“What are we going to do, sit for four years and just condemn the coup?” a senior U.S. official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, told reporters in Washington.

The true divides in Latin America – between justice and injustice, democracy and dictatorship, human rights and corporate rights, people’s power and imperial domination – have never been more visible than today. People’s movements throughout the region to revolutionize corrupt, unequal systems that have isolated and excluded the vast majority in Latin American nations, are successfully taking power democratically and building new models of economic and social justice.

Venezuela, Bolivia, Nicaragua and Ecuador are the vanguard of these movements, with other nations such as Uruguay and Argentina moving at a slower pace towards change. The region has historically been plagued by brutal US intervention, seeking at all costs to dominate the natural and strategic resources contained in this vast, abundant territory. With the exception of the defiant Cuban Revolution, Washington achieved control over puppet regimes placed throughout Latin America by the end of the twentieth century. When Hugo Chávez won the presidency in 1998 and the Bolivarian Revolution began to root, the balance of power and imperial control over the region started to weaken. Eight years of Bush/Cheney brought coup d’etats back to the region, in Venezuela in 2002 against President Chávez and Haiti in 2004 against President Aristide. The former was defeated by a mass popular uprising, the latter succeeded in ousting a president no longer convenient to Washington’s interests.

Despite the Bush administration’s efforts to neutralize the spread of revolution in Latin America through coups, economic sabotages, media warfare, psychological operations, electoral interventions and an increasing military presence, nations right across the border such as Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala elected leftist-leaning presidents. Latin American integration solidified with UNASUR (the union of South American nations) and ALBA (the Bolivarian Alliance of the Americas), and Washington’s grip on power began to slip away. Henry Kissinger said in the seventies, “if we can’t control Latin America, how can we dominate the world?” This imperial vision is more evident today than ever before.

Obama’s presence in the White House was erroneously viewed by many in the region as a sign of an end to US aggression in the world, and especially here, in Latin America. At least, many believed, Obama would downscale the growing tensions with its neighbors to the south. In fact, he himself, the new president of the United States, made allusion to such changes. But now, the Obama administration’s “Smart Power” strategy has been unmasked. The handshakes, smiles, gifts and promises of “no intervention” and “a new era” made by President Obama himself to leaders of Latin American nations last Spring at the Summit of the Americas meeting in Trinidad have unraveled and turned into cynical gestures of hypocrisy. When Obama came to power, Washington’s reputation in the region was at an all-time low. The meager attempts to “change” the North-South relationship in the Americas have made things worse and reaffirmed that Kissinger’s vision of control over this region is a state policy, irrespective of party affiliation or public discourse.

Washington’s role in the coup in Honduras against President Zelaya has been evident from day one. The continual funding of coup leaders, the US military presence at the Soto Cano base in Honduras, the ongoing meetings between State Department officials and the US Ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, with coup leaders, and the cynical attempts to force “mediation” and “negotiation” between the coup leaders and the legitimate government of Honduras, have provided clear evidence of Washington’s intentions to consolidate this new form of “smart coup”. The Obama administration’s initial public insistence on Zelaya’s legitimacy as president of Honduras quickly faded after the first weeks of the coup. Calls for “restitution of democratic and constitutional order” became weak whispers repeated by the monotone voices of State Department spokesmen.

The imposition of Costan Rican president Oscar Arias – a staunch ally of neoliberalism and imperialism -to “mediate” the negotiation ordered by Washington between coup leaders and President Zelaya was a circus. At the time, it was apparent that Washington was engaging in a “buying time” strategy, pandering to the coup leaders while publicly “working” to resolve the conflict in Honduras. Arias’ insincerity and complicity in the coup was evident from the very morning of Zelaya’s violent kidnapping and forced exile.

The Pentagon, State Department and CIA officials present on the Soto Cano base, which is controlled by Washington, arranged for Zelaya’s transport to Costa Rica. Arias had subserviently agreed to refuge the illegally ousted president and to not detain those who kidnapped him and piloted the plane that – in violation of international law – landed in Costa Rican territority. Today, Oscar Arias has called on all nations to “recognize” the illegal and illegitimate elections occurring in Honduras. Why not? he says, if there is no fraud or irregularity, “why not recognize the newly elected president?” The State Department and even President Obama himself have said the same thing, and are calling on all nations – pressuring – to recognize a regime that will be elected under a dictatorship. Seems that fraud and irregularity are already present, considering that today, no democracy exists in Honduras that would permit proper conditions for an electoral process. Not to mention that the State Department admitted to funding the elections and campaigns in Honduras weeks ago. And the “international observers” sent to witness and provide “credibility” to the illegal process are all agencies and agents of empire.

The International Republican Institute and National Democratic Institute, both agencies created to filter funding from USAID and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) to political parties abroad in order to promote US agenda, not only funded those groups involved in the Honduran coup, but now are “observing” the elections. Terrorist groups such as UnoAmerica, led by Venezuelan coup leader Alejando Peña Esclusa, have also sent “observers” to Honduras. Miami-Cuban terrorist and criminal Adolfo Franco, former USAID director, is another “heavyweight” on the list of electoral observers in Honduras today.

But the Organization of American States (OAS) and Carter Center, hardly “leftist” entities, have condemned the electoral process as illegitimate and refused to send observers. So have the United Nations and the European Union, as well as UNASUR and ALBA. Washington stands alone, with its right-wing puppet states in Colombia, Panamá, Perú, Costa Rica and Israel, as the only nations to have publicly indicated recognition of the electoral process in Honduras and the future regime. A high-level State Department official cynically declared to the Washington Post, “What are we going to do, sit for four years and just condemn the coup?” Well, Washington has sat for 50 years and refused to recognize the Cuban government. But that’s because the Cuban government is not convenient for Washington. The Honduran dictatorship is.

The Honduran resistance movement is boycotting the elections, calling on people to abstain from participating in an illegal process. The streets of Honduras have been taken over by thousands of military forces, under control of the coup regime and the Pentagon. With advanced weapons technology from Israel, the coup regime is prepared to massively repress and brutalize any who attempt to resist the electoral process. We must remain vigilant and stand with the people of Honduras in the face of the immense danger surrounding them. Today’s elections are a second coup d’etat against the Honduran people, this time openly designed, promoted, funded and supported by Washington. Whatever the result, no justice will be brought to Honduras until Washington’s intervention ceases.

Washington endorses gunpoint election in Honduras
By Bill Van Auken
27 November 2009

The Obama administration has declared its support for elections being held this Sunday in Honduras, under conditions in which the regime that came to power in a coup last June has refused to cede power and is preparing intense repression against those who oppose it.

The action has placed Washington at odds with virtually all of Latin America, whose governments have refused to recognize the elections as legitimate.

The US endorsement of the elections represents the culmination of a policy that has lent political support to the coup regime headed by the Liberal Party leader of the national legislature, Roberto Micheletti, and the Honduran military, even as Washington has given lip service to the principle of restoring the country’s elected president, Manuel Zelaya, to power.

Zelaya was dragged from the presidential palace by hooded and heavily armed soldiers in the early morning hours of June 28, bundled onto an airplane and flown into exile. Since his clandestine return to the country two months ago, he has been forced to remain holed up in the Brazilian embassy.

In advance of a meeting of the Organization of American States in Washington Monday, the US assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere Affairs, Arturo Valenzuela, sent a letter defending Washington’s position, insisting that Sunday’s elections “are not something invented by the de facto government as a way out or to whitewash the coup.”

The holding of the vote, Valenzuela said, is “consistent with the constitutional mandate to elect the president and congress.”

Valenzuela was only recently confirmed to his position as the senior State Department official responsible for Latin America. Senate Republicans, led by Jim DeMint of South Carolina, had held up his nomination over the Obama administration’s stated support for the return of Zelaya to office. After the administration made it clear it would back the election whether the ousted president was reinstated or not, DeMint and his fellow Republicans dropped their opposition.

Backing the Republicans’ support for the coup regime was a team of high-powered political lobbyists funded by Honduran business interests. This effort was led by President Bill Clinton’s White House counsel, Lanny Davis, a close political associate of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, whom he served as a chief political fundraiser during her 2008 presidential bid.

Valenzuela also announced that the US will send observers to monitor the election. Organizing this mission for Washington will be the International Republican Institute (IRI), and the National Democratic Institute for International Affairs (NDI), organizations set up by the two major US political parties.

Both are funded by the National Endowment for Democracy, an agency established in 1983 to carry out the kind of political operations that previously had been staged by the Central Intelligence Agency. The NED was a leading backer of the Venezuelan coup of 2002 and has been involved in the so-called “color revolutions” carried out in several former Soviet republics. Sitting on the board of the NDI are a number of veteran Democratic politicians as well as the president of the American Federation of Teachers, Randi Weingarten.

The OAS, from which Honduras has been suspended since the coup, Spain and various Latin American governments have refused to send observer teams on the grounds that it is impossible to hold democratic elections under an unelected dictatorship. The only government in Latin America to openly back the elections is that of Panama.

In Honduras, a significant number of candidates have announced their withdrawal from the election. In all, 55 candidates for deputy and 110 for mayor have said they will not participate. Those refusing to run include a candidate for vice president in the Liberal Party, in which both Zelaya and Micheletti are leading members, and the party’s candidate for mayor in San Pedro Sula, the country’s largest city.

Washington’s backing of the election is the culmination of a protracted process that began with the coup itself. Given the overwhelming US domination of the Honduran economy as well as the political life of the country, it is difficult to believe that the overthrow of the country’s president would have taken place without a green light from US officials.

The Honduran military that executed the coup is largely trained and armed by the Pentagon, and the American military maintains its largest military facility in the region on Honduran soil. This is the Soto Cano Air Base, where the plane carrying the ousted and abducted Zelaya landed before continuing to transport him to Costa Rica and exile.

Following the coup, the Obama administration issued a tepid condemnation of the action and a call for the restoration of constitutional order, while the State Department refused in the initial months to explicitly demand Zelaya’s return to the presidency.

Washington promoted a mediation effort by its longtime ally in the region, Costa Rican President Oscar Aria, which led to the so-called San Jose Accord, calling for Zelaya to be restored to office, but only as a figurehead president in a so-called “government of national unity and reconciliation” controlled by the military and civilian officials who overthrew him.

The deal also included a renunciation on Zelaya’s part of any bid to amend the country’s reactionary constitution, a document dictated by the outgoing Honduran military dictatorship and the US Embassy in 1983. It was Zelaya’s attempt to hold a consultative plebiscite asking Hondurans whether they favored a vote on calling a constituent assembly to consider constitutional revisions that provoked his ouster.

Afterwards, his right-wing opponents, parroted by the bulk of the US media, floated the charge that this was an attempt on Zelaya’s part to grab another, illegitimate term in office. As the vote on whether to hold a constituent assembly, which theoretically could overturn the constitution’s term limits, would be held concurrently with the presidential ballot choosing Zelaya’s successor, this charge was patently absurd.

Zelaya and his backers accepted the San Jose Accord, while Micheletti’s so-called de facto government rejected it, raising repeated objections and managing to drag out the process for months, even as it unleashed a wave of violent repression against the mass protests against the coup regime. Opposition sources say that this repression has claimed the lives of 27 people, while thousands more have been illegally detained, many of them suffering beatings and torture.

Finally, at the end of October, a US delegation headed by Thomas Shannon, Valenzuela’s predecessor at the State Department, brokered an agreement signed by both parties, the so-called Guaymuras accord. The terms of this deal were even more reactionary than those drawn up by Arias. In addition to the government of “national unity” and the renunciation of any attempt to alter the 1983 constitution, it conditioned Zelaya’s return to office on a vote by the same Honduran congress that had endorsed his overthrow. Moreover, as subsequently became clear, it included no timetable for the coup regime to step down.

In the wake of the signing, Micheletti announced the formation of a “national unity” government with himself at its head and including not a single Zelaya supporter. Meanwhile, the Congress announced that it would not even meet to consider Zelaya’s restoration until December 2, three days after the election.

First Shannon and then the number-two State Department official on Latin America, Craig Kelly, made it clear that Washington would not condition its support for the election on Zelaya’s return to office, essentially handing the organizers of the coup everything they had sought.

Speaking in Tegucigalpa last week, Kelly declared, “Nobody has the right to take from the Honduran people the right to vote, to elect their leaders.” In a transparent threat to the mass movement that has opposed the coup regime and has called for a boycott of any election held under its rule, Kelly admonished all Hondurans to “avoid provocations, calls to violence.”

Zelaya has facilitated this entire process, seeking to subordinate the movement of the Honduran workers, peasants and students against the regime to these negotiations. From the beginning, he has placed his faith in the Obama administration to rescue him. As late as last Friday, he issued a letter to other Latin American heads of state warning against the “ambiguous and imprecise” positions of the Obama administration and expressing his surprise at Washington’s support for the election.

This process degenerated further into farce last week with the announcement by Micheletti that he would take a “leave of absence” from the presidency from November 25 until December 2 in order to “concentrate all the attention of the Honduran people on the electoral process and not on the political crisis.”

The State Department “welcomed” the move, proclaiming that it would give the Honduran people “breathing space” and allow them to “focus on the election.”

Micheletti named no one to succeed him, and the State Department’s spokesman acknowledged that he did not know who was running the country. The obvious answer is the same people who have run it since the June coup, the military command and the ruling oligarchy.

Micheletti added that faced with any disruption of “order and security that threatens the peace of the nation and the tranquility of the Honduran people,” he would return to the presidency and organize “with vigor and firmness the measures that are necessary to guarantee order.”

Opponents of the regime point out that such measures are already being implemented in preparation for the disputed elections. The regime has imposed a state of emergency and ordered Honduran troops to impose a “general disarmament” beginning this week, with the search for and seizure of weapons. Roadblocks have been set up in various parts of the capital and on national highways, with people subjected to searches and detentions.

In addition to 16,000 troops and 14,000 police agents, the regime has mobilized 5,000 members of the military reserves to be deployed for the election.

The country’s mayors have reportedly been ordered by the armed forces to draw up lists of people considered to be opponents of the elections for possible detention.

Micheletti has threatened that the government will criminally prosecute anyone in the media who advocates a boycott of the November 29 vote. And last Friday, the regime once again forced Canal 36, the sole television outlet that has opposed the coup, off the air.

The Committee of Relatives of Disappeared Detainees in Honduras (COFADEH), one of the country’s principal human rights organizations, issued a warning Sunday that in the run-up to the election, the coup regime is launching a “new wave of death threats, political persecution, illegal detentions, torture [and] militarization of some sectors in the main cities.”

It pointed to “the incursion of cars bearing no license plates and with tinted windows, driven by heavily armed subjects, with their faces covered in ski masks in the neighborhoods identified with resistance to the coup.”

The group also called attention to an order issued by the Ministry of Public Health, instructing health facilities to prepare for mass casualties, postpone elective surgeries and to remain open 24 hours a day during the election period.”

For Immediate Release: November 24, 2009

Contact: Jenny Atlee, 310-699-0042/301-814-3570

Delegation to Conduct Human Rights Accompaniment and Observation in Lead Up to Honduras’ Elections

20 Representatives of Faith-Based, Labor, and Human Rights Groups Available for Interviews from Honduras, November 25 – December 1^st

Hyattsville, MD – A delegation of 20 representatives of faith-based, labor, and human rights organizations will travel to Honduras on November 25, 2009, to conduct human rights accompaniment and observation in the lead-up to the country’s controversial elections on November 29. Motivated due to particular concern about the likelihood of violence around the elections, the delegation’s members hope that their presence will mitigate human rights violations by the Honduran military and police, and that they will be able to document violations that they do witness.

“By providing witness in Honduras, by being there in the presence of people peacefully demonstrating for human rights and a return to democracy, we hope we can prevent further repression and violence,” said Tom Loudon, Co-Director of the Quixote Center, who will be helping to lead the delegation.

This will be the eighth such accompaniment delegation, organized in response to a broad base of Honduran groups in opposition to the coup, since the coup d’etat was first carried out on June 28^th.

The delegation’s members also plan to meet with various civil society organizations and U.S. Embassy officials before and after the elections. On November 29, the delegation plans to split up in order to engage in accompaniment and observation in multiple cities and towns in Honduras.

The Honduran elections remain highly controversial, both inside Honduras and in the international community. President Zelaya has said that it is “too late” for free and fair elections to take place, and human rights organizations and popular movements in Honduras have described elections organized under a dictatorship as a “sick joke.” Over 300 Honduran candidates have dropped out, boycotting the elections, a popular boycott and mass demonstrations against the elections are being planned, and most countries and international bodies have stated that they will not recognize the elections or send observers, including the UN, the EU, and the OAS. The U.S. has signaled that it would like to recognize the election results, but whether it will do is uncertain, as a massive crackdown on protests or other bloodshed might make this politically difficult.

Delegation members will be reachable via the following mobile phone numbers in Honduras:

+504-3322-4247
+504-8819-3569
+504-8819-3575

Delegation members, who will be available for media interviews, include:

Domenic Bellissimo, bellisd@osstf.on.ca

Domenic is an organizer and the provincial staff person responsible for Human Rights Committee and International programs, Ontario Secondary School Teachers’ Federation, which represents nearly 60,000 members including secondary school teachers, support staff and professionals in schools and universities.

Tom Loudon, toml@quixote.org

Tom is Co-Director of the Quixote Center and Program Coordinator for the Alliance for Responsible Trade. Tom has lived in Central America for fifteen of the past twenty years. He worked for two years with Witness for Peace, and subsequently worked in war zones to resettle internally displaced communities organized in to self-defense cooperatives. Post war he worked with a network of peasant organizations to implement alternative technologies.

Mardy Townsend

Mary Townsend is an agronomist interested in sustainable agriculture. She raises grass-fed beef on asmall farm in northeast Ohio. She has been involved in Central America solidarity work since the 1980’s. She spent three years in Nicaragua with Witness for Peace (1987 to 1990) and lived in El Salvador from 1999 to 2001, working for a Salvadoran solidarity organization. She has observed four elections in El Salvador and one in Nicaragua and is a member of the InterReligious Task Force on Central America in Cleveland.

For additional information, please contact Jenny Atlee, 301-699-0042/814-3570 jennya@quixote.org; Rick Arnold, 905-352-2430, comfront@web.ca.

###

Quixote Center: PO Box 5206 Hyattsville, MD 20782 www.quixote.org

“Legalizing Coups d’Etat by Means of Spurious Electoral Processes Divides the Unity of the Nations of América”
A Letter to the Presidents of the Hemisphere

By Manuel Zelaya Rosales
President of Honduras

November 23, 2009
November 22, 2009

Honorable Presidents
Nations of América

Dear Presidents,

I write you in my role as President of Honduras, valuing the excellent relations between our countries and in defense of the democracy violated in Honduras as consequence of the Military Coup d’Etat perpetrated June 28 of this year, when soldiers invaded my home and at gunpoint kidnapped and took me to Costa Rica.

The National Congress forged my resignation letter and, abusing its power, emitted an illegal decree which “separated me from the charge of Constitutional President” without Constitutional backing to do so. The same was the case for the arrest order that the Court had emitted without having received any legal complain and without my having been cited to appear before any tribunal or trial. It has been condemned and described by all the countries of the world as a violent and surprising rupture of democratic order, a Military Coup d’Etat.

At this moment in Honduras we are in a de facto State. There is no Constitution. Nor are there Constitutional powers because they have been destroyed by force by the military Coup d’Etat on that ominous day of June 28, 2009.

The Constitution of the Republic establishes in Article 3: “No one owes obedience to an usurper government, nor to those who occupy public positions or jobs by the force of weapons or using means or procedures that bankrupt or fail to recognize what the Constitution and the law establishes. Those actions by so-called authorities are null and void. The people have the right to insurrection to defend the Constitutional order.”

In reading that article, you can understand that the Honduran people are legally empowered to act using all means, styles and forms that they consider necessary to restore democracy. We have consciously taken the path of peaceful resistance, with the goal of establishing noncooperation and nonviolence like methods of civil disobedience and twenty-first century popular struggle against the rise of military force.

We thank the entire international community for your support for our labor to reconstruct the State of Law, that being the last effort of the poorly reached Tegucigalpa-San José Accord, backed by the OAS and the US Department of State. Its letter and spirit has as its proposal the “return of the title the executive branch to what it was prior to June 28.” And it was openly violated by the de facto regime which in which Mr. Micheletti pretends to head a government of reconciliation, refusing to convene the National Congress, in definitive noncompliance of the timeline and text.

Now, unilaterally, he seeks to utilize the aborted accord by convening the National Congress on December 2, a date upon which the political actors of the accord will have been substantially modified, in the sense that by then they will have already been submitted to the opinion ofthe voters without having restored Constitutional order.

The elections of November 29 and their use of public funds under a de facto regime, without having previously restored democracy and the State of Law as OAS and UN resolutions demand, without even having installed the government of unity and reconciliation, are illegal, illegitimate, and constitute a criminal act.

At the moment that the de facto regime with its soldiers convenes a spurious electoral process under repression, without legal guarantees, and without a political agreement, in which the military dictatorship is the guarantor of the law, it only strengthens its actions of force and impunity.

Precisely today, Channel 36, property of journalist Esdras Amado López, the only television chain that has opposed the regime, has had its signal blocked and taken off the air by the dictatorship.

The de facto regime has frontally disregarded the resolutions of the OAS, the UN and the European Union. It has also violated the Democratic Charter of the OAS and its resolutions while some of Honduras’ friends among countries demonstrate ambiguity and support for the electoral process without having restored democratic order and without political dialogue. That permits the de facto regime to impose its will by force.

As President of Honduras, I communicate with you to say that below these conditions I will not back the electoral process and will proceed to challenge it legally in the name of the men and women of my country and of hundreds of community leaders that suffer the loss of democracy, the repression, the unfair circumstances and the suppression of freedom.

These elections have to be annulled and rescheduled to when the sovereign will of the people is respected.

In these difficult moments for our brother countries of América, we ask for your solidarity with Honduras.

    * That you accompany us based on the facts that you know, reiterating the position of not supporting a unilateral intent to give validity to an accord that was quickly rescinded by the violations consummated by the dictatorship.
    * Reaffirming the condemnation of the coup d’etat of the military State and not supporting a de facto regime whose existence today shames all the peoples of Latin América Latina, that after all the attempts by the international community to reverse the coup d’etat have ended in a total failure for everyone.
    * Appealing to maintain your firmness in the execution of the resolutions passed by the OAS and the UN and not adopting ambiguous and imprecise positions like those displayed today by the government of the United States of America, with whose final posture has weakened the process of reversing the coup d’etat, demonstrating division in the international community. By feeding this coup d’etat the democratic security in the hemisphere and the stability of the Presidents of América is put at risk, with the resurgence of military castes over civil authority. Legitimizing coups d’etat by means of spurious electoral processes divides and does not contribute to the unity of the nations of América.
    * I ask for your cooperation so that this Military Coup d’Etat its bloody violations of human rights do not go unpunished. Already, the International Criminal Court has received complaints and allowed them to proceed to trial to obtain justice for our people and apply the corresponding sanctions to those who committed treason to the Nation and crimes against humanity in Honduras.
    * We voice our energetic rejection of those who support the maneuvers to launder the coup d’etat, covering up for the golpistas to leave their crimes protected.
    * With our full attention, we invite all the nations to recognize our government and that they abstain from supporting the actions of the illegal regime that usurped power by force of weapons.
    * We cordially demand and exhort your representatives to the OAS and the UN to continue defending and supporting the rights of the people and of the legitimately elected governments, since when one of our nations suffers an assault it is an affront to all América; and, each time a government elected by the peoples of América is toppled, violence and terrorism win and Democracy suffers a defeat.

In wait of your response, I appreciate the invaluable support demonstrated until now for these principles and I send you greetings reiterating my esteem and my highest consideration.

JOSE MANUEL ZELAYA ROSALES
President of the Republic of Honduras

cc: Sr. José Miguel Insulza, Secretario General de la OEA
Sr. Ban Ki Moon, Secretario General de la ONU
Sr. José Barroso, Comisión Unión Europea
Archive”

Open Letter to US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
Regarding Violations of Women’s Human Rights in Honduras

November 24, 2009

Open Letter to the Secretary of State of the United States of America
The Honorable Hillary Clinton
Department of State
Washington, DC

Dear Secretary Clinton,

We are writing to you as a world leader in women’s rights. Your courageous track record on this issue has not only inspired hope among women everywhere, but also moved mountains to make an enormous difference in women’s lives.

We turn to you now in recognition of your extraordinary commitment and with great respect to urge you to address the abuses of women’s human rights occurring at present in Honduras. As numerous national and international human rights groups have documented, the de facto regime has engaged in a systematic campaign of intimidation, physical and sexual abuse, and torture. Increasingly, women have been the target of this campaign. We urge you to condemn the violence unleashed against the Honduran people, and in particular against Honduran women, and to take every peaceful measure possible to avoid further violence.

On November 2, representatives from Honduran women’s organizations stood before the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights (ICHR) and presented a grim picture of violations of women’s human rights by the coup regime.

They reported a general climate of intensified and increased physical, verbal, and psychological abuse of women that included the following:

* Women suffer physical aggression, including kicking, beating, insults, and deep contusions caused by nail-studded police batons; rape; sexual abuse; and attacks with tear gas. In at least two cases the aggression resulted in death.
* The most prevalent forms of police and military violence against women involve insults and beatings aimed at women’s crotch areas, breasts, hips, and buttocks.
* Of the 240 cases registered, 23 women were victims of groping and beatings targeted at the breasts and crotch area, as well as sexual insults and threats of sexual violence.
* Of these 23 cases, 7 involve rapes (in the cities of Tegucigalpa, San Pedro Sula, Choloma, El Progreso, and Danli.) These were all gang rapes carried out by police and used explicitly to “punish” women for their involvement in demonstrations.
* Since June 28, there has been an increase in the incidence of femicide. According to a report on violence against women produced by United Nations Development Programme and the Autonomous University of Honduras, 312 women were violently murdered between January and December of 2008; an average of 26 femicides per month. Until March of 2009, there were 16 per month. According to figures from the Office of Women’s Rights, 325 femicides had been reported through the end of September (an average of 31 per month), and during the month of July alone there were 51 femicides.
* Nine women LGBT activists have been killed since the coup, with their bodies showing evidence of torture. The state has refused to perform a forensic autopsy for two of the women.
* Since the Decree of September 21 that suspended civil liberties, peaceful protests have moved from the main streets to the neighborhoods where the military has attacked residents. This has had a disproportionate affect on women, as they and their children become trapped by fear or military occupation in their homes. Women attempting to flee the attacks have been shot.
* Women have been detained by police or military for hours and even days, without charges or access to legal counsel. Women detainees have also been deprived of medicine, food, and water.
* The Inter-American Commission for Human Rights required the Supreme Court of Honduras to provide protective orders for 92 women who fear for their lives under the coup regime. The pro-coup Court has taken no action.
* Feminists and women leaders of the opposition to the coup regime have received death threats from the police and military, or by e-mail or on cell phone voicemail.
* The state institutions responsible for dealing with women’s rights violations no longer function to protect women’s rights or even receive complaints. Since those responsible for investigating cases are often the perpetrators of the crimes, women are unwilling to come forward to report crimes.

The situation for Honduran women constitutes a human rights crisis. As Secretary of State, you have declared women’s rights to be a pillar of U.S. foreign policy. At the United Nations, you have worked to ensure that women’s rights and well-being are a matter of international and global concern, and have stated that allowing women’s rights to be violated with impunity in one place, jeopardizes women`s rights everywhere. Today, we urge you to confirm that in Honduras women’s rights are human rights and must be protected.

It was the rupture of democratic order in the country that gave rise to the current crisis in women’s human rights in Honduras. Therefore, only an immediate return to constitutional government can stop the rapid deterioration of women’s rights. Hastily improvised elections– without the full participation of Honduran society, international recognition, or the reinstatement of the elected president–cannot be free or fair and do not guarantee a return to rule of law. Only a return to rule of law can reestablish legal institutions for redress of human rights violations and end the current situation of impunity for crimes against women.

We ask that you investigate the violations of women’s human rights in Honduras. We urge you to condemn the orchestrated campaign of violence against women being waged by the current de facto regime. Finally, we urge you to insist on a withdrawal of armed forces from the streets, neighborhoods, and homes of Honduras.

The current abuse of women of Honduras imperils the future of Honduras and the region, as it deeply marks the lives and futures of Honduran women. We look to your leadership now. Please step forward, as you have done elsewhere, and work to stop the violence now.

To view the letter visit:
http://www.justassociates.org/actions/honduras/honduras_clinton.htm.

For further information, visit:
http://www.justassociates.org/actions/honduras_action_coup.html

According to bloomberg current coupon 30YR FNMA MBS rallied 9bps to trade below 4.00% today as the Fed continues to buy mortgages to support the housing market.  The Fed is selling free call options to borrowers by pushing the OAS to virtually zero.  Since we don’t see the OAS going below zero, implying a MBS holder is paying the borrower a premium for the right to call the loan this could be a near term low for yields.  However with negative T-bill yields, implying you are paying the government to hold your money anything is possible in today’s bizarro world of the capital markets.  The 5YR auction was well bid today and upon release of the Fed minutes rallied to close at 2.09% with the belly outperforming likely catching many who were short for the supply in a little squeeze.  This type of massive compression is yet another catalyst for our head fake scenario we are watching..

Lewis Amselem, US Interim Representative to the OAS, no doubt ripping out the heart of a colleague.

The Secretary of the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States issued an announcement today of a meeting regarding the situation in Honduras scheduled for December 4 at 3:00PM.

Someone over there at the OAS must be clairvoyant and know what the “situation” of Honduras will be in 11 days.  And isn’t December 4 just 2 days after Micheletti returns to the presidential palace?  By the time the OAS meets, the election will have taken place but its outcome will be widely disputed.  Also, the Honduran state security apparatus will be gearing down a bit from its all out election assault on the people and human rights abuses might be discussed.  God knows, Hillary was mute on this topic.

Since the US is institutionally incapable of doing the right thing about Honduras (yes, and virtually everything else) and Hillary isn’t even throwing crumbs to the masses, I think it would be a good idea to switch the venue for protests from the State Department and plan a protest at the OAS on December 4.  This would be a good opportunity to give the Venezuelan ambassador, Roy Chaderton and the Nicaraguan ambassador, Denis Moncada an “attaboy,” to yell insulting things about the ambassadors from Colombia and Panama, and a priceless opportunity to tell  US’ interim representative, Lewis Amselem, what an ass he is and  hold up signs with choice quotes from his  “I’m a simple guy, I shop at Wal-Mart, I went to public school . . .” speech.

OEA

/Ser.G

CP/INF.5936/09

23 noviembre 2009

Original: español

 Secretario del Consejo Permanente saluda atentamente a los representantes permanentes y cumple en informarles que el Presidente ha convocado a una sesión extraordinaria para el viernes, 4 de diciembre de 2009, a celebrarse a las 3:00 p.m. en el Salón Libertador Simón Bolívar, para considerar la situación de Honduras.

Blog de Wianey Carlet – ClicRBS

Sexta-feira, 20 de novembro de 2009 

Gremistas discutem a Arena da discórdia

…

A direção gremista entende que o contrato é positivo para o clube. Mas, conselheiros, sócios e torcedores têm outra interpretação. Tanto que tentarão, na Justiça, anular o contrato feito entre o Grêmio e a OAS, construtora. O Movimento Grêmio Acima de Tudo anuncia que o processo ingressará na Justiça nos próximos dias. A discussão, longe de merecer reprovação, deve ser saudada e aplaudida. Ela revela que a direção do Grêmio está agindo com a máxima transparência e que existem gremistas preocupados e interessados no futuro do clube.

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Frente a essa notícia veiculada na imprensa nos últimos dias, o Blog GRÊMIO ACIMA DE TUDO apresenta a versão oficial do Movimento Grêmio Acima de Tudo, conforme foi possível ouvir, de forma objetiva e contundente pelo conselheiro Gabriel Fadel, presidente do MGAT na última quinta-feira, durante o jantar de comemoração de aniversário do GRÊMIO SEMPRE IMORTAL.

Conforme o Conselheiro tricolor Gabriel Pauli Fadel afirmou, ao contrário do veiculado pela imprensa, o MGAT não irá propor qualquer ação judicial referente ao contrato celebrado pelo Grêmio com a OAS e que tem por objeto a construção da Arena, ainda que tenha séria restrições em relação ao pactuado. Esclareceu que a posição do Movimento é de que esta questão deve ser debatida internamente visando o devido esclarecimento dos associados quanto ao futuro do  Clube.

Ou seja, a versão que está sendo divulgada de que uma possivel ação judicial teria o patrocínio do Grêmio Acima de Tudo não corresponde a realidade.

Grande novidade! Quero saber quando vão começar a tratar o lobby profissionalmente. Pelo menos, não fica esse joguinho de doações, e sei lá mais o que.

Mas, se sobrar um dinheirinho, manda pra cá.

Daniel Pinheiro

————————————————–

Serra e 11 deputados receberam doações de consórcio do Rodoanel

Governador recebeu R$ 1 milhão da OAS e R$ 100 mil da Carioca. 4 petistas e 5 tucanos também estão entre agraciados

Fonte: Gazeta do Povo

O governador José Serra (PSDB) diz que o consórcio responsável pelas obras do viaduto do Rodoanel onde vigas caíram ferindo três pessoas na sexta (13) terá de indenizar as vítimas se for comprovada falha. Já os deputados dizem que vão pedir explicações e prometem dar início a uma CPI na Assembleia para apurar a responsabilidade das empreiteiras.

Pois essas empresas que estão agora na mira dos políticos foram há pouco tempo grandes colaboradoras deles. A OAS Engenharia e a Carioca, que compõem com a Mendes Jr. o consórcio responsável pelo lote onde houve o acidente, ajudaram a eleger em 2006 tanto o governador José Serra como outros dez deputados estaduais, quatro deles do PSDB e quatro do PT (partido que hoje patrocina a ideia de uma comissão parlamentar de inquérito na Casa).

Segundo dados do Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE), o governador José Serra recebeu R$ 1 milhão da construtora OAS e outros R$ 100 mil da Carioca.

Entre os petistas agraciados com doações da OAS estão Adriano Diogo (R$ 50 mil), Rui Falcão (R$ 150 mil), Ana do Carmo (R$ 30 mil) e Carlos Almeida (R$ 50 mil). Rui Falcão não só recebeu dinheiro da OAS como também da Carioca: R$ 5 mil.

Entre os tucanos que receberam recursos da OAS para a campanha à Assembleia Legislativa estão Orlando Morando (R$ 150 mil), Analice Fernandes (R$ 100 mil), Geraldo Vinholi (R$ 50 mil) e Bruno Covas (R$ 15 mil) – este também patrocinado pela Carioca, com outros R$ 25 mil. Já João Caramez (PSDB) teve uma doação de R$ 20 mil da Carioca.

Os deputados Milton Leite Filho (DEM) e Jorge Caruso (PMDB) completam a lista de políticos ajudados pelas empresas que estão no foco do acidente no km 279 da Régis Bittencourt.

Outro lado

A assessoria de imprensa do Palácio dos Bandeirantes disse que o governador José Serra passou a segunda-feira (16) cumprindo agenda em Mirante do Paranapanema, a 610 km de São Paulo, e que seria muito difícil contatá-lo para comentar o assunto.

Já as assessorias dos deputados estaduais citados foram contatadas pelo G1 e ficaram de ligar de volta, o que não foi feito até as 21h30 desta segunda.

A exceção foi o deputado Orlando Morando (PSDB), que aceitou comentar a doação recebida durante a campanha de 2006. “Não há qualquer vínculo deste acidente envolvendo uma prestadora de serviço do governo comigo”, afirmou.

Membro da Comissão de Transportes da Assembleia Legislativa, ele disse que o Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas (IPT) foi contratado para produzir um laudo que apontará as causas do acidente.

Sobre a doação da OAS à sua campanha, o deputado afirmou que é vice-presidente da Associação Paulista de Supermercados (Apas) e que a empreiteira é uma das que mais constroem supermercados no país. “É natural que [a OAS] me apoie”, afirmou.

Apesar disso, o deputado disse que a ligação com a empreiteira não deve interferir na sua atuação e nas cobranças para buscar os responsáveis pelo acidente no Rodoanel. “O cara mais ácido, mais duro, quanto ao acidente na Linha Amarela do Metrô, fui eu”, ilustrou.

A OAS participa da construção da Linha 4, onde a futura estação Pinheiros desabou em 2007. O acidente matou sete pessoas.

Ay, Dios mio!  I can only assume that the State Department press corps has to retreat to a dark bar and get ripped after enduring Kelly’s responses to their questions on Honduras.

If you want to see this in living color click for the video.

State Department briefing

Ian Kelly, Spokesman

November 16, 2009

Excerpt on Honduras:
QUESTION: On Honduras, Senator Kerry’s – one of his spokespersons recently said that when Thomas Shannon said that the U.S. would recognize the winner of the November 29th elections, even if Zelaya was not to be put back into power beforehand, that that was undermining the deal that had been reached? Can you respond to that?

MR. KELLY: Well, on Honduras, we, of course, are continuing to call on both sides to begin implementing the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord. One of the key parts of that is setting up a government of unity and reconciliation, and we feel that once that is set up and the other elements of the accord are implemented, that it will be easier for the international community to recognize the elections. And I think that’s the point that Tom Shannon was trying to stress in his remarks that are referred to there.

QUESTION: But doesn’t it sort of allow Micheletti to – kind of a backseat way, to still be part of the process when the U.S. has been pretty explicit that it recognizes Zelaya as the president?

MR. KELLY: We have been very explicit that we recognize the – Zelaya as the democratically elected leader of Honduras. We think that there is a good way forward that the two sides agreed to in principle, and that right now, we need to concentrate on implementing it. It establishes a solid foundation not only for a way forward with the elections on November 29, but it establishes a foundation for a reconciliation in Honduras between the two sides.

And so that’s – that is what our energies and efforts are focused on. We continue to remain in daily contact with the two sides, both through our Ambassador in Tegucigalpa, and I know that Craig Kelly is – and also in constant telephone contact with the two sides. And we just remain committed to the implementation of this accord, and we’re sticking to that.

Yeah.

QUESTION: Why do you think that Zelaya doesn’t understand this? He sent a letter to President Obama. It seems to me, or it seems that he – he’s waiting for, from the U.S. – U.S., like a message or a solution of the problem. He doesn’t understand that maybe the problem is in Honduras. How do you feel on that? Is there any sensation of the U.S. Government with this why he continues to – not to solve the problem inside instead of waiting and sending a letter to Obama?

MR. KELLY: Yeah. Well, I’m not going to try and interpret why President Zelaya sent this letter. I’ll just say that we all along have been committed to this reconciliation process, to the restoration of the democratically and constitutionally elected leadership. And we have put a lot of effort into restoring democracy to Honduras. And we condemn the June 28 coup. We supported strong UN and OAS resolutions. We implemented tough measures, including suspension of economic and military assistance. And we have been very actively and very directly involved in a negotiated solution. So, I mean, we have been committed from the very start to this process. There hasn’t been any –

QUESTION: So the U.S. –

MR. KELLY: — hasn’t been any change of policy.

QUESTION: The U.S. feels like the OAS secretary, that there is not much to do on the way forward with elections?

MR. KELLY: I’m not sure what you’re referring to.

QUESTION: The secretary of the Organization of American States, in his last speech on the extraordinary meeting of the session, he said that there is not much things that we can do until – wait for the elections.

MR. KELLY: Well, I’m not sure –

QUESTION: That was Insulza (inaudible).

MR. KELLY: Yeah. I haven’t seen those comments, but we – I mean, we are – we continue to be involved. We think there still is something to be done. But our efforts are on trying to get the two sides to do it, to try and get the Hondurans themselves to do it.

QUESTION: Thank you.

QUESTION: No, no, no. Did Zelaya ever get a response to the letter he sent to the Secretary?

MR. KELLY: We have not sent a formal response back to President Zelaya.

QUESTION: So you just – so what is – well, what is he supposed to think? I mean, you guys are – you’re ignoring him now.

MR. KELLY: No, we’re not ignoring him. In fact –

QUESTION: Yeah, you are. He sent –

MR. KELLY: No, we’re not ignoring him.

QUESTION: He sent a letter to Secretary Clinton asking what the U.S. position was and you just said – and that was like, two weeks ago.

MR. KELLY: Yeah. That doesn’t mean we’re ignoring him, though.

QUESTION: And he has not gotten a response.

MR. KELLY: I mean, we do talk to him. I know that senior American officials do talk to him. Just because we haven’t sent a formal response yet doesn’t mean we’re ignoring him.

QUESTION: Well, it seems – well, you know, talk is one thing, but something put down on paper is quite another. And it just seems to me that you’re kind of still floundering around for a policy here –

MR. KELLY: Well –

QUESTION: — and you’re not willing to put anything down on paper.

MR. KELLY: I don’t agree.

QUESTION: You don’t?

MR. KELLY: I don’t agree we’re floundering. I mean, we haven’t changed our policy. We have senior officials still involved in trying to get the two sides to – not to agree, but to implement something they’ve already agreed to, all right? I think we’re very – we remain very much involved in the process.

QUESTION: Can you explain why you have not replied to a letter from someone you consider to be the democratic –

MR. KELLY: I don’t think I have to. I don’t think I have to respond, Matt. We haven’t respond –

QUESTION: Well, I guess you don’t, because your silence to him says it all.

MR. KELLY: We haven’t”

Honduras Resists has done an excellent job of keeping us informed about the activities of the National Resistance Front against the Coup.  It has provided us with insightful interviews with many members of the resistance.  Today, you get to hear from someone whose face you have seen many time on the front lines:  Abuela de la Resistencia, Dionicia Diaz. 

Grandmother of the Resistance: “Only the people can save the people”

We are here with the famous grandmother of the resistance. Tell us your name and a little about the struggle of the Honduran people.

My name is Dionicia Diaz, grandmother number one. The struggle of the Honduran people is for a constitutional assembly. They carried out a coup d’etat against our president because he was consulting the people, which isn’t prohibited here or in China, but it was a consultation of the people to see if the people wanted to have a fourth ballot box in the coming elections. That fourth ballot box would be to see if we wanted a constitutional assembly. Only the constitutional assembly is above our current constitution. They would see if more of us said yes than no, because they were asking both the people who would say yes and those who would say no, it was a popular consultation. But unfortunately they didn’t let him consult us because Sunday the 28th of June when they were going to consult us they carried out a coup d’etat, without any justification whatsoever.

The only reason they carried out a coup d’etat is cause that fascist who is there in the president’s house is envious because nobody wanted him and nobody voted for him to go to the presidential house because he was a candidate but nobody voted for him the majority of us know him, that he isn’t apt to be a president of a republic. Because a president has to be the father of all the Hondurans, but this fascist can’t be. He came to power by force and divided the people. For him the only people who exist are the oligarchy, the ten families with money. Look where we poor people are – in the streets. They say we are thieves, or that there’s just four of us, but look [points to crowd of people in the protest that day] … it’s not that he’s mistaken, he knows it, he is shaking because I don’t think there’s even a million people on his side and there’s seven million of us. Ever since that day I’ve been in the resistance because they carried out a coup d’etat against the people, not the president.

Why do you say they carried out a coup d’etat against the people, not the president?

Because it was because of the consultation of the people that the president was going to carry out to obtain a constitutional assembly, to have a fourth ballot box the day of the elections to change the constitution that doesn’t serve us at all because it has ancient articles in there that just favor them, not us, and President Manuel Zelaya since he came to the presidency went to the side of the people. The First Lady when from town to town seeing what the people needed. They didn’t rob like all the ones before them. Excuse me but they were all thieves, they all pillaged the coffers of the people and now it is them who are saying that Mel Zelaya violated the Constitution. The people who violated the constitution are the coup-makers. The people who divided the people are the coup-makers. Mel Zelaya won his elections and is the President of the Republic. He’s not up for a vote, they are in elections, they owe the President of the Republic seven months, and they have to pay them.

And you have been in the resistance every day?

Since June 28th, the first day of the coup d’etat.

And you haven’t been afraid of the repression?

I’m not afraid because we don’t owe anything to anybody and we aren’t doing any harm this is a peaceful resistance. Nobody is carrying anything here. They say we carry rocks, look through this backpack, we don’t have rocks we don’t have anything, I just have my megaphone if that is a crime, and they were putting in a decree to make megaphones prohibited. They want to shut our mouths with a decree. They don’t want anybody to talk, what we have here is a dictatorship. The people have a dictatorship and can’t breath. We don’t know what to do, we ask the republics who are friendly, the OAS, the UN, to do something for God’s sake, to send parachutes down on the presidential house because this is unbearable. They are killing the people and nobody is paying.

And who are the resistance, who are the people in the streets?

The resistance is made up of those of us who have waken up and who know that we don’t want to be under the boot of those who have exploited us our whole lives. I’m telling you, when the coup d’etat happened I was in my bed, sick, I could barely get up, but I had gotten up to vote close by at a school where there were boxes to go put your vote in. I was just going to go there, but when they told me that they had carried out a coup against the President, my illness left me. And since that day I’ve been well here in the resistance. Incredible but I was cured. And I continue forward, I continue here in the rsistance.

And tell me some of the moments that have made an impression on you in this resistance?

Well like I tell you, here they have killed brothers and sisters, they have violated sisters, they have thrown teargas bombs that have killed people who got poisoned, and here, according to this coup-maker, nothing is happening. In Honduras everything is fine, there’s no problem. And as I say we have a dictatorship that is doing us so much damage you can’t imagine. We need to get out of this, we need international support.

And what do you think about the elections coming up?

They have them already rigged! The ballot boxes are full already! Some of them will win, whoever is most convenient for them. What they don’t know is that Micheletti would just as well not have the elections recognized internationally because then he wouldn’t have any successor to give power to and he can stay in power his four years, that’s where his sick mind takes him, he’s a psychopath, this man will kill us if he stays there, we need to get him out. As they say, only the people can save the people. If we don’t find another way out, the people, who they hope have gotten tired from them oppressing us, from them beating us, from them gassing us, the people will get tired. That’s what he said! That after the elections in two years the people will have forgotten. In two years the people will have taken him out of there, who knows how, but the people are at the point of exploding.

And what level of support does the resistance have amongst the Honduran population?

The Honduran population is united. We help each other out. There’s no lack of unity here. They say that people have left us, no way, we are sick of being oppressed, they don’t want us to talk, they don’t want us to march but the people continue in the resistance and he can’t shut us up, he can’t hold us back. One thing is people are in their towns, waiting to see if somebody resolves this, but the other is that if it doesn’t get resolved we will resolve it. That is the truth.

And tell me a bit about the history of this strugle?

I was just in the strike of 1954, because the coups that happened before aren’t like this one. You know why? Because before in four days nobody remembered the coup d’etat. Because the people have always been kept busy going to vote, giving their vote, then going to sleep and the problem is over. You voted for the red or for the blue and the problem was over. Now the people aren’t with any candidates, we aren’t in elections, we are in resistance to achieve a constitutional assembly, to change the current constitution that doesn’t help us in any way. They have violated it tons of times to do what they want to do and they don’t take the people into account. The only one who took us into account was our president.

The constitution is very old, very violated, these old articles have done too much damage to us and we should change it, they’ve changed many constitutions here. This one they don’t want to change because it has ancient articles that they put there so that it would never be changed. They think the people will never wake up, that they will always be beneath their booths and never say anything. We won’t have a way to breath. Look how the military has us surrounded. Before when the indigenous or the teachers came to protest at the congress, when we had our president, there in the presidential house, they would sleep there underneath the congress, where they wouldn’t get burnt by the sun or get wet and they would pass the night there. Now look [pointing at line of military arround the congress] You don’t think this is a dictatorship? Please! They say that Mel Zelaya violated the Constitution. And what worse violation than taking out the president of the republic and putting in an unjust coup-maker there? How could you come to my house and take me out if it’s mine and I’m there? That’s how it happened to the president of the republic in that moment, it still is, they have him kidnapped. The resistance wants a constitutional assembly to change the current constitution, we’re not kidnapping or killing or robbing anybody.

What is your message for the other peoples of the world?

I realize that amongst all the peoples there is resistance in favor of Honduras and I thank very much all the peoples who support our resistance, who are in resistance yourselves. And if you can help us in anyway, please do it, because this is an unbearable dictatorship that we can’t tolerate. We will not continue tolerating it. We’re at the breaking point of exploding, at the breaking point of violence. If I look patient here, behind be there are those who won’t bear it any more. They don’t want to because every day they are sending more and more soldiers, more and more decrees to shut our mouths, trying to make us mutes, this is unbearable.

 Foto: Zenilto Barbosa / Site Terra

Temos o direito de exigir que a empresa que venha a construir a Arena apresente um Atestado de Idoneidade ao Grêmio.

Matéria publicada pela Agência Estado em 15/11/09.

Empresa mudou vigas na obra do Rodoanel. Com o objetivo de baratear custos, o consórcio formado pelas empreiteiras OAS, Mendes Júnior e Carioca usou vigas pré-moldadas não previstas para os novos viadutos do Trecho Sul do Rodoanel. Pelo projeto básico, deveriam ser colocadas fundações de concreto conhecidas como tubulões, material mais caro que o usado hoje pelo consórcio na sustentação dos vãos livres. A troca foi uma das 79 irregularidades classificadas como “graves” em relatório emitido pelo Tribunal de Contas da União (TCU) em setembro. As auditorias foram realizadas em 2007 e 2008, nos cinco lotes da obra.

Não se sabe se a troca do material tem relação direta com o desabamento de três vigas sobre a Rodovia Régis Bittencourt (BR-116) na noite de sexta-feira, que deixou três pessoas feridas. Ontem, o governo do Estado disse desconhecer as causas do acidente na maior obra viária em andamento no País. A investigação será feita por técnicos da Dersa, do Instituto de Pesquisas Tecnológicas (IPT) e peritos do Instituto de Criminalística. Para o diretor de Engenharia da Dersa, Paulo Vieira de Souza, o problema ocorreu na execução do projeto. Uma das hipóteses citadas por ele foi a de falhas na fixação das vigas.

Em 29 de setembro, quase dois meses antes do acidente, o TCU relatou que o consórcio responsável pelo lote 5, onde houve o desabamento, fez alterações nos materiais e no projeto da obra, a fim de reduzir custos. O TCU apontou, por exemplo, o uso de estacas de tamanhos inferiores aos previstos no projeto básico. Também estava prevista a instalação de sete vigas de sustentação a cada vão livre formado pelos novos viadutos. Na execução, contudo, foram empregadas 5 ou 6 vigas a cada vão livre. O uso de um número menor de vigas também foi detectado no lote 4.

Como consequência dessas e de outras mudanças nos outros cinco lotes, o TCU apontou indícios de superfaturamento nas medições dos serviços das empreiteiras que totalizaram R$ 184 milhões. Para a Corte, foi reduzida a quantidade de material de construção usada na obra, mas os preços repassados ao Estado foram mantidos. O TCU também afirma que as empreiteiras alteraram o método de medição das obras. O critério de medição passou a ser feito por meio dos avanços físicos da obra, substituindo o critério anterior, realizado com base nas quantidades unitárias, como metros e quilômetros.

As mudanças nas obras, segundo o TCU, resultaram numa “combinação altamente danosa às finanças” da União – a obra de R$ 3,6 bilhões é resultado de uma parceria entre os governos federal (R$ 1,2 bilhão) e estadual (R$ 2,4 bilhões). Apesar das objeções feitas pelos auditores, o TCU não recomendou a paralisação da obra ou o bloqueio dos repasses federais. A decisão de prosseguir com os trabalhos foi tomada com base em despacho emitido pelo ministro João Augusto Nardes.

Em setembro, os envolvidos na obra do Trecho Sul do Rodoanel assinaram um Termo de Ajustamento de Conduta (TAC) com o Ministério Público Federal em São Paulo no qual abriram mão de receber R$ 265 milhões em aditivos contratuais considerados ilegais pelo TCU. Procuradas ontem, as empreiteiras do lote 5 não se manifestaram até as 20 horas. As informações são do jornal O Estado de S. Paulo

Segundo notícia no site da Veja (com Agência Estado), há indícios de sérios problemas na execução do Rodoanel que vão de troca de projeto e material contratado a superfaturamento.

Vale acompanhar.

A obra é importante para São Paulo, mas precisa não só ser segura como ter sua prestação de contas de acordo com as boas práticas. Segundo o TCU não é exatamente o que ocorre no Trecho Sul, envolvendo as empreiteiras OAS, Mendes Júnior e Carioca.

Essa não foi uma boa semana para o governo federal com o Ministério das Minas e Energia, nas mãos do afilhado de José Sarney, Edison Lobão e seu apagão mal explicado, nem para José Serra com essa queda das vigas do Rodoanel.

Daily International News 11.11.09
Yes…I’m in the office on Veterans’ Day.

Koreas

‘US envoy to N Korea’ after clash [BBC]

SKorea troops on high alert after navy skirmish [AP]

Central/South Asia

Cambodia rejects demands to extradite Thaksin [Phnom Penh Post]

AfPak

3 Top Obama Advisers Favor Adding Troops in Afghanistan [NYT]

Middle East

Saudis ‘to keep up Houthi campaign’ [Al-Jazeera]

Yemen, U.S. sign military deal as country fights rebels [Reuters]

Abbas resists U.S. pressure to resume peace talks [Reuters]

Europe

EU to name first permanent president on 19 November [EU Observer]

Life for German Who Killed Woman in Court [NYT]

Africa

Zimbabwe PM attends cabinet after ending boycott [AFP]

Don’t let it be contagious: The neighbours of a shaky west African state fear that its instability could spread [Economist]

Americas

OAS Insulza admits frustration with the stalled Honduras situation [MercoPress]

8:00PM

>Report on Women’s Human Rights Violations Shows Systematic Attack on Women Under Honduran Coup

Laura Carlsen | November 10, 2009
Americas Program, Center for International Policy (CIP)

>U.S. Tries to Salvage Honduras Accord

 By GINGER THOMPSON
Published: November 10, 2009

WASHINGTON — Under fire from allies in Latin America and on Capitol Hill, the Obama Administration moved Tuesday to try to salvage the American-brokered agreement that had been billed as paving the way for a peaceful end to the coup in Honduras. Instead, the accord seems to have provided the country’s de facto government with a way to stay in power until a presidential election scheduled for the end of this month.

The State Department dispatched Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Craig Kelly to Honduras on Tuesday for meetings with President Manuel Zelaya, who was ousted from power more than four months ago, and with the head of the de facto government, Roberto Micheletti.

Senior administration officials said Mr. Kelly would try to get both men to abide by the terms of an October 30 agreement that called on them to form a coalition government to run the country while the Honduran Congress prepares for a vote on whether to return Mr. Zelaya to power.

The deal began to unravel last week when the Congress announced it would postpone a vote on Mr. Zelaya’s return to power until after the election. In protest, Mr. Zelaya then refused to submit names for the coalition government. And the United States, breaking with its allies in Latin America, announced it would recognize the results of the upcoming presidential election, even if Mr. Zelaya were not reinstated.

While the announcement was celebrated by Republicans as a “reversal” in the administration’s policy, it ignited a firestorm of criticism from Mr. Obama’s allies at home and across Latin America.

Rep. Howard Berman, Democrat of California who is chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, telephoned Assistant Secretary of State James Steinberg to express his concerns about the administration’s handling of Honduran crisis. An aide to the congressman said, “It was not a feel-good phone call.”

Frederick Jones, a spokesman for Senator John Kerry, Democrat of Massachusetts who is chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said the senator believed the State Department’s “abrupt change” of policy towards Honduras, “caused the collapse of an accord it helped negotiate.”

On Tuesday, the Secretary General of the Organization of American States, José Miguel Insulza, said that he would not send observers to monitor the presidential election, scheduled for Nov. 29. And many of the organization’s 34 members said they would not recognize the winner of the contest unless Mr. Zelaya was reinstated to complete his term.

“Paraguay is not only not going to accept the outcome of the elections, it will not even accept that the elections are held,” said Hugo Saguier Caballero, Paraguay’s ambassador to the O.A.S.. “These elections for us simply will not exist.”

Ruy de Lima Casaes e Silva, Brazil’s ambassador to the organization, said the situation in Honduras seemed like a “badly written soap opera, with sinister characters played by the de facto regime, which history will judge.”

The Obama Administration’s representative to the O.A.S., Lewis Amselem, said that the agreement signed in Honduras two weeks ago did not guarantee President Zelaya’s reinstatement, but put that decision in the hands of the Honduran Congress.

Mr. Amselem said it was not possible to translate Latin America’s position on the coup into policy, noting that most of the countries had themselves used elections to establish democratic order after coups. And he urgently pressed for a more pragmatic line.

“I’ve heard many in this room say that they will not recognize the elections in Honduras,” Mr. Amselem said to his counterparts at an O.A.S. meeting in Washington. “I’m not trying to be a wise guy, but what does that mean? What does that mean in the real world, not in the world of magical realism?””
 

6:00PM

>OAS-HONDURAS: US Amb. Amselem Delivers Collective Slap to Fellow Diplomats

>STATE DEPARTMENT BRIEFING

P. J. Crowley, Spokesperson

Nobember 10, 2009

EXCERPT ON HONDURAS:

And finally, before taking your questions, Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary Craig Kelly has arrived in Tegucigalpa today to continue working with the parties and the verification commission. He’ll be there today and tomorrow, focused on trying to move the process forward towards a free and fair election and the seating of a new government in Honduras at the end of this month.

And with that, Bob.

QUESTION: Would the Kelly visit include a delivery of a direct message from President Obama about the situation?

MR. CROWLEY: If he has – if he’s carrying such a message, we’ll let him deliver that first before talking about it.

QUESTION: And when is that coming up?

MR. CROWLEY: But certainly, we – it’s important for us to continue to support the OAS process and to push for full implementation of the San Jose and Tegucigalpa accords which provide a pathway to a free and fair election. And the outcome, which if handled properly, can be supported both within Honduras and within the region. And obviously, we continue – we’ll continue to kind of push both sides to live up to the agreement that they reached recently, and to continue to move forward towards the election on November 29.

QUESTION: And I’m sure you’re aware of the protesters out front who are saying that this is a sham election.

MR. CROWLEY: Yes, I heard them myself. (Laughter.)

QUESTION: Has anyone from the State Department met with the representatives of the protestors or taken a letter from them, or what is your –

MR. CROWLEY: Not to my knowledge.

QUESTION: Or any response to the protestors saying it’s a sham election?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, first of all, on that point, we have been earnestly pushing to get a resolution of this issue so that you could have, in fact, a free and fair election on November 29 that both the United States, Honduras, the region could stand behind, support, and lead to the installation of a new government that the people of Honduras can support and can heal this divide that has –

QUESTION: Why is –

MR. CROWLEY: — that Honduras has suffered through over several months. We understand that this is a very emotional issue and – which is why we’ve been so integrally involved; not only Craig Kelly, but Tom Shannon, others, our support for the OAS process going back a number of months, because we recognize that the only path out of this is through an electoral process that – where we’re – the people of Honduras get to speak and you have a new government that can go about the work of serving the needs of its people.

Go ahead.

QUESTION: Why does restoring Zelaya to power a couple of weeks before the election make it more likely credible?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I think what’s first and foremost important is that you get to a new election on November 29 that the people of Honduras can participate in, that is free and fair, that’s effectively monitored by the international community. We, the United States, are prepared to help in that effort. But there is an accord, there is an agreement. As part of that agreement, the existing institutions within Honduras will determine how to implement that accord. We certainly encourage and continue to encourage.

One of the reasons Craig Kelly is there is to push both sides to take the steps that they promised to take. One of those steps, working with the congress, is what to do about the existing government. But we will continue to show our support for the verification commission and continue to encourage both sides to live up to their responsibilities. Now, part of that is to establish a unified government that can work through the transition until the election takes place and a new government is put in place.

Charlie.

QUESTION: Do you have an issue in –

MR. CROWLEY: Let’s – go ahead.

QUESTION: The – today’s meeting at the OAS, most of the countries, they say they are not going to recognize electoral results, also the Group of Rio. How do you see the way out for Zelaya?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I don’t think we see a way out for Zelaya per se. We obviously – he has an interest and we have over several months wanted to see the return and restoration of constitutional order. It’s not about any one person. It’s about a return of democratic processes and democratic government in Honduras. It’s an important aspect to us of continuing to support democracy within the hemisphere.

As to what will – obviously, the accords that both sides agreed to recently through the intervention of the United States and under the leadership of Tom Shannon, they have set forth a path to a new election. We need to see both sides working to – on that path, taking affirmative steps so that you can produce a free and fair election that’s effectively monitored, that produces a credible result for the Honduran people.

As to what will happen on November 29, I think it’s important to put these steps and these processes in place so that you can have confidence in the electoral process and the result. But obviously, on November 29 when the election takes place, we’ll be able to evaluate what happened and then what the consequences are.

QUESTION: But the electoral process continues to moving forward, yes?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, we want to see the electoral process move forward. We want to see this be done in a way that ensures a free and fair election. We are prepared to support this effort, along with other countries within the OAS and – but obviously, we’re coming up on two to three weeks before that election. A lot of work has to be done between now and then.

>Excerpt on State Dept. Spokesman, P. J. Crowley comment regarding Arturo Valenzuela and Tom Shannon 

MR. CROWLEY: My very, very good friend Arturo Valenzuela will be sworn in this afternoon as the new Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs. And a great American, Tom Shannon, will continue to focus on – as the Ambassador-designate for Brazil. Tom was up on the Hill for further meetings with the Senate. And we certainly continue to encourage the Senate to act on his confirmation as soon as possible.

Monday, November 9, 2009

>National Front of Resistance Against the Coup: The elections will not be recognized, the struggle continues

The National Front of Resistance Against the Coup declares to the Honduran people and the International Community  ^th passed without the restitution of legitimate president Manual Zelaya, we declare we will actively not recognize the electoral process of 29 November of this year.   ^th elections to act in accordance with previously-stated commitments and publicly pull out of the electoral farce.

6. We call together the mobilized and as yet unorganized sectors of the population to join actions which reject the electoral farce and promote acts of civil disobedience, as supported by Article 3 of the Constitution of the Republic, which gives us the right to disobedience and popular insurrection.

1. Since the midnight deadline of Thursday November 5

Elections which are imposed by a de facto regime that represses and violates the human and political rights of the citizenry would only validate nationally and internationally the oligarchical dictatorship and secure the continuation of a system which marginalizes and exploits popular sectors in order to guarantee the privileges of a few.

Participation in such a process would give legitimacy to the coup regime and to its successor which would be fraudulently installed on January 27, 2010.

2. The refusal to acknowledge the electoral farce will remain firm between now and the elections even if President Manuel Zelaya is re-instated. A period of 20 days is too little time to dismantle an electoral fraud conceived to ensure that one of the representatives of the coup-making oligarchy will be put in place and therefore give continuity to its repressive and anti-democratic project.

The prior statement does not mean that we have renounced our fundamental demand that constitutional order be returned to Honduras, including the return of President Zelaya to the position he was elected to fill for four years by the Honduran people.

3. Now more than ever it is clear that the exercise of participatory democracy through the installation of a Constituent Assembly is not just a non-negotiable right but also the only way to provide the Honduran people with a democratic and inclusive political system.

4. We denounce the complicit attitude of the US government, maneuvering to stall the crisis and now showing its true intention to give validity to the coup regime, thereby ensuring that the successor government will be docile in the face of the interests of transnational companies and their goal of regional control. Therefore, we consider correct the decision made by President Zelaya to declare the failure of the Tegucigalpa Agreement, an agreement which is part of the US strategy to stall Zelaya’s restitution in order to validate the electoral process.

5. We call on all organizations and candidates in the November 29

7. To the friendly nations and peoples of the world, we call on you to maintain political pressure to overthrow the military dictatorship imposed by oligarchy and imperialism, as well as commit to recognize neither the illegitimate elections of November 29 nor the spurious authorities who seek to pass as representatives elected by the people.

http://hondurasresists.blogspot.com/

“We resist and we will win.”
Tegucigalpa November 9th, 2009

>Honduran Resistance Slams US Role in Crisis

HAVANA, Cuba, Nov 10 (acn) Honduras’ National Front against the Coup d’Etat exposed the
complicity of the United States with the de facto regime in the Centro American country in
a communiqué circulated this Monday.

The Front denounced the US contribution to the delays to the crisis and its willingness to
recognize the legitimacy of the upcoming election, scheduled for November 29, reported Prensa
Latina news agency.

The document stressed that the Tegucigalpa-San Jose agreement signed with the approval of
Washington is part of the US strategy to delay the restoration of institutional order. 

Signed on October 30 between representatives of the constitutional government and the coup
regime, the agreement left the restitution of President Manuel Zelaya up to the Congress and
did not set a date for his reinstatement to be enforced. 

Although coup forces are still in power and the political crisis continues to affect the
country, US Ambassador to Honduras, Hugo Llorens, openly supports the November 29 election and
has said that it is the way for the country to go back to democracy.

The National Front against the Coup d´Etat expressed its disapproval of an election promoted
by an illegitimate regime.

For his part, the independent candidate Carlos H. Reyes presented his resignation to the
Supreme Electoral Tribunal, for he said the situation the country is facing today makes it
impossible to organize a free, transparent election.

worldnews/aga/3.55 PM/aga

Resistence Denounces US Complicity with Honduran Coup

Cuban News Agency
ainnews@ain.cu

>Nicaragua acusa a EEUU de apoyar a golpistas hondureños

Washington. PL. | 10 noviembre del 2009

Nicaragua acusó este martes al régimen de facto hondureño de incumplir los acuerdos alcanzados para poner fin a la crisis que vive ese país y afirmó que Estados Unidos se prestó a esas maniobras.

Son inaceptables las acciones del líder de los golpistas, Roberto Micheletti, para impedir la restitución del presidente Manuel Zelaya, subrayó el embajador nicaragüense, Denis Moncada, al intervenir en una reunión extraordinaria de la Organización de Estados Americanos (OEA).

Esa estrategia pretende legitimar las próximas elecciones y consolidar al régimen de facto, manifestó el diplomático.

Moncada denunció que ese fue el propósito de la última delegación estadounidense que viajó a Honduras.

Los acuerdos son papel muerto. Pese a la paciencia de Zelaya y su buena fe, sólo recibió maniobras sucias y engaños, aseguró el representante nicaragüense.

Comentó que las conversaciones comenzaron a enturbiarse desde que el departamento de Estado norteamericano le arrebató a la OEA el papel de mediador en la crisis.

Es imperativa la restitución de Zelaya para resolver esta situación y poner fin a la inestabilidad, la violación de los derechos humanos y la inconstitucionalidad en Honduras, expresó. “

>Voices of Honduran Resistance Call for Deepening of Democracy

Written by Matt Schwartz

Tuesday, 10 November 2009

>The empire with bases loaded
By Manuel E. Yepe

A CubaNews translation. Edited by Walter Lippmann.

Regarding the Agreement “for Cooperation and Technical Assistance and Security” recently signed by the governments of Colombia and the United States and denounced by the Cuban revolutionary leader Fidel Castro as equivalent to the annexation of the former to the latter, I suggest we read again the essay that Chalmers Johnson, a researcher, writer and emeritus professor from the University of California in San Diego, published in 1999 with the title America’s Empire of Bases, which begins as follows:

As distinct from other peoples, most Americans do not recognize –or do not want to recognize– that the United States dominates the world through its military power. Due to government secrecy, our citizens are often ignorant of the fact that our garrisons encircle the planet. This vast network of American bases on every continent except Antarctica actually constitutes a new form of empire –an empire of bases with its own geography not likely to be taught in any high school geography class. Without grasping the dimensions of this globe-girdling Baseworld, one can’t begin to understand the size and nature of our imperial aspirations or the degree to which a new kind of militarism is undermining our constitutional order.”

In other words, as early as ten years ago, Professor Johnson, a sharp critic of U.S. imperialism and particularly of its role in Asia, presented us with plenty of data about a project initially entrusted to Andy Hoehn, deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy, to implement President Bush’s preventive war strategy against “rogue states,” “bad guys,” and “evil-doers.”

Those plans identify “something they call the”arc of instability”, which is said to run from the Andean region of South America (read: Colombia) through North Africa and then sweeps across the Middle East to the Philippines and Indonesia. This is, of course, more or less identical with what used to be called the Third World –and perhaps no less crucially it covers the world’s key oil reserves. (…) The real reason for constructing this new ring of American bases along the equator is to expand our empire and reinforce our military domination of the world.”

Johnson continues: “Once upon a time, you could trace the spread of imperialism by counting up colonies. America’s version of the colony is the military base.  (…) Militarism and imperialism are Siamese twins joined at the hip. Each thrives off the other…”

Reading the text of the military agreement that Bogotá and the superpower signed a few days ago is sufficient to reveal how humiliating are the privileges, liberties and impunity that the U.S. troops, civilians and military contractors will enjoy in relation to to Colombia and its citizens when they set foot on that country in keeping with the agreement to become, in fact, an army of occupation in the Andean country.

Besides being shameful to the Colombians, these prerogatives are outrageous to all Latin Americans given the serious threat that the takeover of an entire nation located in the very heart of the region represents to their national sovereignty.

In her article “The true intentions behind the Military Agreement with Colombia”, American-Venezuelan journalist Eva Golinger quotes an official document issued by the Air Force division of the State Department which says that the U.S. army base of Palanquero, one of seven they will run in Colombia, will “provide a chance to conduct full-spectrum operations in a critical sub-region… where security and stability are constantly threatened by terrorists rebels funded with drug money, anti-American governments, endemic poverty and frequent natural disasters… “.

This contradicts what the governments of Colombia and the U.S. have publicly claimed about the military agreement being only about anti-drug and counter-terrorist operations and activities within the Colombian territory. It also entails a pre-declaration of war against ALBA member states in Latin America, precisely the ones Washington has identified as “anti-American governments”. Obviously, it also sends a serious warning to the rest of the hemisphere.

The only new thing about the hegemonic escalation this agreement brings with it is that this time the real American power has blamed all this indignity on the learned and still popular president Barack Obama, This comes as a surprise to many people in Latin America and the world who had taken for granted that the era of imperial arm-twisting, embodied in its heyday by an uncultured, corrupt and disgraced George Bush, Jr., had been left behind for good.

Perhaps the danger that the Empire absorbs Latin America pursuant to its plans for the “arc of instability” is not any greater now with the insulting agreement to build bases in Colombia, because our peoples have already been warned and, in the end, “forewarned is…”.

November 2009

Chalmers Johnson: America’s Empire of Bases (1999)
http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0115-08.htm

The OAS met this morning to discuss the latest developments in Honudras and, with the exception of the US and Canada, all the other countries who spoke affirmed the position that if President Zelaya is not reinstated, they will not recognize the outcome of the elections.

After all the speeches had been made and the meeting was winding down, US Ambassador Lewis Amselem asked to speak a second time. Perhaps, he just couldn’t help himself.  I suspect he is often seized by overwhelming urges to be undiplomatic.  He proceeded to make the following statement (pretty much verbatim – but, if you want the words with the dripping sarcasm they were delivered, you can check the video  starting at minute 18:30):

 “I’m just a simple, middle-class boy born to immigrant parents in New York City. I went to public schools. I shop at Costco and Walmart, I watch TV, I fly coach on American Airlines and I drive an old Chevy truck. I’m not very sophisticated so I want clarification from my “betters” here about what they mean when they say they “will not recognize the results of the election in Honduras.” I’m not trying to be a wise guy, but what does this mean in the real world? Does this mean closing embassies, no trade, no travel, no investment with, to or from Honduras? And, if so, for how long?

Are we going to apply the same standard to every country in this room which has had a disruption in constitutional order and saved itself through elections?  If we do, this room is going to be pretty empty.”

Context is everything. If there ever was a “don’t go there” moment, this was it.  But, Amselem dove head first, never thinking once that many of those “disruptions of constitutional order” in Latin America were caused by the US and resulted in brutal dictators who never allowed a free and fair election.  Not to name all, but there were US coups in Guatemala (1954), Chile (1973),  and Haiti (2004).  When not pushing the button on coups, the US has protected  its interests by exerting ”influence” in elections held all over Latin America.  

Finally, if Amselem is worried about Honduras being isolated and wants to know what this means in the real world, he didn’t need to go to the OAS for an answer.  I’m sure the State Department has plenty of material on the US’ nearly 50 year blockade of Cuba.

Amselem got ”smart” with a group of people who know his country’s history better than he does — a dangerous thing for a diplomat to do.   

If you wish to know more about Amselem and his sordid background, please visit an excellent blog, Machetera.

Since March of 2008, with the attack by the Colombian Army and Air Force on a guerrilla camp in which Raul Reyes, the then number 2 of the FARC, was killed two kilometers inside Ecuador, the threat of war has hung over the region. I have always maintained that there will be no war between Colombia and any of its neighbors. With President Chavez’s remarks this week, the threat of war looms over the Andean region. Here, I will briefly outline my arguments for why there will not be a war between the two sister republics of Venezuela and Colombia.

My reasons are fairly numerous and weigh varyingly on the situation and the argument. First, I will outline the legal reasons. The Charter of the Organization of American States states that all member states have a collective security agreement, meaning any member state invaded will be defended by all other states combined. The Charter refers to other prevalent international law documents for more specific details. Under international law, if  two member states of an organization go to war, the state which was invaded will be defended by the remaining states. If Venezuela were to invade Colombia, the OAS member states would be forced to defend Colombia. Also, if Venezuela were to invade Colombia, it would be considered a preventitive war, not preemptive. Preventitive wars are still considered illegal under international law. Preventitive war is a war that a state starts when it thinks that it will be invaded in the future by a country. Preemptive war is when a state invades while being invaded – literally if missiles are flying overhead, a state can invade. The first, preventitive war, is illegal. Preemptive, contrarily, is considered legal. Of course, Chavez would not have to worry about being prosecuted most likely; he would have to worry about the remaining OAS states backing Colombia.

Next we have basic military reasons. Despite major arms purchases by Chavez, the Venezuelan Army is only about 100,000 soldiers (tops), while the Colombia is more than twice that size. Most of the Venezuelan army, as well, is not prepared for combat or using new weapons. I doubt that long range weapons will not be a huge decisive factor given the size and borders of the country. Also, Air Forces would be involved meaning that long range missiles, for example, can be countered with bombing attacks including against the missile installations. Additionally, if Venezuela were to invade, its best window of opportunity has already passed. Basically, Venezuela would need to have invaded already in order to gain the best advantage against Colombia. If Chavez truly feared an invasion by the US through Colombia, he would have attacked BEFORE the base agreement was signed. There is a piece of realist international theory that states that if a state sees its neighbor state gaining strength and power, that state will invade its neighbor before the neighbor becomes more powerful. It’s unclear if Venezuela in hard power terms is stronger than Colombia, but if Chavez does think so, the most opportune time to invade has already passed.

We could be looking at a security dilemma with Colombia now possibly sending 12,000 troops to the Venezuelan border. Despite this, I simply opine that the security dilemma hardly applies in its theoretical manner anymore given the very liberal international system in which we find ourselves.

Fourth, regarding Chavez and the US bases, this is not a question of legitimate fear of US invasion. It all comes down to one issue: power politics. Any US bases agreement in the region would hinder Chavez’s influence in the continent. Noting that Venezuela is arguably the regional hegemon (for me, second to Brazil) and has clear aspirations of extending, increasing and strengthening its influence, any direct US presence in the region inhibits those aspirations. Really, Chavez could actually fear a US invasion through Colombia (forgetting that US troops are bogged down elsewhere and the US public is not too keen on another war, just to name a couple factors), but his foremost concern is regional power and influence. The same game is being played by the US.

Also important, the international climate on war has shifted greatly. International invasion is hardly accepted anymore, unless under collective security agreements, and any blatant aggression with a incredibly debatable threat will have severe political backlashes for Chavez. Lastly, given that security has deteriorated terribly in Venezuela, not only in Caracas, Chavez’s plan of uniting the people against the common enemy could fail if security were to worsen even more with a full-out war. Simply put, on numerous levels, it would political suicide for Chavez to invade. Hence why despite threatening war, Venezuela has come out saying it wants a debate about the US military presence. 

Finally, I do accept the argument that Chavez did not want to resort to war first but was hoping that economic and political pressure would work. Unfortunately, from his perspective, that strategy failed. But this does not automatically mean that he will resort to war; quite the contrary – all of his viable options has failed and it seems he will have to live with the US bases. War is simply out of the question for Chavez.

While Lanny Davis never goes away completely,  soon we will not have the chance to kick him around anymore on the Honduras issue.  If you feel the need to set Lanny straight on anything, consider leaving a comment –after all, this is the Wall Street Journal.

“The US should recognize the coming election, whether Manuel Zelaya does or not.”

                                                           –Lanny Davis, what a guy

NOVEMBER 9, 2009  9:38 P.M. ET

The Way Forward in Honduras
The U.S. should recognize the coming election, whether Manuel Zelaya does or not.

By LANNY J. DAVIS

For months Honduras has faced a political crisis. In June, its president, Manuel Zelaya, attempted to subvert the country’s constitution and was removed from office. He has since pushed to return to power, called the current president—Robert Micheletti—illegitimate, and has cast a shadow over presidential elections to be held at the end of this month.

On Oct. 30, it appeared the crisis might come to a close when representatives of Mr. Zelaya signed an agreement with representatives of Mr. Micheletti to create a reconciliation government to oversee the country until the next president is seated (among other provisions). But in recent days, that agreement—known as the Tegucigalpa/San Jose Accord—fell apart.

It’s more accurate to say Mr. Zelaya moved to destroy the accord. It called for him to propose members of the reconciliation government by Nov. 5, and it also gave Honduras’s Congress the right to vote whether to reinstate him as president. But Mr. Zelaya refused to make his appointments, even while Mr. Micheletti proposed his appointments on time. On Friday, Mr. Zelaya declared the accord null and void before Congress could vote on whether to restore him to power. Interestingly, he had insisted on adding the congressional vote to the agreement, so his decision to blow up the process before the vote is an indication that even he realizes he would lose a vote in a Congress controlled by his liberal party.

If there is to be a resolution to this crisis, it will likely only come if the Obama administration (which helped both sides hammer out the accord), leaders in the U.S. Congress, and the Organization of American States (OAS) make sure that Mr. Zelaya does not get away with breaking his word.

One vital part of the accord calls for international monitors to go to Honduras to prepare for the presidential elections, which are scheduled for Nov. 29. Under the accord the monitors will work with the Honduran Supreme Electoral Tribunal, a four-member body appointed by Honduras’s Congress when Mr. Zelaya was in power, and which is independent of the executive branch. The White House and the U.S. Congress need to call for this step to be taken immediately.

Mr. Zelaya’s modus operandi is clear. In 2005, he got elected president while vowing to uphold the constitution. He then violated the country’s constitution by pushing for a vote that would have allowed him to extend his time in office. Honduras’s Constitution specifically states that a president who does that is to be automatically removed, which is why the country’s Supreme Court and Congress supported his removal. Mr. Zelaya’s response was to turn to OAS Secretary General José Miguel Insulza and the OAS to support him in ignoring his constitutional and legal commitments—and they did so.

Mr. Zelaya’s agenda is to reinstall himself to power before the presidential elections. If he succeeds, he might be able to disrupt those elections and create a constitutional crisis by ensuring that no one is credibly elected president. If that occurs, he would likely declare himself president ad infinitum—just what he was trying to do when he was ousted in June.

The bottom line is that a deal is a deal. The U.S. government needs to insist on the implementation of the accord and endorse the results of the Nov. 29 presidential elections as verified by international monitors. Once that happens, Mr. Zelaya will be irrelevant, a footnote as a president who thought he was above the constitution.

And then, on Jan. 27, a new president will be sworn into office in Honduras. That will restore to normalcy the proud little constitutional republic that has always been a loyal and reliable friend of the United States.

Mr. Davis, an attorney at the Washington D.C. office of McDermott, Will & Emery, is a former special counsel to President Bill Clinton and represents the Honduran Latin American Business Council.

On 19 and 20 November 2009, the “Regional Conference on Refugee Protection and International Migration in the Americas – Protection Considerations in the Context of Mixed Migration” will take place in San José, Costa Rica. The conference, which has been made possible through funding provided by the European Commission and the US State Department’ Bureau on Population, Refugees and Migration, is convened jointly by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and the Organisation of American States (OAS) in cooperation with the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights.

The Conference will primarily focus on mixed migratory movements in the Americas. Participants will exchange information, experiences and views on mixed migration issues in the continent and shall particularly discuss protection considerations arising with respect to asylum-seekers and refugees, victims of human trafficking, unaccompanied children and victims of physical or sexual violence or trauma as well as with view to general human rights of people on the move.

The Conference, which will be conducted only in Spanish and English, will bring together representatives of 20 States from all over the Americas, interested donor countries, international and regional organizations, national institutions for the promotion of human rights, the academia, representatives of civil society organizations as well as other stakeholders directly involved in addressing mixed migratory movements in the region.

Source: ACNUR