Carmona Borjas fled to the United States where he found his calling as a leading anti-Chávez figure and, more recently, as a fierce critic of the Zelaya regime in Honduras.

In 2004, Carmona-Borjas was listed as part time faculty at the Department of Romance Languages and Literature at George Washington University; as recently as November 2008, set up a class entitled "Political Management in Latin America" offered through the Graduate School of Political Management. According to the GW Hatchet, the local student paper, the class had a roster of right-wing, free-trade boosting speakers including Colombian President Álvaro Uribe, former U.S. ambassador to Venezuela Otto Reich, Leopoldo López, a Venezuelan politician, Secretary of Commerce Carlos Gutiérrez, and Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL).

According to the Hatchet, the class sought to "analyze Latin American governments that have failed social policies, which have led to anti-system political movements." "Many Latin American countries have forged ties with re-emerging powers and countries in pursuit of nuclear capability," Carmona-Borjas said, "ties that can endanger the interests of the United States in the region."

But it was not part time teaching in D.C. that distinguished Carmona Borjas as a political player. No, it was the Venezuelan's work as Vice President of the mysterious anti-corruption and watchdog outfit known as Arcadia Foundation that really set him apart. From his perch at Arcadia, Carmona-Borjas launched anti-corruption attacks against Honduras and the Zelaya regime. In particular, he conducted a massive public relations campaign against Hondutel, the state telecommunications company in Honduras. In article after article published in the Central American media, Borjas-Carmona accused Hondutel of corruption.

The Right-Wing Telecom Connection

The Venezuelan right winger was joined in his criticisms by Otto Reich, former U.S. Ambassador to Venezuela, State Department official under Bush, and foreign policy adviser for McCain's 2008 campaign. Reich was linked to figures in the 2002 coup against Chávez and has worked as a corporate lobbyist for firms such as telecom giant AT&T. His firm, Otto Reich Associates, advises U.S. corporations in Latin America and promotes the American free trade agenda by fighting privatization.

I speculated before that Reich and Carmona-Borjas might have known of each other, and the George Washington University connection is now proof of that. What seems to have united both Reich and Carmona-Borjas was their interest in the telecommunications issue. That's not too surprising in light of the history. Indeed, for McCain and his right-wing ilk the telecom industry has been a central political focus. McCain has had important historic ties to big corporations such as AT&T, MCI, and Qualcomm. In return for their financial contributions, McCain, who partly oversees the telecommunication industry in the Senate, has acted to protect and look out for the political and economic interests of the telecoms on Capitol Hill.

To get a sense of the sheer scope of McCain's incestuous relationship with the telecoms, one need only log on to the Web site of the Center for Responsive Politics. In the 1998 electoral cycle, AT&T gave $34,000 to McCain. In the 2000 cycle, the telecom giant provided $69,000; in 2002 $61,000; in 2004 $39,000; in 2006 $29,000; and in 2008 $187,000. Over the course of his career, AT&T has been McCain's second largest corporate backer.

What's more, AT&T has donated handsomely to McCain's International Republican Institute (IRI). McCain chairs this group and though he seldom talks about it, he has gotten much of his foreign policy experience working with the operation that is funded by the U.S. government and private money. The IRI, which receives tens of millions of taxpayer dollars each year, claims to promote democracy worldwide. In 2006, AT&T gave the IRI $200,000. AT&T spokesman Michael Balmoris declined to elaborate on why the international telecommunications provider wrote a big check. "AT&T contributes to a variety of charitable organizations," he said flippantly.

IRI and Telecom Agenda in Latin America

The IRI has fought against regimes in Latin America that resist privatization of the telecom industry. In Venezuela, where the government nationalized the telecom firm CANTV, IRI generously funded anti-Chávez civil society groups that were opposed to the regime. Starting in 1998, the year Chávez was elected, IRI worked with Venezuelan organizations to produce anti-Chávez media campaigns, including newspaper, television, and radio ads.

Additionally, when politicians, union and civil society leaders went to Washington to meet with U.S. officials just one month before the April 2002 coup, IRI picked up the bill. The IRI also helped to fund the corrupt Confederation of Venezuelan Workers (which played a major role in the anti-Chávez destabilization campaign leading up to the coup) and Súmate, an organization involved in a signature-gathering campaign to present a petition calling for Chávez's recall.

Like Hugo Chávez, Honduran President Zelaya was known to be as a fierce critic of telecommunications privatization. In this sense, he was at odds with the current coup president Roberto Micheletti as well as right-wing interests in the U.S. such as McCain's IRI, Arcadia, and Otto Reich Associates that push for the free trade agenda and privatization.

The Curious Case of Cormac

For evidence of further U.S. corporate and right-wing ties to the Honduran imbroglio, one need look no farther than PR Newswire for last Monday, July 6. In an article headlined "Honduran Congressional, Business Leaders to Hold Washington, D.C., Press Conference," we learn that a delegation sought "several days of meetings with United States policymakers to clarify any misunderstandings about Honduras' constitutional process and to discuss next steps to ensure the preservation of the country's democratic institutions."

Founded in March 2001, the Cormac Group is a "strategic consulting and lobbying firm" advocating "open and fair markets." Cormac works in the telecommunications sector and seeks to construct "a barrier-free regulatory structure that enhances competition." Cormac's Founding Partner John Timmons was a fundraiser for McCain and former Senate aide and has represented AT&T. Another partner at Cormac, Jonathan Slade, "has developed a well-known reputation from helping American and foreign companies impact the U.S. foreign policy process, particularly related to Latin America."

Hard Right and Not Obama

What seems to have united all these right-wing groups and figures -- from Arcadia to Otto Reich -- was their allegiance to free markets and privatization of the telecom industry. It was these entities allied to the hard right and McCain that played the most prominent role in the pressure campaign against Zelaya -- not the Obama Administration.

[truedelphi]

10. Ssh. No one hear wants to hear that.

Even if it is the truth.

[elehhhhna]

11. so our next war is over patent rights? holy smokes!

[Joanne98]

13. I'm pretty sure that countries have the legal right to violate drug patents.

If it's a life of death situtation for their citizens. I'm surprised S Africa didn't already do it.

[elehhhhna]

19. this is why, some say, the Gates Foundation gives away TONS of money to

pay for variosu medicines for peole in Africa. If it becomes okay to curtail, circumvent, or void certain patent rights "for the common good", then patents held by many companies could be worth lots less than they are now.

[pinto]

6. Those seem pretty selective cut and pastes from a long discussion. Here's the transcript -

The commitment to see Zelaya return seems clear, as is the commitment to elections, as is the commitment to on-going negotiations among both parties and other nations in Central America. One line taken out of a press briefing isn't a clear picture of our foreign policy by a long shot, imho ~ pinto

QUESTION: What’s the latest on the Honduras? It seems as though the talks this weekend did not work out so well, and I’m wondering where you stand.

MR. CROWLEY: Actually, I think we think they might have produced a greater progress than as at first evident. I wouldn’t – in our view, a foundation was laid this weekend for a possible resolution that adheres to the principles of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, and decisions taken within the Organization of American States and the variety of ways we have and continue to communicate with the parties to encourage them to stay focused on these negotiations and to reach a peaceful negotiated restoration of Honduras’s democratic and constitutional order.

Over the weekend, both Assistant Secretary Tom Shannon and our Ambassador in Honduras, Ambassador Llorens, had periodic – had a wide range of contacts, periodic updates from President Arias, as well as contact with both the negotiating teams for President Zelaya and the de facto regime. We’ve also been consulting over the weekend with other counterparts from other countries. They, in turn, have been communicating through the weekend with both parties.

And yesterday from New Delhi, the Secretary had a phone conversation with the leader of the de facto regime, Mr. Micheletti. And she laid out during that call – encouraged him to continue focus on these negotiations and also helped him understand the potential consequences of the failure to take advantage of this mediation.

QUESTION: Now, that’s the first time that she – that anyone, I think, has talked to Micheletti?

MR. CROWLEY: That’s a fair question. I don’t – we have been touch with representatives from both sides, but that clearly is her first contact with him.

QUESTION: So not on –

QUESTION: Do you have any readout on how firm she was in her conversation with Micheletti?

MR. CROWLEY: I think she –

QUESTION: Because Mr. Kelly has been, you know, very vocal from this podium, saying: We want Zelaya returned. And he has now announced that he is planning to go back this weekend even if there is the potential for some sort of confrontation with the military.

MR. CROWLEY: Well, let me take the second point first. Obviously, we’re in a 72-hour suspension. The negotiating teams have left Costa Rica to consult with each side. We would expect and hope that these negotiations will continue later in the week. Meanwhile today, in the OAS I think there is an assessment going on of the current mediation. And we hope that there will be a reaffirmation within the member-states of the OAS of the importance of this mediation and the need to continue to focus on this kind of a peaceful resolution.

QUESTION: Well, to go back --

MR. CROWLEY: Sure.

QUESTION: -- was she very clear to Mr. Micheletti that the U.S. does not recognize the de facto government, and that whatever its objections during this weekend’s talks, it needs to make preparations to step aside and let the elected president come back?

MR. CROWLEY: I think it was a very tough phone call. However, I think it was – she made clear if the de facto regime needed to be reminded that we seek a restoration of democratic and constitutional order, a peaceful resolution. We do not think that anybody should take any kind of steps that would add to the risk of violence in Honduras, and that we completely support the ongoing Arias mediation.

QUESTION: So are you cautioning Mr. Zelaya to stay in Nicaragua, or whichever country gives him shelter, for the time being if that does lead to a lessening of tension?

MR. CROWLEY: I think we’ve also made clear to President Zelaya that we think that mediation is the way to go.

Yes.

QUESTION: Can you – any tougher actions, any declarations that you’re planning to do if they – the defacto regime keep doing the same --

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, we have options if not – also legal requirements if these negotiations fail.

QUESTION: You said – you spoke about greater progress than just at first sight. What kind of progress exactly and what do they agree on?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I think I’ll leave it to President Arias. It’s very difficult to do a play-by-play from here in Washington. But through the weekend, you did have movement of the positions that both sides took coming into negotiation, which is not to say that we are at the – at a successful conclusion yet; in fact, we’re not. But obviously, the negotiations were still ongoing. But I think President Arias in his communications with us has indicated that he actually saw movement on both sides during the course of the weekend, which is why he thought it was useful to come back there in a week.

QUESTION: And also, the European Union suspended its aid to Honduras today. Is it something U.S. is considering?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, we have options that are available to us if these negotiations are unsuccessful.

Paul.

QUESTION: The de facto government indicated yesterday, I believe, that they couldn’t accept any arrangement whereby Zelaya could come back. Have you seen any indication since the Secretary’s phone call that they might be softening that requirement?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, let’s wait and see what happens. Obviously, there’s some posturing going on here. But clearly, we believe that it’s important, as we’ve said throughout this situation, that we need to have a restoration of democratic and constitutional order. We would like to see President Zelaya returned to Honduras, and that we’d like to see a clear path that leads to follow-on elections.

Jill.

QUESTION: P.J., just to clarify that. You said that you told Zelaya that mediation is the way. But have you told him specifically, “Do not go back because it’s dangerous and it could create tension and violence”.

MR. CROWLEY: Yes.

QUESTION: Directly, you’ve said that?

MR. CROWLEY: Yes.

QUESTION: Okay.

QUESTION: P.J., can you elaborate on what these options are – these other options?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, obviously, in the Secretary’s phone call with Micheletti she reminded him about the consequences for Honduras if they fail to accept the principles that President Arias has laid out, which would – it has a significant impact in terms of aid and consequences, potentially longer-term consequences, for a relationship between Honduras and the United States.

They move on to India, North Korea and other matters. Then back to Honduras and the region ~ pinto

QUESTION: Coming back to Honduras, we’re getting some reports out of the region that there might be some sort of rift now between Zelaya and the Venezuelan Government. Is that Washington’s understanding? And if so, is that something that can be leveraged as these negotiations move on? To put it another way, is Chavez out of the way, and does that make Washington happy?

MR. CROWLEY: (Laughter.) We certainly think that if we were choosing a model government and a model leader for countries of the region to follow, that the current leadership in Venezuela would not be a particular model. If that is the lesson that President Zelaya has learned from this episode, that would be a good lesson.

QUESTION: Can I go back to Zelaya? And you were talking about the last time that someone had spoken to him. I mean, if you’re – you seem to be kind of leaving yourself room for Zelaya not to be returned as the president. I mean, there doesn’t seem to be all that much communication with him. I mean, he didn’t meet with, you know, Secretary Clinton when he was here. I mean, it doesn’t seem --

MR. CROWLEY: Say it again? (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I’m sorry, no, he did. I’m sorry, sorry about that. I’ve been away.

MR. CROWLEY: I was in that meeting. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: I’m sorry. I’ve been away awhile. But it just doesn’t seem that there’s been a whole lot of high-level contact with him increasingly as this crisis goes on. And the longer he stays out as – the longer that he stays out of the country, I mean, it seems rather unlikely that he’s going to return as president, wouldn’t you say?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, again, we are committed to the current mediation. At the risk of quoting from Yogi Berra – (laughter) --

QUESTION: Go ahead.

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, I think that the mediation has shown some results and also shows some additional promise. That’s why we support President Arias and why we’re looking today within the OAS for a reaffirmation within the OAS of these mediation efforts.

We have – maintaining steady contact with President Zelaya. He has met with Secretary Clinton. He has met with Assistant Secretary Shannon. He has met with Dan Restrepo of the National Security Council. We’ve maintained contact with him and his team throughout this weekend. We are committed to President Zelaya’s return as part of a negotiated solution, and we are committed to finding ways to get Honduras to a point where it can hold a peaceful and legitimate election later this year, so --

QUESTION: You’re committed to his --

MR. CROWLEY: -- I’m not sure I agree with your supposition.

QUESTION: Okay. Well, if you’re committed to his return, then why didn’t – that – wasn’t that reflected in the statement that you issued over the weekend?

MR. CROWLEY: I mean, right now, our focus is on the mediation efforts and trying to help President Arias find a way to bring this to a successful conclusion. I mean, this isn’t – it – we shouldn’t personalize this. We are committed to a return to democratic and constitutional order. We want to see President Zelaya finish his term. We want to see Honduras move forward with new elections and to put in place a new government that the Honduran people can support, and we’ll see as legitimate. We reject the – rejected the extra-constitutional way in which President Zelaya was removed from power. But these are about the – this is about our support for the principles that are laid out in the Inter-American Democratic Charter.

I think what you see here is that we have put in place a policy that reflects those principles. It’s why the Secretary went to the region last month and fought hard for those principles in the – when the issue came up over Cuba. It’s not about a particular leader. It’s about a trend that we’ve seen in the region, a very encouraging trend that we’ve seen in the region in recent decades. And we don’t want to see any backsliding from that trend.

Yes.

QUESTION: When you say that the Venezuelan Government is – should not be an example of government for any leader --

MR. CROWLEY: I’m a believer in understatement.

QUESTION: Can you say that again? (Laughter.) It’s like – it’s justifying, sort of, the coup d’état, because if any government try to follow the socialist Government of Venezuela, then it’s fair, then, that somebody can try to make it – you know, defeat the government or something like that? Can you explain a little bit where we’re – what was your statement about Venezuela?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I think, as we have talked about and as the Secretary has said in recent days, we have, on the one hand, restored our Ambassador to Venezuela. There are a number of issues that we want to discuss with the Venezuelan Government.

On the other side of the coin, we have concerns about the government of President Chavez, not only what he’s done in terms of his own country – his intimidation of news media, for example, the steps he has taken to restrict participation and debate within his country. And we’re also concerned about unhelpful steps that he’s taken with some of this neighbors, and interference that we’ve seen Venezuela – with respect to relations with other countries, whether it’s Honduras on the one hand, or whether it’s Colombia on the other. And when we’ve had issues with President Chavez, we have always made those clear.

QUESTION: Have you ruled this as a coup d'état there legally --

MR. CROWLEY: No.

I think it always pays to go to the source ~ pinto

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2009/july/126250.htm

[tiny elvis]

17. kinder, gentler coups

we are committed to the current mediation
We would expect and hope that these negotiations will continue
we hope that there will be a reaffirmation within the member-states of the OAS of the importance of this mediation and the need to continue to focus on this kind of a peaceful resolution
mediation is the way to go
the mediation has shown some results
we completely support the ongoing Arias mediation

it seems rather unlikely that he’s going to return as president, wouldn’t you say?
I mean, again, we are committed to the current mediation.

right now, our focus is on the mediation efforts and trying to help President Arias find a way to bring this to a successful conclusion
etc
The elected president can come back if... what? Crowley doesn't say. That's a bad sign, because it is us who he won't tell.
But we know. If he does what United Fruit tells him to do.

[hay rick]

24. Thanks for the context. nt

[Peace Patriot]

7. That subject line is not really accurate.

(Note: The subject line is the title of the original article being quoted.)

The US State Dept. has not said that it is NOT a coup d'etat. Designation as a coup d'etat is a formal proceeding, which carries the legal requirement, in the US, of the US government cutting off all aid. The US has suspended military and some other aid, but not all.

It may be a legalism, but it also may be important, ultimately--if Obama's stated policy of respect and cooperation in Latin America is to succeed, and replace historical and recent US support of fascism, militarism, bullying and impoverishment of most Latin Americans. I don't have a lot of hope that this can occur--or that Obama has sufficient power to do this (or genuinely wants to). But if an improved US policy is to really occur, it may hanging on this thread: designation as a coup.

The US has NOT YET designated it as a coup. But it has NOT determined that it is not a coup. That cannot happen at a press conference, as a casual answer.

The subject line says: "DEPT OF STATE AGREES WITH COUP REGIME IN HONDURAS THAT 'NO COUP D'ETAT' HAS TAKEN PLACE."

That is not true.

To put a positive coloration on what the State Dept. is doing--it is holding its options open. It is using the leverage of funding (which must end, if they designate it a coup--by law) to pressure the coup leaders to restore democratic order and let Zelaya finish his term as president.

To put a negative coloration on it--and I tend to agree with Gollinger that Clinton's State Dept. is playing a dirty game on this one (Clinton is being advised by John Negroponte, for godssakes!)--Clinton is trying to stop leftist reforms in Honduras, to retain the US military base in Honduras (as a "lily pad" country for aggression against the countries with leftist governments and lots of oil--chief among them, Venezuela), and to stop the overwhelmingly successful leftist democracy trend in South and Central America. (She and the Pentagon are building five US military bases in Colombia--a country run by narco-fascists, with one of the worst human rights records on earth.)

Gollinger is extremely knowledgeable on this issue, and has done incredibly good research on it--to inform us all. I don't criticize her lightly. But I think we should take care to be accurate, at this very delicate moment of Obama vs Clinton policy, to give whatever forces for good there may in the Obama administration, as to Latin America, a chance to influence State Dept. policy--not to mention giving Zelaya whatever chance he has to be reinstated peacefully (which probably requires US support). A peaceful restoration is the desired outcome. After that, it will be up to the people of Honduras to reform their country. Zelaya cannot do it alone--and he will be out of office in five months. But an essential first step toward reform is to restore democratic order. If Clinton can be pressured to do that--and that IS what she appears to be doing (wants to be seen as doing)--I think that is a good.

The State Dept. has NOT YET designated this as a coup and cut off all funding. And it has NOT YET "agreed with" the coupsters that they are not a coup. A casual reference by a State Dept. spokesman cannot change this. Neither thing has occurred.

As for his Chavez-bashing, well, that gives us a clue as to what Clinton's policy really is. That is no surprise to any of us who have been closely following Latin America events. Clinton is as bad as the Bushites on bashing--and probably plotting war against--the people of Venezuela (who have repeatedly elected the Chavez government with big majorities--in elections that are far, far more transparent than our own--and give that government high marks--average 60%--in all opinion polls and other indicators). I have no illusions about Clinton. But I guess I still have some about Obama. Most of all, I think that overwhelming Latin American opinion, and world opinion, will stay Clinton's hand, as to declaring that this coup is NOT coup, in any formal way. And it is very important to know--and could be very important to the situation itself--that she has NOT done so. She does not overtly support the coup--not yet.

[bemildred]

8. Yes, I agree with your view. nt

[suzie]

9. A good analysis. Thanks.

[irislake]

15. What a very huge surprise!

Yawn.

[IndianaGreen]

16. DLC Democrats = GOP corporate shills

How could we forget that from 2004 primaries.

[natrat]

20. oh the change, the audacity of a complete bullshit administration

[katty]

21. No Coup? really, because the CIA has everything 'under control'?

just unbelievable.

[PATRICK]

22. The known and unknown

Hope for better US foreign policy rests solely on the unknown. Obama can have more heart and competence, but even Kerry was dead set against Chavez. The result is organic unity with the whole imperialist death squad to corporatist enforcement of Latin American "solidarity" with US interests. The DC establishment can simply see no other way at all and considers the socialist alternative to US interference as "extreme" while accepting its own crimes and horrors and overall tyranny without even a blink.

The second thing we are always bemoaning is that Obama, regardless of how you want to mind-read or rationalize Obama's general direction,, in the face of GOP induced ruin and catastrophe he has chosen the continuity approach in the hands of a Clinton II style. The other option would have been a brand new progressive approach to revolutionize America away from the root causes of all the cancers. That is not happening, though you may hope for it eventually or as an organic by-product of competence, decency and sanity. Overlaying the dismaying evils with good reminds me of the parable of the patched garment- big time. It matters, I suppose, whether Obama really fails to see the real evils and better solutions(impossible maybe but better) but the bald results are very consistent with what we would expect from almost every contemporary pol in every speech and campaign.

Dennis et al. excepted.

[MasonJar]

23. I approve heartily of Chavez and his attempt to give his people the

chance to survive. I heartly disapprove of the USA policy in South America now and for the last century. I "laugh" at the fool answering the questions. I just hope he is not speaking for the current administration. We should be standing behind the elected governments of all countries in the hemisphere. Columbia is the country that I would say was the poor example to follow, and it is the one this "moran" specifically cites. Change we can count on?????????????

[bertman]

26. Hear!! Hear!!

[earcandle]

25. Chavez is running a real democracy. We could learn something from him. And besides, what right

have we to spend my tax dollars on this shit?  

I didn't give permission for this.

Did any of you?