The Honduran Resistance Will Continue

In the weeks since the November election, the English language press has gone silent about the Honduran resistance. But that does not mean the Honduran resistance has disappeared. During a march in Tegucigalpa at the beginning of this month, Tiempo reported, some speakers called for the Frente to form a political movement or alternate political party. But this is not the main goal of the Resistance movement.

Inside Costa Rica reports that the National Resistance Front has called for marches on January 27 to protest the inauguration of Porfirio Lobo Sosa, whose projected administration is characterized as "the continuation of the dictatorship of the oligarchy." Anyone who was hoping that the inauguration of Lobo Sosa would end Honduran dissent will obviously find themselves disappointed.

The Frente stated that the goal of demonstrations is to "insist on the demand of a national constituent assembly, popular and democratic, to restore Honduras." This demand will not go away.

As in previous demonstrations in Tegucigalpa, the beginning point for the planned march there January 27 will be the Universidad Nacional Pedagogica. Marchers will apparently face increased security according to reports in pro-coup El Heraldo:

Álvarez affirmed that there will be strong security measures, with police and military agents, in ten cities of Honduras.

This presumably includes San Pedro Sula, the second-largest city in Honduras, site of a second march called for by the Resistance. Another report published by Heraldo, after describing security at the stadium where the inauguration will take place, commented that

It is planned to develop operations in the barrios and colonias of the capital, as well as in all the cities of the country. The Armed Forces have placed at the disposal more than 2700 members just for the capital. An equal number is that of the police.

Special operations will be developed beginning in the next hours on all the frontiers of the country.

In respect to the demonstrations, such as that programmed by the zelayists for the 27th of January, the police authorities reminded that, based on the Law of Co-existence, they should be notified with 24 hours of advance notice of the realization of the same and their trajectory.

(The Law referred to, for those who do not remember, was passed by the de facto regime in late October to restrict freedom of assembly that is guaranteed in the Honduran Constitution.)

What kinds of operations are planned for the barrios and colonias of Tegucigalpa-- far from the site of the ceremonial transfer of power, but the heart of the resistance that continued after the de facto regime imposed repeated curfews? what makes it necessary to deploy soldiers and anti-riot police in ten Honduran cities? If the new government were really so universally appreciated, what would be the need for continued repressive militarization?

Needless to say, confrontations with peaceful protestors by military and riot police would mar the attempt to portray the government of Lobo Sosa as the solution to the destruction of civil liberties by the de facto regime.

The decision on continued strategy, starting with the planned marches, was taken by the leaders of the Resistance last weekend. While El Heraldo would like to dismiss the Resistance marches as the work of "zelayistas", the National Resistance Front cannot be reduced to the supporters of any current political party or faction within one.

As reported by Prensa Latina, more than 80 leaders of the resistance, including Juan Barahona, Carlos H. Reyes, Rafael Alegría, Bertha Cáceres, and Carlos Eduardo Reina, conferred in Siguatepeque, a small city located on the main highway between Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula. They reaffirmed the need to resist division along traditional lines of party loyalty, which have dominated Honduran politics.

While much of the English-language press has remained focused on the drama of negotiating a dignified exit for President Zelaya, and on the attempts to distance Lobo Sosa from Micheletti, it is arguable that what will ultimately be most significant for the possibility of effective political transformation in Honduras will be what happens with the Resistance.

On January 27, we will see whether the Resistance mobilizes a sufficiently visible presence to ensure that international media have to take note.

Honduran Congress Delays until After Elections

The Washington Post is reporting, based on AP wire stories from Honduras, that the Honduran Congress will not hold its vote on restoring the constitutionally elected president, José Manuel Zelaya Rosales, until after the November 29 election. Citing statements by Jose Saavedra, president of the Honduran Congress, on national radio, this report says Congress will hold its vote on December 2.

Saavedra said that the date was set because by then he was sure he would have all the non-binding reports Congress has solicited concerning the restitution of Zelaya. You will remember that the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord called for Congress to consult with the Supreme Court. Instead, Congress solicited reports from the Procuraduria, the Supreme Court, and the Public Prosecutor. It has received reports from the Human Rights Commissioner and the Procuraduria, and will receive the report of the Supreme Court tomorrow. However, Luis Rubi, the Public Prosecutor, is delaying his report until next week sometime. La Tribuna noted that the convocation of Congress coincided with the return visit of Craig Kelly.

In some ways, this decision is irrelevant, since Zelaya has now stated that he would not accept a restoration that would pave the way for international recognition of the elections. His position, which supports the position of the Frente de Resistencia, is that the climate in Honduras has not allowed for free and fair expression of opinion. Cynics will say this is how Honduran elections always take place: but that ignores what is in fact striking about the position taken by the Frente, followed by Zelaya and by independent candidate Carlos H. Reyes: it is a position that actually takes seriously an electoral process that is deeply flawed. Rather than simply remain in a state of apathetic acceptance, the Frente is calling for an active rejection of politics that provides no real possibility for popular participation.

Also interesting is the assessment of the possible impact on the election given by the AP reporter, Freddy Cuevas, based in Tegucigalpa:

Several Latin American countries have warned they will not recognize the outcome of the election unless Zelaya is restored beforehand. But the United States has not ruled out restoring diplomatic ties with a newly elected Honduran government even if Zelaya remains out of power through the vote.

In other words: the US action outweighs the intentions of "several" (read: all but one, so far) Latin American countries (as well as members of the EU and presumably other world governments that have yet to speak out on the legitimacy of the elections but that voted for the UN resolution on the coup).

Cuevas specifically cites yet another damaging statement from yet another US State Department spokesperson that will inevitably be interpreted in Honduras as support for Roberto Micheletti's regime:

The administration of President Barack Obama has repeatedly said that recognition of the election is not linked to any one action, said State Department spokesman Charles Luoma-Overstreet. Rather, he said, the State Department is hoping a broader, U.S.-brokered accord is enacted.

By now, I think it is hard to argue that State does not understand what is made of statements like these. It will be received as "recognition of the election is not linked to voting on restoring President Zelaya", even though the Tegucigalpa-San Jose Accord makes no sense if the requirement for a vote is not linked to the election, and most honest readings at the time took it to require a vote before the election (and in my view, a vote before the deadline for forming the unity government was surely implicit, no matter what State now claims.)

Curiously, Cuevas' report misstates what President Zelaya said in his letter to US President Obama, which was that he will not accept restoral because it will legitimate the elections. Instead, Cuevas says Zelaya said he would not accept restoration if it comes after the elections.

If we assume that Cuevas' report reflects a view in Tegucigalpa-- and his reporting has often reflected the views of the supporters of the de facto regime-- then perhaps the newly announced date for the Congressional vote is intentional: Congress now can go through with its assigned role secure in the belief that President Zelaya would not accept restoral even if it were the outcome, because of the timing.

Carlos H. Reyes pulls out

Spanish language sources including Honduras La Prensa are reporting that Carlos Reyes has pulled out of the elections.

Updates as we have more details.

Update 7:00 AM PDT: "The last mask that has fallen is the mask of the United States of America; we cannot continue with this disaster ("papada"), time has run out," said Reyes. "We withdraw from the electoral process because it is of the golpistas, not the people. Monday I will withdraw offically, and from today (Sunday) I am announcing it to the media." Reyes added that what will come of the November 29 elections is a bastard government (gobierno espurio).

Reyes indicated he is not withdrawing from the Frente, from politics, or from the popular fight.

Update 10:45 AM PDT: Its official, Carlos H. Reyes has officially withdrawn from the election by formally notifying the Election Tribunal this morning.

Is this the coalition that the elites were afraid to see emerge?

An article in tomorrow's El Heraldo, one of the pro-coup Honduran newspapers, describes a "strategic-political alliance" emerging with Carlos H. Reyes, running as an independent candidate for president, aided by Manuel Zelaya, the UD party, members of the Liberal party loyal to Zelaya, and "popular and progressive sectors of the PINU", to be announced in the next few days.

Legally, the story notes, no formal alliance can be established because May 28 was the last day to register such an entity with the Supreme Electoral Tribunal.

The story continues:

But it could be done from the strategic or political point of view, and would consist of a call that the leaders of those parties, movements, or organized sectors that would make up an electorate to vote for a specific presidential candidate and for the Liberal congress members allied with Zelaya, for those of the UD, and of the progressive sectors of the PINU (Innovation and Unity Party).

The story says the announcement comes from UD party deputy Marvin Ponce, who

did not rule out a resignation by Cesar Ham as presidential candidate of the UD to leave open an expedited route for the popular leader Carlos H. Reyes, who is signed on with the Electoral Tribunal as an independent presidential candidate.

Ham, the story notes, is still a candidate, despite supposedly having confessed to an administrative infraction.

Ponce is quoted during an interview on Radio Cadena as saying

We agree with him [Reyes?]. He is a great leader, a great fighter; we are in distinct trenches, but we are making an effort to seek unity, including with the sectors of the Liberal party that are opposed to the coup, progressive sectors of the Pinu, of social movements, with Manuel Zelaya Rosales.

We are going to have a great political alliance in the next days that is going to resound to fight power, now not only hoping to obtain a few deputies, but to fight the power in the country. It will be a great surprise. we are talking about a political alliance to confront the oligarchy in this country

Ponce added that others who would enter into the alliance would include

progressive sectors of civil society, campesino organizations, unions, teachers, indigenous people and peoples who have historically been relegated.

The report ends with statements from members of the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, refusing to be drawn into ruling on whether such an alliance would be legal, ending with a quote from one of these officials that "this could be another type of alliance, that will only be known to the people who will make this type of efforts".

If that is, as it seems to be, a promise not to act against such an alliance on the technical grounds of all formal alliances needing to be registered by May 28, this may be the beginning of precisely the kind of new political movement that Rodolfo Pastor Fasquelle predicted would be one of the products of the coup and its exposure of the rigid conservatism of the Liberal party.