Sword/Pen Stories

An interview I did with Francisco Cordero-Gené, of the Friends Peace Center in San José.  Cordero-Gené is the former head advisor to the Costa Rican legislative assembly.  Here he explains his opposition to the authorization of US military involvement in Costa Rica.

http://amigosparalapaz.org/en/node/75

Spanish translation of Fear, Suspicion as U.S. Military En Route to Costa Rica

Written by Joseph Shansky

Translated by Robert Cavooris and Janina Pinzón-Suárez

http://upsidedownworld.org/main/en-espatopmenu-81/2607–miedo-y-sospecha-milicia-de-eeuu-rumbo-a-costa-rica

A short radio interview I did recently, on new militarization in Latin America.

http://antiwar.com/radio/2010/07/23/joseph-shansky/

Originally published at Upside Down World

Written by Joseph Shansky

Thursday, 15 July 2010 10:51

Tensions are high in Costa Rica following the announcement of the impending arrival of US military vessels. In the past year alone, a sudden expansion of United States military presence around Latin America has alarmed many in the region. Now it is spreading to the one nation which had previously been known for the absence of any standing permanent army, foreign or national. After receiving a diplomatic request from the US Embassy, on July 1 the Costa Rican legislative assembly approved a measure to grant unprecedented access to a U.S. military fleet in Costa Rica’s waters. The vessels will arrive for at least six months to assist counter-narcotics operations by Costa Rican authorities. Costa Rica has long been used a stopping point of entry for drugs coming from Colombia and Panama on their way further north. This type of partnership between the U.S. and Costa Rica is not new. Since 1999, a maritime agreement titled the “Joint Patrol” between the United States and Costa Rica has allowed the U.S. Coast Guard to operate in the waters of Costa Rica for similar purposes. However, this particular agreement goes far beyond previously established boundaries. The Joint Patrol agreement limited U.S. personnel to Coast Guard only, allowing for Costa Rican law enforcement to ride on U.S. ships if they have reason to suspect suspicious activity, and vice versa. Under the new agreement the ships, which can occupy up to 7,000 Navy personnel and 200 helicopters, will join the Coast Guard and according to the Embassy letter, will “enjoy freedom of movement and the right to carry out activities they consider necessary for the fulfillment of their mission, which includes wearing their uniforms while exercising official functions.” In other words, immunity from any actions they deem appropriate in the name of policing the waters. The contract has drawn confusion about the intent of the ships more than anything else, stemming from a general distrust of US action in the region, likely based on recent events like the tacitly-approved military coup in Honduras (and news emerging last week of new plans for another military base there), as well as last year’s controversial accord to establish seven new military bases in Colombia. The announcement has already provoked a fierce response in Costa Rica. The measure, which can be also renewed after December 31, has drawn sharp criticism from both lawmakers and civilians. Critics say that a massive foreign military landing at their shores not only directly violates that constitution as it stands today, but tears at the moral fabric of a nation which constitutionally abolished its own army in 1949. In an impassioned address to the assembly during the vote, Parliamentary leader José María Villalta, of the Frente Amplio (Broad Front) party, argued that apart from legal ramifications, the measure inherently goes against Costa Rican ideals. “We cannot remain silent,” Villalta said. “The fundamental values of the Costa Rican State are stake, the core values that have distinguished this country- a country of peace, which rejects militarism, where we have a declaration of perpetual neutrality regarding conflicts of war in other countries and now we want to become complicit in a strategy of militarization is taking place in Latin America.” In an interview with Upside Down World, Francisco Cordero-Gené, who served as former head advisor to the Costa Rican legislative assembly during the past two administrations (prior to that of current President Laura Chinchilla, who has voiced support for the measure) outlined the main legal contentions of those opposed. “Aside from the dark procedure by which the permit was approved, it clearly provides unlimited access to ports for troops of the Navy Department of Defense, not just law enforcement authorities of the Coast Guard. Therefore, we argue that the reason given for giving the permit has been invalidated. It exceeds the responsibilities of Congress- no basis to authorize this invasion is theirs alone,” said Cordero-Gené. Indeed, Article 12 of the 1949 Constitution reads: “Military forces may only be organized under a continental agreement or for the national defense; in either case, they shall always be subordinate to the civil power: they may not deliberate or make statements or representations individually or collectively.” Because of this clause, there have been five legal recourse briefs (recursos de amparo) submitted so far in opposition to the Congressional decision, intended to declare the approval unconstitutional on these grounds. Organizations such as the Quaker Friends Peace Center, of which Cordero-Gené belongs to, question the motives of the ships which will be dispersed to Costa Rica individually. At a time when there’s been violent labor disputes in Panama recently (due to banana workers protesting new policies that would weaken the position of labor unions, allowing companies to fire or replace striking workers) Cordero-Gené says he wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a connection. “The lack of a debate in Congress makes one suspect that they will be operating militarily and not necessarily confined to the drug trafficking operations,” said Cordero-Gené. Is it a coincidence that ships arrive as a new port management is being put into practice, eliminating the authority of the state agency JAPDEVA (Port Management Board of the Atlantic Coast Development) and its group of unionized dock workers…and preventing any possibility of strikes, work stoppages and incidents in Limón, such as those in Panama? ” So far there are no clear answers to these and many other questions, such as why the funds being used for this operation not instead being directed to help train and equip the Costa Rican Coast Guard. Even the Washington Office on Latin America (WOLA), widely regarded as the highest non-governmental domestic authority on all U.S. affairs in the area, seems to be left scratching its head. “Once again, the government has not released a single public statement on this- no one is talking about it,” says Adam Isacson, a senior associate on WOLA’s Regional Security Policy program. “There is certainly a drug problem in the area, but we don’t know whether the 7,000 number (of Marines) being discussed is any bigger than what’s allowed in the 1999 agreement. The increase could be justified, but we simply don’t know at this point.” Cordero-Gené agrees that drug security is popular issue in Costa Rica, but says that it’s a problem of perception rather than statistical increase in crime. “The drug problem is not essentially the problem of security; because the assaults and crimes committed are due more to poverty in an increasingly violent culture…It’s obvious that this displacement is a response to the arms race and alliances to neutralize the countries of the Bolivarian Alliance (ALBA),” he added. “This front is undoubtedly linked to the accusations from both presidents of Colombia (current President Alvaro Uribe and incoming President Juan Manuel Santos) that Hugo Chavez supports the narco-guerrillas.” Cordero-Gené is not alone in this line of geo-political thinking- these are just a few of the many explanations being floated around opposition circles since the announcement in Costa Rica. For now they remain only theories, but in the context of last year’s US agreements to new military bases and logistical training in countries like Colombia, Brazil, and Peru, many see them as unsurprising and plausible. Public outrage against the measure is building in Costa Rica. Anti-militarization rallies have already been held in San José. In only a few days since the announcement, a Facebook group titled “¡No a la presencia militar en Costa Rica!” (No military presence in Costa Rica!) has gained over 20,000 supporters. A large demonstration amongst the public sectors is being planned for July 26, when the first of the ships is due to arrive. Regardless of its stated intent, with so much uncertainty around the vague conditions of the agreement, a foreign military suddenly entering a nation with a proud tradition of peaceful conflict resolution, neutrality and disarmament is leading to far more questions than answers. Joseph Shansky can be reached at fallow3(at)gmail.com.

Originally published at Upside Down World

Written by Joseph Shansky

Monday, 28 June 2010 09:07

At one point during the military coup in Honduras last year, a US representative to the Organization of American States (OAS) joked that Hondurans were living in a state of “magical realism”, a folkloric literary genre blurring reality and the surreal, often in the historical or political context of Latin America. He wasn’t far off, despite the bizarre comparison: A democratically-elected president is overthrown by an elite conspiring against him, forced out of the country, the military takes over, the people revolt in massive opposition, while governments across the world refuse to recognize the new regime and withdraw their ambassadors. Only the United States, the most powerful of all countries, remains on the fence, then hops off onto the side of the golpistas (coup-makers) while presenting a straight face of diplomacy. Yes, the story of how elected president Manuel Zelaya was violently removed from power under the guise of legal proceedings would make great fiction, but sadly remains the true story of the first successful Latin American military coup in decades. _ _ Honduras burst into the international news last summer when on the morning of June 28th, Hondurans awoke (in more than one sense) to a dismantled government and a military takeover of their country. The Honduran Congress had just issued the trumped-up charge that Zelaya, of the Liberal Party, had violated the law by attempting to assess the interest of the general population in potentially rewriting the outdated Constitution to include new progressive reforms. Hondurans were scheduled to vote that day in a non-binding referendum. Instead, the president was flown out of the country by military troops operating under the orders of Congressional head Roberto Micheletti (of the same party), who then became de-facto president. The people took to the streets in protest. The police and military, acting under Micheletti’s command, responded with violence, and a saga began which continues to this day, despite a new administration. It quickly became apparent that many of the leaders of the military establishment which seized Zelaya and spent the past year ensuring that Hondurans lived in perpetual fear, had in fact been trained at the infamous School of the Americas one thread of many leading back north. Enter the United States, whose intervention in the region is unfortunately not limited to the history books. From the beginning of the coup to the most recent headlines on Honduras, the shadow of the U.S. has loomed large. The US mainstream media is always eager to disregard Latin American social movements demanding autonomy as motivated by the presumably sinister leftist influence of Hugo Chavez and other leaders in the region. Zelaya came into power by no means a radical, but he gradually worked to enact common-sense progressive measures. Some examples: a higher minimum wage, agrarian reform, an idea to convert the US military base in Soto Cano to a civilian airport, a rejection of recent IMF agreements, etc. These changes were seen as a threat by a ruling oligarchy both in Honduras and elsewhere, who viewed their business and economic interests as in jeopardy. When Zelaya was forced out, Barack Obama verbally wrist-slapped the golpistas, but refrained from using the legal language necessary to trigger more drastic measures against the coup government, such as economic sanctions, freezing assets, or withdrawing his ambassador, as so many other countries did immediately. The most significant result of all of this is the popular uprising which has been under the threat – and reality – of violence since its inception. June 28, 2009 marked the birth of a truly grassroots movement formed out of the simple premise that the electoral process which brought Zelaya into power by popular support must be respected and defended to its legal end. Day after day last summer, around the country in both rural and urban zones, Hondurans marched to demand Zelaya’s return and the re-establishment of democratic order. As I participated with the marchers, it was a glorious domino effect to witness – families walking proudly down the road, beckoning others peering cautiously out doors and windows to join the crowds, whose numbers grew exponentially each day. Meanwhile, the theatre continued and the performances, especially by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Embassy, in particular Ambassador Hugo Llorens, were impeccable. I had the opportunity to meet with the Ambassador in August 2009, as part of a delegation monitoring human rights. He was sympathetic (“You’re preaching to the converted” and “We condemn the regime, and think that they’re thugs”), but despite several references to the urgency of the situation, he turned out to be a master at extending the “diplomatic process” until it was too late for many. The amount of recorded evidence of illegal abuses directly connected to the Micheletti and Lobo governments is overwhelming. So is the number of hours of tape which has State Department representatives finding new ways to avoid addressing this topic when pressed. In general, the US continued to disregard the increasingly threatening measures taking place – activists, media, and government figures opposed to the coup were targeted, resulting in account after account of kidnapping, torture, and murder. A February report by the Committee for the Families of the Disappeared and Detained in Honduras (COFADEH) lists 40 confirmed Resistance-related deaths, though that number continues to grow since then. In addition, there was an almost-total blackout of the independent media outlets which much of the country relied on to get their news. All of this went on as backdrop to the run-up of new elections. The US eventually brokered an agreement leading to the installation of the Lobo government, by means of approving an election cycle in a climate of fear and intimidation, where press freedom was severely restricted. As more people went missing, were detained at random, were found in ditches with signs of torture, as horror stories emerged daily, certain individuals and organizations on the front lines became more vulnerable. In hindsight we can see now just how risky it was – and still is – to be in visible opposition to the golpistas. During the days of street repression, the state violence was uncontrolled, unleashed against groups that always appeared physically united in the streets. Now, in contrast, the Resistance movement, led by the National Popular Resistance Front (FNRP), simply referred to as the Resistance, has become more physically fragmented, and thus more vulnerable. Now the disappearances and killings are targeted. Those who put their life on the line last year continue to pay the price. Family members of activists are at risk as well. The most brazen acts are still being seen today. All we need to do is look at those who have suffered the most for being at the front lines. Out of all sectors of the Honduran population, the gay and lesbian community has seen the highest number of victims. Usually they have been connected directly to opposition circles, and the majority of incidents have happened since Pepe Lobo took office in January. The most notorious case remains that of Walter Trochez, a beloved organizer who was captured, escaped, and then killed a week later. Journalists – Nine have been killed in the country so far this year alone, with the great majority working for news outlets opposed to the coup. The Committee to Protect Journalists has listed Honduras as one of the most dangerous countries in the world in regard to their mission. Unions – Throughout the coup, the offices of the Honduran Union of Industry Workers of Soft Drinks and Similar Beverages (STIBYS) became shelter for the Resistance and their allies. The union was targeted by armed forces during the coup, and its leaders have been subject to constant assault and persecution. STIBYS president (and former Honduran presidential candidate) Carlos H. Reyes was badly beaten during a protest last year. Earlier this month, the brother-in-law of STIBYS Vice President Porfirio Ponce was killed in an attack when armed men stopped his car at a traffic light, also wounding Ponce’s father and sister. Farm workers – Outside the cities, agricultural and rural organizations have been under threat as well. There is an almost constant military presence in rural areas where farmers and peasants are fighting for land reform. In the Aguán region, where Zelaya’s efforts to redistribute land were most at stake, tensions have exploded into what has been described as “clashes”, but is in essence a war against the campesinos, in particular the United Campesino Movement of Aguán (MUCA). Eight campesinos have been killed since December 2009, when workers moved to retake the land they had been stripped of in the chaos of the coup. While writing this, I receive notice of another campesino killing, a 16 year old boy. Gruesome photos showing his torture are attached. Five others have been arrested. These incidents have become common. What allows us to receive this tragic news only a few hours after the fact is a dedicated network of support in both the US and around the world. Despite the constant familiar dread of opening bad news emails, it’s been a pleasure to witness such solidarity. Previously isolated organizations, many of whom sent delegations to Honduras or were actively monitoring the coup, have united into what is now formally known as the Honduran Solidarity Network. The HSN has evolved to a level of professionalism and consistency that would be difficult to maintain for many, involving participants spread over various countries. Member groups hold conference calls weekly, with updates coming directly from FNRP connections. Twice they have pooled funds to publish full-page ads in major Honduran newspapers declaring international support for the Resistance and opposition to the Lobo government. These actions are increasingly important as the violence in Honduras continues to remain under the radar. _ _ All causes and effects of the coup are still alive, but President Lobo is now going through the motions to set up a Truth and Reconciliation Commission with a mission statement that couldn’t be more vague (“to ensure peace, harmony and tranquility for the Honduran people”), and which has no teeth. It is not legally binding and it does not take into consideration accounts by any of the human rights organizations that would clearly offer the most critical perspectives when it comes to investigating these crimes. In response, six key human rights organizations have come together to create an alternative commission, to be launched on the first anniversary of the coup, and headed by respected figures such as Nobel laureates, writers, and priests. Among other mandates, the “Comisión de la Verdad” will make a point to hear the testimonies of victims, and be in will line with United Nation standards. Details on both Commissions, including backgrounds of members, can be found here. To this day, no U.S. State Dept. spokesperson has acknowledged the thousands of human rights violations committed under the Micheletti and Lobo governments. The US continues to maintain the absurd claim that reconciliation has come to the country, recently seen in Hillary Clinton’s efforts to persuade the OAS to re-admit Honduras. And on June 18, Llorens announced that the Honduran government would be receiving $20 million from the US to enhance “security”. Thankfully not all US politicians have responded this way. Some have been strong allies of the opposition movement. A new letter signed by 27 US Representatives, addressed to Clinton, makes for the strongest wording yet, written to “…express our continuing concern regarding the grievous violations of human rights and the democratic order which commenced with the coup and continue to this day.” A year old now, the Resistance has grown into a widespread political body. As Los Necios put it, it “has shifted from short-term action to the structures and strategy to take power and change the country”. They imagine a different Honduran society, with an eye to the project Zelaya had begun to take initial measures on- the reformation of the Honduran Constitution, or constituyente. Zelaya himself, still in exile, recently affirmed his commitment to the project in a letter dated June 11: “I am a liberal in permanent resistance and I will continue being so, of those that practice their true doctrine, opposed to military dictators and antidemocratic regimes…The homeland in this moment calls us to struggle for unity and for the Constituyente…the suffering of the victims of this crime against humanity, with the loss of lives of our martyrs who condemned the coup d’Etat, cannot be in vain, nor pass into oblivion.“ What happened in Honduras is worth revisiting a year later, if only to understand that despite all rhetoric by both the US and Honduran governments, the coup is not over. June 28 marks the anniversary of the tragedy it brought. But this date should also be celebrated as the birth of a movement that has united diverse forces from around the country. It offers hope and inspiration for a new Honduras in which the people have a voice over their own destinies- some would say a magical story, becoming more real each day, still being written. Joseph Shansky was reporting from Honduras during the recent military coup, and can be reached at fallow3(at)gmail.com.

Video-

TV interview shot a few months ago, but aired in late June.  Discussing Honduras human rights violations under the Lobo administration, and local actions w/ Minnesota Hands Off Honduras.

http://ourworldindepth.org/archives/309

Originally published in the Twin Cities Daily Planet

February 08, 2010

Joëlle Vitiello is a professor of French and Francophone studies at Macalester College in St. Paul.  She also studies Haitian literature, and happened to be in Port-au-Prince on January 12, so she was an eyewitness to the earthquake in Haiti.  The Daily Planet interviewed Vitiello about her experiences during the earthquake, the aftermath, and what the future of Haiti now looks like.

DP: First, can you talk about your background and how you got involved in Haiti prior to the earthquake?

JV:  Early in my career I went a conference and met several Haitian writers who were living in Quebec. At the time, there were still some discourses about Quebec being independent.  I started to work on these issues, and discovered that there is a whole new body of literature that no one knew outside of the island.

DP:  And what brought you to Haiti this time?

JV:  This time I was joining a French festival organized with a focus on Haitian literature.  I was going to participate in a TV debate about Haitian writers who had recently passed away.  I was also going to finish research to prepare a course on Haiti and human rights. I had spent the week before in Quebec, and so I took the early flight that day.

DP:  So you arrived on the same day?

JV:  Yes, I arrived on January 12.  I had gotten to the hotel and was just texting to my friend that I arrived safely when it started.  I was on the second floor of the hotel, and at first there was a sound like automatic gunfire or a jackhammer.  Then it was hard to stay up, so I realized it was an earthquake.  I’ve been in earthquakes before so I went to the door and held onto the walls.

DP: Your hotel wasn’t damaged too badly?

JV: The hotel had no damage at all.  It’s one of the few buildings that is built with Italian wood and has a very light structure.  There was some water coming from the floor above, but they repaired it fairly quickly that night.

DP: What about outside?

JV:  Outside, people were running in the streets.  Mostly people were in a hurry to get home to check on their loved ones.  We stayed on the square so there were no high structures around.  It provided a safe space to be, and that’s where thousands of people slept during the first few nights.  People organized very quickly. It was remarkable.  There were a few people injured, so we took them into the hotel.

DP: What did you see on the ground in those first days?

JV:  At the hotel there were teams of doctors, French and American.  One of the American doctors specialized in trauma, so right away they treated the injured. The hotel also took in people who lost their houses, children who were worried and didn’t know where to go.  The first night there I met everyone staying at the hotel.  I don’t know if it was my way of comforting myself or dealing with my anxiety.  I had no idea what had happened out there. We soon learned that the palace had crumbled, and all of the main streets.  The next day we went into town to see if we could find communications, and that’s when we first saw some of the worst sights.

DP: You mentioned solidarity amongst Haitians immediately.

JV: Honestly, I didn’t see anything that was not solidarity.  All the people were comforting children, inquiring constantly about their families.  Without communication it was very hard. Also, this happened in the first week of a carnival season.  During Carnival, there are neighborhood bands that go around singing and having offerings.  So you could hear them going from neighborhood to neighborhood and see them in the hills.  There were also lots of people praying and shouting religious songs and drumming.  All of these indicated people trying to come together as communities.

The first coverage I saw was at the embassy.  They had CNN twenty four hours a day.  So that was a little maddening, to be glued to CNN.  There were also journalists at the hotel.  It was hard for them because they don’t speak French, they can’t communicate.  I suspect it was hard for many journalists to get access to the Haitian government, which may explain what we didn’t hear much about the government right away.

DP: Why do you think the focus was on the negative aspects, such as how prisoners escaped from jail or looting, rather than the resilience?

JV: What was shown on TV did happen, but it was very isolated.  Remember that many people lost their entire families. There was no water, no food, and soon sanitation would become a problem.  They were amazingly patient in the face of adversity, but tempers flare and that’s normal.  It’s unfortunate that’s what the media captured, because I sincerely believe that it doesn’t reflect the experiences of the majority of Haitians.  Haiti has always suffered a negative image because of disease, poverty, and a lack of understanding of the culture.  Those are the familiar images, and they are now what we expect to see.

DP:  You said you’re working on a human rights course now.  Are you going to be incorporating anything from this experience?

JV:  I imagine so.  The earthquake is a natural phenomenon, but it leaves devastation that has nothing natural about it.  The hills are porous because of five hundred years of deforestation, which affects the water supply and the way buildings are constructed. In Haitian literature, very often a natural phenomenon is linked to social injustices.

DP:  What’s important to know as we watch the re-building efforts?

JV:  Journalists need to understand the political geography of the city and the country.  They need to understand the neighborhoods of any city that has been damaged, which neighborhoods are or are not getting aid, and to have a realistic idea of what the Haitian government can do.

The Haitian president is an agronomist, and he said something important- that Haiti needs to produce its own food again.  In Minnesota, we have a responsibility because we have a lot of agribusiness exporting to Haiti.  We affect not only the diet of Haitian people, but also the economy.  We need to let this country get its richness back.  Haitians have a great historical sense of who they are, and are used to an informal economy.  It’s important to trust them and to go at their pace.

-Joe Shansky

(Minneapolis)

Originally published for the Twin Cities Daily Planet

January 29, 2010

On January 28, students, teachers, and citizens gathered for “An Unnatural Disaster: A Panel Discussion on the Earthquake, Neo-colonialism and Resistance in Haiti” at the University of Minnesota to analyze the political and social implications of the recent earthquake in Haiti.  The focus was on the role of the United States in Haiti, both historically and in response to the earthquake.

Joëlle Vitiello, a professor of Haitian literature and culture, recently returned from Haiti and was an eyewitness during the earthquake.  Though she couldn’t attend the discussion, in a prepared statement she addressed common misconceptions of the immediate aftermath.  Despite a dominant story in the news about “looting” and “scavenging”, Vitiello reports that solidarity amongst Haitians was instant, and she saw no violence.

Regardless, the desperate lack of food and water calls for Haitians to do what they can to survive, said Ruben Joanem, speaking to a packed auditorium.  Joanem is a Haitian immigrant and graduate student at the university. “After one week?  If there’s water, I’m going to get it.  These people are not looters. They are survivors,” he said.

Local activist Teddy Shibabaw addressed the problem of private contractors and the potential riches in rebuilding Haiti.  French professor April Knutsen spoke of Haiti’s troubled history with the United States, about the slave rebellion leading to Haiti’s independence, and the current economic policies contributing to the overwhelming poverty of Haiti.

Throughout the evening, the United States was a major point of discussion but rarely contention.  All of the panelists agreed that the United States and other world powers hold a large responsibility for both the physically vulnerable circumstances of the land (such as international agencies using subsidized agriculture in Haiti as leverage for loans), as well as the inadequate humanitarian response.

August Nimtz, a political science professor, discussed the large Cuban presence in the Haitian medical community.  Almost a quarter of Haitian doctors were trained in Cuba, which was the first country on the scene immediately after the quake.  Nimtz said the militant U.S. reaction to the earthquake was foreshadowed by a similar response to Hurricane Katrina.  In fact, there are ties between New Orleans and Haiti.  Cuba also offered to send 1,600 doctors following Hurricane Katrina, an offer which was rejected by the U.S. government and FEMA.   “The U.S. response [in both events] was criminal. We should be outraged, but we should not be surprised,” Nimtz said.

-Joe Shansky

Originally published at PULSE Media

Thursday, 28 January 2010

As the extent of the destruction in Haiti becomes clearer, so do the priorities on the ground.  The majority of Haitians affected by the earthquake are now homeless, and the need for shelter is urgent.  There are many ways to help for those who cannot afford to donate money, and innovation has become a major theme in many of the smaller grassroots efforts.

One example is a US-based initiative whose mission lies in the name, “One Thousand Tents for Haiti”.  Created by Seattle activist Johnny Fernandes, the beauty of the project is that it is both simple and practical.  Anyone can participate.  The initial goal is to collect 1000 extra tents from around the US by the end of February to send to Haiti.

“I felt compelled to act on a purely humanitarian level,” says Fernandes.  “The re-building of the affected areas will take years.  The vast majority of the people have no shelter, no homes to go back to—men, women and children are all sleeping outside, exposed to the elements.  This is for those who want to help but don’t necessarily have money to donate, but may be able to give a used tent they have in their garage.”

His goal cuts right to the most immediate needs of Haitians, as there have been numerous reports out of Port-au-Prince from aid groups stating that tents are a top priority right now.

Fernandes has already received a massive a show of support through a growing Facebook group, where most communication is done. The tents are being directed to one location in Florida, where they will be then shipped to Haiti.

“We are working with Haitians in America and in Haiti to ensure full transparency and accountability in the distribution of the tents.  I expect at least one member of the group to be present for the distribution,” he says.

While both used and new tents (and donations for tents) are welcome, Fernandes prefers if people don’t spend money on new tents, and instead “let ingenuity, determination and community prevail.”

“I wanted people to come together and use their creativity instead of their wallets. As individuals, the task may seem monumental, but as a group the goal is more achievable.  Most people want to help, but sometimes need a catalyst.”

If you have an extra tent to donate, contact Johnny Fernandes at johnny.a.fernandes@gmail.com or through the Facebook group “One Thousand Tents for Haiti“.

-Joe Shansky

FYI-  I’ll be interviewed about Honduras on the program “Just Peace”  on WRFG (Radio Free Georgia)  89.3 FM.

5 pm CST

Listen here:  http://wrfg.org/listen.asp

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published at Upside Down World

Wednesday, 23 December 2009

Walter Trochez

“As a revolutionary I will be today, tomorrow and forever on the front lines of my people, all the while knowing that I may lose my life.” - Walter Trochez, 25, murdered in Tegucigalpa on 12/13/09

The bodies of slain activists are piling up in Honduras. While it’s being kept quiet in most Honduran and international media, the rage is building among a dedicated network of friends spreading the word quickly with the tragic announcement of each compañero/a.

Now that the world heard from mainstream news outlets such as the New York Times of a “clean and fair” election on Nov. 29 (orchestrated by the US-supported junta currently in power), the violence has increased even faster than feared.

The specific targets of these killings have been those perceived as the biggest threats to the coup establishment. The bravest, and thus the most vulnerable: Members of the Popular Resistance against the coup. Their friends and family. People who provide the Resistance with food and shelter. Teachers, students, and ordinary citizens who simply recognize the fallacy of an un-elected regime taking over their country. All associated with the Resistance have faced constant and growing repercussions for their courage in protesting the coup. With the international community given the green light by the US that democratic order has returned via elections, it’s open season for violent forces in Honduras working to tear apart the political unity of the Resistance Front against the coup.

The killings are happening almost faster than they can be recorded.

On Sunday, Dec. 7, a group of six people were gunned down while walking down the street in the Villanueva neighborhood of Tegucigalpa. According to sources, a white van with no license plates stopped in front of the group. Four masked men jumped out of the van and forced the group to get on the ground, where they were shot. The five victims who were killed were:

· Marcos Vinicio Matute Acosta, 39

· Kennet Josué Ramírez Rosa, 23

· Gabriel Antonio Parrales Zelaya, 34

· Roger Andrés Reyes Aguilar, 22

· Isaac Enrique Soto Coello, 24

One woman, Wendy Molina, 32, was shot several times and played dead when one of the assassins pulled her hair, checking to see if anyone in the group was still alive. She was taken to the hospital and survived.

The Honduran independent newspaper El Libertador reports that the group members were all organizers against the coup. According to a resident in the area, “The boys had organized committees so that the neighbors could get involved in the Resistance Front.”

This massacre was part of a string of Resistance-related murders during the past few weeks alone. On December 3, Walter Trochez, 25 a well-known activist in the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community was snatched off the street and thrown into a van, again by four masked men, in downtown Tegucigalpa. In the report that he later filed to local and national authorities, Walter said he was interrogated for hours for information on Resistance members and activities, and was beaten in the face with a pistol for refusing to speak. He was told that he would be killed regardless, and he eventually escaped by throwing open the van door, falling into the street, and running away.

It wasn’t the first time Walter had been subject to these kinds of threats. He was a much-loved organizer against the coup who had been documenting human rights violations, particularly in the gay community. Walter had just published two articles. One following the elections was titled “The Triumph of Abstentionism“, on the success of the effort by the Resistance to encourage citizens to refuse to vote. The other was called “Escalation of Hate and Homophobic Crimes against the LGBTT Community Rooted in the Civil-Religious-Military Coup d’état in Honduras”.

In both, he concludes: “As a revolutionary I will be today, tomorrow and forever on the front lines of my people, all the while knowing that I may lose my life”.

On Dec. 13, one week later, Walter was shot in the chest by a drive-by gunman while walking home. He died at the hospital.

On Dec. 5, Santos Garcia Corrales, an active member of the National Resistance Front, was detained by security forces in New Colony Capital, south of Tegucigalpa. He was then tortured for information on a local merchant who was providing food and supplies to the Resistance. After reporting the incident to local authorities, Santos’ body was found five days later on Dec 10, decapitated.

There have been others as well, notably a rise in murders in the LGBT community since the coup. In particular, several transvestites have been recently killed in similarly gruesome ways. Human rights advocates report that “up to 18 gay and transgender men have been killed nationwide — as many as the five prior years — in the nearly six months since a political crisis rocked the nation.”

The latest victim, Carlos Turcios, was kidnapped outside his home in Choloma Cortes, at three in the afternoon of Wednesday Dec. 16. He was found dead the next day, with his hands and head cut off. Carlos had been vice-president of the Choloma chapter of the Resistance Front, a town located a few hours outside of the capital. Andres Pavón, president of CODEH (Committee for the Defense of Human Rights in Honduras), commented: “We believe this horrendous crime joins others where the bodies show signs of brutal torture…This aggression is directed to the construction of collective fear.”

It is a sinister effort to shake up a community that is now in fact stronger than ever. As Walter Trochez noted (and CNN confirmed), most of the country refused to go to the polls that day. Many of the world’s governments, including most of Latin America, refused to recognize the results.

In this climate of fierce repression, citizens can no longer depend on authorities for the most basic protective rights, and those fearful for their lives cannot report to the police. Complaints they file, such as those of Santos and Walter, could soon become signatures to their own death letters. Many believe with good reason that the killings are state-sponsored. At the very least, they are the result of new conditions which allow for the widespread deterioration of state protection.

Pavón and other human rights leaders in Honduras have been extremely vocal in denouncing these atrocities, but the story has remained under the radar for most Hondurans and almost all international media. At the time when Hondurans most need exposure to these abuses, they’ve been left to fend for themselves.

How did this happen? Why are people being randomly executed in dark corners of the country for simply standing in opposition to a military coup?

Most of the bloodshed is on the hands of coup president Roberto Micheletti and other leaders of the regime. However, President Barack Obama and the US State Department played a major role in allowing conditions to get to this point. The US government took no concrete action against the thousands of documented violations since the coup took place June 28. It’s no shock that the violence has worsened dramatically with the eyes of the world now averted.

In a recent interview, Francisco Rios of the National Front Against the Coup reiterated Frente communiqués which stated that the Resistance, though now lying low, is preparing a massive organization effort for next year and beyond. Rios reported that they have stopped meeting publicly as a safety measure for now, but will soon begin dividing into chapters around the country with plans to emerge as a new, strengthened political force. Walter, Santos, Carlos, and all of the Resistance fighters who gave their lives have inspired others in the movement to continue the struggle for justice in Honduras.

Joseph Shansky was reporting from Honduras during the recent military coup, and can be reached at fallow3@gmail.com.

Also published as “Latin America in the Age of Obama” at CounterPunch

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published at Upside Down World

Thursday, 10 December 2009

President Obama was elected partly because of his promise to a large Hispanic constituency to give both new attention and new respect to Latin America. Judging from the US role in the military coup in Honduras, he must think that one of the two is enough.

For those who closely followed the coup and its aftermath, a tiny fear sat in the back of our minds. Eventually it was confirmed. As the State Department position shifted from condemning to condoning the illegal government, the outline of a bigger picture became clear. If this violent takeover were really to be approved by the US, it would mark a frightening new focus on the region.

In late June, Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was kidnapped by the military and forced out of the country. For the next five months, an illegitimate government, headed by Congressional leader Roberto Micheletti, suppressed the outrage of many Honduran citizens against this regime through a number of violent means including murder, torture, and detention of citizens.

Throughout this time, the US response to these allegations was silence.

Even though it was impossible for a free or fair election to take place under these circumstances, the US endorsed what is internationally recognized as a fraud. After months of stumbling through embarrassing press conferences dominated by contradictory statements, doublespeak, and back-pedaling, the US appeared firmly committed to helping overthrow democratic order by blessing the Honduran elections as the way out. It has deliberately chosen sides in the battle between the popular struggle for social justice in Latin America and the assured continuation of its own economic interests with the election of coup-supporting conservatives like Porfirio Lobo.

A REGIONAL DIVIDE

Throughout the coup, Zelaya had overwhelming verbal support from the majority of his counterparts in the region.

Upon his bold return to Honduras in late September, Brazil’s President Lula opened the doors of his Tegucigalpa embassy to shelter the president, journalists, and supporters as his “guests”. That was the moment that things might have turned around for those fighting for his restoration. The populace had grown weary of struggling since late June demanding Zelaya’s reinstatement and protesting peacefully against the violations of so many basic rights. Zelaya’s homecoming was a move which energized them once again. But thanks to endless delay tactics on the part of US officials, his position in the embassy soon grew to resemble less that of a president than a prisoner.

Additionally, the US position may have drawn a line in the sand among other Latin American governments.

Over the past 5 months, of all Latin American countries, only Columbia, Peru and Panama (all strong US allies and economic dependents) rejected Zelaya’s status as the rightful leader of Honduras. But since the elections, others seem to be falling into line behind the US. El Salvador’s newly-elected FMLN President Funes agreed with the US line, stating that the elections will “end the crisis and lead to a unity government, the restoration of constitutional order and reconciliation in the brother country”. Now even Brazil appears to be adjusting its stance.

“There is a new situation,” Brazil’s Chief of Staff Dilma Rousseff said recently. “There was an election. That process will be taken into account. We cannot turn a blind eye to the coup, but we can also not turn a blind eye to the election.”

At a Special Meeting of the Organization of American States (OAS) on December 4, conflicting views were clear. US Ambassador Carmen Lomellin confirmed the US position to recognize the election results regardless: “The TSE and the Honduran people conducted remarkably free, fair and transparent elections.”

Costa Rican Ambassador Jose Enrique Castillo Barientes concurred: “Any position against the elections means crushing the solution.”

However, Bolivian Ambassador Jose Pinelo vehemently disagreed: “Under no circumstances will my government accept this objective. Recognizing a government formed like this means recognizing coup plotters.”

ELECTION DAY- VIOLENCE AND ABSTENTION

The Nov. 29 election passed with predictable results. For most Hondurans, Election Day in Honduras was never seen as a turning point. Rather, it followed a familiar rhetoric that democracy can be always gained, or restored, in the ballot box. That this simple action could clean up the violent elimination of democratic order is a profound lie.

On the contrary, it provided opportunity for an escalation of abuse under the guise of protection. This is nothing new for Honduran citizens. Armed forces dispersed throughout the country to ensure a climate of fear and intimidation leading up to and especially on Election Day. As of  Nov. 29, not only were national independent media banned from the airwaves, but as Laura Carlsen, the director of the Americas Program, recently reported, even international journalists became subject to vicious harassment and threatening to the point of fearing for their lives.

Most of the violence was kept out outside of the capital on election day, but the repression was intense in smaller towns and especially in the second largest city, San Pedro Sula. Micheletti’s claim that an additional 30,000 armed forces for this particular week was for the citizens’ “protection” is absurd. Reports of all kinds of abuses by police and military poured in from human rights delegations and journalists stationed all around Honduras that day. A Real News video clearly shows police officers deliberately smashing windows of cars, beating protesters with batons in the street, and hitting journalists who dared to do their job. Again, these tactics were for the most part not unique to that day. They were consistent with the regime’s behavior throughout the coup and represented the usual degree of violence against its own citizens.

Amnesty International has now called for an independent investigation into all human rights violations since the coup, including “killings following excessive use of force, arbitrary arrests of demonstrators by police and military, indiscriminate and unnecessary use of tear gas, ill treatment of detainees in custody, violence against women, and harassment of activists, journalists, lawyers and judges.”

Lobo has announced that he wants political amnesty for all parties involved in the coup, effectively requesting that all of the above violations, still unacknowledged, now also go unpunished by their perpetrators. If this was to happen, it would represent the final elimination of almost all legal processes in Honduras since Zelaya’s ousting.

While the coup government claims to have seen the highest electoral turnout in Honduran history, the National Front against the Coup (or Frente) claims the lowest. They cite an enormous victory in their much-promoted nonparticipation, claiming that 65-70 percent stayed away from the polls.

On the other hand, the coup government claimed a 62 percent turnout. However, a new investigation by Jesse Freeston of the Real News has revealed that this figure, which was distributed and repeated by almost every major media outlet in the world, appears to have been an arbitrary creation by one of the heads of the Supreme Tribunal Electoral (TSE). According to TSE’s own numbers, in reality less than half of the country voted that day.

Both the regime and the Resistance know the importance of keeping their supporters energized beyond the elections. Some of the international community (led by CNN headlines that evening boasting “high turnout” and saying the day was “calm and without incident”) are inclined to accept the idea that the elections are a healthy step forward. To believe that they are a clean break from the recent troubles is a convenient but dangerous assertion.

A NEW PRECEDENT

By most accounts, the coup was a surprising success for its leaders and backers. It now sets an alarming example that military coups can be sustained with backing of the world’s leading power. But many Latin American leaders are warning of a dangerous model.

“What is at stake is whether we validate or not a new methodology of coups d’etat,” said Argentine Foreign Minister Jorge Taiana at the recent Ibero-American Summit. His Cuban counterpart, Bruno Rodriguez, agreed: “To recognize the spurious government emerging from these illegitimate elections will betray principles of peace, democracy and justice.”

Fidel Castro wrote in a recent editorial: “I hold the view that before Obama completes his term, there will be from six to eight right-wing governments in Latin America that will be allies of the empire.”

It’s not an outrageous prediction. Threatening signs are appearing all over the region. In Columbia, the United States just signed an agreement to expand its military presence by building new bases, igniting a feud between the US ally and Venezuela. In Paraguay, coup rumors were stirred when leftist president Fernando Lugo fired top military officials last month. In Guatemala, Obama’s fellow Nobel Peace laureate, indigenous activist Rigoberta Menchu, warned of plans amongst the Bolivian oligarchy against President Evo Morales.

However, on the same day of the fraudulent Honduran elections, Uruguayans selected José Mujica, a leftist and former guerilla, as president. And in Bolivia, Evo Morales just won another term in a landslide victory. The tide has not yet turned.

Most disturbing is that even amongst US officials there is now no dispute that what happened in Honduras was a military coup d’état. When I met with US Ambassador Hugo Llorens in Tegucigalpa in August, he was able to reluctantly confirm this when pressed. In his first State Department briefing on the day after the elections, Arturo Valenzuela, the new Assistant Secretary for the US Bureau of Hemispheric Affairs, described what took place as a “military coup” twice, marking the first time US officials have officially admitted this.

THE CONSTITUYENTE AND THE FUTURE

Those who’ve been fighting against the regime and against the elections have done so primarily for the return of legal order to Honduras. The Honduran Resistance, which formed in response to Zelaya’s expulsion, became a social movement no one could have predicted. In many ways, the level of repression by the regime throughout the coup was a direct response to the surprising force of the Resistance movement. It is also a testament to the movement’s strength.

While some right-wing forces are doubtlessly watching to see how far Micheletti and his cohorts can get, others are taking notes from the Resistance in preparation for what comes next. The demands of the people are not limited to the restitution of President Zelaya. They want to ensure all Hondurans that the systemic injustices they’ve lived under for so long will be one day turned around. Their ultimate goal is a new Constitution for Honduras.

The project they seek to implement is a large one, and is designed to follow a successful model already in place in Venezuela, Bolivia, and Ecuador. It will not be easy. The constituyente (constituent assembly) is an effort to rewrite the outdated Honduran constitution with new cultural, economic, and social reforms. After Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez proved it was possible to gain mass support for the idea in 1999, Bolivia adopted a new constitution in 2007. The following year, the people of Ecuador approved a draft constitution which guaranteed among other radical ideas, “free education through university and social security benefits for stay-at-home mothers” and “inalienable rights to nature”.

Likewise, Manuel Zelaya proposed reforms for Honduras which focused on land re-distribution, an increase in the minimum wage, and new rights for women and the poor. It was partly because these ideas were so popular with economically-disadvantaged Hondurans that he was overthrown. But his supporters are moving on with an eye to the future.

Now Resistance leaders have called for the people of Honduras to “close that chapter” of their struggle. They are turning their focus to the constituyente and to the 2013 elections.

It’s uncertain what form their action will take. But they are still riding the momentum of their struggle. Emboldened by almost unanimous international support, Hondurans are now re-awakened to just how fragile a democracy can be.

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published at Upside Down World

Sunday, 01 November 2009

Never underestimate the capabilities of the slightest American muscle-flexing.

After deliberately failing to use its massive economic and diplomatic influence in the tiny Central American country, the US has reportedly given the international community reason to breathe a sigh of relief in what Hillary Clinton is calling an “historic agreement”. According to the US, the Honduran governmental power struggle has been resolved, and an agreement for President Manuel Zelaya to be reinstated has been reached.

All thanks to a breezy State Department intervention that could have come four months, twenty-six lives, hundreds of disappearances, and thousands of random detentions earlier for Honduran citizens. Instead they let it play out like an internal civil disagreement while watching from above until the time was politically opportune to step in.

In other words, the two children who were bickering in what Henry Kissinger famously dubbed “our backyard” have been rightfully scolded, and forced by Uncle Sam to make nice.

But the details of what is now being called the Guaymuras Accords are messy. They involve a series of conditions and fine print designed to continue the regime’s now-familiar tactic of delaying real progress through semantics and by creating more legal headaches. At the same time, any pressure on the US to fight for a constructive return of Zelaya’s presidential powers is now gone.

Despite coup leader Roberto Micheletti’s claim that his de-facto government has made “significant concessions” in the accords, the real concessions have come from the other side. All one needs to do is imagine how Zelaya’s supporters and coup opponents would have reacted soon after the coup to the type of “power-sharing” agreement that is currently being celebrated. It would have been considered laughable.

These are the basic terms both sides have agreed to:

- Creation of a government of national reconciliation that includes cabinet members from both sides

- Suspension of any possible vote on holding a Constitutional Assembly until after Jan. 27, when Zelaya’s term ends

- A general amnesty for political crimes was rejected by both sides

- Command of the Armed Forces to be placed under the Electoral Tribunal during the month prior to the elections.

- Restitution of Zelaya to the presidency following a non-binding opinion from the Supreme Court and approval of Congress

- Creation of a Verification Commission to follow up on the accords, consisting of two members of the Organization of American States (OAS), and one member each from the constitutional government and the coup regime.

- Creation of a Truth Commission to begin work in 2010

- Revoke international sanctions against Honduras following the accords

The accords give President Zelaya some of his original rights as the democratically-elected president of Honduras. But who knows when? As of October 31, there have already been several contradictory statements coming out from Micheletti’s team. One of his negotiators said that since Congress would not be in session before the elections, it is now unlikely that Zelaya would be returned to any kind of power before that date.

If he is, it hinges on approval by the same Congress that approved his seizure and relinquishes his executive power over the armed forces. In the “power-sharing” agreement, the coup government would retain control over the military, a critical advantage.

It also dismisses amnesty for political crimes on both sides, but at the moment Zelaya is the one facing a mountain of trumped-up charges, thanks to a summer of legal proceedings which took place under an illegitimate government and a shady judicial system.

Another obstacle to a rightful reinstatement may be the Honduran Supreme Court, which has consistently interpreted constitutional law at its leisure throughout the coup. For example, from Sept. 22 through Oct. 19, five constitutional rights were suspended under a decree by the coup government. These included personal liberty, freedom of expression, freedom of movement, habeas corpus, and freedom of association. This was based on a clause in the 1982 Constitution which allowed for such restrictions in states of emergency, and is a perfect example of why Hondurans are demanding a new Constitution.

The Honduran Supreme Court, which has been described by the Council on Hemispheric Affairs as “one of the most corrupt institutions in Latin America”, can give a non-binding opinion regarding Zelaya’s return which Congress can then take or leave. However, this process takes time, again indicating stalling on the part of the coup regime.

Perhaps most importantly, the push for a popular Constituent Assembly during his term has also been dropped by Zelaya and his negotiating team. The Constituent Assembly would have created a body to rewrite the 1982 Honduran Constitution in newly democratic terms. On June 28, the day that Zelaya was forcibly removed from power and ejected from the country, Hondurans were scheduled to vote on a non-binding referendum for a Constituent Assembly. The outcome was to determine whether or not to then have a later vote to rewrite the outdated 1982 Constitution, which caused much debate on the coup in the first place. Subsequent polls have indicated a majority of Hondurans support this reform. In the big picture, this is the real change for the future which thousands of Hondurans have been fighting for in the streets.

Now, what the Guaymuras Accords actually do most is create a space for the United States to recognize the legitimacy of the upcoming presidential elections, scheduled for November 29. With National Party front-runner Pepe Lobo likely to win (thanks to a campaign season in which any independent voices were sharply silenced by media censorship), the US also likely secures another puppet in the region who will be opposed to the progressive social, economic and political reforms being articulated and demanded by the country’s social movements. This also serves to counter the region’s growing independence from Washington’s political and economic influence.

Furthermore, throughout the entirety of the coup, neither Secretary of State Clinton nor President Obama (surely occupied with political concessions of his own at home) have acknowledged the repression and violence perpetrated by the Micheletti government and Honduran military in its wake. And they still refuse to do so.

So the actual power returned to Zelaya may be symbolic at best. But it’s extremely important for another group involved- the Resistance movement all around the country. Since the announcement on October 30 of Zelaya’s pending reinstatement, people here have triumphantly taken to the streets in a manner unseen since…actually, two weeks ago when Honduras qualified for the 2010 World Cup.

The unity of the Resistance has put continual pressure on the coup government. Its mobilization constantly put Honduras into the world spotlight, and highlighted the violent reaction of a surprised regime. Undoubtedly the prospect of Zelaya’s return would never have occured without the leadership of the Resistance. The psychological effects of bringing their President back in any way after more than 125 days in the streets mark a clear victory for the movement.

And of course there are enormous differences between the (relatively) bloodless Honduran coup and the devastating Kissinger days of the 1970s, which led to tens of thousands of CIA-sponsored murders and disappearances in countries like Chile and Argentina.

Still, the bottom line remains the same. Military coups in Latin America are not a thing of the past yet, and their outcome can be strongly influenced, in fact practically determined, by the US. Time will tell if the events in Honduras were an isolated affair, or if they indicate the type of reaction we will be seeing to the new age of leftist revolutions and social movements in Latin America.

What is clear now is that after months of refusing to take real diplomatic action, the State Department has found a way to not only save face internationally, but to manipulate the outcome to make it appear to be a foreign policy win for the US.

Though it’s still early in the proceedings, a clear victor has already emerged in the Honduran stand-off.

This terrific comic history was designed by ARCHCOMIX, and is partially adapted from one of my previous articles, Community Defiance in Honduras.

Originally published at the Huffington Post.

On November 29, national elections will take place in Honduras. Five months earlier, on June 28th, Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was arrested in the middle of the night by the armed forces and forcibly exiled to Costa Rica — on the day he had proposed to hold a non-binding public poll on a popular assembly. Why? For his supposed intention of subverting the Honduran constitution to extend his time in office. Zelaya still remains under effective house arrest in the Brazlian embassy — which is surrounded by coup leader Roberto Micheletti’s troops — after being smuggled back into the country. Read the first part of The Honduran Coup: A Graphic History here.

After a considerable delay, the US finally intervened to broker a deal on Oct 30, which has since been rejected outright by Zelaya and decried by the International community. Despite its previous solidarity with the deposed President, the US has now agreed to recognize the new elections that are scheduled for November 29, with or without Zelaya’s restitution. Why the change of heart for the Obama administration?

In our follow-up to The Honduran Coup: A Graphic History, which was published online at Alternet.org in October, we look at the situation on the ground in Honduras, examining the details of the proposed accord and the background realpolitik that led to the sudden change of heart in the US’s stance. See the links below each page for their sources and corroborating evidence.

VIEW THE ENTIRE COMIC HERE

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published at PULSE Media and the Twin Cities Daily Planet

October 28, 2009

with one comment

Honduran military surrounds Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa. (Photo: AFP)

By Joseph Shansky

Recently, musicians such as Rage Against the Machine, Steve Earle and Pearl Jam joined the newly-formed National Campaign to Close Guantanamo Bay.  It’s a public effort to protest the past misuse of recordings during “enhanced interrogation techniques” at Guantanamo prison.  An exaggerated volume and incessant repetition of loud music are just a few auditory torture techniques famously used by the American government overseas to disorient prisoners.

However, the issue of psychological warfare should not only be seen in a past context.  Since these revelations, the question of its continued use in other parts of the world deserves exposure.

One timely example is Honduras.  In June of this year, President Manuel Zelaya was violently removed from power in a military coup d’état and replaced with a non-elected government, led by former National Congress leader Roberto Micheletti.  Since his return to Honduras September 21, President Zelaya has been residing with supporters in the Brazilian embassy in Tegucigalpa, with Honduran armed forces stationed outside.

Following orders by coup government officials, the army has been frequently directing harsh noises at the embassy occupants.  The most recent example took place early in the morning of October 21, when the broadcast included military anthems, rock music, and animal noises (pig grunts, in an apparent attempt to add insult to injury) at an excessive volume, and on a constant loop from around 1:30 am to 7 am.

This was the latest in a series of increasingly dramatic acts of harassment against embassy occupants, including flashing blinding lights at the windows during the night, designed to cause sleep deprivation.  Little has been mentioned in the international press of these sonic and visual assaults on the embassy which began upon the President’s return.

Sources from inside the embassy confirm that the harassment has been almost constant.  Andrés Conteris, founder of Democracy Now! en Español, is one of an estimated forty Zelaya supporters still camped out at the embassy.  Conteris, who has been reporting internationally throughout the siege, says the latest techniques follow an earlier blueprint:

The psychological warfare methods directed against the Brazilian embassy follow an arbitrary pattern which is part of keeping us off balance.  The all-night assault with noise and music on Oct. 21 is the latest use of Directional Energy Weapons (DEW), which began with the unbearably shrill sound known as the LRAD on Sept 22.

The LRAD (Remote Long Range Acoustic Device) is a sinister sound cannon used to emit piercing and pain-inducing sounds designed to disperse crowds and can cause severe loss of hearing.  The LRAD was also used by police in Pittsburgh at the G-20 protests on the same day it was first used at the embassy.

Apart from the appalling nature of such attacks, not to mention the legal implications, a question arises as to how this is allowed to go on in such a blatant manner for so long without fear of consequence.  When General Romeo Vásquez Velásquez was asked on the following morning about the noises, he sarcastically attributed the music to an early celebration of Honduran Armed Forces Day.  An even more telling attitude would be that of de facto Defense Minister Adolfo Lionel Sevilla, who said that the occupants “should be grateful it was music and not bombs”[1].

What allows the regime to believe they can operate with impunity is that basically they can, and they have been doing so since the coup.  The US, which instantly “condemned” the coup on June 28, has since taken virtually no real punitive measures of consequence.  Verbal condemnation and heel-dragging have been substituted for effective action.  This has been echoed in some form for months, from the Organization of the American States to the United Nations, which responded to the latest reports with this statement:

The Permanent Council denounces and strongly condemns the hostile action by the de facto regime against the embassy of Brazil in Tegucigalpa and the harassment of its occupants through deliberate actions that affect them physically and psychologically and violate their human rights. [2]

In this context, US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice’s response to the initial September 22 embassy attacks is not surprising:

We condemn acts of intimidation against the Brazilian embassy and call upon the de facto government of Honduras to cease harassing the Brazilian embassy. [3]

But since September this harassment has only increased both at the embassy and among the general population.  Numerous reports have emerged from leading human rights groups in Honduras documenting the ongoing violations of the rights of citizens in the streets and in private homes.  In addition, the attitude of “no consequence” has undermined negotiations to bring about a just resolution to the crisis.  The coup government is under no pressure to negotiate in good faith.

Several attempts from within the US to pass congressional legislation demanding more pressure on the coup government have fallen short.  Rep. Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ) has sponsored the strongest legislation so far. These attempts have been overshadowed by US Republicans leading stateside efforts to support the November presidential elections in Honduras. This follows the position of coup officials, who have successfully delayed negotiations with a renewed focus on the elections they claim will wipe the slate clean for Honduras.

However, the voices dismiss the destructive aftermath of a coup which also allows small elites to monitor the circulation of virtually all information.  The few independent media outlets that have voiced dissent against the coup have been taken off the air or severely limited. This cuts off the democratic process essential to fair elections.  Two of the major presidential candidates, César Ham of the Democratic Unification Party (UD) and Carlos H. Reyes (Independent) have recently stepped down, calling the elections illegitimate at this point.

This leaves a campaign in full swing by candidates who have been directly supporting the Micheletti de facto government.  They ignore the pleas of a clear majority of the country wanting to stabilize Honduras by reinstating President Zelaya.  Coup supporters in both Honduras and the US have cited Zelaya’s removal as necessary to prevent the leftist influence growing throughout Latin America, even if it means overthrowing a democratically-elected leader.  In reality, Honduras can now be seen as a laboratory in which any real social reforms are violently squashed before they can spread.  Many see it as a return to a fearful era of past military coups in Latin America.

Defenders of the coup regime often point to the constitutional aspects of Zelaya’s removal and specifically to an August analysis from the Library of Congress which deemed the coup legal and constitutional.  This was flatly contradicted by a new Forbes Magazine investigation which concluded by declaring the Law Library of Congress “complicit in the illegal acts of an authoritarian and undemocratic regime”.[4]

There is now overwhelming evidence that Zelaya’s removal was illegal, and that it paved the way for serious violations of human rights and civil liberties (including freedom of speech, press, assembly, and transit) all over Honduras.

The US, with a firm economic grasp on Honduran business and political interests, has the leverage necessary to act directly against this regime in a number of concrete ways, the least of which are laid out in Rep. Grijalva’s letter to President Obama.  It has chosen not to.  And this is exactly what battalion officials like Velásquez depend on when they give reckless orders to blast the embassy with intolerable sound and light.

President Obama pledged to show Latin America a new face and a new respect from that of a dismissive Bush administration.  With the first military coup d’état in many years, he’s had a golden opportunity.  Instead, State Department language has only grown more tepid since first vehemently denouncing the coup in June.  The few actions it has taken, such as suspending visas of coup leaders and limiting certain channels of aid, have done nothing to resolve the crisis or to halt the repression in Honduras.

Thanks in part to an almost calculated show of US inaction, the regime in Honduras has operated a campaign independent of international law and without consequence.  In doing so it recalls the US’s own shameful crimes in Central America and elsewhere, long promised by President Obama as an era to never revisit.

[1] http://www.tiempo.hn/secciones/crisis-politica/6052-ministro-de-defensa-no-estamos-de-acuerdo-con-restitucion-de-zelaya

[2] http://hondurasemb.org/2009/10/22/condemnation-of-the-acts-of-intimidation-against-the-embassy-of-brazil-in-honduras/

[3] http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2009/0925/breaking73.htm

[4] http://www.forbes.com/2009/10/20/honduras-manuel-zelaya-law-library-opinions-contributors-coup.html

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

1. [...] in total impunity to keep the Zelaya party deprived of sleep sound both surreal and horrendous: here’s a great article by Joe Shansky at Pulsemedia.org on the worrying use of psychological weapons by police, both in the US and [...]

   Archcomix by Dan Archer » Archive » The New Guantanamo & Resolution in Honduras

   October 30, 2009 at 8:19 pm

   Reply

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published at PULSE Media and Socialist Worker

October 28, 2009

by Joseph Shansky

Originally published in the October 2009 print issue of Z Magazine and CounterPunch

As I pack my bags to go, I hear that the military repression is getting worse—150 arrested, many wounded. In the airport waiting room I scan CNN, but there is no mention of this on the world news. When I get to my hotel room in San Pedro Sula, I’m still looking for news. In the middle of channel-surfing, all stations go black for ten seconds and over an image of the Honduran flag a voice pleads for the Honduran people to be patient as democracy is restored. The exile of the president comes off as nothing more than a necessary inconvenience, its opposition a mere nuisance.

Police barricade

Later, I sit on the steps in front of the hotel and speak to a man passing by on a bike who is clearly in favor of the new government. “Zelaya. He’s friends with Chavez,” he says disgustedly. And Chavez? “Well, he’s a dictator who wants to take over the world.” I ask him to elaborate and he rephrases. I can’t get any details out of him, just a vague dismissal of Zelaya’s policies.

Just a few minutes earlier, I had been watching ten second clips of Hugo Chavez’s speeches, followed by President Zelaya’s own speeches, with “similar phrases” extracted and highlighted. The implication was that they were in bed together with a socialist agenda destined to destroy the average Honduran. It’s a massive campaign, which I see multiple times in an hour.

At about 9:00 AM, a taxi drops us off in front of a small crowd of people gathered to attend the march in Tegucigalpa. Several people are carrying a giant Honduran flag, under which some seek relief from the sun. The mood is light, some people are in costume, friends are meeting up, people are passing around water and sandwiches, and everyone seems geared up for at least a few hours of walking. After a while, the crowd has grown by several hundred and we begin to march. Immediately I hear a megaphone blare, “¡En filas, en filas!” (In rows! In rows!) In a very short time the protesters drop off into three neat lines, a display of spontaneous organization which I’ve never seen in a protest before. It is a show not only of order, but of solidarity—a united front.

As the morning goes on, the crowd gets larger and soon I can’t see a beginning or an end. Some are branching out to tag walls with slogans ranging from general (“¡Fuera golpistas!” “¡Urge, Mel!”) to specific references to the CIA and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Graffiti covers almost all corners. We pass several lines of police armed with riot gear, shields, batons, guns, and, most crudely, large sharpened branches from trees. Still, the mood is celebratory. As we enter the center of the city, the crowd begins to splinter and the anarchists emerge. They smash several windows and tear down street cameras. Their behavior will later be attributed by almost all major media in Honduras (and worldwide) to the other 95 percent of demonstrators who have been consistently urging disciplined non-violence. At the central plaza, it begins to rain heavily. We duck into a café and the march is over, for now.

The next day, we travel about an hour to an abandoned schoolyard in Savanna Grande. The premises are being used as a campground to re-energize, restock supplies (small plates of rice and a tortilla for each person, along with endless plastic bags of fresh water), and rest for the night. The group is part of the process in which thousands of rural demonstrators simultaneously walk across Honduras to converge on its two largest cities, Tegucigalpa and San Pedro Sula, on August 11.

Campesino march

This particular group of about 75 people is from Choluteca. They are poor, determined, and happy to be there. They range from young children to several elderly women and everyone in between. The first person I speak with at the campesino camp is a woman whose brother had been disappeared by the Honduran military in the 1980s.

I am at Sábana Grande with a delegation of human rights observers that I am assisting through Global Exchange. The delegates are given the opportunity to interview the demonstrators and to hear about why they leave their homes and towns. When it grows dark and the delegates are ready to head back, I ask if I can stay the night with them and am immediately welcomed into the fold. The night passes quickly after someone takes out a guitar. What has been a solemn and tired group promptly turns into a jubilant dancing mass, sound-tracked by fiery protest songs.

I wake around 6:30 AM to trucks pulling into the courtyard with fresh supplies for the marchers. A large pot of sweetened coffee is brought out and someone greets me by name, thrusts a cookie in my face and a small plastic cup of coffee in my hand. Ten minutes later we are back on the main road, walking along the highway in the direction of the capital. Again, spirits are high. The three straight lines are enforced, providing fodder for one elderly marcher to joke about organizers’ discipline. But unlike the demonstrations in the city, no one is watching along the sidelines. Several trucks accompany us to provide water. A couple of guys run ahead of the marchers to monitor and direct incoming traffic. As we continue down the highway, we pick up more people. The chants grow more intense, as if daring fatigue. We finally make it to the city.
The anarchists are kicking me out of Pizza Hut. They storm in, teenagers wearing bandanas over their faces, and announce that anyone who doesn’t leave immediately will be deemed a golpista, a person who is with the coup. The restaurant is located across the street from the convergence point for the marchers coming from across the country. Thousands are present. For many, the location of the demonstration has become, in part, a referendum on capitalism.

Graffiti at Burger King

The walls of Pizza Hut are covered with anti-corporate graffiti, as are the outsides of Burger King, McDonalds, and many other fast-food corporations, which represent to many Hondurans the dark side of globalization. A select few individuals and families own the vast majority of businesses in Honduras, as well as almost all major print, television, and radio media. These large business interests are widely known to be helping fund and otherwise support the military takeover.

Down the block, trucks with speakers blare protest songs and are also equipped with megaphones. Padre Andres Tamayo, a leading environmental and social justice activist, speaks fiercely against the coup while emphasizing the need to remain faithful to social justice and disciplined nonviolent action. Later, one of the Global Exchange delegates, Allan, is on the truck/stage and the crowd is responding wildly to his suggestion that a U.S. banana workers union in Mississippi boycott shipments of Dole and Chiquita products from Honduras by refusing to unload cargo.

Next, the coordinator of the delegation takes the megaphone. I climb up to film his speech and stare down at the crowd of thousands as he begins. He angrily explains how just that morning President Obama called critics of the U.S.’s handling of this situation in Honduras “hypocrites,” despite his own rhetoric about the new face of Latin American policy under his Administration. Soon the crowd is fully engaged in a call-and-response deeming Obama as the true hypocrite.

Convergence point blocked, Tegucigalpa

Later that afternoon, the rally is still going on when a police barricade forms, blocking the marchers from heading to the President’s house. After a few hours, the protest leaders convince the demonstrators to back away before things get ugly. We head for the hotel to rest, satisfied that at least for the day, the action is over. We are wrong. Two blocks from the hotel we see a cloud of smoke rising into the skyline. It appears to be coming from the area of the mall where we are headed. As I round the corner, I see a burning bus and people fleeing toward us. Past the bus is a line of riot police marching in step. Looking left, I see that a few blocks down people are running in all directions and it appears a large group has been split apart by the tear gas the police are dispensing. I see that a Popeye’s restaurant is on fire. The entire lower floor is in flames. There’s no sign of fire trucks or ambulances or even police. Only the riot troops are on the scene and they’re ignoring the fire as they storm past Popeye’s toward the crowd. Over the next few days, it is suggested more than once that the arson is the work of provocateurs, made to look as though demonstrators had gone wild. This is the way the story was framed in almost all international news reports, particularly during the few seconds it is on CNN that night.

As we begin videotaping the scene, a woman runs alongside the police, tearfully pleading for them to not kill people. “We’re all Hondurans,” she shouts. “Please don’t hurt your own people.” We make it clear that we are international media. We get within a few feet and extend our arms with the cameras to get as close as possible to make it known to the police that their actions will be watched around the world. The police continue on, ignoring both the woman and us. Following, we see that they are headed in the direction of an even bigger mass of people a few blocks away. The protesters must have migrated here and things are going to get bad fast as the riot police continue spraying tear gas in the general direction of the crowd. Another woman, seeing us filming, grabs my arm and we listen carefully as she says she just saw five young men being cornered and detained by the police. Reports of detainees and missing people increase and become a central focus in our work in the next few days.
The following afternoon, the offices of the Committee of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared in Honduras (COFADEH) smell of tear gas. Normally the place is full of a very different kind of energy, several floors of people rushing around, displays of hundreds of photos of missing and deceased allies, incredible art work, and notices of ongoing events related to the resistance movement against the coup. COFADEH is a leading human rights organization in Honduras and a regular meeting place for much of the community affected by police repression in the past and now. As we walk in, the floor is strewn with bodies, all young people. They’ve just come from another demonstration and the repression has worsened. People are lying down, nursing wounds, clutching handkerchiefs soaked in water and pressing them to their faces to quell the sting of the tear gas. A few reporters are milling around, some are interviewing them about the attacks. New reports are rapidly coming in about similar unprovoked attacks all over the city. The police are using a “catch and release” strategy, grabbing demonstrators, beating them, and letting them go before any paperwork can be filed.

Even more disturbing are the reports of missing children. At the police station later, we’re told that there are at least 14 underage people missing on this day alone, on top of the estimate of about 40 from the previous day. We help facilitate contact between a human rights lawyer and relatives of those detained or missing.

The coup resistance is a network of spirited camaraderie unlike anything I’ve imagined. However, there is one organization, which is consistently in the eye of the storm and should be heralded for having the courage to speak the truth to the people of Honduras throughout this crisis. That is Radio Globo, an independently owned and operated station based out in Tegucigalpa. It is the primary source of information for anyone involved in resisting the coup. Their transmitters were sabotaged in mid-August and they recently received notice of a pending removal of their broadcast license.

On the last day, our group was invited to speak on the air at Radio Globo about our thoughts and impressions. The format was a roundtable discussion. We ended up being interviewed for almost an hour. The host was gracious, inquisitive, and genuinely curious as to our perceptions of the political crisis. Our reception at Radio Globo, as well as at the demonstrations and on the street, is a testament to how vital it is for an international presence inside Honduras.

At the time of this writing, it is almost two months since the coup. The de-facto government is increasing pressure through countless fear tactics. Despite limited global support, thousands of Hondurans are in the streets every day to show their opposition, but as one person from the Center for Women’s Rights put it, “We’re getting tired.” For their struggle to continue to be virtually invisible in the U.S. is another example of the public apathy that world leaders, aided by the blind eye of mass media, are able to generate in conflicts where they sense no immediate personal stakes.