Back on June 30th at Thinkin’Bout Stuff:
President Obama and most nations have called for the reinstatement of the President of Honduras who was removed via a military coup… apparently, when President Manuel Zelaya tried to force through a referendum allowing him to be president for life, the military stepped in (I know this is probably an oversimplification).
<snip>
So… when a “president” tries to become a dictator and is thrown own by the military, Obama wants him returned to power…
Tonight on Fox News’ On the Record, Greta Van Susteren interviewed the interim leader of Honduras who indicated there will be an election on November 29th, he will not run, and that the removal of Zelaya was constitutional. Greta shared that the Honduran Constitution, Article 239, states:
No citizen who has already served as head of the executive branch can be president or vice-president. Whoever violates this law or proposes its reform, as well as those who support such violation directly or indirectly, will immediately cease in his functions and will be unable to hold public office for a period of ten years.
Seems pretty clear… Zelaya was violating Honduran law, was trying to establish himself as a dictator like his pal Hugo Chavez, and was removed from office as per the requirement established under the Honduran constitution.
So why is Obama refusing to recognize the Honduran election and insisting that Zelaya be reinstated?
Is there more to this that is not apparent? Are Obama and other world leaders right that this was a military coup and Zelaya needs to be reinstated?
At least based upon what was shared tonight, seems like the US may be on the wrong side on this one.
UPDATE: Interesting article from The Seattle Times -
Four presidential candidates pledged Wednesday to support a proposed deal that would restore the ousted Honduran leader to power.
The candidates released their statement after meeting with Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, the chief mediator in the conflict who has warned that the Nov. 29 elections would have no credibility unless Manuel Zelaya returns to power beforehand.
However, the four candidates – including the two leading contenders – stopped short of directly calling on the interim Honduran government to drop its opposition to the U.S.-backed agreement, proposed weeks ago by Arias.
<snip>
The Arias plan would restore Zelaya with limited powers to finish his constitutional term, which ends in January. It also requires that Zelaya abandon his ambitions to change the Honduran constitution, an effort which alienated Congress, the military and his own party, eventually prompting his ouster.
Confusing… wouldn’t this violate their constitution? Thought the constitution required he be removed…
Oh well… tough enough to figure out whether stuff we do in the US violates our constitution… maybe we should let Honduras sort it out without our interference.
|
|
|
|