By Shoshana Bryen

WASHINGTON, D.C. — For those who have asked why JINSA has kept Honduras in the spotlight since June, this is why: small democratic countries trying mightily to exercise legitimate governance and self-determination deserve our vocal support even – or especially – when they do things the U.S. would prefer they didn’t.

Honduras is one of these countries, as is Israel.  We have been surprised by the lack of Israeli interest in the democratic exercise of sovereign rights by Honduras, and especially in the lack of interest in the pressure exerted by the U.S. government to force compliance with America’s wishes.

The presidential and legislative election held in Honduras on Sunday provides an opportunity for American administration to walk back its decision to punish the small, poor Central American country for ousting its then-president Manuel Zelaya last June as he tried to pave the way for multiple terms, in violation of the Honduran constitution.  The election included only candidates nominated long before Zelaya’s ouster – and the interim president, who was never a candidate, removed himself from public view in the last week of the campaign.

The first decision of Team Obama back then was knee-jerk support for the radical line – joining Chavez, Ortega and Castro calling the ouster, authorized by the Honduran Supreme Court and legislature, a coup.  Then, in swift succession a) agreeing to the suspension of Honduras from the OAS; b) withdrawing accreditation from Honduran Ambassador Roberto Flores; c) withholding foreign aid; d) threatening Honduran access to previously awarded Millennium Challenge grants; e) refusing a diplomatic visa to the interim president for his visit to the UN General Assembly (a violation of UN rules); and e) using the American Ambassador in Honduras as point man to threaten Honduras’s future relations with Washington.

It was distinctly more American pressure than was applied to the Iranian government as it stole an election and punished demonstrators with arrest, torture and death.

The interim Honduran government, plus most of the arms of authority in the country – the legislature, the Supreme Court, the Catholic Church and the Human Rights Commission – held fast to the belief that their constitution mattered.  And after Senate Republicans held up the nominations of two Obama appointees for State Department Latin America posts, the Administration was pressured into turning to Costa Rica’s Oscar Arias to try to hammer out an agreement between Zelaya and the interim government.

A four-point plan emerged, giving the Honduran legislature and Supreme Court the lead in determining their own country’s future and obliging the U.S. and the OAS to sanction yesterday’s election.  The legislature will meet on 2 December to determine the fate of Zelaya and his failed attempt to hijack the country.  The interim president has said he will respect the legislature’s decision – even if it brings Zelaya back to complete his term until the January handover of power to the newly elected president.

Oscar Arias told the AP that he believes other Central and South American nations will respect the Honduran vote – Costa Rica will, he promised.  Brazil, Argentina and others have said they may not – claiming the election would only ratify the “coup.”  This is blatant interference in the internal affairs of a neighboring country, and the U.S., still the most important player in the hemisphere, should be quick to declare where it stands.

If it stands on the side of Honduras, all could be well that ends well.

We often call Israel the canary in the coal mine of Western, liberal democracy.  Honduras may prove to be the canary in Israel’s coal mine.

*
Bryen is special projects director for the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs. (JINSA). Her column is sponsored by Waxie Sanitary Supply in memory of Morris Wax, longtime JINSA supporter and national board member.

“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.

BOGUS HONDURAN ELECTIONS TODAY: Hypocrites Washington, Costa Rica, Panama,
Perú, Colombia & Israel the only nations to recognize the illegal
elections

By Eva Golinger

"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.

28-Noviembre-2009
La Zona 504

El Gobierno de Honduras le dió un rotundo No al
diálogo de San José y desde entonces Óscar Arias
a llamado a los diferentes Presidente del mundo , que
no reconozcan las elecciones de Honduras que se
van a celebrar el 29 de Noviembre del 2009.

Óscar Arias, cuestionó hoy las razones de los países
latinoamericanos para desconocer el resultado de las
elecciones del próximo domingo en ese país
centroamericano.

“La verdad es que yo le quiero preguntar a los países de
América Latina, que han dicho que no quieren reconocer
al futuro Gobierno, ¿por qué reconocen al Gobierno de Irán
cuando las elecciones no fueron limpias?, ¿por qué
reconocen al Gobierno de Afganistán, cuando las
elecciones no fueron limpias?”, manifestó hoy el
gobernante en Israel, donde realiza una visita oficial.

Arias criticó la posición de países que han dicho que
no reconocerán como legítimo al vencedor de los
comicios en Honduras, con el argumento de que “por
querer castigar a la persona que el pueblo hondureño
escoja en las próximas elecciones, realmente a quienes
están castigando es a los hondureños más humildes”,
informó a través de un comunicado la presidencia
costarricense.

Transcribimos a continuación la carta enviada por el Padre Ronal Vargas a la Universidad de Salamanca en la cual renuncia a la maestría obtenida con mucho esfuerzo en ese centro educativo, como protesta por el doctorado honoris causa que se va a entregar en esa Universidad al presidente Oscar Arias Sánchez, como resultado de las gestiones de su primo, el perseguidor y chupa medias, diputado Fernando Sánchez. Aprovecha la ocasión el padre Vargas para protestar por el estado de injusticia en que ha sumido a Costa Rica, el régimen de dictadura en democracia de los Arias.

Liberia, Guanacaste, Costa Rica, 24 de noviembre de 2009

 Sr. Manuel Alcántara Sáez Vicerrector de Relaciones Internacionales y Cooperación UNIVERSIDAD DE SALAMANCA ESPAÑA

Espero no atrasarlo en sus importantes tareas universitarias. Permítame con libertad y rapidez expresarle solamente tres puntitos: 1. MI SENCILLA PRESENTACIÓN: Aunque mi nombre es Ronal Vargas Araya y me encanta que me llamen por mi nombre, muchas personas sólo me dicen “padre”, por el hecho de seguir siendo, por casi 16 años, sacerdote de la iglesia Católica, eso si, con prioridad y la consciencia cierta de estar ante todo al servicio del Reino de verdad, justicia y paz que predicó Jesús, el Magister de Galilea. Nací e hice mis estudios de primaria y secundaria en Costa Rica y mis estudios universitarios en Guatemala. Al regresar nuevamente a mi patria pude convalidar un profesorado en la enseñanza de la Filosofía en la UCR y concluir la licenciatura en Administración Educativa de la UNED, lo que me permitió dedicarme por algún tiempo a la docencia. Con orgullo recién concluí mi Maestría en Doctrina Social de la Iglesia en la prestigiosa Universidad de Salamanca. El doctor Don Felipe Ruiz Alonso, actual Secretario General Académico de la Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca en el Campus de Madrid, me comunicó el 22 de enero de este año 2009 que en el trabajo final del Máster obtuve la calificación de “Notable”. Concluí estos estudios superiores en la sede de Honduras, una nueva experiencia a distancia de la Universidad, con un selecto grupo de compañeras y compañeros de todos los países de Centro América, recibiendo las clases de varios eminentes catedráticos de Salamanca. Y si más no me equivoco, hasta hoy he sido el único de mi grupo en aprobar el trabajo final.

 2. MI HONDA PREOCUPACIÓN: Con mucha decepción y profunda consternación, he estado leyendo durante los recientes meses de octubre y noviembre sobre el inmerecido galardón del doctorado “Honoris Causa” que la prestigiosa universidad de la cual soy egresado, y hoy por usted representada, piensa dar en estos días a Don Oscar Arias Sánchez, ciudadano presidente en ejercicio del Poder Ejecutivo, controlador del Poder Legislativo, sombra oscura del Poder Judicial y del Tribunal Supremo de Elecciones. En Costa Rica tenemos otra perspectiva de su Gobierno y no pocas encuestas lo han considerado como uno de los peores presidentes de América Latina,[1] pues es común escucharlo ridiculizar nuestras instituciones públicas, burlarse de la Constitución Política y de representantes de la religión mayoritaria del país y hasta dar declaraciones vergonzosas contra una niña guanacasteca que declamó una valiente poesía en su presencia o contra un colegial de Chacarita al que le profetizó sin más un futuro de fracasado. Como sacerdote y egresado de la Universidad Pontificia de Salamanca, me siento sorprendido y avergonzado de este reconocimiento que algunas pocas figuras notables y grotescas de nuestra política nacional han gestionado ante la universidad, particularmente el diputado y familiar cercano del presidente, Don Fernando Sánchez, cuyo mayor “logro” político es ser el coautor del decálogo más antidemocrático que haya conocido la historia reciente de mi país, conocido entre nosotros como “el memorándum del miedo”. Levantando más el enfermizo EGO del presidente Arias la Universidad de Salamanca no honra a Costa Rica, sino a los últimos vestigios neoliberales que en ella gobiernan.Si quieren reconocer nuestra tradición democrática y pacifista hay miles de personajes más representativos y menos corrompidos con los que sí nos sentiríamos identificados. Son muchos los motivos apuntados por miles de ciudadanos honestos de mi país, encabezados por mi buena amiga la ex defensora de los Habitantes Lisbeth Quesada; yo también considero desmerecido este reconocimiento, entre otros, por los siguientes: • Nunca como antes la institucionalidad de este país ha estado tan despreciada ni la democracia participativa tan controlada, fiscalizada y perseguida como en este Gobierno de Arias. Tal como el mismo presidente lo aseguró, vivimos su original concepción de una “democracia en tiranía”… “Desde la derecha hasta la izquierda racionales, se debe entender que los problemas de la democracia no se arreglan con autoritarismos, ni con la demagogia de más democracia, como dice haber querido don Óscar”.[2] Premiándolo, no se premia a Costa Rica, más bien se nos da una bofetada a los que seguimos creyendo en la democracia participativa y con transparencia, algo extraño en su gestión. • El hoy presidente Arias con artimañas violentó la Constitución Política para ser reelecto en el cargo, utilizando sus influencias con magistrados que habían sido funcionarios de su primer gobierno. Don Oscar “añora para acá ese despotismo arbitrario, sin la molestia del Legislativo, la Sala IV, ni la oposición. Es decir, donde su ilustrada voluntad sea inapelable. Aunque lo disimule, está rechazando la democracia representativa y los contrapesos y quiere una delegativa donde tenga todo el poder para hacer lo que desea”.[3] • En mi tierra guanacasteca, la región del territorio nacional donde más sufrimos la crisis hídrica, el presidente Arias por medio de varios funcionarios públicos sigue violentando nuestra legislación para favorecer a empresarios privados que financiaron su campaña política, tratando de cederles sin más el agua potable del valiente pueblo de Sardinal que todavía no se deja vencer. “Su gobierno, como muchos anteriores, no cesa de reducir la esfera de lo público y de apropiarse de lo que es de todos: los ríos para generar electricidad, el ICE para beneficiar a las telefónicas privadas, los acuíferos para beneficiar a urbanizadores y hoteleros, etc. etc.”.[4] • En este mismo Guanacaste, donde el actual presidente es uno de los mayores latifundistas, logró apropiarse de forma irregular de varias hectáreas de tierra junto al mar, en Colonia Gil Tablada Corea de La Cruz, y aunque la Contraloría General de la República y el Tribunal de Justicia de Liberia demostraron a saciedad lo irregular de su adquisición, y como utilizó a funcionarios públicos para apropiarse de parcelas destinadas a campesinos sin tierra, no ha tenido la vergüenza ética para devolver al Estado estas tierras mal habidas. • Su plan “paz para la naturaleza” es una constante amenaza para “descansar en paz” lo que queda de ambiente y ecología, promoviendo privatizar los parques nacionales y desmejorar nuestra legislación ambiental y declarando de interés público el reinicio de la nefasta minería metálica a cielo abierto… “La doble moral o doble discurso del presidente de Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, en materia ambiental, principalmente en su Iniciativa Paz con la Naturaleza, fue denunciado por la revista estadounidense Time, en un reportaje publicado en su edición del fin de semana anterior”.[5]

3. MI HUMILDE PETICIÓN: No sé cual de todos los atestados anteriores del señor presidente sea el que llenó los requisitos para recibir tan significativa distinción de la Universidad de Salamanca, pero espero reconsideren todavía su polémica decisión. Aunque incurrí en muchos gastos económicos, problemas laborales y un gran desgaste físico y emocional por tantos viajes que debí hacer entre los años 2006 y 2007 a la hermana república de Honduras para concluir con titánicos esfuerzos la Maestría felizmente alcanzada, con todo dolor y sacrificio que mi petición significa, pero empujado por mis convicciones éticas y políticas, solicito respetuosa pero enérgicamente, si la Universidad insiste en darle el doctorado “Honoris Causa” a don Oscar Arias, que se borre de las Actas y Archivos universitarios cualquier vestigio de mi nombre, de mis estudios y de la Maestría recién concluida. Con toda consideración, y esperando recapaciten esta trascendental decisión:

 Ronal Vargas Araya, cédula 2-424-362

Director de CARITAS, Pastoral Social, Diócesis de Tilarán Costa Rica

San José, Costa Rica / Wirralwater, Flickr.com

Costa Rica has been an example for years in Latin America. Economic growth, tourism, an image of natural paradise, a strong democracy… The situation seemed to be ideal in an area torn by guerrillas, coups and violence. But recent events could put the model into question. While Costa Rica prepares the presidential election (in February 2010), security is at the center of debates. And in a country where the rate of foreigners is one of the highest in the world (10% of the global population), insecurity is often assimilated with migrants.

“I will expel criminal aliens”. The sentence was used as a campaign slogan by one of the candidates, the Christian Democrat Luis Fishman (himself the son of Polish immigrants!)  President Oscar Arias approved laws that restrict matrimonial possibilities for foreigners and prohibit them the carrying of weapons after a police officer was shot during a confrontation with young Jamaicans. Some politicians ask for the borders closure and zero immigration. Nicaraguan community is criticized. It is the most important one with about 400 thousand people. Most of them are among the poorest of Costa Rica.

Even if the situation of Costa Rica is enviable in Latin America, some organizations ask politicians not to fall in the danger of a rich nation by rejecting the fault of violence on migrants. Electoral trend or  society phenomenon? It is probably one of the first “rich” problem of a country that leads the economical growth of the area

Costa Rica started to get started as its own country.  In March of 1856, the Costa Ricans  defended their country from invasion by William Walker in the Battle of Santa Rosa, which occurred in Guanacaste.  The story of William Walker is interesting, so I’m going to have a tangent here (supplied in part with information from Wikipedia, not that I endorse its use for anything more scientific!)….

William Walker was born in 1824 in Tennessee, he graduated early, spent a few years in Europe studying medicine, observed the 1848 revolutions in Europe, returned to finish a medical degree at University of Pennsylvania, practiced in Philly, moved to New Orleans, became a lawyer, edited a newspaper, moved to California….sounds rather normal so far, right?

Well, he apparently had done as much as a normal person would ever want to do, so he then moved on to deciding to make a hobby out of privately conquering Latin America.

He started by taking over a small part of Mexico and declaring himself president of the region.  He was forced out by the Mexican government, sent back to the US, tried for starting a war that violated US principles, acquitted, and moved on to planning some more.  At the time, there was a war in Nicaragua, and he saw an opportunity.  He recruited over one thousand men and started on the way to controlling (he was in southern Nicaragua, where most of the population is, and which happens to be near the Costa Rican border).  Costa Rica declared war on William Walker, Walker sent a small army to invade Costa Rica, but the invaders were defeated in the Battle of Santa Rosa in March.

La Casona, Santa Rosa

In April, Costa Rica sent forces into Nicaragua and defeated some of Walker’s troops in the Second Battle of Rivas, Juan Santamaría played a key role (remember this name).  Walker at this point had declared himself the president of Nicaragua.  His policies were put in place to encourage people to immigrate to Nicaragua, particularly spun towards Southerners who were interested in spreading slavery.

Eventually, his time was up.  His policies were weakening, people were revolting, and in May of 1857, he surrendered to the US Navy.  When he arrived in New York, he was  considered a hero, but then blamed the Navy for his “failure”, and lost popular opinion.  He tried to go on another spree, but was retrained by the Navy.  Eventually he returned to Central America, but was taken into custody by the British Navy because they considered him a threat to their own intentions.  The British Navy gave him to the Hondurans, who decided he should be shot by a firing squad (seems this was the preferred method at the time, remember Pablo from “History of Costa Rica, Part 1″?).  Walker was 36 years old when he was killed on 12 September 1860.

Back to Costa Rica….

Juan Santamaría (the name you were supposed to remember from the Walker tangent) was a young man who joined the forces against William Walker.  He was a drummer but gained his fame by setting fire to the camp of Walker’s men.  Juan did not survive the incident, but did became a national hero.  There is a statue dedicated to him in Alejuela, his birthplace.  However, the interesting thing about the statue is that Juan’s likeness is in Haiti, while another similar statue (that was commissioned at the same time) is actually in Alejuela.  At some point, the two were confused, and Costa Rica wound up with a statue wearing a non-Costa Rican outfit, which no one noticed initially.  Apparently, even after some one did notice, it was not a big enough deal for them to switch it!

Monument to the Heroes, Santa Rosa

I’ve about had my fill of writing about history (I mean, after William Walker’s escapades, anything is bound to be boring in comparison!), so here we go in super-fast-forward….

So, after William Walker and Juan Santamaría, there were some governmental changes, including a new constitution in 1871.   Education was made mandatory, water and electricity access were improved, and reforms were common.  After the depression the most influential players were the government, the Communist party, and the Church (Catholic).

Rafal Guadia was the president from 1940-1944 and started lots of good things: UCR (Universidad de Costa Rica, the national university), Caja Costarricense del Seguro Social (Caja, the social health system), and labor laws.

After a 5 week Civil War in 1948, the Communist Party was ultimately banned, the army was abolished, and a new Constitution was constructed based on the one from 1871.

A variety of men were presidents, including Oscar Arias (who won a Noble Peace Prize), who was a president in the 80s, and is the current president (you can read more about him here: http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/peace/laureates/1987/arias-bio.html).

That more or less brings us to today, with not so much emphasis on the last century (sorry!).  More about Costa Rica in the next post….

HONDURAS: What deal? The Fat Lady has Many Sisters

Throughout the Honduran crisis the media have reported agreements between the two sides as if Micheletti was really capable of making concessions and President Zelaya was certain nothing would happen to him if he walked out of the Brazilian embassy. Things happening now must be analyzed based on what happened before. But, most media accounts are devoid of such context. The three factors that must be considered when analyzing developments in Honduras are: everything that has taken place in the last four months, a Fat Lady about to sing and several of her sisters waiting in the wings. If you will, the past, the present, and betting on what is likely to take place in the future.

When I awoke this morning I heard Andres Conteris on Democracy Now being interviewed from the Brazilian embassy where he has been since Zelaya’s arrival on September 22. With each question posed to him, it became more and more apparent to me that wherever Zelaya land’s in this whole thing, the people of Honduras will have to continue fighting this thing on their own. Later, in the broadcast, Rep. Grajalva was interviewed later about health care reform, Amy Goodman asked him what he thought of the agreement in Honduras. After swallowing hard, he said, “I have more questions about it than praise.” Tom Shannon and his entourage were not in Tegucigalpa to tame a feisty Micheletti into a handover of power, rather they were there to collaborate with the golpistas to ensure that Zelaya did not come to power in any true sense of the word. Even bringing him back boxed in heavily by a “unity government”in order to make the elections look credible is a risk for the golpistas. And, this is why the Fat Lady has not sung yet.

Before a closer look at the latest “agreement,” a review of some past chapters in this saga should help to interpret what is (or isn’t) going on now.

While there have been some ridiculous twists and turns in the aftermath of this coup, only one aspect has remained constant and that is the art of delay. The best time eaters are Roberto Micheletti, Oscar Arias, and Hillary Clinton.. Micheletti ate up time by insulting one international delegation after another and then welcoming them back a few weeks later. Oscar Arias, getting his instructions from the US State Department, conducted a charade of a negotiation that just wouldn’t go away. But, it certainly gobbled up an immense amount of time. And then there is Hillary Clinton, queen of cool, who ate up the clock by remaining aloof and unavailable, yet manipulating the overall game from the sidelines. If you recall, on at least two occasions, Zelaya, went to Washington to meet Clinton but was forced to hang around a while until she decided to grant him an appointment. This blatant disrespect of a head of state was the first and best signal that the US was not going to help Zelaya back to the presidential palace.

 Running out the clock was/is the primary tactic in this tug-of-war because it never was the intention of those operating the levers to reinstate Zelaya . In fact, it appears that the US was one of the primary reasons Zelaya was taken out in the first place.

Below is an excerpt from an article by Barry Grey that may shed more light on this, “US Seeks Deal between Honduran Coup Leaders and Deposed President” – July 2, 2009

“There is ample evidence that the Obama administration was deeply involved in plans by Zelaya’s opponents within the Honduran ruling elite—sections of business, the military, the political establishment and the Church—to destabilize or topple his government. The New York Times on Tuesday cited an unnamed US official as saying that US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Thomas Shannon and US Ambassador to Honduras Hugo Llorens spoke to “military officials and opposition leaders” in the days before the coup. He said, “There was talk of how they might remove the president from office, how he could be arrested, on whose authority they could do that.”

Both Shannon and Llorens served under the Bush administration as top advisers on Andean affairs—covering Venezuela, Colombia, Bolivia, Peru and Ecuador. Their stints on the National Security Council and at the State Department coincided with the US-backed coup that briefly toppled Venezuela’s Chávez in 2002.

It appears that the Obama administration was seeking to effect a de facto coup, but without a direct use of the military and under the cover of constitutional legality. That would, it hoped, reverse Washington’s declining influence in Latin America and pave the way for an offensive against Chávez and his left nationalist allies in Nicaragua, Bolivia, Ecuador and other countries aligned with Venezuela in the Bolivarian Alliance for the Americas.”

Before going further, I want to put this military coup thing to bed. The Honduran military kidnapped the president and forcibly exiled him.to Costa Rica. Then, it put a wall of armor between the golpistas and the people of Honduras. The military defended its coup through gross human rights abuses, including murders and disappearances and maintains a massive presence throughout the entire country four months after the coup. If the military, at any point, had laid down their guns, this coup would have fallen in three days.

With this, let’s examine how many songs the fat ladies might have to sing before this thing is really over.

The agreement produced late Thursday nite, appears to have five basic components: formation of a “unity” government, recognition of the November 29 election, no amnesty, verification committee to make sure the agreement is implemented, and a truth commission.

The agreement calls for a “unity” government and one can expect Zelaya to be boxed in very tightly. The only unity in this government will be among the golpistas on how best to keep Zelaya’s hands tied.

As for recognizing the November 29 election, you could not put a bigger dagger in the heart of the people of Honduras. For all intents and purposes, this will be a golpista election. And, as was the case in Haiti, the people of Honduras will boycott it massively. In the agreement, the international community is being asked to guarantee that it will recognize the result of the election before it even takes place. Regardless of who wins in the election, the winner will carry the banner for the golpistas and the de facto regime’s power grab will be legitimized.

Regarding no amnesty, the de facto regime is holding an outstanding warrant for Zelaya’s arrest and there is nothing I have seen to suggest that they won’t execute the warrant if it benefits their political strategy. After all, just yesterday, the de facto regime petitioned the ICC regarding Brazil harboring Zelaya in its embassy based on the warrant issued by the regime

God forbid, but the verification of implementation of the steps in the agreement could be handed to the moonlighting mediator, Oscar Arias. The possibility is so immediately ludicrous that I can’t ponder it further.

Wow, a truth commission. With the help of the media, the Michelettis, Clinton and her spokesmen, P J. Crowley and Ian Kelly along with her ambassador in Honduras, Hugo Llorens, and Oscar Arias, etc., the truth has been perverted or buried to such an extent that the worth of holding such a commission should be re-considered. Now, if you could have a Rwanda type truth commission where victims question and berate the accused publicly followed by a vote of the community to see if the accused should go to prison – well, that kind of truth commission I could get into.

Finally, for the agreement to be ratified, the Honduran Congress is required to vote on Zelaya’s return AFTER the Supreme Court gives its approval first. We are back to square one. Could it be that the Honduran institution most hostile to Zelaya and responsible for his arrest and expulsion may well decide the fate of millions of Hondurans? There can be no doubt that the Honduran Supreme Court is the biggest Fat Lady in the Honduran opera.

La falta de acuerdo para restituir en el poder al depuesto presidente de Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, puso fin ayer a un diálogo que para algunos nació muerto desde su contacto con el Gobierno de facto de Roberto Micheletti en Costa Rica, y que ayer no presentaba puertas hacia ninguna parte.
“Para nosotros el diálogo nació muerto desde la primera reunión en Costa Rica (en julio pasado), porque el régimen golpista siempre se negó a que el presidente Zelaya sea restituido en el poder”, comentó ayer el secretario general del Frente Nacional de Resistencia contra el golpe de Estado, Juan Barahona. “Lo advertimos y estamos viendo que el diálogo fracasó”, expresó Barahona.
El diálogo, cuya primera aproximación tuvo lugar el día 9 de julio pasado en Costa Rica -en San José-, llegó en su última fase en Tegucigalpa a avanzar en un 95 por ciento en las últimas dos semanas, con el acompañamiento de la Organización de Estados Americanos.
La reanudación del diálogo en Tegucigalpa el pasado 7 de octubre caminó con más pausas que prisa, hasta estancarse el pasado 16 de este mes, cuando las comisiones de diálogo no se pusieron de acuerdo en el punto más importante: la vuelta de Manuel Zelaya a la presidencia del empobrecido país centroamericano.
Las partes hablaban optimistas la semana pasada de haber avanzado en un 95 por ciento del diálogo, enmarcado básicamente en el Acuerdo de San José.
Las comisiones volvieron a reunirse el pasado miércoles, cuando ambas partes intercambiaron propuestas y contrapropuestas, sin acuerdos en nada, mientras que el reloj que marcaba un 95 por ciento de avance, comenzó a retroceder hasta ponerse ayer en cero.
Zelaya dio de madrugada por terminado el diálogo con los representantes de Micheletti, que aún con eso insistió en reiterar la propuesta de que ambos se aparten y den paso a un nuevo Gobierno.
Al final del día la comisión de Roberto Micheletti confirmó el fracaso del diálogo, de lo que culpó a Manuel Zelaya.
La contrapropuesta presentada ayer por Micheletti -reiterada en términos similares desde hace meses- fue de nuevo respondida por Zelaya con una negativa, al sostener que la salida a la crisis política causada por su derrocamiento no es buscar una tercera persona para que gobierne, sino respetar la soberanía popular. Las comisiones de Zelaya y Micheletti en el proceso de diálogo se sentaron por primera vez en Costa Rica el 9 de julio, dos semanas después de que Zelaya fuera derrocado y enviado a ese país, el 28 de junio pasado, por los militares.
El primer acercamiento en Costa Rica entre las representaciones de Zelaya y Micheletti, ambos miembros del gobernante Partido Liberal, fracasó por falta de acuerdo, aunque ambas partes dejaron la mesa lista para regresar en cualquier momento, siempre con la mediación de Óscar Arias, el que fuera Premio Nobel de la Paz en el año 1987.
La mediación del presidente de Costa Rica suponía para muchos el principio del fin de una crisis que, a casi cuatro meses de haberse iniciado, tiene a Honduras con dos presidentes, el depuesto Zelaya refugiado en la Embajada de Brasil desde el 21 de septiembre y al de facto Micheletti en la Casa Presidencial.
Zelaya es el único reconocido por la comunidad internacional, que exige su restitución, mientras que Micheletti subsiste sin apoyo externo y empecinado en no dejar el poder hasta el 27 de enero de 2010, cuando finaliza el mandato del derrocado presidente.
El 22 de este mes, Arias presentó el denominado Acuerdo de San José, que contempla la formación de un Gobierno de unidad encabezado por Zelaya y la restitución de éste en el poder, entre otras acciones, que la representación de Micheletti rechazó. No obstante, con el respaldo de la OEA, las Naciones Unidas y Estados Unidos, que endureció sus medidas de presión contra Honduras, el Acuerdo de San José ha sido el marco del diálogo retomado a partir del 7 de octubre.
En la práctica, el proceso de diálogo le ha servido a Micheletti para consolidar su régimen de facto, del que ha reiterado que se irá el 27 de enero de 2010, cuando concluye el mandato de Zelaya.
A pesar de todo, la Organización de Estados Americanos considera que todavía se puede superar la crisis. “Nosotros siempre vamos a creer en un acuerdo”, decían ayer.

Fuente: La Opinión de Murcia. España

El premio Nobel de la Paz y presidente de Costa Rica, Oscar Arias, recibirá el doctorado honoris causa por la Universidad de Salamanca el próximo 2 de diciembre.

Oscar Arias es doctor honoris causa por más de 45 universidades de todo el mundo, premio Nobel de la Paz en 1987, Príncipe de Asturias de Cooperación en 1988. La propuesta para el doctorado honoris causa de la USAL partió de la Facultad de Educación y fue aprobada por el Claustro de doctores el 21 de noviembre de 2008.

Se han tenido en cuenta sus reflexiones educativas, sus iniciativas legislativas en temas de educación y su aliento al programa “Educación para la Paz”. Además también ha contado su papel para mejorar las relaciones académicas de las universidades de su país y la Universidad de Salamanca. La USAL obtuvo uno de los primeros programas de cooperación interuniversitaria dentro del programa ALFA, para la creación de un programa de Doctorado en la Universidad de Costa Rica, instituido en 1995 y del que se benefician alumnos y profesores procedentes de toda Centroamérica.

Con este nombramiento la USAL continúa con su larga tradición de ser el gran puente hacia Latinoamérica y receptora, a la vez que formadora, de gran parte de la intelectualidad de los países que tuvieron como primer modelo universitario el de Salamanca. Además premia el esfuerzo en el desarrollo de la educación y consecución de la paz a través de la promoción de las oportunidades sociales y de la reducción de las desigualdades económicas y culturales.

[Presidente de Costa Rica, en declaraciones publicadas este miércoles por el diario La Nación en las cuales rechazó la apertura de las denominadas "bases de paz" o foros de debate en la Embajada venezolana en San José]

“Uno puede aprender de Venezuela cómo jugar mejor béisbol, pero sobre paz no nos puede enseñar nada”.

NOTE:  This article originally appeared on the HONDURAS OYE! blog, but the editor function on the blog is not working (perhaps, gov’t. gremlins are?) preventing me from doing hotlinks and other really important editing tasks.  Here, the article with hotlinks.

In the 1990 film, “La Femme Nikita,” a young heroin addict kills a cop, is jailed for his murder, and subsequently is placed by French government intelligence services in the underground to conduct assassinations for them. When one of her assassinations goes awry, “Victor, the Cleaner,” is sent in to dispose of both the bodies and the evidence.

Unfortunately, this is the image that came to my mind when I first heard last week that a man by the name of John Biehl said that he was hopeful about an agreement between Honduran President Zelaya and the golpistas.  A few days later, I learned that Biehl, actually his name is John Biehl del Rio, is an advisor to OAS Secretary-General, Jose Miguel Insulza.  Then, just a few days ago, Arias declared support for the November 29 election.  And today, Biehl del Rio announces that a meeting between the golpistas and Zelaya will take place next week. Is this guy a fortune teller, a magician?  No wonder, out of the ill-fated attempt by OAS officials to enter Honduras a week ago, Biehl was the only one allowed in. I don’t know about you, but when the history is written, I would prefer to be one of the guys turned away by the golpistas at the airport.  I decided it was time to find out more.

His Wikipedia biography shows a varied diplomatic career.  Biehl del Rio is a Chilean of Danish heritage. In the 1980’s,  Biehl was an employee of the United Nations Development Program where he served as a development advisor in Honduras, Panama, Mexico, Costa Rica, Peru and Colombia. He also worked for Oscar Arias in Costa Rica as a policy maker and speech writer and was known as Arias’ “closest confidant” and “alter ego.” In addition, it was Biehl del Rio who led the successful campaign for Arias’ Nobel Peace Prize. In the late 1990’s , he served as Chilean ambassador to the US.  Next stop for Biehl was the International Crisis Group, as the Director of Colombia and the Andean Region, beginning in 2001.

When Biehl del Rio came to his most recent job in the political affairs department at the OAS, his first assignment was to oversee the OAS mission to monitor the Nicaraguan elections.  Back during the Reagan administration, Oscar Arias started bucking the US’ use of Contras in Nicaragua and ordered Contras arrested if found in Costs Rica.  Biehl del Rio was with the UN at the time and lobbied folks in Washington against Reagan’s use of the Contras in the war in Nicaragua.  In retaliation, the Reagan administration condemned Arias and tried to have Biehl del Rio fired from the UN.  Over time, as Arias began conducting peace negotiations concerning the war in Nicaragua, it was obvious that the Reagan administration had gotten to him because his actions became increasingly duplicitous.  With his suggestion of a unity government between the Sandinistas and the US bought and paid for Contras, it was obvious that Arias was working for the US government.  When he received the Nobel Peace Prize for his Nicaraguan peace plan, it was a deep affront to the Sandinistas.  Ever since that time, Arias has been in the US’ pocket and one cannot doubt that his alter ego, Biehl del Rio, has been as well.

In the Nicaragua negotiations, Arias dealt with the Sandinistas and the Contras as nearly equal entities, thus legitimizing the Contra war.  And while the Clinton State Department would deny it,  the US and its envoy, Arias, have been doing the same thing concerning Honduras.  From the very beginning, Arias’ mediations put the Michelettis at the same table as the Zelayas.  This is not mediating, this is fixing the deal.

Now that a November election looks to be a firm part of the plan and the will of the Honduras people has been grossly disrespected by Hillary Clinton, Oscar Arias and, I’ll have to throw in Insulza also because only he could have made the OAS walk the fine line between  Zelaya and the golpistas, it’s time to clean up the mess for international consumption. Issues of law will be erased, Zelaya will make compromises he never intended, and Hondurans determined to boycott the elections will be recast as unpatriotic elements in the country who don’t want peace.

Haitians boycotted their latest election this last April because it excluded all candidates from running who were associated with Lavalas, the largest and most popular party in Haiti. Yet, incredibly, the election went on and the 5% voter turnout result was certified. The US Ambassador to Haiti, Janet Sanderson, followed up with a public statement a day after the election suggesting that the Haitian government arrest all 42 leaders of the boycott.

Honduras, as it has in other instances since the June 28 coup, continues in a path similar to Haiti which also suffered a  US-sponsored coup in 2004.   But, how do you take the rags of a travesty and make it look like a whole piece of cloth? I guess,”John Biehl del Rio, the Cleaner,” will show us how it’s done.

]]> http://hondurasoye.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/honduran-national-resistance-update-103-2/ Sun, 04 Oct 2009 14:26:31 +0000 magbana http://hondurasoye.wordpress.com/2009/10/04/honduran-national-resistance-update-103-2/

>HONDURAS: ARIAS AND INSULZA SEND IN “THE CLEANER”

http://hondurasoye.wordpress.com/2009/10/03/honduras-arias-and-insulza-send-in-the-cleaner/

>Based on statistics gathered through Honduras Laboral, as of 10/2. 17 have been killed and 4,000 detained over the three months of protests. The latest of those deaths is teacher Mario Fidel Contreras who has been active in the National Resistance. He was killed by unknown people who pretended to steal his cell phone but who shot him instead. This manner of attack has been used increasingly and anti-coup protesters seem to be the target. A note was found on his body that said: This will happen to all of those in the resistance.

http://honduraslaboral.org/

>US Plans to establish Naval bases in Panama, Darien y Punta Coca

http://www.rebelion.org/noticia.php?id=92545&titular=eeuu-instalar%E1-bases-navales-en-dari%E9n-y-punta-coca-panam%E1-

So the US has been neglecting Latin America and the way to make up for it is to barricade the continent with military bases?

>Latest headlines from Telesur:

>>Micheletti says the state of siege will end on Monday.

http://www.telesurtv.net/noticias/afondo/especiales/Golpe_de_estado_honduras/nota.php?ckl=58834&cc=132

>>Micheletti admits to a secret meeting with Insulza at Palmerola.

http://www.telesurtv.net/noticias/afondo/especiales/Golpe_de_estado_honduras/nota.php?ckl=58835&cc=132

In the 1990 film, “La Femme Nikita,” a young heroin addict kills a cop, is jailed for his murder, and subsequently is placed by French government intelligence services in the underground to conduct assassinations for them. When one of her assassinations goes awry, “Victor, the Cleaner,” is sent in to dispose of both the bodies and the evidence.

Unfortunately, this is the image that came to my mind when I first heard last week that a man by the name of John Biehl said that he was hopeful about an agreement between Honduran President Zelaya and the golpistas.  A few days later, I learned that Biehl, actually his name is John Biehl del Rio, is an advisor to OAS Secretary-General, Jose Miguel Insulza.  Then, just a few days ago, Arias declared support for the November 29 election.  And today, Biehl del Rio announces that a meeting between the golpistas and Zelaya will take place next week. Is this guy a fortune teller, a magician?  No wonder, out of the ill-fated attempt by OAS officials to enter Honduras a week ago, Biehl was the only one allowed in. I don’t know about you, but when the history is written, I would prefer to be one of the guys turned away by the golpistas at the airport.  I decided it was time to find out more.

His Wikipedia biography shows a varied diplomatic career.  Biehl del Rio is a Chilean of Danish heritage. In the 1980’s,  Biehl was an employee of the United Nations Development Program where he served as a development advisor in Honduras, Panama, Mexico, Costa Rica, Peru and Colombia. He also worked for Oscar Arias in Costa Rica as a policy maker and speech writer and was known as Arias’ “closest confidant” and “alter ego.” In addition, it was Biehl del Rio who led the successful campaign for Arias’ Nobel Peace Prize. In the late 1990’s , he served as Chilean ambassador to the US.  Next stop for Biehl was the International Crisis Group, as the Director of Colombia and the Andean Region, beginning in 2001.

When Biehl del Rio came to his most recent job in the political affairs department at the OAS, his first assignment was to oversee the OAS mission to monitor the Nicaraguan elections.  Back during the Reagan administration, Oscar Arias started bucking the US’ use of Contras in Nicaragua and ordered Contras arrested if found in Costs Rica.  Biehl del Rio was with the UN at the time and lobbied folks in Washington against Reagan’s use of the Contras in the war in Nicaragua.  In retaliation, the Reagan administration condemned Arias and tried to have Biehl del Rio fired from the UN.  Over time, as Arias began conducting peace negotiations concerning the war in Nicaragua, it was obvious that the Reagan administration had gotten to him because his actions became increasingly duplicitous.  With his suggestion of a unity government between the Sandinistas and the US bought and paid for Contras, it was obvious that Arias was working for the US government.  When he received the Nobel Peace Prize for his Nicaraguan peace plan, it was a deep affront to the Sandinistas.  Ever since that time, Arias has been in the US’ pocket and one cannot doubt that his alter ego, Biehl del Rio, has been as well.

In the Nicaragua negotiations, Arias dealt with the Sandinistas and the Contras as nearly equal entities, thus legitimizing the Contra war.  And while the Clinton State Department would deny it,  the US and its envoy, Arias, have been doing the same thing concerning Honduras.  From the very beginning, Arias’ mediations put the Michelettis at the same table as the Zelayas.  This is not mediating, this is fixing the deal.

Now that a November election looks to be a firm part of the plan and the will of the Honduras people has been grossly disrespected by Hillary Clinton, Oscar Arias and, I’ll have to throw in Insulza also because only he could have made the OAS walk the fine line between  Zelaya and the golpistas, it’s time to clean up the mess for international consumption. Issues of law will be erased, Zelaya will make compromises he never intended, and Hondurans determined to boycott the elections will be recast as unpatriotic elements in the country who don’t want peace.

Haitians boycotted their latest election this last April because it excluded all candidates from running who were associated with Lavalas, the largest and most popular party in Haiti. Yet, incredibly, the election went on and the 5% voter turnout result was certified. The US Ambassador to Haiti, Janet Sanderson, followed up with a public statement a day after the election suggesting that the Haitian government arrest all 42 leaders of the boycott.

Honduras, as it has in other instances since the June 28 coup, continues in a path similar to Haiti which also suffered a  US-sponsored coup in 2004.   But, how do you take the rags of a travesty and make it look like a whole piece of cloth? I guess,”John Biehl del Rio, the Cleaner,” will show us how it’s done.

Costa Rican president, Oscar Arias is known as the US’ man in Latin America.  It is for this reason that the US chose Arias to be the mediator between constitutional president, Mel Zelaya and de facto regime leader and presidential place holder, Roberto Micheletti.

Arias has just announced that he supports having the November 29 presidential elections as a way to “avoid isolating the de facto regime.”  Arias is in Miami presently, but on Monday in a conversation with Micheletti, Arias says that Micheletti agreed to lift the state of siege if elections could go forward.  Now this is “quid pro quoing” at its best.  Micheletti will drop the decree if Arias will endorse the elections.  You don’t need to call the State Department to ask what they think.  When Arias’ mouth  moves, State Department policy rolls out.

One last thing, what’s the moonlighting mediator, part-time prez, and US envoy doing in Miami and does it have anything to do with Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen’s trip to Honduras?

As always, stay tuned.

Thursday, October 1st 2009 – 8:53 am UTC
Arias calls for support for Honduras November election

Costa Rica’s president Oscar Arias called on the international community to collaborate with Honduras November presidential election, avoiding isolating the de facto regime, thus helping to find a way out to the current crisis.

Costa Rica president Oscar Arias mediator of the conflict Costa Rica president Oscar Arias mediator of the conflict

“The worst that can happen is to isolate Honduras”, said Arias who insisted the international community must do its outmost to ensure the electoral process takes place.

President Arias who is acting as a mediator in the Honduras crisis since the ousting of elected President Manuel Zelaya last June, called on both sides of the conflict to sign and abide by his proposal which contemplates the reinstatement of Zelaya and an amnesty for the military involved in his ousting.

Arias currently in Miami said that last Monday he was on the phone with interim Honduran president Roberto Micheletti who told him he was willing to lift the decree imposing a state of siege so the electoral process could advance.

“He agreed with me that without individual rights and constitutional guarantees suspended no electoral campaign can take place”, said Arias.

“The worst that can happen to Honduras is that a majority of countries do not recognize the winner of elections scheduled for November 29”, he emphasized.

Meanwhile the main business organization of Honduras proposed a plan which reinstates Zelaya, with limited powers, and the deployment of a multinational force to ensure peace and transparency of the whole electoral process.”