|
Archives: November 2009
IMMIGRATION: DO UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS?
DO UNDOCUMENTED PEOPLE HAVE RIGHTS?
By David Bacon
TruthOut, 11/23/09
http://www.truthout.org/1123096
One winter morning in 1996, Border Patrol agents charged into a Los Angeles street-corner clinic where 40 day laborers had lined up to be tested for AIDS. One worker, Omar Sierra, had just taken his seat, and a nurse had inserted the needle for drawing the blood. As agents of the migra ran across the street and sidewalk, Sierra jumped up, tore off the tourniquet, pulled the needle out of his vein and ran.
Sierra escaped and made it home. Shaken by his experience and determined never to forget his friends who were deported, he wrote a song.
I'm going to sing you a story, friends
that will make you cry,
how one day in front of K-Mart
the Migra came down on us,
sent by the sheriff
of this very same place . . .
We don't understand why,
we don't know the reason,
why there is so much
discrimination against us.
In the end we'll wind up
all the same in the grave.
With this verse I leave you,
I'm tired of singing,
hoping the migra
won't come after us again,
because in the end, we all have to work.
Working - A Criminal Act
Sierra states an obvious truth about people in the U.S. without immigration papers: "We all have to work." Yet work has become a crime for the undocumented. That Hollywood raid took place 13 years ago, but since then immigration enforcement against workers has grown much more widespread, with catastrophic consequences. In the last eight years of the Bush administration in particular, a succession of raids treated undocumented workers as criminals.
A year ago in Los Angeles, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents ("the migra") arrived at Micro Solutions, a circuit board assembly plant in the San Fernando Valley. Unsuspecting workers were first herded into the plant's cafeteria. Then immigration agents told those who were citizens to line up on one side of the room. Then they told the workers who had green cards to go over to the same side. Finally, as one worker said, "it just left us." The remaining workers - those who were neither citizens nor visa holders -- were put into vans, and taken off to the migra jail.
Some women were later released to care for their kids, but had to wear ankle bracelets, and couldn't work. How were they supposed to pay rent? Where would they get money to buy food?
On May 12, 2008, ICE agents raided the Agriprocessors meatpacking plant in Postville, Iowa. They sent 388 Guatemalan young people to the National Cattle Congress, a livestock showground in Waterloo, two hours away. In a makeshift courtroom workers went in chains before a judge who'd helped prosecutors design plea agreements five months before the raid even took place. The workers had given the company Social Security numbers that were either invented, or belonged to someone else. The judge and prosecutor told workers they'd be charged with aggravated identity theft, which carries a two-year prison jolt, and held without bail. If they pleaded guilty to misusing a Social Security number, however, they would serve just five months, and be deported immediately afterwards.
Many of these young people spoke only Mam or Qanjobal, the indigenous language of the region of Guatemala from which they came, so even with Spanish translation they understood little of the skewed process. They had no real options anyway, and agreed to the five months in a federal lockup and were then expelled from the country. One of them was a young worker who'd been beaten with a meat hook by a supervisor. Lacking papers, he was afraid to complain. After the raid, he went to prison with the others. The supervisor stayed working on the line.
As in Los Angeles, women released to care for their children couldn't work, they had no way to pay rent or buy food, their husbands or brothers were in prison or deported, and they were held up to ostracism in this tiny town. Had it not been for St. Brigida's Catholic Church and local activists, the women and children would have been left hungry and homeless as they waited months for their own hearings and deportations.
They say it's just "illegals" - that makes this politically acceptable.
A year ago, ICE agents raided a Howard Industries plant in Laurel, Mississippi, sending 481 workers to a privately-run detention center in Jena, Louisiana, and releasing 106 women in ankle bracelets. Workers were incarcerated with no idea of where they were being held, and weren't charged or provided lawyers for days. they slept on concrete floors, and went on a hunger strike after a week of peanut butter and jelly sandwiches.
Patricia Ice, attorney for the Mississippi Immigrant Rights Alliance (MIRA), called the raid political. "They want a mass exodus of immigrants out of the state," she declared. "The political establishment here is threatened by Mississippi's changing demographics, and what the electorate might look like in 20 years."
She means that African-Americans are moving back to Mississippi, and now make up over 35% of the population. In ten years, immigrants will make up another 10%. MIRA and the state's legislative black caucus have a plan - combine those votes with unions and progressive whites, and Mississippi can finally get rid of the power structure that's governed in Jackson since Reconstruction.
The Howard Industries raid was intended to drive a wedge into the heart of that political coalition - to stop any possibility for change.
ICE says these raids protect U.S. citizens and legal residents against employers who hire undocumented workers in order to lower wages and working conditions. But very often immigration raids are used against workers efforts when they organize and protest those same conditions. At the big Smithfield plant in Tarheel, North Carolina, where workers spent 16 years trying to join the union, the company tried to fire 300 people, including the immigrant union leadership, saying it had discovered that their Social Security numbers were no good. Workers stopped the lines for three days, and won temporary reinstatement for those who were fired. But then the migra conducted two raids, and 21 workers went to prison for using numbers that belonged to someone else. The fear the raids created was compared by one organizer to a neutron bomb. It took two years for the union campaign to recover.
Since the end of the Bush administration, immigration authorities say they will follow a softer policy. Instead of raids, they say they'll implement a system for checking the legal status of workers - an electronic database called E-Verify. People working with bad Social Security numbers will be fired. In October, 2000 young women in the Los Angeles garment factory of American Apparel were fired. And in November 1200 janitors were fired in Minneapolis.
The Department of Homeland Security says it's auditing the records of 654 companies nationwide, to find the names of undocumented workers. Will hundreds of thousands more get fired? What kind of economic recovery goes with firing thousands of workers?
Workplace raids, firings and E-verify are all means to enforce employer sanctions - the part of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 that said, for the first time, that employers had to check the immigration status of workers. The law essentially made it a federal crime for an undocumented person to work. Those who call for stricter enforcement say sanctions were never implemented, and point out that only a handful of employers were ever fined. But tens, maybe even hundreds of thousands of workers have been fired for not having papers. No one keeps track of the number - these people don't count.
ICE says sanctions enforcement targets employers "who are using illegal workers to drive down wages," -- those who pay illegal workers substandard wages or force them to endure intolerable working conditions.
Curing intolerable conditions by firing or deporting workers who endure them doesn't help the workers or change the conditions, however. And that's not who ICE targets anyway. American Apparel pays better than most garment factories, although workers had to work fast and hard to earn that pay. In Minneapolis, the 1200 fired janitors at ABM belong to SEIU Local 26 and get a higher wage than non-union workers - and had to strike and fight to win it.
ICE is still targeting the same set of employers the Bush raids went after - union companies like Howard Industries, or organizing drives like those at Smithfield. The Agriprocessors raid came less than a year after workers there tried to organize. At Howard Industries in Mississippi, the migra conducted the biggest raid of all in the middle of union contract negotiations. ICE is punishing undocumented workers who earn too much, or who become too visible by demanding higher wages and organizing unions. And despite the notion that sanctions enforcement will punish those employers who exploit immigrants, at American Apparel and ABM the employers were rewarded for cooperation by being immunized from prosecution. So this policy really only hurts workers.
What purpose does criminalization serve? In part it serves a huge bureaucracy. With 15,000 agents, ICE has become the second largest enforcement arm of the Federal government. Private detention centers have been built across the country, operated by companies like Geo Corporation, formerly called Wackenhut, and before that, Pinkertons. Janet Napolitano, DHS secretary, recently announced plans to build two new detention supercenter. About 350,000 people were detained for immigration violations last year, and at any one time about 35,000 people were in detention (read: prison).
But the driving force behind enforcement is deeper than contracts and jobs.
Open the Front Door, Close the Back Door
Former Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said "there's an obvious solution to the problem of illegal work, which is you open the front door and you shut the back door." Chertoff means by "opening the front door" that he wants people to come to the U.S. as contract workers, recruited by employers using visas that say a worker can only come to work. This is the logic and requirement for every guest worker program, going back to the braceros. And to make people come only through this employment-based system, he'll "close the back door," by making walking through the desert across the border, or working outside of this contract labor system, a crime punished, not just by deportation, but by detention and prison.
People coming as contract labor never become citizens, vote or hold power. That's very convenient in Mississippi, for instance, where employers need the labor of immigrants, but are afraid of what will happen if they vote. And by no coincidence, the state employs more guest workers per capita than any other. Mississippi recently passed a state employer sanctions law, with a $10,000 fine and five years in jail for working without being "authorized."
E-Verify, the high-tech immigration database endorsed by both the Bush and Obama administrations, is only the latest idea for enforcing this kind of criminalization. The purpose of E-Verify, raids, firings and every other kind of workplace immigration enforcement, is the basic criminalization of work -- if you have no papers, it is a crime to have a job.
So you stand on the street corner, a truck stops to pick up laborers, and you get in. You work all day in the sun until you're so tired you can hardly go back to your room. This is a crime. You do it to send money home to your family and the people who depend on you. This is a crime too.
How many criminals like this are there? The Pew Hispanic Trust says there are 12 million people without papers here in the U.S.
But it's not just here. Manu Chao wrote a whole CD of songs about this: Clandestino. He sings about people going from Morocco to Spain. Turkey to Germany. Jamaica to London. There are over 200 million people, all over the world, living outside the countries where they were born. If all the world's "illegal workers" got together in one place there would be enough people for ten Mexico Cities or fifteen Los Angeleses.
If working is a crime, then workers are criminals. And if workers become criminals, proponents of this system say, they'll go home. That's the basic justification for all workplace immigration enforcement.
But is anyone going home? No one is leaving, because there's no job to go home to.
Since 1994, six million Mexicans have come to live in the U.S. Millions came without visas, because it wasn't possible for them to get one.
All over the world people are moving, from poor countries to rich ones. The largest Salvadoran city in the world is Los Angeles. More than half the world's sailors come from the Philippines. More migrants go from the country to the city in China than cross borders in all the rest of the world combined.
So many people from Guatemala are living in the U.S. that one neighborhood in Los Angeles is now called Little San Miguel. San Miguel Acatan was the site of the worst massacre of indigenous people by the U.S.-armed Guatemalan Army in that country's civil war, in 1982. Now more San Migueleños live in Los Angeles than in San Miguel.
The economic pressures causing displacement and migration are reaching into the most remote towns and villages in Mexico, where people still speak languages that were old when Columbus arrived in the Americas - Mixteco, Zapoteco, Triqui, Chatino, Purepecha, Nahuatl. There is no community in Mexico that does not have family members in the U.S.
Why Are So Many People Displaced?
NAFTA is just one element of the changes that have transformed the Mexican economy in the interests of foreign investors and wealthy Mexican partners. The treaty let huge U.S. companies, like Archer Daniels Midland, sell corn in Mexico for a price lower than what it cost small farmers in Oaxaca to grow it. Big U.S.. companies get huge subsidies from Congress -- $2 billion in the last farm bill.. But the World Bank and NAFTA's rules dictated that subsidies for Mexican farmers had to end. This was not the creation of a "level playing field," despite all the propaganda.
In Cananea, a small town in the Sonora mountains and site of one of the world's largest copper mines, miners have been on strike for two years. Grupo Mexico, a multinational corporation that was virtually given the mine in one of the infamous privatizations of former President Carlos Salinas, wants to cut labor costs by eliminating hundreds of jobs, busting the miners' union, and blacklisting its leaders. If miners lose the strike and their jobs, the border is only 50 miles north.
If you were a miner with a busted union and no job to support your family, where would you go? When Cananea miners lost the last strike against job cuts in 1998, over 800 were blacklisted, and many wound up working in Tucson, Phoenix and Los Angeles. No wonder the current strike has been going on for over two years. Miners are fighting to stay home, in Cananea, in Mexico.
The Mexican government just sent in the army to occupy all the power plants in Mexico City, dissolved the state-owned Power and Light Company (Luz y Fuerza), and fired its 44,000 employees. This act threatens to destroy the union there, one of the country's oldest and most democratic. This is a step towards selling off Mexico's electrical grid to foreign, private investors, just as the telephones, airlines, ports, railroads and factories have all been privatized over the last two decades. Where will the fired electrical workers go? If they don't win their current battle with the government, they'll follow many of their predecessors north.
NAFTA, and the economic reforms promoted by the U.S. and Mexican governments, helped big companies get rich by keeping wages low, by giving them subsidies and letting them push farmers into bankruptcy, by privatizing state enterprises and allowing cuts in the workforce and working conditions. But those are the changes that make it hard for families to survive: Low wages. Can't farm any more. Laid off to cut costs. Factory privatized and union busted.
Salinas promised Mexicans cheap food if NAFTA was approved and corn imports flooded the country. Now the price of tortillas is three times what it was when the treaty passed. That's great for Grupo Maseca, Mexico's monopoly tortilla producer (and Archer Daniels Midland sits on its board. And it's great for WalMart, now Mexico's largest retailer. But if you can't afford to buy those tortillas, then you go where you can buy them.
The advocates of economic liberalization said an economy of maquiladoras and low wages would produce jobs on the border. But today, hundreds of thousands of workers there have lost their jobs - when the recession began in the U.S., people stopped buying the products made in border factories. Even while they're working, the wages of maquiladora workers are so low - $4-6/day - that it takes half a day's pay to buy a gallon of milk. Most live in cardboard houses on streets with no pavement or sewer system. When they lose their jobs, and the border is a few blocks away, where do you think will they go? If you had no job or food for your family, what would you do?
And when people protest, the government brings in the police and the army to protect order and investment. People are beaten, as the teachers were in Oaxaca in 2006. After the army filled Oaxaca's jails, how many more people had to leave?
When Honduran President Manuel Zelaya simply raised the minimum wage to give families a better future, not as migrants, but in Honduras, the U.S.-trained military kidnapped him in his pajamas, put him on an airplane and flew him out of the country. How many people will leave Honduras, because the door to a sustainable future at home has been closed?
The lack of human rights itself is a factor contributing to migration, since it makes it more difficult, even impossible, to organize for change. Unequal trade agreements and military intervention don't stop the flow of migrants - they produce it by displacing people - making it impossible for them to survive without leaving home. Immigration laws then regulate this flow of people.
Migration is not an accidental byproduct of free trade. The economies of the U.S. and wealthy countries depend on migration, on the labor provided by a constant flow of migrants. Congress and the administration aren't trying to stop migration. Nothing can, not with trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA and the economic policies they represent. Immigration enforcement does not keep people from crossing the border, or prevent them from working. Instead, immigration policy determines the status of people once they're here. It enforces inequality among workers in rights, and economic and social status. That inequality then produces lower wages and higher profits
U.S. immigration policy has historically been designed to supply labor to employers, at a manageable cost, imposed by employers. And at its most overt, that labor supply policy has made workers vulnerable to employers, who can withdraw the right to stay in the country by firing them.
This is not an extremist view. Recently that gang of revolutionaries, the Council on Foreign Relations, proposed two goals for U.S. immigration policy. "We should reform the legal immigration system," it advocated, "so that it operates more efficiently, responds more accurately to labor market needs, and enhances U.S. competitiveness." This essentially calls for using migration to supply labor at competitive, or low, wages.
"We should restore the integrity of immigration laws," the Council went on to say, "through an enforcement regime that strongly discourages employers and employees from operating outside that legal system." This couples an enforcement regime like the one at present, with its raids and firings, to that labor supply system.
To employers, this system is not broken - it works well.
About 12 million people live in the U.S. without immigration documents. Another 26-28 million were born elsewhere, and are citizens or visa-holders. That's almost 40 million people. If everyone went home tomorrow, would there be fruit and vegetables on the shelves at Safeway? Who would cut up the cows and pigs in meatpacking plants? Who would clean the offices of New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco or Chicago?
Immigrants are not the only workers in our workforce, the only people willing to work, or the only people who need jobs. Our workforce includes African American, Native American, Asian American and Chicano families who have contributed their labor for hundreds of years. The vast majority of white people - the descendents of European immigrants - are workers too. We all work. We all need to work, to put bread on the table for our families. But without the labor of immigrants, the system would stop.
Those companies using that labor, however - the grape growers in Delano or the owners of office buildings in Century City, or the giant Blackstone group that owns hotels across the country - do not pay the actual cost of producing the workforce they rely on. Who pays for the needs of workers' families in the towns and countries from which they come? Who builds the schools in the tiny Oaxacan villages that send their young people into California's fields? Who builds the homes for the families of the meatpacking workers of Nebraska? Who pays for the doctor when the child of a Salvadoran janitor working in Los Angeles gets sick? The growers and the meatpackers and the building owners pay for nothing. They don't even pay taxes in the countries from which their workers come, and some don't pay taxes here either. So who pays the cost of producing and maintaining their workforce?
The workers pay for everything with the money they send home. Structural adjustment policies require countries like Mexico or the Philippines to cut the government budget for social services, so remittances pay for whatever social services those communities now get. For employers, that's a very cheap system.
Here in the U.S. it's cheap too. Workers without papers pay taxes and Social Security, but are barred from the benefits. For them there's no unemployment insurance, no disability pay if they get sick, and no retirement benefits. Workers fought for these social benefits, and won them in the New Deal. For people without papers, the New Deal never happened. Even legal residents with green cards can't get many Social Security benefits. If they take these benefits away from immigrants, it wont be long before they come after people born here.
Why can't everyone get a Social Security number? After all, we want people to be part of the system. All workers, the undocumented included, get old and injured. Should people live on dog food after a lifetime of work? The purpose of Social Security is to assure dignity and income to the old and injured. The system should not be misused to determine immigration status and facilitate witch-hunts, firings and deportations for workers without it.
Wages for most immigrants are so low people can hardly live on them. There's a big difference in wages between a day laborer and a longshoreman -- $8.25/hour minimum wage in San Francisco, where a dockworker gets over $25, plus benefits. If employers had to pay low wage workers, including immigrants, the wages of longshoremen, the lives of working families would improve immeasurably. And it can happen. Before people on the waterfront organized the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, they were like day labors. hired every morning in a humiliating shapeup where each person competed for a job with dozens of others. Dockworkers were considered bums. Now they own apartment houses. It's the union that did it.
But if employers had to raise the wages of immigrants to the level of longshoremen, it would cost them a lot. Just the difference between the minimum wage received by 12 million undocumented workers and the average U.S. wage might well be over $80 billion a year. No wonder organizing efforts among immigrant workers meet such fierce opposition.
But immigrants are fighters. In 1992 undocumented drywallers stopped Southern California residential construction for a year from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border. They've gone on strike at factories, office buildings, laundries, hotels and fields. Those unions today that are growing are often those that have made an alliance with immigrant workers, and know that they will fight for better conditions. In fact, the battles fought by immigrants over the last twenty years made the unions of Los Angeles strong today, and changed the politics of the city. In city after city, a similar transformation is possible or already underway.
So unions should make a commitment too. In 1999 the AFL-CIO held an historic convention in Los Angeles, and there unions said they would fight to get rid of the law that makes work a crime. Unions said they'd fight to protect the right of all workers to organize, immigrants included. Labor should live up to that promise. Today unions are fighting for the Employee Free Choice Act, intended to make it easier and quicker for workers to organize. That would help all workers, immigrants included. But if 12 million people have no right to their jobs at all, and are breaking the law simply by working, how will they use the rights that EFCA is designed to protect? Unions and workers need both labor law reform and immigration reform that decriminalizes work.
Employers and the wealthy love immigrants and hate them. They want and need people's labor, but they don't want to pay. And what better way not to pay than to turn workers into criminals?
Creating Illegality
This is an old story. The use of migration as a supply of criminalized low-paid, or even unpaid labor began when this country began. Who were the first "illegals"? They were Africans displaced by the most brutal means, kidnapped, chained and marched to the coast, put on ships and taken across the middle passage to the Americas. And for what purpose? To provide labor on plantations, but not as equal people - not even as people at all. When the U.S. Constitution was adopted, a slave was counted as three-fifths of a human being, not because planters intended to give them three-fifths of a white person's rights, but so that slave masters could get more representatives in Congress.
Some of the nation's first laws defined who could be enslaved and who couldn't. The "drop of African blood" defined who was legal and who wasn't. When Illinois and Indiana came into the Union, as free states, their first laws said a person of African descent couldn't reside there. Were there no free Black people living in those territories? Did they not therefore become "illegal"?
That concept of illegality was then applied to other people, for the same purpose. Chinese immigrants were brought from Toishan under contract to work on the railroad, and drain the Sacramento/San Joaquin River delta. Then the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act forbade their continued immigration, because under U.S. nationality law, they could never become citizens. At the time the law said the Chinese had no right to be here, there were already thousands of Chinese migrants in California, and even Idaho.
In the early 1900s California's grower-dominated legislature made it a crime for Filipinos to marry women who were not Filipinas. At the same time, immigration of women from the Philippines to the mainland was very difficult. For the Filipino farm workers of the 1930s and 40s and 50s, it was virtually a crime to have a family. Many men stayed single until their 50s or 60s, living in labor camps, moving and working wherever the growers needed their labor.
During the bracero program from 1942 to 1964 growers recruited workers from Mexico, who could only come under contract, and had to leave the country at the end of the harvest. They called the braceros legal, but what kind of legality has people living behind barbed wire in camps, traveling and working only where the growers wanted? If braceros went on strike, they were deported. Part of their wages were withheld, supposedly to guarantee their return to Mexico. Half a century later they're still fighting to recover the lost money.
But everyone fought to stay. The Chinese endured the burning of Chinatowns in Salinas and San Francisco. Filipinos had to fight just for the right to have a family. Many braceros just walked out of the labor camps, and kept living and working underground for thirty years, until they could got legal status from the amnesty of 1986.
Immigration policy based on producing a labor supply for employers always has two consequences. Displacement of communities abroad becomes an unspoken policy, because it produces workers. And inequality becomes an official policy.
Almost two hundred years after the civil war eliminated much of dejure inequality written into law, defacto inequality is still very much with us. But today immigration law, with its category of illegality, is reinstituting inequality under law. Calling someone an "illegal" doesn't refer to an illegal act. It's not the border that makes people illegal any more than the middle passage made people slaves. Slavery was created on the slave block and in the plantation. Today's illegality is also created within the borders, by a legal system that excludes people from normal rights and social benefits.
Illegal status is created here. All the immigration reform bills in congress share the assumption that immigrants, even those with visas, shouldn't be the equals of the people in the community around them, with the same rights. For those without visas, the exclusion and inequality is even fiercer. And this is not a defacto exclusion or denial of rights. It is dejure denial, written into law, that justifies the raid in Laurel, the firings in Los Angeles, or the ankle bracelets in Postville.
Today the U.S. faces a basic choice in direction for its immigration policy. There is a corporate agenda on migration, promoted by powerful voices in Washington DC, like the Council on Foreign Relations and the employers' lobby, the Essential Worker Immigration Coalition (think Wal-Mart, Marriott, or Tyson Foods). They propose managing the flow of migration with new guest worker programs, and increased penalties against those who try to migrate and work outside this system. Some of their proposals also contain a truncated legalization for the undocumented, but one that would disqualify most people or have them wait for years for visas, while removing employer liability for the undocumented workers they've already hired.
But, Washington lobbyists ask, wouldn't guest worker programs be preferable to what we have now? The Southern Poverty Law Center's report, Close to Slavery, documents that today's braceros are routinely cheated of wages and overtime. Workers recruited from India to work in a Mississippi shipyard paid $15-20,000 for each visa. The company cut their promised wages, and fired their leader, Joseph Jacobs, when workers protested. If workers do protest, they're put on a blacklist. The Department of Labor under Bush never decertified a guest worker contractor for labor violations, and said the blacklist is legal. When Rafael Santiago was sent by the Farm Labor Organizing Committee to Monterrey to monitor hiring by the North Carolina Growers Association, to eliminate the blacklist and end contractor corruption, his office was broken into, and he was tied up, tortured and killed.
No employer hires guest workers in order to pay more. They hire them to keep wages low.
That's one possible direction - away from equality and the expansion of rights..
Undoing Inequality
Our own history tells us that a different direction is not only possible, but was partially achieved by the civil rights movement. In 1964, heroes of the Chicano movement like Bert Corona, Ernesto Galarza, Cesar Chavez and Dolores Huerta forced Congress to end the bracero program. The next year, Mexicans and Filipinos went out on strike in the fields of Coachella and Delano, and the United Farm Workers was born.
The following year, in 1965, those leaders, together with many others, went back to Congress. Give us a law, they said, that doesn't make workers into braceros or criminals behind barbed wire, into slaves for growers. Give us a law that says our families are what's important, our communities. That was how we won the family preference system. That's why, once you have a green card, you can petition for your mother and father, or your children, to join you in the U.S. We didn't have that before. The civil rights movement won that law.
That fight is not over. In fact, we have to fight harder now than ever. Native-born workers and settled immigrant communities see the growth of an employment system based on low wages and insecurity as a threat. It fosters competition among workers for jobs, and expands the part of the workforce with the lowest income and the fewest rights. It's not hard for people to see the impact of inequality and growing poverty, even if they get confused about its cause.
But we don't have to assume that fear is hardwired into us, or that we can't overcome it. Mainstream newspapers said people applauded in the Laurel plant when the immigrants were arrested and taken out in handcuffs. But after the arrests, Black workers came out of the gate and embraced the immigrant women sitting outside in their ankle bracelets, demanding their unpaid wages. African American women offered to bring food to Mexican mothers, and supported their demand for back wages.
At Smithfield in North Carolina, two immigration raids and 300 firings scared workers so badly that their union drive stopped. But then Mexicans and African Americans together brought the union in. They found a common cause by saying to each other that they all needed better wages and conditions, that they all had a right to work, and that they union would fight for the job of anyone, immigrant or native-born.
Unions know that immigrants can be fighters, like other workers. In 1992 drywallers stopped home construction for a year with a strike that extended from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border. Immigrants, including the undocumented, have gone on strike at factories, office buildings, laundries, hotels and fields. Some unions today are growing, and they're often those that know immigrant workers will fight for better wages and conditions. The battles fought by immigrants over the last twenty years are helping to create political power in cities like Los Angeles.
In recognition of that process, and of their own self-interest, unions made a commitment at the AFL-CIO convention in Los Angeles. They said they would fight to get rid of the law that makes work a crime, and to protect the right of all workers to organize. Labor should live up to that promise.
So What Do We Want?
First, we want legalization, giving 12 million people residence rights and green cards, so they can live like normal human beings. We do not want immigration used as a cheap labor supply system, with workers paying off recruiters, and, once here, frightened that they'll be deported if they lose their jobs.
We need to get rid of the laws that make immigrants criminals and working a crime. No more detention centers, no more ankle bracelets, no more firings and no-match letters, and no more raids. We need equality and rights. All people in our communities should have the same rights and status.
We have to make sure that those who say they advocate for immigrants aren't really advocating for low wages. That the decision-makers of Washington DC won't plunge families in Mexico, El Salvador or Colombia into poverty, to force a new generation of workers to leave home and go through the doors of furniture factories and laundries, office buildings and packing plants, onto construction sites, or just into the gardens and nurseries of the rich.
Families in Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador or the Philippines deserve a decent life too. They have a right to survive, a right to not migrate. To make that right a reality, they need jobs and productive farms, good schools and healthcare. Our government must stop negotiating trade agreements like NAFTA and CAFTA, and instead prohibit the use of trade and economic policy that causes poverty and displacement.
Those people who do choose to come here to work deserve the same things that every other worker does. We all have the same rights, and the same needs - jobs, schools, medical care, a decent place to live, and the right to walk the streets or drive our cars without fear.
Major changes in immigration policy are not possible if we don't fight at the same time for these other basic needs: jobs, education, housing, healthcare, justice. But these are things that everyone needs, not just immigrants. And if we fight together, we can stop raids, and at the same time create a more just society for everyone, immigrant and non-immigrant alike
Is this possible?
In 1955, at the height of the cold war, braceros and farm workers didn't think change would ever come. Growers had all the power, and farm workers none. Ten years later we had a new immigration law protecting families, and the bracero program was over. A new union for farm workers was on strike in Delano.
We can have an immigration system that respects human rights. We can stop deportations. We can win security for working families on both sides of our borders.
Yes, it's possible. Si se puede!
For more articles and images, see http://dbacon.igc.org
See also Illegal People -- How Globalization Creates Migration and Criminalizes Immigrants (Beacon Press, 2008)
Recipient: C.L.R. James Award, best book of 2007-2008
http://www.beacon.org/productdetails.cfm?PC=2002
See also the photodocumentary on indigenous migration to the US
Communities Without Borders (Cornell University/ILR Press, 2006)
http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=4575
See also The Children of NAFTA, Labor Wars on the U.S./Mexico Border (University of California, 2004)
http://www.ucpress.edu/books/pages/9989.html
--
__________________________________
David Bacon, Photographs and Stories
http://dbacon.igc.org
More...
[0] comments (320 views) | link
HONDURAS: Mainstream election reporting ignores bigger picture
This article is interesting and in some places actually good. It is by a former vice-president of Costa Rica who had to step down when he was caught doing some dastardly deeds in Arias’ efforts to pass the referendum on CAFTA in 2007.
Democracy Loses the Honduran Election
It's an abomination that Sunday's presidential vote came without consequence for the country's coup-makers.
BY KEVIN CASAS-ZAMORA | DECEMBER 1, 2009 FOREIGN POLICY
After five months of political deadlock in Honduras, conservative cattle rancher Porfirio Lobo seems to have lifted the country out of crisis. Lobo, who shares neither the left-leaning ideology nor the cowboy hat touted by ousted President Manuel Zelaya, handsomely won Sunday's presidential election in Honduras with 55 percent of the vote. Despite the relative dearth of foreign observers present to see the vote, it seems clear that Hondurans turned up in decent numbers, that the election was largely devoid of violence, and that it more or less met international standards. Already, a group of countries led by the United States, Honduras's most vital ally and trade partner, has announced that they will recognize Lobo's victory. They are no doubt relieved to find a seemingly quiet exit from months of political disarray.
Given the harsh and unanimous international condemnation that met the June 28 coup, this turn of events should be counted as a great victory for Roberto Micheletti, the de facto president of the country since then. Unfortunately, the plaudits end there. This is not a win for Honduras, and it's certainly no shining day for democracy.
The problem is not that countries recognized the election. Recognizing it is better than not recognizing it, which would have been the surest way to prolong this sorry episode. The real problem is that the apparent success of the election lets the orchestrators of the coup get away scot-free after casually kicking out an elected official. It is one thing to convince the international community to turn a blind eye to a crass deposition of a legitimate president; it is quite another to achieve that without paying any price whatsoever for it. The coup team has now accomplished both. And so the shortcomings of the Honduras's rotten political system have simply been crystallized.
Instead, the elusive prize of international legitimacy for the new Honduran government should have been conferred after a meaningful process of national dialogue -- a process including the zelayistas (and Zelaya himself). Even better, international favor could have been conditioned on an effort to rethink a surreal constitution that leaves the country vulnerable to future democratic breakdowns. Or perhaps a serious introspection among the Honduran elite about the introduction of social reforms of the sort that are desperately needed in a country afflicted by the pervasive poverty and obscene inequalities that make Zelaya-style populism an irresistible temptation. Lobo paid lip service to these lofty goals upon proclaiming his victory, but now that the threat of international isolation has been removed, it's unlikely that anything will come of it.
The Honduran political elite are reading this outcome as an unconditional victory and, above all, as a license to return to politics as usual, as though nothing had happened. That will mean a return to the usual tooth-and-nail fight between factions of the well-heeled oligarchy -- each cheered on by segments of the impoverished populace -- for the spoils of a weak state. With such a political style and such a lack of political leadership -- both made obvious in this episode -- it is no wonder that Honduras is dead last on the fight against corruption in Central America, according to the figures just released by Transparency International.
To be sure, this is no vindication of Zelaya, an irresponsible politician who is as much a part and a product of the Honduran elite as anyone. The ousted president played his hand poorly: His unsurpassed ability to ramble confirmed all the prejudices about him, and his racking up miles in Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez's plane proved a dead-end route to regaining the presidency. Zelaya will go down in history as the single biggest culprit in his own coup. He was right about one thing (revising the Honduran constitution) but for the wrong reasons (he wanted to tamper with term limits and re-election clauses). He doesn't have a political future other than as a cause célèbre at all the future jamborees organized by Chávez and his Bolivarian colleagues.
But Chávez is also a loser here. The Venezuelan president was quickly cut out of the picture by all the relevant actors -- including Zelaya -- months ago; he won't have a friend in Tegucigalpa now that Lobo has been elected. It is even a defeat of sorts for Brazil, which was thrown into the center of the crisis by Zelaya's decision to seek shelter at the Brazilian Embassy and then missed the chance to deploy regional influence and craft an adequate political settlement.
And it is a resounding defeat for the Organization of American States (OAS), which is left in tatters, incapable of protecting the lofty goals of the Inter-American Democratic Charter and equally unable to bridge not just the traditional divide between the hemisphere's North and South but now also the ideological rift that is threatening to split Latin America between left and right. In particular, the fact that the United States and Brazil are publicly at odds over the recognition of the Honduran election (Brasilia is refusing to recognize the results) is likely to accelerate a process through which Brazil abandons the OAS in favor of other regional outfits, such as the Union of South American Nations, where it can wield power more freely.
Finally, it is a gaping failure for U.S. diplomacy, which shifted from indignation with the June 28 coup to indifference, to confusion, and finally to acquiescence -- all in less than five months. The crisis laid bare the State Department and the White House's completely incoherent approach toward Latin America. The United States should be particularly embarrassed about the collapse of the purported agreement between Micheletti and Zelaya, heralded as a diplomatic triumph by everyone from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Sen. John Kerry. Before the champagne stopped fizzing, the big triumph morphed into a big debacle, when it became clear that the Honduran Congress had no intention of reversing the coup by reinstating Zelaya before the election. Either the U.S. diplomats announced the accord believing that the Honduran Congress was ready to reinstate Zelaya (in which case they were taken for a ride by the Honduran political elite), or they announced it knowing full well that the votes were not there. In the former hypothesis, they behaved with remarkable incompetence; in the latter, with remarkable cynicism. In both cases, Washington's credibility as an interlocutor of future political crises in the region is damaged.
And maybe that's exactly what the State Department wants: to steer clear of disputes in Latin America, a minor headache in the big scheme of things. But a lot of people, in Latin America and beyond, will take note. While there's no clear risk of a Honduras-style coup cropping up anytime soon, Micheletti's ability to make Foggy Bottom dance to his own tune will nevertheless be recorded and remembered by other oligarchies in the region. Moreover, Washington's inability to impose an adequate political solution to a petty power struggle in Honduras raises legitimate questions about America's diplomatic prowess. Not only that, if Washington couldn't handle Honduras, how will it tackle the Middle East?
Alas, there's not a lot to gloat about in the outcome of this hapless episode. Micheletti and Lobo are simply the last men standing on a barren landscape. Their victory is a hollow one. And make no mistake: It is no victory for democracy.
Kevin Casas-Zamora is senior fellow in foreign policy at the Brookings Institution and served as vice president of Costa Rica in 2006 and 2007.
++++++++++++++++++
http://en.mercopress.com/2009/11/30/the-ibero-american-summit-remains-divided-over-the-honduran-crisis
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Rafael Alegria: 65-70% Abstention Nationwide.
Radio Globo is reporting turnout from different polling places. Each polling place has about 300 names. In Tegucigalpa, turnout was varying between 30 and 45 percent according to heads of polling places. Radio Globo's reporters found that in some of those polling places outside of Tegucigalpa are reporting turnouts of 17-42 voters per polling place, so far today, with fewer than 30 minutes left to vote. Similar numbers in San Pedro and La Lima. Since the official story is that turnout is "massive" it will be fun to see the "official" numbers. The informal ones are quite an education.
Rafael Alegria, a leader of the Frente de Resistencia, is saying on Radio Globo, that their census of voter turnout suggests that anywhere from 65-70% of the electorate stayed home and did not vote today.
++++++++++++++++
Here is a Honduras election day report from the Danish Association for International Cooperation translated into English by the Alliance for Global Justice. Unfortunately, the great pictures didn't come into the email with the text. To see the pictures and original Spanish go to http://www.ms.dk/sw148422.asp
Doubts over the level of abstention
The participation was the greatest in history says the Supreme Electoral Tribunal. The participation was the lowest in history says the Resistance. The confusion is great over the real numbers, but all indications are of victory for National Party candidate Pepe Lobo.
[caption] Polling place in Tegucigalpa, Sunday at 4:20pm. The long lines of the TSE and local media are not visible. The ambiance might better be described as boring. Photo: Christian Korsgaard
.
November 30, 2009
by Christian Korsgaard, correspondent, MS Central América.
The polling places in Honduras closed at 5:00pm on Sunday after a day of conflicting reports that raised questions about whether the Supreme Electoral Tribunal (TSE) and the Resistance were referring to the same election.
Meanwhile, most of the local media reported early on of a massive
participation, the Resistance has stayed firm during the whole day, arguing that the level of abstention was the highest in history. The Resistance had recommended a boycott of the elections, since due to numerous violations of the human rights, they consider do not consider them to be not valid nor democratic.
At 2:30pm the TSE decided to extend the time for voting by one hour supposedly because many voters were still in line and because in some tables the indelible ink had become run out due to the large number of voters.
Where are the voters?
Nevertheless, during a tour of polling places at the end of the afternoon, we did not manage to confirm the information of the TSE and of the local media – which are mostly controlled by pro-coup groups.
Half-empty and with election officials with their feet up making amiable conversation among themselves, by no means gave the impression that Honduras was on its way to a “super-election.”
In two polling places in central Tegucigalpa with nine and seven voting tables respectively, we manage to count five and seven persons in process of voting or in line. The voters' long lines that the TSE and the media had mentioned the whole day was not in sight. On the other hand, we meet election officials yawning and looking impatiently to their watches.
[caption] The election officials had plenty of time to converse between themselves. In the rear, the semi-empty pink urn demonstrates the limited
participation. Photo: Christian Korsgaard.
Pepe Lobo on the road to victory
But in Honduras nothing is as it seems to be and the TSE presented the first preliminary, but official results. According to the TSE, the nationalist Pepe Lobo gains a comfortable victory with 55 per cent of the vote, followed by liberal Elvin Santos with 38 per cent. None of the three other candidates seem to have achieved more than three per cent of the vote.
This result is no surprise. What is a surprise is the prediction of the TSE over the level of participation which it hoped would break all records and reach 61 per cent. The resistance immediately rejected this information and instead estimated that the level of abstention was the highest in history.
“It does not take glasses to see. The monitoring by our organization at a national level shows us that the level of abstention is like a minimum of 65 to 70 per cent, the highest in the national history, which implies that scarcely 30-35 per cent of the electorate voted. In this form the Honduran people have punished the candidates participating in a coup and the dictatorship, those who now are in the predicament of how to show before the international public opinion a voters' volume that did not exist," expressed the Resistance in a press release.
At the same time it called for a Grand Assembly on Monday and annouced a “grand Victory Caravan against the Electoral Farse” on Monday afternoon.
Fighting in San Pedro Sula
While the elections passed without violence in Tegucigalpa, it is not possible to say the same about San Pedro Sula. The Resistance had announced that they would not go in the streets, but in San Pedro Sula civil dissatisfactions decided to protest. The demonstration was immediately dissolved by police using tear-gas
++++++++++++++++
http://hondurasresists.blogspot.com/2009/11/day-159-of-resistance-despite-state.html
+++++++++++++++++
Red Comal and the campesino training center ECOSOL,an NGO working with marketing farming goods started by Trinidad Sanchez and Mary Mc Cann when they were with AFSC was raided this afternoon by over 50 soldiers, some of them hooded. Although Red Comal had condemned the coup and has been part of the resistance in Siguatepeque, it has always been pacifist in true Quaker fashion. The military is accusing them of harboring guerrilleros, storing arms and of having a printing press printing anti-election propaganda. This could not be further from the truth. The military has smashed down doors, taken computers and even money. If this is the way the regime is going to conduct elections, God help us.
More...
[0] comments (244 views) | link
TRADE: FAIR TRADE OPPORTUNITIES GALORE!
Nov 27, 28,29 9AM-3PM
Manchester United Methodist Church (636) 394-7506
Dec 4-6 College Church, St Louis Univ. - set up 3:30 Friday ends Sunday at 9 30- 2. Friday and sat 8:30-10: 30
St. Francis Xavier (College Church) (314) 977-7300
Dec 5 Evangelical United Church of Christ Webster Groves 5:30-7:00
Dec 6 (call for times and directions)
Grace United Methodist Church (314) 863-1992
Evangelical United Church of Christ (314) 968-1727 9:30-2:00
St. Margaret's of Scotland Cath. Church (314) 776-0363
Unity Lutheran Church (314) 382-4241
Bethel Evangelical Lutheran Church (314) 863-3112
All Saints Catholic Church (314) 721- 6403
Nov 21 - 29 St. Vincent Catholic Church, Soulard,
All Saints Catholic Church 2 weekends
Fredericktown Christian, Fredericktown, MO
Dec 12 1st Presbyterian, Sullivan, MO
Dec 19 St Paul UCC, Columbia IL
More...
[0] comments (232 views) | link
HONDURAS: DE FACTO REGIME PREPARES REPRESSION LEADING UP TO ILLEGITIMATE ELECTIONS
All over Honduras, youth in resistance, women in resistance, artists in resistance, lawyers in resistance, well-dressed and blackberried political party leaders in resistance, campesinos in resistance, are saying no to these November 29th elections--and for good reason. While many other Hondurans see the elections as a way out of the difficult situation they are in, the problems with this climate must be not be ignored.
How can these elections be fair when one of the few T.V. stations in Honduras broadcasting independent news has its signal blocked and when restrictions placed on freedom of assembly make campaigning difficult? How free can an election be when the same armed forces that backed the June 28th coup, and that have acted to repress protests, are delivering the ballots and safeguarding polling places? And how much choice can people have when a large number of candidates have withdrawn?
Since the coup, the United States government has been, frankly, wishy-washy. While it has condemned the coup and established some sanctions, it has not gone far enough to pressure the regime to step down. After the collapse of the October accords, in which U.S. diplomats helped to almost reach a resolution of the crisis, the U.S. made the fatal mistake of letting the de facto regime believe it could continue in power without cost. This cannot continue--our government must take a stronger stance before another day goes by. Giving a U.S. stamp of approval to these elections will lower the bar for what is considered "free and fair" elections elsewhere in Latin America.
Write an email today asking our government to push for the restoration of civil liberties, human rights, and democratic order in Honduras!
This Thanksgiving, I am so grateful to know that I can rely on activists like you to speak out at critical moments like this and continue to work with us for peace and justice in the time to come.
www.lawg.org
=============
Honduras: No One’s Idea of an Electoral Fiesta
Written by Lisa Haugaard
Latin America Working Group
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
“Vote? Me? No way? For what?” said the young man, almost spitting out the words. “What is there to vote for in this election?”
All over Honduras, youth “in resistance,” women in resistance, artists in resistance, lawyers in resistance, well-dressed and blackberried political party leaders in resistance, campesinos in resistance, are saying no to these November 29th elections. While the word “resistance” may conjure up images of masked guerrillas, this image is totally misleading. As I could see in a trip this week to Tegucigalpa, it is, so far, in general an extraordinarily peaceful, civic resistance.
And yet to other Hondurans, elections seem like a way out of the terrible mess they have found themselves in. For many better-off Hondurans, exaggerated fears of a Chavez-style takeover fuel their support of the coup, and elections will bring them, they hope, a stamp of approval that the international community has, they feel, mysteriously withheld. And many Hondurans who did not support the coup are thinking, if only we can get through the elections, maybe things will calm down, maybe life will return to normal.
And yet an election so illegitimate will leave scars that are hard to heal.
Possibly the last chance at having an election accepted as legitimate by coup opponents came when de facto leader Roberto Micheletti refused to step down and the Honduran Congress delayed voting on the restoration of President Manuel Zelaya as had been established in a cobbled-together October accord. Micheletti’s subsequent offer to abstain from exercising presidential powers for six days around the election is seen as “ni gallo ni gallina” (“neither rooster nor hen”) by puzzled Hondurans.
Independent candidate Carlos H. Reyes withdrew from the presidential race stating that there were not adequate conditions for an election, while some other leftist party members running for the Congress remained in the game. Deposed president Manuel Zelaya remains holed up in the Brazilian Embassy, and the streets around the embassy are barricaded and manned by police.
U.S. diplomat Tom Shannon’s apparent endorsement of the elections despite this backtracking by the Micheletti regime was seen as a betrayal by Hondurans opposed to the coup, although subsequently a State Department spokesman said the United States will wait to see what happens on Election Day. The multiplicity of confusing statements from the United States frustrates them. “How can the most powerful nation on earth not manage to have a united message?” one asked. “If they United States really wanted to overturn this coup,” I heard more than once, in a common if perhaps not realistic evaluation, “They’d just have to snap their fingers.”
Whether or not electoral fraud occurs, the minimal conditions needed for campaigning in the lead up to free and fair elections do not exist. A state of emergency was declared via decree number PCM-M-30-0009 on November 19th “for all activities related to the general elections that take place on November 29th, to guarantee the right to vote [and] the transport, custody and monitoring of electoral materials.” The emergency decree authorizes the Defense Ministry to obtain whatever resources needed for “military operations to guarantee the right to vote.”
Even prior to this emergency decree, other decrees or declarations limiting civil liberties remain in effect, including one that requires public meetings of more than 20 people to obtain police permission twenty-four hours in advance, and another restricting the use of loudspeakers. According to the human rights group CIPRODEH, these are applied selectively, not enforced on the two main political parties but on the smaller parties and social movements. A decree authorizing the government to suspend licenses of radio and TV stations and other media for disturbing social peace remains in effect. Television news programs are one-sided, with newscasters portraying any call to abstain from voting as unpatriotic and painting a picture of clean and well-run elections. One of the few TV stations incorporating other perspectives, station 36, while now back on the air has its signal jammed outside of Tegucigalpa. Even within Tegucigalpa, according to human rights groups its signal is interfered with and its news broadcast replaced, inexplicably, with old cowboy movies—as I saw myself this week as I was clicking around for news. You can read more background information in May I Speak Freely Media’s article “Fear and Loathing in Honduras: Elections Under Repression.” http://mayispeakfreely.org/index.php?gSec=doc&doc_id=348
As one entrepreneur skeptical of the elections told me, “Exactly which electoral fiesta are they talking about?”
Five thousand army reservists have been mobilized around the elections, and the armed forces are playing a role in delivering ballots. Soldiers have been seen on the buses handing out leaflets encouraging people to vote. One observer noted, “The army is like a dragon that had been sleeping, and now it is awake.”
While some twenty deaths of Hondurans at the hands of army and police remain largely uninvestigated and unprosecuted, according to the Honduran human rights group CIPRODEH, Honduran judicial agencies are prosecuting people for violating curfews and protesting. The Attorney General has pledged to prosecute people for calling for an electoral boycott, an offense under Honduran law.
In an on-target Time magazine article, senior policy director at the Council of the Americas asserted, "You can't use an election to clean the slate after a coup. It just threatens to roll back democratic norms in Central America by decades." http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1940235,00.html?xid=thepage_newsletter
The U.S. government must not put a stamp of approval on elections under these conditions.
++++++++++++++++++
DE FACTO REGIME PREPARES REPRESSION LEADING UP TO ILLEGITIMATE ELECTIONS
The Committee of Detained and Disappeared of Honduras (COFADEH) expresses its concern to the national and international community regarding the deterioration of the human rights situation in Honduras which is deepening each day.
A new wave of violence includes death threats, political persecution, illegal detentions, tortures and the militarization of sectors of principal cities. Of particular concern is the incursion of vehicles without license plates, darkened windows, driven by heavily armed agents with hooded faces into neighborhoods identified as allied with the Resistance against the coup and self declared as “free of political propaganda.” These actions follow the creation of lists profiling leaders of the resistance movement by order of the military and police.
The overall environment that has been created is one of repression and uncertainty. This was reinforced by a statement issued on November 16, 2009 by the Sub-Secretary of the Service Networks of the Ministry of Public Health that orders the preparation of a CONTINGENCY PLAN for provision of health services for 24 hours per day from November 19th thru December 4th, 2009. According to statement No. 1055-09-SSRDS, the plan must include: Anticipated Suspension of Activity without putting the health of patients at risk, Re-scheduling of Surgeries during these dates and supply of medicine and equipment necessary for the plan.
These measures appear to be related to the conduction of the illegal electoral process on November 29, which is proceeding in an irregular manner and reflects the militarization and para-militarization of the country. The military reserves have been mobilized to support the 16,000 members of the armed forces and 14,000 police already mobilized in the distribution of ballot boxes.
In departments in the western part of the country, army reserves distributed fliers to intimidate the population in resistance, characterizing members of the resistance as irrational delinquents and discrediting marches and protests as inhumane and uncivilized behavior. This activity parallels the “anti-communist” campaigns of the 1980’s.
The military control advances and consolidates as Michelleti announces a “strategic departure” from the country between November 25th and December 2, 2009. The security forces equip themselves with new repressive tools. An armored vehicle has been added to the Secretary of Security for dispersing protests. The anti-riot units are equipped with video cameras and high pressure water cannon and a mechanism that marks anyone who comes in contact with the water for 48 hours. The armed forces have begun conducting selective checks along major roads in the country and departments in the Atlantic zone of the country have experienced military over flights.
COFADEH communicates its concern to all Human Rights institutions and the international community regarding the safety of social activists who struggle for the reestablishment of democratic order.
COFADEH asks the international community to be on alert regarding the human rights situation in Honduras and to demand that the Honduran state guarantee the right to life and integrity of the Honduran population and foreigners living in the country.
COFADEH, Tegucigalpa, Honduras. November 21, 2009
Spanish language website for resistance: www.porlademocracia.org
+++++++++++++++++++++++
http://dcprogressive.org/2009/11/21/honduras-heads-toward-controversial-election/
November 21, 2009...12:11 pm
Honduras Heads Toward Controversial Election
Hondurans are scheduled to go to the polls next week to elect a new President, thus hypothetically bringing an end to the country’s protracted political crisis. However, tensions are high as controversy continues over the legitimacy of the elections set to occur on November 29th. Ousted President Zelaya continues to make incendiary speeches from the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, where he has been holed up for almost two months. He is calling on his supporters to boycott the elections unless he is restored to power before they occur.
Soldiers guard boxes of general election ballots in Tegucigalpa
Meanwhile, interim leader Micheletti recently announced that he would take a leave of absence from November 25 to December 2, in order to “allow Hondurans to concentrate on the electoral process and not on the political crisis.” The announcement was greeted with unsurprising cynicism by Zelaya, who characterized it as a “crude maneuver that implicitly recognizes that Micheletti’s presence in office stains the electoral process.”
Both Brazil and Argentina have refused to acknowledge the elections if Zelaya is not reinstated beforehand, while the U.S. has said they will recognize the results if the election is free and fair. The U.S. State Department has announced they will fund election observers from the NDI and IRI.
Many within Honduras are answering Zelaya’s call to boycott the upcoming vote. Over 40 candidates, including former presidential hopeful Carols H. Reyes, have withdrawn from the election in order to “raise the voices of the resistance members that have been beaten, assassinated and repressed.”
Indications continue to emerge that the Micheletti government has not set the stage for legitimate elections. The issue of media freedom has come up time and time again as Zelaya supporters accuse the interim government of censorship. Micheletti’s spokesmen deny the accusations, maintaining that restrictions on the media were lifted last month. Nevertheless, “the coup regime is broadcasting dire warnings about “terrorist” attempts to stop the elections, and even the possibility of Nicaraguan and Venezuelan attacks.”
In an open letter to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka asserted that fair elections will be impossible because of the interim government’s coercive tactics.
“The current environment in Honduras, including an illegitimate government in power, makes free, fair and open elections impossible. The violent and coercive repression of political opposition to the de-facto coup regime, including trade unionists, has continued. National and international human rights organizations report ongoing human rights violations committed by state security forces, including killings, severe beatings, sexual violence, the imprisonment and torture of activists, as well as the arrest and detention of President Zelaya’s supporters.”
Unfortunately, as the election draws closer, it seems less and less likely that the results will restore unity to the politically divided country. And on the international stage, the elections have the potential to divide the hemisphere if some Latin American nations refuse to acknowledge the results. It may rest with the United States – Honduras’ primary trading partner – to ensure that the vote is conducted in a democratic manner.
More...
[0] comments (254 views) | link
SOA: Powerful Weekend Resisting Violence & Oppression
Four Line-Crossers Arrested
We came together at the gates of Ft. Benning to solemnly remember those killed by the graduates of the SOA. Four carried their witness across military lines and were arrested on the base: Nancy Gwin of Syracuse, NY; Ken Hayes of Austin, TX; Fr. Louis Vitale of Oakland, CA; and Michael Walli of Washington, DC.
Michael is refusing to post bail, and will remain in custody at least until the trial in January 2010. Nancy, Ken and Louis have been released and will soon be headed back to their communities to spread the truth about the SOA/WHINSEC. You can join them! Keep your eyes out for further updates with messages about their journeys.
Hundreds of Demonstrators Penetrate Police Barricades
Following the procession, several hundred activists risked arrest, marching into the street beyond the confines of the protest to carry their message of resistance and people power even further. Puppetistas carrying large puppets of the six Jesuit martyrs alongside Cakalak Thunder and other drumming groups led a march together beyond police barricades to lift of the spirit of life so as to better remember the work and ideas of those who we have lost. Resistencia, Presente!
More...
[0] comments (218 views) | link
EL SALVADOR: 194 persons dead from the floods--a reminder of Hurricane Mitch
From SHARE FOUNDATION:
You may have been reading our previous eNewsletter updates on the situation in El Salvador following the destruction wrecked by Hurricane Ida. As you might recall from those communications, SHARE is partnering with counterparts in three regions of the country that experienced significant destruction from the flood waters. Just yesterday, I approved three initial projects, worth approximately $17,000 that will provide mattresses, blankets, and basic food items (beans, rice, oil, flour, and drinking water) to an estimated 600 families (or approximately 2700 individuals) in three municipalities.
Clearly, this is an important beginning, but it is only a beginning. The numbers of people affected by Ida continue to rise as the reports from the National Civil Protection System are updated each day. As of yesterday, nearly 15,000 people were reported in temporary shelter settings. It is important to note here that this number does not even begin to take into consideration those who set up rudimentary structures near their homes in order to protect what may have been left behind by the storm and to begin the reconstruction/restoration process.
Our partners are prioritizing women and families in the communities that are not receiving assistance from other entities. We anticipate the need to extend our support and solidarity to these communities and others will grow over the coming weeks. In order for this to be possible, we continue to rely on the support that comes from individuals like you who have a strong connection with El Salvador.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
On Saturday, November 7, intense rains produced by Hurricane Ida caused major destruction in El Salvador leaving 192 people dead and 14,295 people in shelters. A month’s worth of rain (14 inches) fell in less than three hours, causing floods and landslides that destroyed homes, roads, bridges, and entire communities. The departments of San Salvador and San Vicente were the most affected. Approximately 80 people are still missing as rescue workers dig through the mud and collapsed buildings in search of survivors and bodies.
President Mauricio Funes declared a state of National Emergency and the Legislative Assembly quickly followed suit, declaring a state of National Calamity—a measure that allows Funes’ administration to reallocate funds to attend to the crisis. According to Funes, the failure of previous administrations to carry out risk-management projects has intensified the gravity of the disaster, which is disproportionately affecting poor and marginalized communities.
Venezuela was one of the first countries to provide relief aid, sending two airplanes full of food, supplies, and medicine on Monday, November 9. Other countries including Mexico, Brazil, Taiwan, and the United States also responded to requests for aid with supplies and money. Cuba sent a team of doctors that are attending to the needs of the victims in San Vicente. CISPES has also raised $6,000 to send to organizations doing relief work.
+++++++++++++++++
The situation in El Salvador where I studied last semester looks dire. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/8349333.stm) Below is a description from a friend about the situation, she is there right now. Please give what you can. Even a dollar will make a difference.
-Javier (IFCLA intern)
Dearest friends and coworkers (please forward to anyone you know)
I am writing to beg for help. Wednesday I met with a woman to discuss an organic chicken project in El Salvador. Sunday morning she died. I saw her house and two children with my own eyes.
The situation is dire. For four days me (sic) and my friends have been driving around in Santiago Texacuangos, El Salvador delivering food and water. There are no NGOs, there is no Red Cross, there is no one but us. I hope international aid arrives soon. I do not know how much longer people can survive.
I cannot deliver water and food tommorrow. We ran out of money to buy water today. I have no special disaster skills. I have a truck, and I have friends with money and it is helping keep at least some alive for a few days. To the communities we have visited (and there are more) we can only hand out a handful of beans and rice to each family. This may sustain them for one meal, but not for the 5 days this disaster has taken place.
We need your pennies to keep people alive. http://friendsofsantamaria.blogspot.com/
You can donate online, and we are using the money to deliver food and water.
Since I have no money to deliver food and water tomorrow, my friends and I
are spending the day contacting NGOs to figure out WHO can help in a more sustainable way. In the meantime, whatever you can give may keep Salvadorans alive. The website we made tells the story of our rag tag relief effort. I am emotionally and physically exhausted, but I am alive. I have resources. I have you. Please give anything in your capacity. Please pray for the Salvadoran people.
In the utmost urgency of solidarity and love
Beth
More...
[0] comments (197 views) | link
SOA: St. Louisans go to Ft. Benning Nov. 20-22 --Anniversary of Jesuit University Massacre
On the 20th anniversary of their murders, Salvadoran Pres. Mauricio Funes honored the six Jesuit priests killed by the Atlacatl Army Batallion for their bravery, dignity, and their academic contributions to El Salvador. Funes said that he hoped it would heal wounds that had been open too long. For 20 years, right wing governments had refused to recognize the murder victims, who included the housekeeper and her daughter.
++++++++++++++++++
Come to the Send Off November 15, 7:00pm on the steps of the College Church, Grand and Lindell... as part of the weekly Peace Vigil...End the Coup - Close the SOA! Honor the Memory of the Martyrs! Tina Busch Nema will be speaking on November 16th from 5 to 6pm in Tegeler Room 207.
Tina Busch Nema will be speaking on November 16th from 5 to 6pm in Tegeler Room 207.
Tina is local peace activist who spent time living in Central America during the 80s. Her work there has continued to influence her views on American policy, specifically the School Of the Americas (SOA). Several years ago Tina crossed the line at Fort Benning and as a result spent several months in a federal prison.
SLU will be serving food. Please RSVP to this message or to shollan2@slu.edu
+++++++++++++++++
SOA Watch is extremely concerned about the situation in Honduras, where SOA graduates overthrew the democratically elected government on June 28, 2009. An agreement that was brokered last week between representatives of President Zelaya and the coup regime was supposed to "return the holder of executive power to its pre-June 28 state" but it turns out it was just another stalling tactic by the coup regime. Read a statement from Honduran President Manuel Zelaya below.
SOA Watch supports the three key demands that the National Front of Resistance Against the Coup in Honduras has put forward:
the return to constitutional order with the reinstatement of the legitimate president, Manuel Zelaya Rosales
respect for the sovereign right of the Honduran people to establish a National Constituent Assembly for the purpose of refounding their nation
punishment for those who have violated human rights.
Join us in calling the White House and leave a message for President Obama and Dan Restrepo (202-456-1111 or 202-456-1414) and the State Department and leave a message for Secretary Clinton and Tom Shannon (202-647-4000) to not recognize the military coup regime, headed by Roberto Micheletti and SOA graduate General Romeo Vasquez, or the coup regimes elections that are scheduled for November 29. President Zelaya must be reinstated!
++++++++++++++++++
Immigrants Deserve Dignity (Stewart Co., GA Detention Center Protest)
On Friday November 20 People will vigil outside the Detention Center for Immigrants in Lumpkin, GA. Watch this youtube:
http://www.detentionwatchnetwork.org/node/435
More...
[0] comments (224 views) | link
HONDURAS: Reconciliation Aborted -- scroll down to take action
For Immediate Release: November 5, 2009
Office of U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina)
Contact: Wesley Denton (202) 228-5079
DeMint: Administration Commits to Recognize Honduran Elections
Senator secures commitment for U.S. to back Nov. 29 elections even if Zelaya is not reinstated
WASHINGTON, DC -- Today, U.S. Senator Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, announced he has secured a commitment from the Obama administration to recognize the Honduran elections on November 29th, regardless of whether former President Manuel Zelaya is returned to office and regardless of whether the vote on reinstatement takes place before or after November 29th. Given this commitment, which Senator DeMint has requested for months, he will lift objections on the nominations of Arturo Valenzuela to be Assistant Secretary of Western Hemisphere Affairs and Thomas Shannon to be U.S. Ambassador to Brazil.
“I am happy to report the Obama Administration has finally reversed its misguided Honduran policy and will fully recognize the November 29th elections,” said Senator DeMint. “Secretary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Shannon have assured me that the U.S. will recognize the outcome of the Honduran elections regardless of whether Manuel Zelaya is reinstated. I take our administration at their word that they will now side with the Honduran people and end their focus on the disgraced Zelaya.”
“My goal has always been to work with the administration to get the policy on the Honduran elections reversed. Now that this goal has been achieved, I will lift my objections to the two nominations.
“This marks an important step forward for the brave people of Honduras. They are proving, despite crushing hardship and impossible odds, that freedom and democracy can succeed anywhere people are willing to fight for it.
“The independence, transparency, and fairness of their elections have never been in doubt. And now, thanks to the Obama Administration’s welcome reversal, the new government sworn into office next January can expect the full support of the United States and I hope the entire international community.”
“I trust Secretary Clinton and Mr. Shannon to keep their word, but this is the beginning of the process, not the end. I will eagerly watch the elections, and continue closely monitoring our administration’s future actions with respect to Honduras and Latin America.”
###
http://demint.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=c6542515-c3af-d65a-085d-537015ff8a97
++++++++++++++
deal is dead: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8345899.stm
++++++++++++++++
latimes.com
Editorial
Obama must stand firm on Honduras crisis
A U.S.-brokered deal to return ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to
office is unraveling, and the Obama administration seems to be wavering.
November 5, 2009
The Obama administration last week brokered what looked like a promising
deal to end the political crisis in Honduras. Sadly, this week it already is
fraying. The de facto leaders of Honduras are foot-dragging, prompting
President Manuel Zelaya, whom they ousted in a civilian-military coup four
months ago, to issue an ultimatum from his refuge in the Brazilian Embassy
in Tegucigalpa, the Honduran capital.
Both sides need to stand down and focus on restoring democracy before the
country's Nov. 29 presidential election. The Obama administration,
meanwhile, must hold firm to its principles and quit backing away from its
stated belief that Zelaya should be allowed to serve out the remaining three
months of his term.
Under the accord, the two sides were to form a national unity government by
today and let the Honduran Congress decide whether to return Zelaya to
office. Although the agreement did not set a date for the vote or
specifically guarantee Zelaya's restitution, it called for "an end to the
situation facing the country." The deposed president signed, in the apparent
belief that the vote would be a formality and that he would be back in
office within a week. The de facto leader, Roberto Micheletti, seemed to be
compromising in order to secure international backing for the next election
and an end to the country's isolation. The European Union, the Organization
of American States and the U.S. had said they wouldn't recognize the next
president if Zelaya weren't returned to office first.
Now Micheletti and his allies are dithering, waiting to call Congress back
from recess until the Supreme Court and the attorney general issue
nonbinding opinions on Zelaya's return. Without Congress, no government can
be formed. As usual, they're trying to run out the clock. Zelaya, in turn,
is threatening to pull out of the deal if he isn't reinstated today. The
Micheletti camp responds: Sorry, a deal is a deal. This leaves U.S.
Secretary of Labor Hilda Solis and the rest of the verification commission
established under the deal in the awkward position of sitting around with
nothing to verify.
Although still saying it supports Zelaya's return to power, the U.S.
government seems to be punting. "This is now a Honduran process," State
Department spokesman Ian Kelly said. "It's not for us to interpret the
agreement." But it is the government's job to continue pressing for what's
right, alongside its Latin American allies.
The path back to democracy has been clear from the start: Zelaya should
return to power under an agreement not to tamper with the constitution --
the issue that incited the Honduran elite in the first place -- and serve
the remainder of his term as part of a unity government with international
oversight. The U.S., which reopened its consulate after the accord was
signed, should not lift sanctions unless this happens.
If the Obama administration chooses to recognize the election without Zelaya
first being reinstated, it will find itself at odds with the rest of Latin
America. That would be a setback for democracy and for the United States.
Copyright C 2009, The Los Angeles Times
+++++++++++++++++
State Department Briefing:
For people who want to try to figure out the State Department's position on Honduras, the ever-informative Honduras Coup 2009 blog has links to the transcript and video of yesterday's (Nov. 7) press briefing, along with analysis and key excerpts:
http://hondurascoup2009.blogspot.com/2009/11/more-from-ian-kelleys-daily-press.html
+++++++++++++++++++
Arturo Valenzuela confirmed by Senate for Western hemisphere at State
Ex diplomáticos nicaragüenses con expectativas
Arturo Valenzuela, nuevo Vicesecretario de Estado para América Latina
Leyla Jarquín y AFP
END - 21:52 - 06/11/2009
El Senado de los Estados Unidos, EU, confirmó al politólogo chileno Arturo Valenzuela como el nuevo Vicesecretario de Estado Adjunto para América Latina, luego de casi seis meses de veto a su candidatura por parte de un solo senador republicano que estaba en desacuerdo con la postura de su país respecto a la crisis en Honduras.
La confirmación se produjo en la noche del jueves, poco después de que el senador Jim DeMint, de Carolina del Sur, anunció el fin a su veto. La decisión de DeMint responde a que el gobierno de Barack Obama le “garantizó” que rectificaba su política hacia el país centroamericano.
Shannon a Brasil
“La secretaria (de Estado) Clinton y el (saliente) vicesecretario (de Estado para América Latina), Thomas Shannon, me han garantizado que Estados Unidos reconocerá el resultado de las elecciones hondureñas, haya sido restituido o no Manuel Zelaya”, señaló DeMint en un comunicado.
Arturo Valenzuela viene a sustituir a Tomas Shanon, quien ahora está nominado por el gobierno de Obama para ser embajador en Brasil. El cargo de Vicesecretario de Estado Adjunto para América Latina es el principal cargo gubernamental para las relaciones con la región.
Expectativas
El ex vicecanciller Víctor Hugo Tinoco calificó como “positivo” el hecho que Valenzuela sea chileno, pues puede significar que tiene sensibilidad por los temas de derechos humanos y políticos debido a que la generación de los años 70 de ese país suramericano vivió el derrocamiento de Salvador Allende de parte de los militares dirigidos por el dictador Augusto Pinochet.
“Muchos migraron a otros países marcados por la dictadura de Pinochet que trastocó sus libertades ciudadanas y políticas”, explicó Tinoco, por lo que señaló que “tal vez por eso (Valenzuela) le dé relevancia al tema”.
Para el ex canciller Francisco Aguirre Sacasa este nombramiento del Senado estadounidense genera muchas expectativas, pues “habrá que ver cómo va a reaccionar ante la crisis en Honduras, la situación en Nicaragua, la tensión entre Colombia y Venezuela y el debilitamiento de México producto del narcotráfico”.
Aguirre Sacasa destacó que la América Latina de hoy no es la misma con la que tuvo que “lidiar” el ex presidente Bill Clinton, ya que según él “la democracia está bajo asalto en países” de la región.
Además se refirió a que será “interesante” ver la relación que tiene con el secretario general de la Organización de Estados Americanos, OEA, el también chileno José Miguel Insulza, puesto que estima que éste “se ha acurrucado” al presidente venezolano Hugo Chávez.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Reflection by Virginia Druhe
Last week President Obama sent Under Secretary for the Western Hemisphere Thomas Shannon and White House aide Dan Restrepo to negotiate an agreement. They did so within 36 hours, confirming my belief that we could have acted 4 1/2 months ago to resolve the situation. The big difference is that instead of acting in concert with other nations to support democratic process in Honduras , we have now acted alone to suppress it.
On its face, the U.S. sponsored agreement was reasonable. Zelaya was to be reinstated by an act of Congress, a verification commission and a truth commission established, amnesty ruled out, and so on. However, the coup government has simply refused to act on its commitment. A timetable attached to the agreement called for the Congress to act by November 5, but to date the Congress has not been called into session.
Despite its ultimate nullification, immediately after the agreement was signed the U.S. began to act as though it is implemented. Sanctions are lifted, visas are being issued and Senator DeMint (R – SC) has announced that since the Administration has agreed to recognize the Honduran elections on November 29 as legitimate he will no longer block hearings on Thomas Shannon's appointment as Ambassador to Brazil and for his appointed replacement as Under Secretary for the Western Hemisphere .
In summary, President Obama promised change in US policy toward Latin America when he attended the meeting of the Organization of American States in the spring. In practice, the change is that the U.S. has resumed actively undermining the democratic process in Latin America when it does not suit the interests of right wing ideologues within our government and their very short sighted view of threats to U.S. political and economic control.
In the meantime, nonviolent popular resistance of the kind we so praise and love in Iran and elsewhere continues in Honduras , betrayed by its own national political leadership and now by ours. It will be important in the coming weeks, and especially after the elections at the end of November, to be attentive to acts of violence toward the leadership of this movement. They may well be targeted for arrest, torture, disappearance or assassination. If the resistance movement then develops violent expressions our ongoing support for the coup will be responsible.
I believe this process in Honduras takes on larger importance in the context of Latin America . Right wing ideologues in our government have been allowed to declare that further moves toward economic independence will not be tolerated; democratic process will be no defense against U.S. interests.
As a policy response, I ask that you contact both the State Department and the White House and state clearly that you are aware that this agreement has not been honored by the coup government and that the Administration's willingess to restore normalcy to the relationship is a betrayal of the people of Honduras and of their courageous nonviolent defense of democracy. It is also a betrayal of our national values and our true national interest in Latin America.
TAKE ACTION!
1. Call the State Department and leave a message for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Assistant Secretary Thomas Shannon: 202-647-4000.
Tell them not to recognize the coup regime’s illegitimate elections that are scheduled for November 29. President Zelaya must be reinstated as the first step for the restoration of democracy in Honduras!
2. Then call the White House and leave a second message for President Barack Obama and Dan Restrepo (Special Assistant to the President and National Security Council Senior Director for Western Hemisphere Affairs): 202-456-1111 or 202-456-1414.
+++++++++++++++
Statement by President Zelaya:
PRESIDENCY OF THE REPUBLIC
From the Desk of the President
Tegucigalpa November 6, 2009
Translation by Patricia Adams, The Quixote Center.
Original Spanish version below.
DELCARATION
Our weapon are ideas, our struggle is peaceful
Agreement Failed because of Micheletti's Failure to Comply.
In the face of the mockery that Mr. Micheletti has made of the Honduran People and the International Community: boycotting the Tegucigalpa/San Jose Agreement; letting the deadline for the creation of the Government of Unity pass without convening the National Congress, as is within his power and responsibility to do per the written agreement; the lack of a will to fulfill the Agreement in both letter and spirit is clear; ignoring the Plan Arias proposal, as well as the OAS and the UN resolutions; we declare that the Agreement has been a failure, because of the failure of the de facto regime to comply with the commitment to organize and install a government of unity and national reconciliation by this date; a government which should by law be presided over by the President elected by the People, José Manuel Zelaya Rosales.
We are not willing to give up the rights of the people by legitimating this Coup d'Etat.
We do not accept the militarization of society nor that the President of Honduras be named by the elite of the Armed Forces.
Democracy is the highest good of society and is the only path for confronting the problems of the third poorest economy in Latin America, and therefore we are not willing to be cheated nor that our Democracy be robbed from us.
The permanent violations of Human Rights, the cancellation of public freedoms, the confiscation of communication media, as well as the status of the President elected by the people who is surrounded by the military inside the Brazilian Embassy and the political witch hunting, is all proof of the preparation of an enormous Political-Electoral fraud on November 29th.
We announce that we will completely ignore this electoral process and the results of the aforementioned evils, elections under a dictatorship are a fraud for the people.
We invite the Ministers of the OAS to make immediate pronouncements about the actions of the government legitimately elected by the people of Honduras, and to continue to condemn and ignore this de facto regime.
On behalf of the people, we thank the International Community, the OAS, Secretary Insulza, the ex-President of Chile Mr Ricardo Lagos Escobar, and the US Labor Secretary Mrs Hilda Solís.
PRESIDENCIA DE LA REPUBLICA
Del Escritorio de Señor Presidente
Tegucigalpa 6 de noviembre del 2009
PRONUNCIAMIENTO
Nuestra armas son las ideas, nuestra lucha es pacifica
Fracasa Acuerdo por Incumplimiento de Micheletti.
Ante la burla que el Señor Micheletti ha inferido al pueblo Hondureño y a la Comunidad Internacional, Boicoteando el Acuerdo Tegucigalpa/San José y dejar que se vencieran los plazos para la Organización del Gobierno de Unidad al no convocar al Congreso Nacional de acuerdo a sus facultades y compromisos suscritos, evidentemente se manifiesta la falta de voluntad para cumplir la letra y el espíritu del Acuerdo, desconociendo la propuesta del Plan Arias, la resoluciones de Organización de Estados Americanos de Naciones Unidas, declaramos fracasado el Acuerdo por el incumplimiento del régimen de facto del compromiso de que a esta fecha debía de estar organizado e instalado el gobierno de unidad y de Reconciliación nacional; El que por ley debe de ser presidido por el Presidente Electo por el Pueblo José Manuel Zelaya Rosales.
Que no estamos dispuestos a perder los derechos del pueblo legitimando este Golpe de Estado.
No aceptamos que se militarice la sociedad y que el Presidente de Honduras sea nombrado en las Cúpulas de las Fuerzas Armadas.
La Democracia es un bien supremo de la sociedad y es el único camino para enfrentar los problemas de la tercera economía mas pobre de Latinoamérica por lo que no estamos dispuestos a permitir que nos roben con este tipo de trampas nuestra Democracia.
Las violaciones permanentes de los Derechos Humanos, la cancelación de las libertades públicas, y la confiscación de medios de comunicación al igual que la situación del Presidente electo por el pueblo rodeado por militares en la sede Diplomática del Brasil y la persecución Política es la prueba evidente de la preparación de un gran fraude Político-Electoral para el 29 de noviembre.
Anunciamos nuestro total desconocimiento a este proceso electoral y a los resultados por los vicios antes mencionados, elecciones bajo dictadura son un fraude para el pueblo.
Invitar de manera inmediata a los Cancilleres de la OEA a que se pronuncien sobre lo que acontece en el gobierno legítimamente electo por el pueblo Hondureño y continué la condena y el desconocimiento a este régimen de facto.
Agradecemos al pueblo el apoyo brindado por la Comunidad Internacional, a la Organización de Estados Americano, secretario insulsa al ex Presidente de Chile Señor Ricardo Lagos Escobar, a la Ministra de Trabajo del Gobierno de Estados Unidos Señora Hilda Solís.
+++++++++++++++++++
Honduras's political conflict
Zelaya's scrap of paper
Nov 5th 2009 | TEGUCIGALPA
From The Economist print edition
Unless outsiders continue to press, a deal to end a stubborn political conflict risks coming unstuck even before it is implemented
http://www.economist.com/world/americas/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14802313
++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Posted on Monday, November 9, 2009
Honduras deal collapses, and Zelaya's backers blame U.S.
By Tyler Bridges | McClatchy Newspapers
CARACAS, Venezuela — A U.S.-brokered accord that was supposed to return ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to power has collapsed and his supporters pinned much of the blame Monday on the Obama administration.
Honduras' Congress has made no plans to vote on whether to enact the agreement following remarks by Assistant Secretary of State Thomas Shannon that seemed to remove U.S. pressure.
Shannon said last week that the deal meant that the Obama administration would accept the outcome of the Nov. 29 presidential and congressional elections, regardless of whether Zelaya was back in power.
Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C., lifted a hold on Shannon becoming U.S. ambassador to Brazil after Shannon and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton privately reiterated this view on the elections, DeMint said.
Analysts said Monday that Shannon's statement in a television interview Wednesday undercut most of Zelaya's leverage, gave Congress a good reason to dodge a tough vote and strengthened the resolve of de facto President Roberto Micheletti to remain in power.
"The United States is no longer interested in punishing a coup-installed government," Honduran Congresswoman Elvia Valle said by telephone from Tegucigalpa Monday. Shannon's declarations "have left a bitter taste in our mouths."
Zelaya supporters, who've been organizing street protests against the Micheletti regime, are down to their final card: Calling on Hondurans to boycott the elections.
Carlos H. Reyes, the presidential candidate who was favored by the leftist Zelaya's hard-core supporters but had no chance to win, withdrew from the race Monday.
"For us to participate in the elections would mean following the strategy of the coup-installed government," Reyes said.
Zelaya, holed up in the Brazilian Embassy, is running out of options, said Orlando Perez, a political science professor at Central Michigan University who follows Honduras.
"At the end of the day, it seems like the coup will stand," Perez said from Michigan. "It is an ominous sign for democratic governments and elected leaders in the region."
Micheletti is moving forward with plans to organize the upcoming elections, which both sides had hoped would propel Honduras past a political crisis that exploded when soldiers hustled Zelaya out of the country on June 28, and the Congress immediately voted to name Micheletti as his replacement.
The Obama administration and foreign governments throughout Latin America called for Zelaya's return to power. The Obama administration also cut $30 million in aid to Honduras and revoked U.S. travel visas held by Micheletti and his powerful supporters.
Zelaya's ouster and the political machinations have thrust Honduras — a small Central American nation that looks to the U.S. for political and economic support — into the news for months.
Zelaya and many analysts inside and outside Honduras hailed the Oct. 30 agreement between him and Micheletti, although it actually left his return to power up to the country's Congress.
A Micheletti spokeswoman on Monday called on Congress to vote on the agreement.
Heather Berkman, a Washington-based analyst with the Eurasia Group, said that she'd expected the presidential campaign front-runner, Porfirio "Pepe" Lobo of the National Party, to push his party's members of Congress to join with Zelaya's supporters to approve the agreement and guarantee international recognition of the election outcome.
"But Pepe Lobo was in a tough position and has decided that he doesn't want to alienate his supporters," Berkman said Monday.
Micheletti reiterated his accusation Monday that Zelaya broke the agreement late last week by failing to offer a list of candidates for senior positions in the "unity" government called for under the deal.
Zelaya on Sunday said he didn't put forth his candidates because the agreement called for him to oversee the unity government.
Calling the agreement "a failure," he added, "The de facto president who carried out a coup is going to direct the cabinet? This is reconciliation?"
Perez said he thought that the Obama administration decided it had no option but to recognize the election result after concluding that Honduras' political, military and economic elite wouldn't accept Zelaya's return.
The deposed president had been on the outs with the elite since he shifted mid-term to become a free-spending leftist allied with Venezuela's socialist president, Hugo Chavez. Zelaya said he'd like to extend his stay in office, as Chavez has done.
DeMint is also taking credit for the U.S. support for the election after receiving private assurances from Shannon and Clinton.
DeMint said last week that Shannon and Clinton both had assured him that the Obama administration would accept Honduras' winner, even if Zelaya weren't president.
As a result, DeMint released his hold blocking Shannon from becoming ambassador to Brazil and another on Arturo Valenzuela to replace Shannon as the top diplomat for Latin America. However, Sen. George LeMieux, R-Fla., then put on a new hold on Shannon.
Shannon made his comments last week to CNN en Espanol. State Department spokesman Charles Luoma-Overstreet in an e-mail to McClatchy questioned the widespread interpretation of what Shannon said and sent a transcript of the interview that left out the relevant quotes. The actual transcript shows Shannon twice confirming that the U.S. would respect the outcome of the elections no matter whether Zelaya were restored.
A senior State Department official declined to discuss Shannon's statements Monday, saying instead, "What we're trying to do is get the parties to follow the accord . . . If the accord is not implemented fully, that will affect international perceptions."
++++++++++++++++++++++
More...
[0] comments (220 views) | link
IMMIGRATION: Migrant Shelter Besieged
Migrant Shelter Besieged
November 7, 2009
A Catholic Church-run migrant shelter in the northern Mexican state of Coahuila is the target of escalating attacks. Every day, Casa del Migrante Posada Belen in the state capital of Saltillo serves between 80-100 mainly Central American migrants headed to the United States. But since last month, staff and property have been busy responding to aggression, harassment and death threats.
Father Pedro Pantoja Arreola, shelter coordinator, reported that threats
against his person reached a fever pitch one evening last week when he
received 50 anonymous telephone calls in the space of several hours.
According to Pantoja, he could hear no words spoken on the other end of
the line-only breathing.
Earlier, on October 11, a shelter worker observed a group of about 12
people destroying an electricity meter and cutting off power. Later, on
October 25, a group of unidentified persons broke windows and destroyed an
electrical transformer, again shutting off power to the building. The
vandals reportedly shouted insults at the occupants inside and warned them
to leave the premises. On October 28, yet another group attempted to
forcibly enter the shelter, according to a letter from a network of 40
Mexican human rights organizations directed at high Mexican officials.
In the wake of the attacks, Saltillo Bishop Raul Vera accused the local
National Action Party (PAN) of creating a climate of hostility around the
presence of migrants. In particular, Bishop Vera singled out PAN state
legislator Carlos Orta for allegedly orchestrating a “campaign of
xenophobia” against Central American migrants.
Supported by other state lawmakers, Orta is pushing a legislative
initiative that urges the Mexican Congress to modify immigration
legislation and give Mexico’s Interior Ministry, an agency responsible for
internal security, authority to regulate church-run shelters. Orta
spearheaded the initiative after a Honduran immigrant was accused of
killing a local businessperson on September 30.
In his preamble to the proposed legislation, Orta made reference to the
“brutal murder of a citizen at the hands of a foreigner.” The PAN
representative said the “eternal conflict” between victims and criminals
was evidenced by the September 30 slaying of the Saltillo merchant.
According to Orta, migrant shelters should toe the line with National
Migration Institute (INM) rules and regulations governing the presence of
foreigners in Mexico.
“It’s regrettable and condemnable that someone who should be taking
advantage of his position to do good is instead committing injustices,”
Bishop Vera said of Orta. “We citizens don’t pay (politicians) high
salaries for this.”
Stretching from Chiapas to Chihuahua, church-sponsored migrant centers
provide food, medical attention and shelter to thousands of Central
Americans traveling to the United States. On the border, the facilities
also give assistance to undocumented migrants deported from the US.
Despite the recession and tougher US border controls, the shelters
continue welcoming large numbers of people from both directions.
Jesus Gerardo Lopez Macias, Saltillo INM delegate, said many Latin
Americans, especially adolescents, keep making their way north. In Ciudad
Juarez, the Casa del Migrante reported receiving 6,000 deportees through
October 31 of this year-a sharp increase over 2008 when the shelter
assisted 3,500 migrants for the entire year.
In the Saltillo region, tensions and troubles have accompanied the migrant
surge in recent years. In 2002, two Honduran migrants, Delmer Alexander
Pacheco and a man known only as Jose David, were murdered near train
tracks. According to the INM’S Lopez, young migrants face ongoing dangers
from sexual exploitation and human trafficking.
As in other regions of Mexico, organized bands of traffickers have
increasingly attempted to channel the migrant stream in Coahuila under
their control.
In response to the incidents at Casa del Migrante Posada Belen, the
Migration Forum network as well as Amnesty International issued statements
condemning the attacks and demanding urgent actions by Mexican authorities
to safeguard the shelter and its staff.
Until now, protective measures recommended by the National Human Rights
Commission, which were accepted by the federal Public Security Ministry,
have not been effective in eliminating threats to the shelter, the
Migration Forum charged.
Sources: La Jornada, November 3, 4 and 6, 2009. Articles by Leopoldo Ramos
and Emir Olivares Alonso. Zocalo.com.mx, October 27 and November 6, 2009.
Articles by Paola A. Praga and El Universal news service. Norte, November
3, 2009. Article by Claudia Ivonne Sanchez.
Frontera NorteSur (FNS): on-line, U.S.-Mexico border news
Center for Latin American and Border Studies
New Mexico State University Las Cruces,New Mexico
More...
[0] comments (199 views) | link
MILITARISM: Bases in Colombia and Panama
COLOMBIA
US Establishes Military Bases in Colombia as Honduran Crisis Continues
By Benjamin Dangl
In a quiet ceremony behind closed doors in the Colombian Presidential Palace, US Ambassador William Brownfield sat down with three Colombian ministers to sign a deal allowing for 1,400 US military and private contractors to operate in seven expanded military bases in the country. The date was October 30, just one day after an apparent solution had been reached to allow ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya to return to power. These two developments are central to the mixed messages the Obama administration is sending to Latin America.
Full article: http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1744/1/
The US further complicated matters when Tom Shannon, the US Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, recently told CNN that the US will officially recognize the results of the November 29 election whether or not Zelaya is in office. In response, Zelaya sent US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton a letter asking for clarification on the US stance. Such conflicting signals have defined the US response to the situation in Honduras since the coup took place.
The US sent another troubling message to the region when it signed the military bases agreement with Colombia. Most aspects of the deal remain unknown as the Colombian government has not responded to requests from various Latin American presidents for more information and transparency. The leaders are concerned that the expanded US military presence poses a regional security threat and violates Latin American sovereignty.
One of the bases is to be expanded to allow for the use of C-17 planes. “The idea”, the Associated Press reported, “is to make Colombia a regional hub for Pentagon operations... nearly half the continent can be covered by a C-17 [military transport] without refueling”, which “helps achieve the regional engagement strategy”.
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, whose country neighbors Colombia, has been a major critic of the deal from the start. He has asked why C-17 planes, with "warfighting capability" and the capacity to carry 200 paratroopers, would be used at these bases. Chavez pointed out that the plane that kidnapped Zelaya from Honduras stopped at a US air force base in the country before heading to Costa Rica.
"The official signing of the agreement, which allows the United States to deploy seven military bases in the heart of our America... threatens not only Venezuela, but all the peoples in the center and the south of our hemisphere," Fidel Castro wrote in a recent column. "A country like Cuba is well aware that after the United States imposes its military bases, it leaves only when it desires to do so.”
“Colombia decided to hand over its sovereignty to the United States... Colombia no longer governs its territory,” President Chavez said on a Venezuelan TV program. “Colombia today is no longer a sovereign country... it is a kind of colony.”
The US-funded Plan Colombia in the so-called war on drugs in Colombia has been characterized by terrible human rights violations - violations that are only likely to increase with this military escalation.
“The Colombian regime, which backs death squads and has the continent’s worst human rights record, has received US military support second in scale only to Israel,” political commentator John Pilger pointed out.
While the crisis drags on in Honduras, relations between Washington and Latin America have taken another turn for the worse. As George Withers of the Washington Office on Latin America told the Associated Press, "At a time when we should be pursuing every kind of diplomatic avenue to reduce tensions, this appears to be a military decision that may increase tension."
***
Benjamin Dangl is the editor of TowardFreedom.com, a progressive perspective on world events and the author of The Price of Fire: Resource Wars and Social Movements in Bolivia (AK Press).
-
Related articles:
Throwing Bullets at Failed Policies: US Plans For New Bases in Colombia
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1675/54/
Written by Benjamin Dangl
Thursday, 10 September 2009
ImageIt was a winter day in the Argentine city of Bariloche when 12 South American presidents gathered there on August 28. It was so cold that Hugo Chavez wore a red scarf and Evo Morales put on a sweater. The presidents arrived at the Union of South American Nations (UNASUR) meeting to discuss a US plan to establish seven new military bases in Colombia. Though officials in Colombia and the US say the bases would be aimed at combating terrorism and the drug trade, US military and air force documents point to other objectives.
Earlier his year, when Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa decided to not renew the US lease on the military base in Manta, Ecuador, the US set its sights on Colombia, a long-time US ally and one of the biggest recipients of US military aid in the world. Under the agreement the US eventually developed with Colombia, the US would have access to seven military bases for 10 years, stationing up to 1,400 US personnel and private contractors.
One US military document cited by the AP explains that the Palenquero base in Colombia – which the US plans transform with a $46 million upgrade – would be a stopping off point for the US military and air force so that "nearly half the continent can be covered by a C-17 (military transport) without refueling."
Uruguayan analyst Raul Zibechi writes in an article for the Americas Program that the US is shifting away from large, immobile bases to more a more flexible model involving smaller bases. He cites the U.S. Air Force's April 2009 report entitled "Global en Route Strategy" which "refers to the ability to utilize these installations above all for air transport, making it possible to have control from a distance and act as a dissuasive force, leaving direct intervention only for exceptionally critical situations." The cooperation of local governments is a key aspect of this plan. Zibechi writes, "This ongoing cooperation is much more important than direct military presence, as current military technology allows troops to concentrate in any given area within a matter of hours."
Considering the regional implications of the expanded US presence, the presidents at the Bariloche meeting agreed that UNASUR countries will "abstain from resorting to the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity" of other South American countries, and planned to investigate the military bases agreement further.
Yet what many of the region’s presidents already know is that increased US militarization is unlikely to curb violence in Colombia because the biggest perpetrators of violence in the country are already allies of the US, largely through the multi-billion dollar Plan Colombia.
"The largest number of killings of civilians each year in Colombia is not committed by the guerrillas," Latin American political analyst John Lindsay Poland writes in the Americas Program. "A large majority of Colombia's 4.7 million internally displaced people were forced from their homes by paramilitary violence, with more than 11 million acres of land violently stolen. The increased U.S. military presence won't contribute anything to returning those lands to their rightful owners, nor to holding the Colombian Army accountable for more than 1,700 civilian killings committed since 2002."
US soldiers in Colombia also reportedly committed 37 acts of sexual abuse from 2006 to 2007. Poland writes, "A U.S. soldier and contractor reportedly raped a 12-year-old Colombian girl inside the Tolemaida military base in 2006, dumping her outside the gates in the morning." The two rapists remain free and are back in the US without facing charges.
An increased US military presence in a failed war on drugs is also unlikely to curtail narco-trafficking, as pointed out by President Morales at the meeting in Bariloche. Morales spoke of his experiences as a coca grower and union leader facing the brunt of US militarization. "I witness this," he said, when describing repression. "So now we're narcoterrorists. When they couldn't call us communists anymore, they called us subversives, and then traffickers, and since the September 11 attacks, terrorists," Morales said. "The history of Latin America repeats itself."
Many analysts see the plans for these bases as an indication that Washington is not interested in changing its disastrous policies in the war on drugs. "This agreement is made within a framework of anti-drug policy that is overwhelmingly seen as a failure," Michael Shifter of The Inter-American Dialogue told NPR. "Is there a better way to fight drugs without just continuing the same policy that hasn't produced very much for decades?"
Morales said the root of the drug problem lies in the US, not in South America. "If UNASUR sent troops to the United States to control consumption, would they accept it? Impossible!"
The Road to Zelaya’s Return: Money, Guns and Social Movements in Honduras
http://towardfreedom.com/home/content/view/1687/54/
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Real purpose of US bases in Colombia: Eva Golinger
BREAKING NEWS: Official US Air Force Document Reveals the True
Intentions Behind the US-Colombia Military Agreement *
by Eva Golinger
http://www.chavezcode.com/2009/11/breaking-news-official-us-air-force.html
An official document from the Department of the US Air Force reveals that the military base in Palanquero, Colombia will provide the Pentagon with “…an opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America…” This information contradicts the explainations offered by Colombian President Alvaro Uribe and the US State Department regarding the military agreement signed between the two nations this past October 30th.
Both governments have publicly stated that the military agreement refers only to counternarcotics and counterterrorism operations within Colombian territory.
President Uribe has reiterated numerous times that the military agreement with the US will not affect Colombia’s neighbors, despite constant concern in the region regarding the true objetives of the agreement. But the US Air Force document, dated May 2009, confirms that the concerns of South American nations have been right on target. The document exposes that the true intentions behind the agreement are to enable the US to engage in “full spectrum military operations in a critical sub-region of our hemisphere where security and stability is under constant threat from narcotics funded terrorist insurgencies…and anti-US governments…”
The military agreement between Washington and Colombia authorizes the access and use of seven military installations in Palanquero, Malambo, Tolemaida, Larandia, Apíay, Cartagena and Málaga. Additionally, the agreement allows for “the access and use of all other installations and locations as necessary” throughout Colombia, with no restrictions. Together with the complete immunity the agreement provides to US military and civilian personnel, including private defense and security contractors, the clause authorizing the US to utilize any installation throughout the entire country - even commercial aiports, for military ends, signifies a complete renouncing of Colombian sovereignty and officially converts Colombia into a client-state of the US.
The Air Force document underlines the importance of the military base in Palanquero and justifies the $46 million requested in the 2010 budget (now approved by Congress) in order to improve the airfield, associated ramps and other installations on the base to convert it into a US Cooperative Security Location (CSL). “Establishing a Cooperative Security Location (CSL) in Palanquero best supports the COCOM’s (Command Combatant’s) Theater Posture
Strategy and demonstrates our commitment to this relationship.
Development of this CSL provides a unique opportunity for full spectrum operations in a critical sub-region of our hemisphere where security and stability is under constant threat from narcotics funded terrorist insurgencies, anti-US governments, endemic poverty and recurring natural disasters.”
It’s not difficult to imagine which governments in South America are considered by Washington to be “anti-US governments”. The constant agressive declarations and statements emitted by the State and Defense Departments and the US Congress against Venezuela and Bolivia, and even to some extent Ecuador, evidence that the ALBA nations are the ones perceived by Washington as a “constant threat”.
To classify a country as “anti-US” is to consider it an enemy of the United
States. In this context, it’s obvious that the military agreement with Colombia is a reaction to a region the US now considers full of “enemies”.
COUNTERNARCOTICS OPERATIONS ARE SECONDARY
Per the US Air Force document, “Access to Colombia will further its strategic
partnership with the United States. The strong security cooperation relationship also offers an opportunity for conducting full spectrum operations throughout South America to include mitigating the Counternarcotics capability.” This statement clearly evidences that counternarcotics operations are secondary to the real objetives of the military agreement between Colombia and Washington. Again, this clearly contrasts the constant declarations of the Uribe and Obama governments insisting that the main focus of the agreement is to combat drug trafficking and production. The Air Force document emphasizes the necessity to improve “full spectrum” military operations throughout South America – not just in Colombia – in order to combat “constant threats” from “anti-US governments” in the region.
PALANQUERO IS THE BEST OPTION FOR CONTINENTAL MOBILITY
The Air Force document explains that “Palanquero is unquestionably the best site for investing in infrastructure development within Colombia. Its central
location is within reach of…operations areas…its isolation maximizes Operational Security (OPSEC) and Force Protection and minimizes the US military profile. The intent is to leverage existing infrastructure to the
maximum extent possible, improve the US ability to respond rapidly to crisis, and assure regional access and presence at minimum cost.
Palanquero supports the mobility mission by providing access to the entire South American continent with the exception of Cape Horn…”
ESPIONAGE AND WARFARE
The document additionally confirms that the US military presence in Palanquero,
Colombia, will improve the capacity of espionage and intelligence operations, and will allow the US armed forces to increase their warfare capabilities in the region. “Development of this CSL wil further the strategic partnership forged between the US and Colombia and is in the interest of both nations…A presence will also increase our capability to conduct Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (ISR), improve global reach, support logistics requirements, improve partnerships, improve theater security cooperation and expand expeditionary warfare capability.”
The language of war included in this document evidences the true intentions
behind the military agreement between Washington and Colombia:they are preparing for war in Latin America. The past few days have been full of conflict and tension between Colombia and Venezuela. Just days ago, the Venezuelan government captured three spies from the Colombian intelligence
agency, DAS, and discovered several active destabilization and espionage operations against Cuba, Ecuador and Venezuela. The operations - Fénix, Salomón and Falcón, respectively, were revealed in documents found with the
captured DAS agents.
Approximately two weeks ago, 10 bodies were found in Táchira, a border zone with Colombia. After completing the relevant investigations, the Venezuelan government discovered that the bodies belonged to Colombian paramilitaries infiltrated inside Venezuelan territory. This dangerous paramilitary infiltration from Colombia forms part of a destabilization plan against Venezuela that seeks to create a paramilitary state inside Venezuelan territory in order to breakdown President Chávez’s government.
The military agreement between Washington and Colombia will only increase
regional tensions and violence. The information revealed in the US Air Force
document unquestionably evidences that Washington seeks to promote a state
of warfare in South America, using Colombia as its launching pad.
Before this declaration of war, the peoples of Latin America must stand
strong and unified. Latin American integration is the best defense against the
Empire’s aggression.
*The US Air Force document was submitted in May 2009 to Congress as part of
the 2010 budget justification. It is an official government document and
reaffirms the authenticity of the White Book: Global Enroute Strategy of the
US Air Mobility Command, which was denounced by President Chávez during the
UNASUR meeting in Bariloche, Argentina this past August 28th. I have placed
the original document and the non-official translation to Spanish that I did
of the relevant parts relating to Palanquero on the web page of the Center
to Alert and Defend the People “Centro de Alerta para la Defensa de los
pueblos”, a new space we are creating to garantee that strategic information
is available to those under constant threat from imperialist aggression.
++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chavez steps up Colombia war talk
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has urged his armed forces to be prepared for possible war with Colombia amid growing diplomatic and border tensions.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8349745.stm
++++++++++++++++++++
Bogotá, November 6. The representation of Lieutenant Colonel Javier Alberto Ayala- Amaya as instructor in Human Rights in the Western Hemisphere Institute of Cooperation and Security ( WHINSEC - formerly the School of the Americas), located at Fort Benning in Georgia, permitted Colombia to be decorated and recognized as a leader on the subject of training in human rights.
The Colombian military institution received this recognition for the commitment and work carried forward on the subject of Human Rights by the Colombian Army, which stands out for being the only army in the world with a command in Human Rights and with offices in this branch division, brigades and battalions.
The official was awarded the medal of Commander of the Army of the United States for his meritorious service and exceptional professionalism as an instructor in this subject. The medal was conferred upon him by the Commander of the Army of the United States, General Martin E. Dempsey.
For 15 months this high official presented the best institutional image in sharing experiences with armies from 37 countries. During this time more than one thousand students per year learned about the integral policy in Human Rights which Colombia has implemented.
In the WHINSEC the Colombian Army stood out for being the only one in the world with a command position in Human Rights and with offices on this topic in divisions, brigades and battalions.
Likewise, the rules of behaviour in combat and confrontation established by the Force reflect the experience of the troops in operational law, a situation which places the institution (the Colombian Army) as the hemispheric leader in programs of training.
Lieutenant Colonel Ayala forms part of a broad group of officials, lower ranking personnel and civilians who have been trained and have taught in Human Rights in other countries. The knowledge and academic experience acquired by these members of the [Colombian ] Army have also been placed at the service of the military institution.
Original Spanish :
http://web.presidencia.gov.co/sp/2009/noviembre/06/08062009.html
CSN cordially invites you to follow the daily human rights practices (abuses) of the Colombian Army, as they are made public in the Colombian press.
http://colombiasupport.net/2009/colombian_army_csn_report_08_09.pdf
More...
[0] comments (223 views) | link
UPDATES: PARAGUAY; MEXICO; ECUADOR; CUBA; EL SALVADOR
Saturday, November 7th 2009 - 8:30 am UTC
In spite of coup denials Paraguayan president continues with military purge
Paraguayan President Fernando Lugo continued to purge the top ranks of the military Friday, removing the armed forces’ commander. Lugo fired the commanders of the country’s army, air force and navy on Wednesday.
The armed forces commander, Rear Adm. Cibar Benitez Caceres, had been the only top official to survive Wednesday's dismissals. Lugo has given no reason for the firings, publicly denying rumors of a coup plot.
Benitez Caceres will be replaced as armed forces chief by Brig. Gen. Juan Oscar Velazquez Castillo, the president's executive order said.
Benitez Caceeres said at Thursday's swearing-in ceremony of the news commanders that other changes would be coming in the lower ranks, but denied there was any truth to talk of a coup.
Some opposition politicians said Friday that Lugo is trying to install military commanders more in tune with his political and ideological leanings. Opposition Sen. Enrique Gonzalez Quintana was quoted in the Neike.com digital newspaper as saying Lugo has an agenda similar to that of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.
Paraguay's history is filled with unstable transitions of power since it emerged in 1989 from Gen. Alfredo Stroessner's 35-year dictatorship. There were attempted coups in 1996 and 2000, and President Raul Cubas resigned amid controversy in 1999.
Friday's military shakeup is the fourth since Lugo took office. The former Catholic bishop was elected to a five-year term last year, bringing an end to six decades of one-party rule in Paraguay.
Lugo has struggled to push reforms through a majority-opposition legislature. Opposition lawmakers, who say Lugo also has been ineffective in battling the nation's crime wave, are trying to impeach him.
http://en.mercopress.com/2009/11/07/in-spite-of-coup-denials-paraguayan-president-continues-with-military-purge
++++++++++++++++++++
International Tribunal on Trade Union FreedomCondemns Mexican Presidency
By James D. Cockcroft
November 01, 2009
In Mexico City on October 28, the International Tribunal on Trade Union Freedom (October 26, 2009-May 1, 2010), concluded its first of two public sessions with a scathing preliminary report that condemned President Felipe Calderón for his violent union-busting measures since taking office after his questionable 2006 election. The Tribunal had been organized in prior months by more than 30 social and civil organizations of Mexico and other countries. It heard public testimonies by representatives of 16 trade unions under attack in Mexico's privatization race to the bottom. [...]
Read the full article: http://www.zmag.org/znet/viewArticle/23010
+++++++++++++++
ELECTRICITY BLACK OUTS IN ECUADOR due to draught
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8347954.stm
More...
[0] comments (215 views) | link
TRADE: FTAs will come up next... Help turn around the WTO
The White House has been paving the way for these FTAs, but has not been able to act on them because of a combination of public pressure and other priorities--namely the health care push and the global resource war, with its Afghanistan/Iraq/Palestine/Colombia concentrations. In fact, this last Summer, when FTAs were supposed to come to ahead, the White House backed off, admitting that it was too politically risky at the time to move forward with these. But if health care reform of some sort passes, then I think it's entirely likely a new push for the FTAs could develop.
What's more--after the polarity of the health care debate, a push for the FTAs, while causing some division among Democrats--but what's new about that?--would unite otherwised polarized leaders of the Democrats and Republicans.
The window dressing of appeasements and concessions that provide a cover of some token recognition of labor rights and environmental standards--coupled with silence over agricultural issues, could smooth over some of the voter alienation and damage in passing these FTAs.
Then, again, I could be totally wrong. I'm just a failed singer-songwriter, so what do I know? But probably worth some thought.
Certainly, we should be ready for the fight if and when it comes before us.
By the way--all for meaningful major health care reform, preferably in the form of truly socialized medicine.
More...
[0] comments (171 views) | link
COLOMBIA: "War" Declared on Student Leaders-Barranquilla, Colombia
We are very concerned for the lives of the persons named in the death threat copied below. We urge you to take action to demand protection for these student and human rights activists. This is the latest of several such threats in recent weeks. Some of the students have already been forced to end their studies, being displaced to other cities for their security. INTERNATIONAL SOLIDARITY CAN HELP SAVE LIVES! ACTION OPPORTUNITIES LISTED BELOW THIS SECTION.
The Death Threat:
OPEN LETTER
TO THE UNIVERSITY COMMUNITY
WE ARE ALL AUC
BARRANQUILLA NOV 5, 2009
Today is a very important day since we are initiating the plan of extermination against those persons who have been motivating and arousing the presence of communists, within the University, calling themselves PCC, MJB, ELN and all the clowns that yet have a presence in the University of the Atlantic.
This is not a warning; we are at the point of initiating a war in the Atlantic and WITHIN THE UNIVERSITY.
The active members of the following student organizations will be executed:
FEU/FARC-EP, ACEU/JUCO, and among them, the ringleaders:
HENRY MOLINA -LAW-FEU IN BOGOTA
FERNANDO MARTES -PHILOSOPHY-FEU IN BOGOTA
VICTORIA CAÑAS -LAW GRADUATE-FEU IN BARRANQUILLA
EDWIN GARCIA -LAW GRADUATE -FEU IN BARRANQUILLA
YULISA PEREIRA -LAW GRADUATE -FEU IN BOGOTA
CARLOS JULIO ESCOBAR -SOCIOLOGY-JUCO IN BARRANQUILLA
NEVIS NIÑO -SOCIOLOGY-JUCO IN BARRANQUILLA
CARLOS DE LA HOZ -ECONOMY-FEU IN BARRANQUILLA
JHOAN MENDOZA -ECONOMY-FEU IN BARRANQUILLA
CLAUDIA LOPEZ -PHILOSOPHY JUCO IN BARRANQUILLA
JAMES PADILLA -ENGINEERING-JUCO IN BARRANQUILLA
This is not a game, already you are individualized and arranged, this time you may not hide, meet together and make our work harder, we assure you that this year there will be no grades for any of you, no one is secure not even outside of Barranquilla and this time there is no MARIA CEDEÑO who may watch over because this one also has the Grim Reaper breathing in her ear.
This is a part of the list you all know who is missing...
To the university community we beg pardon for those innocents that could be left damaged and REMEMBER ANY INFORMATION WILL BE REWARDED.
DEATH TO THE GUERRILLOS (sic),
AUTODEFENSAS UNIDAS DE COLOMBIA
THE REARMING
CARIBBEAN COAST
TRANSLATORS NOTE: The various organizations' full titles were not spelled out, but only initials given.
The AUC refers to the AUTODEFENSES UNIDAS DE COLOMBIA (UNITED SELF-DEFENSE FORCES OF COLOMBIA), which has been the largest paramilitary organization in Colombia.
PCC - PARTIDO COMUNISTA DE COLOMBIA (COLOMBIAN COMMUNIST PARTY)
MJB - MOVIMIENTO JUVENIL BOLIVARIANA (BOLIVARIAN YOUTH MOVEMENT)
FEU - FEDERACIÓN DE ESTUDIANTES UNIVERSITARIOS (FEDERATION OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS)
ACEU - ASOCIACIÓN COLOMBIANA DE ESTUDIANTES UNIVERSITARIOS (COLOMBIAN ASSOCIATION OF UNIVERSITY STUDENTS)
JUCO - JUVENTIL COMUNISTA COLOMBIANO (COLOMBIAN COMMUNIST YOUTH)
Also listed were the names of the two largest insurgencies in Colombia--of which the students are being falsely identified as members :
FARC/EP - FUERZAS ARMADAS REVOLUCIONARIAS DE COLOMBIA/EJERCITO POPULAR (REVOLUTIONARY ARMED FORCES OF COLOMBIA/PEOPLE'S ARMY)
ELN - EJERCITO DE LIBERACIÓN NACIONAL (NATIONAL LIBERATION ARMY)
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More...
[0] comments (201 views) | link
Reflection: How To End Wars
How to End Wars
By David Swanson
Around the United States, peace groups are engaged in effective campaigns against proposed new military installations, local funding of weapons companies, and the routine destruction of the environment and of workers' health by such companies. Activists are building better media outlets, educating young people, educating old people, keeping military testing and recruiting out of schools, and discouraging the Army from building real-weapon video arcades in shopping malls. But when it comes to stopping our wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, our citizens are less clear how to go about it.
The peace movement was defunded and demobilized by the absurd belief that an election alone would make a difference, and now there is widespread desire to tell everyone that it didn't. Certainly, it didn't. We have a larger military budget, bases in more nations, and more troops and mercenaries on the ground in Afghanistan and Iraq combined now than before the election. We need to understand that this was entirely predictable and predicted. Those who expected something from an election alone need to be clear that such expectation was entirely - not just partially - misguided. Disappointment with a president needs to be replaced with acknowledgement of strategic error. The latter generates less despair and allows clearer thinking about strategy going forward.
There is still and will always be a role for journalists, bloggers, authors, and pundits to expose the abuses of any and all government officials, including the president. But the primary role of peace activists should have nothing to do with presidents, or with senators. We have virtually no ability to influence them. When you're invited to discuss these wars on a television show, by all means expose what the president is doing. But asking members of an activist group to spend their time writing or calling the White House is a waste of energy that could be better used. It should be directed at the House of Representatives.
And when we look at the House, we see that the easiest way to quickly generate a large list of cosponsors is to propose bills. This pleases our closest allies in the House and impresses funders and allies in Washington, D.C. But it is not the easiest way to use the House to actually end wars. A bill with no teeth to it instructing the Pentagon to produce a plan to exit Afghanistan someday is something that one could almost imagine passing the Senate and being signed by the president. At best that process might move public opinion a bit more in the right direction. But it would further enforce in the public's minds, and Congress's, the idea that when and where wars are fought should be determined by the president or the Pentagon.
Passing a bill barring the spending of any money on an escalation in Afghanistan shifts the discussion to one of opposing an escalation rather than demanding withdrawal. This has led many peace groups to self-censor their demands for withdrawal. And passing such a bill through the Senate and persuading the President to sign it, or overriding a veto is a beautiful fantasy, but a far, far, far more difficult undertaking than a simpler and more direct approach.
If you want to stop funding wars, or even just the escalation of wars, the easiest way is to just not fund them. This can be done in the House alone. The Senate is not needed. The president is not needed. Rather than passing a bill stating that you won't fund wars, and then dreaming about getting the Senate to pass it too, you can choose to not pass bills that fund the wars. If the House makes clear that it will not fund an escalated war, then the war cannot be escalated. If the House makes clear that it will not fund a continued war, then the war cannot be continued.
The process of signing congress members onto a bill against funding or a bill requiring an exit plan is not counterproductive. It nudges them in the right direction. It creates a discussion about the possibility of including such measures in funding bills. It identifies lists of congress members to target in lobbying for stronger commitments. But when these bills are all we ask for, then they are not compromises or middle-ground. They are harder to move forward when they are all we ask for. And moving them forward without a broader vision of how we actually end the wars doesn't get us anywhere in the end.
Our primary demand must be: publicly commit to voting no on any bill that funds these wars. If unrelated measures are included in such bills, they must still be voted down and those other measures passed separately. If your representative is worried about funding a withdrawal itself, assure them that a bill to fund purely withdrawal has our support. If they are worried about abandoning foreign nations, assure them that we support diplomacy and aid. But we need them to join the list of their colleagues who have committed to voting no on bills that fund the wars. And we need them to lobby their colleagues to join them on that list.
By moving our focus to Congress we do something else useful. We allow people to protest wars who refuse to protest a president. By identifying wars with a president, we grant all future presidents the power to make wars, and we discourage participation in citizen activism by people who fantasize about the president being their friend or who think it's not wise to protest a popular president.
Our focus on Congress should include their responsibility on Iraq as well as Afghanistan and Pakistan. Congress has now required the Pentagon to provide it with monthly reports on its progress toward fully withdrawing from Iraq by the end of 2011. When those reports are not forthcoming or do not credibly suggest progress toward that goal, congressional committees must be forced by us to subpoena Secretary of "Defense" Robert Gates. And in fact, the House Judiciary Committee must be compelled by us as soon as possible to restore the checking power of impeachment by opening an impeachment inquiry into Jay Bybee, a federal judge who, while employed by the Justice Department, signed memos purporting to legalize torture and aggressive war. At the very least, Bybee must be subpoenaed, and Congress must use the Capitol Police to enforce that subpoena rather than futilely asking the Justice Department to do it.
If Congress asserts the power to hold war criminals accountable (which, again, can be done without the Senate or the president), we will be in a far better position to deter further wars and escalations, and Congress will be in a better position to cut off funding.
In June, 32 congress members voted No on war funding. They should be thanked and rewarded. But they should, above all, be asked and pressured to make a commitment to join this list of members committed to voting No from here on out: http://afterdowningstreet.org/whipwars
The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has said that he'd like to see another $50 billion passed in another supplemental war spending bill in the next few months. This is money to fund an escalation that we are supposed to believe has not been decided upon yet. This must be stopped. Some congress members are speaking against it. Even the Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee David Obey has suggested he might oppose this. He very much needs to be encouraged by people around the nation to not put our money where his mouth isn't.
I just had the privilege of speaking at a rally in Portland, Maine, where an enthusiastic crowd of Mainers demanded the actions I'm proposing here. Their two congress members voted the right way in June, and they are working to win their public commitments to continue that practice and to lobby their colleagues to join them in that commitment.
Resources to help in this effort (and a place to report your results) in your congressional district can be found at http://afterdowningstreet.org/whipwars Here's a flyer on ending the war in Vietghanistan: PDF. Here's how to step up your activism. Here's what's needed instead of bombs and guns. Here's a way to nonviolently resist.
Here's a very useful list of top targets and multiple ways to contact them. You can help with that even if they are not your representative.
What I am proposing is not easy. It's just the easiest path we have. It will be easier, the more of us get involved, the more of us refrain from discouraging each other with our knowledge of how hard the struggle will be, and the more of us who are willing to go beyond lobbying to nonviolently disrupting, including by sitting in our congress members' offices and refusing to leave until they agree to leave Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. These wars, like all wars, are Congress's wars. The blood is on their hands and they represent us.
- David Swanson is the author of the new book "Daybreak: Undoing the Imperial Presidency and Forming a More Perfect Union" by Seven Stories Press. You can order it and find out when tour will be in your town: http://davidswanson.org/book
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
[0] comments (234 views) | link
COLOMBIA ANALYSIS: "Green Revolution" turns the color of blood and fire in Colombia
The desire of North Americans to decrease their ecological footprint has increased the demand for eco-products such as palm oil-fed bio-fuel cars, organic palm oil cosmetic products and processed foods using palm oil that corporations like Kraft and Nestle tout as a "healthier" substitute for partially-hydrogenated oils. The global north's craving for palm oil has driven Colombia to become the world's largest producer of that crop. But this "green revolution" turns the color of blood and fire in Colombia.
Much like the Spanish colonialists searched for gold using military might during the sixteenth century, the United States is searching for green fuel. Under Plan Colombia, the US has invested six billion dollars in military aid to Colombia, and according to The Nation, "Since 2003, USAID's alternative development contracts have provided nearly twenty million to oil palm agribusiness projects across the country." By the year 2020, Colombian President Alvaro Uribe hopes to turn Colombia into the world's main producer of palm oil, creating six million hectares of palm plantations to feed the green consumerism in the global north.
To make room for more plantations, Colombian authorities, in collusion with paramilitaries, have displaced hundreds of small communities and murdered their leaders. Afro-Colombian communities, in particular, have suffered from this political violence. Moreover, after the so-called demobilization of paramilitary groups in 2005, former paramilitaries received many of these palm plantations as a way to reincorporate the armed actors back into society. The Magdalena Medio region, where CPT does its primary work, is one of the principle areas designated for palm plantations. Right now, 100,000 hectares of palm are planted there. Uribe's plan will increase that amount to 250,000 hectares. At what price?
One campesino community in this region, Las Pavas, has recently experienced the devastating effects of this agri-business. On 14 July 2009, the Colombian National Police entered the community and evicted the 123 families, destroying their houses and burning their farms-thus adding their number to the four million displaced people in Colombia.
This community of campesinos has occupied and worked the land in Las Pavas since 1993. Under Colombian law, after occupying and working land for a period of five years or more, communities have the right to receive titles to their holdings. In this case, the original title-holder, an uncle of drug lord Pablo Escobar, "sold" the land to a huge palm oil plantation, as if the campesinos of Las Pavas had no legitimate claim to it. The organic palm oil company, Daabon, which supplies oil to the cosmetics company, The Body Shop, got an eviction order against the campesinos. Although the National Institute for Rural Development has not yet granted the campesinos titles, legally, they have a right to stay on their land because the land cannot be formally transferred to a third party until this issue is resolved. Yet the Daabon Company successfully urged the judge and the police to perform the illegal eviction and has since started to cut down the forest, build a road and plant palm on the farms of the community.
The Southern Bolivar Agricultural-Mining Federation, a coalition of campesinos and small miners who have organized in defense of the land and livelihood of the Southern Bolivar communities, is non-violently resisting the consumption of their land by palm oil agribusiness. Their leaders have been jailed and assassinated. Most recently, on 22 April, Federation leader Edgar Martinez was assassinated in the city of San Pablo in the Magdalena Medio. However, the Federation continues to struggle for human rights. On 20-21 August, after the government failed to show up for a scheduled meeting while the Federation waited three days, they declared a permanent assembly and a mass mobilization in conjunction with a mobilization of indigenous Colombians called "the Minga." (See 25 November 2008 CPTnet release, "COLOMBIA: Indigenous peoples join "La Minga" and march on Bogota."
Because palm oil seeds are renewable, consume carbon, and give more oil per seed than other products, some people believe palm oil can allow citizens of the global north to continue their over-consumption and avoid the ecological crisis. But environmental organizations have documented the deforestation and the destruction of peat land associated with palm oil plantations, thus putting into question palm oil's ecologically friendly aspects. Even if these plantations were not harmful to such ecosystems, however, wealthy nations need to consider whether owning multiple cars, having access to cheap, processed food, and cultivating beautiful skin are worth more than the lives and livelihoods of Colombian communities for whom palm oil has brought only death, destruction and displacement.
More...
[0] comments (223 views) | link
PERU: Government launches attack on Indigenous peoples' organization
Peru: Government launches attack on Indigenous peoples' organization
Introduction and translation by Kiraz Janicke
November 4, 2009 --The government of Peru has launched a massive attack on Indigenous peoples through a request to dissolve the Amazon Interethnic Development Association of the Peruvian Rainforest (AIDESEP), Peru's largest and most representative Indigenous organisation. AIDESEP groups numerous regional organisations, representing 65 ethnic groups and has led the struggle against the Garcia governments neoliberal decrees (which are part of the US Free Trade Agreement) aimed at opening up huge swathes of the Amazon to exploitation by transnational logging, mining and oil companies.
Since the Indigneous uprising in Bagua in which an unknown number of Indigneous people were massacred by Peruvian police on June 5, 2009, the leaders of AIDESEP have been facing political persecution, some have been arrested and its president, Alberto Pizango, has been forced to flee and seek asylum in Nicaragua.
Below is a statement below by Andean and Amazonian peoples protesting against the government's attempt to dissolve their organisation.
* * *
Pronouncement by the Andean and Amazonian peoples: For our rights and in defence of organisational autonomy
Against the request by the public prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice to order the dissolution of the national organisation of Indigenous peoples that make up the Amazon Interethnic Development Association of the Peruvian Rainforest (AIDESEP), the community organisations and Indigenous peoples of Peru, and various civil society organisations, express the following:
1. That continuing with its policy of silencing the organisations representing Indigenous peoples, the government through the public prosecutor of the Ministry of Justice has requested the dissolution of the Interethnic Association for Development of the Peruvian Jungle (AIDESEP), as notified October 15, 2009, by the 37th Criminal Court of Lima. This act corresponds to the interests of ending the representative organisations ofIindigenous peoples and communities, and at the same time aims to sharpen social discontent promoting new mobilisations and uprisings, in order to later blame others.
2. Once again the government implements its policy of double standards, because on one hand it announces the installation of spaces for dialogue with Indigenous organisations and the other seeks to dismantle the organisations that have spoken out against the unconsultative application of a series of public policies and legal measures that undermine our legitimate rights to self-determination, land, consultation and others. This shows it is putting economic interests before our rights as Indigenous peoples.
3. We denounce this practice that is not unique to the incumbent government, but habitual of the regimes in recent decades. It seeks to silence and destroy existing organisations or generate other parallel entitites using individuals or organisations that lack representation and legitimacy. This and other situations have led to a series of recommendations by international agencies that monitor compliance with treaties and conventions as in the case of CERD, CEACR-ILO, High Commissioner of United Nations and others.
Given this situation we declare:
We recognise AIDESEP in its condition as a territorial organisation representing the Indigenous Amazon people, with input and suggestions in defence of our rights as peoples during its years of existence. We also support its regional and community-based organisations in the face of this attempt at dissolution by the current government. We reaffirm that our existence as distinct peoples is not subject to the will of the state and as such our organisational autonomy and institutional force must be respected.
We reaffirm the just and legitimate defence of our rights as Indigenous peoples and communities, as are recognised by the constitution, international conventions and treaties.
We reject the discriminatory state policy, which aims to interrupt the process of dialogue between the state and the legitimately elected representatives of Amazon Indigenous peoples, which emerged after the events of Bagua. This should express and give effect to the agreements reached in the communities of the central and northern jungle.
We demand the cessation of hostilities against the national Indigenous organisation AIDESEP and its leaders. There must be an end of claims against it and the filing of complaints for acts that were not generated by the organisation but were generated by unwise government policy and the denial of the existence of Indigenous peoples by the current government.
We demand the establishment of a horizontal dialogue process in good faith and the suspending of operations that attack this process under construction and do not contribute to confidence building between the parties.
We demand that the situation of Indigenous peoples are addressed in general, and that this includes the Amazon, the Andes and the coast, with the aim of determining national policies and that the state does not encourage fragmentation in its treatment [of Indigenous peoples].
Signed in Lima, November 1, 2009.
National Confederation of Communities Affected by Mining Peru -- CONACAMI
Andean Coordinator of Indigenous Organisations --I OTC
Campesino Confederation of Peru -- CCP
National Agrarian Confederation -- CNA
Advisory Council of Indigenous Peoples of the Andean Community -- CCPICAN
Indigenous Collective
Program for Democracy and Global Transformation -- PDTG
More...
[0] comments (194 views) | link
HONDURAS: Analysis of the "Agreement"
The Nation
Honduras: Solution or Stall?
By Greg Grandin
October 30, 2009
The Honduran crisis may soon be over. Maybe. The leader of the coup government,
Roberto Micheletti, agreed to a nine-point plan to end the country's political
impasse, brokered by Thomas Shannon, the former US Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and Barack Obama's yet-to-be-confirmed ambassador to Brazil. The deal would return Manuel Zelaya, the democratically elected president deposed in a military coup four months ago, to office; in exchange, the international community will end Honduras' diplomatic isolation and recognize upcoming presidential elections, scheduled for November 29.
Hardliners in the coup government, however, see a loophole in the accords, which gives the Honduran National Congress the power to approve or reject Zelaya's return. And no sooner was the ink dry on the accord when a top Micheletti advisor, Marcia Facusse de Villeda, told Bloomberg News that
"Zelaya won't be restored." In a barefaced admission that the coup government was trying to buy time, Facusse said that"just by signing this agreement we already have the recognition of the international community for the elections." Another Micheletti aide, Arturo Corrales, saidthat since the congress is not in session, no vote on the agreement could be scheduled until "after the elections."
But such a calculated reading of the agreement will not play well with most
countries, including the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and the European Union, which have repeatedly called for restoration of Zelaya.
Brazil--whose Tegucigalpa embassy has given Zelaya shelter since his dramatic
surprise return to Honduras over a month ago--applauded Shannon's deal, yet made it clearZelaya had to be reinstated. And in Honduras, the National Party, whose candidate is expected to win next month's vote, wants this crisis to be over. Its members in Congress may join with Liberal Party deputies loyal to Zelaya to approve the deal.
The accord leaves unresolved the issue of whether the widespread human rights
violations that have taken place since the coup will be investigated and prosecuted, only vaguely rejecting an amnesty for "political crimes" and calling for the establishment of a truth commission. More than a dozen Zelaya supporters have been executed over the last four months. Security forces have illegally detainednearly 10,000 people; police and soldiers have beaten protesters and gang-raped women. And the very idea of a negotiated solution to the crisis grants legitimacy to those provoked it.
Still, if Zelaya were to be restored to the presidency, even just symbolically, to preside over the November elections and supervise a transfer of power to its winner, it would represent a significant victory for progressive forces in the hemisphere.
Here's why:
1. The attempt by Micheletti and his backers--both in and out of Honduras--to
justify the overthrow of Zelaya by claiming it was a constitutional transfer of
power will have definitively failed. If this justification was allowed to go
unchallenged, it would have set a dangerous precedent for the rest of Latin America.
2. Efforts to rally support for the coup under the banner of anti-leftism, or
anti-Chavismo--much the way anti-communism served to unite conservatives during the Cold War--will likewise have failed.
3. It will confirm the political influence--and unity--of Latin America's
progressive governments, particularly Brazil and Venezuela, which have taken the lead in demanding that the coup not stand--a position that aligned them with much of the rest of the world.
4. It will be an important push back for Republicans like South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint and Otto Reich, who tried to use the crisis to push for a more hardline US policy against the left in Latin America. It is DeMint who has put the hold on Shannon's confirmation, as well as on the confirmation of Arturo Valenzuela, Obama's pick for Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs.
5. It will hopefully help the Obama administration realize that in many Latin
American countries, there is no alternative to working with the left. In Honduras, the violence of the coup government, as well as the fact that the extended crisis smoked out its less than savory supporters, like Reich, awoke not too pleasant memories of the Cold War. Reich recently penned an essay urging Obama to replicate Ronald Reagan's successful Latin American policy, which the Iran-Contra alum believed paved the way for the fall of the Berlin Wall. Many, however, remember too well Reagan's patronage of death squads and torturers. And reports that Honduran planters were importing Colombian paramilitaries to protect their interests were not helping defenders of the coup make their case. As protests continued, it became clear to all who paid attention that it was the good guys - trade unionists, peasants, Native Americans, environmentalists, feminists, gay and lesbian activists, and progressive priests - who were demanding the return of Zelaya.
6. Zelaya's return would be a huge boost for those good guys, who are largely
responsible for the inability of the coup government to consolidate its rule.
Against all expectations, they have defied tear gas, batons, bullets, and curfews, and engaged in creative and heroic acts of resistance, growing stronger and more unified than they were before the coup four months ago. They will engage with the new government from a position of strength, while the elites who have long ruled Honduras will be fractured and chastised. The accords brokered by Shannon force Zelaya to renounce any attempt to convene a
constitutional convention, yet the National Front against the Coup - the umbrella group that has coordinated opposition to Micheletti - has made it clear that that demand is "non-negotiable" and that it would continue to push for it, no matter who is president.
It was of course fear of a constituent assembly that provoked the coup in the first place, and it is an irony probably not lost on those who executed it that a large majority of Hondurans, according to a recent poll, now think that such an assembly would be the best way to solve the country's political crisis.
The last thing Micheletti and his supporters want to see is Mel Zelaya, with his white cowboy hat and wide smile, addressing a large crowd filling the streets of Tegucigalpa celebrating his reinstallation, building momentum for fights to come.
And this is why Shannon's deal is anything but done.
More...
[0] comments (229 views) | link
HONDURAS: “Statistics and Faces of the Repression” Violations of Human Rights in the framework of the coup d’état in Honduras. Tegucigalpa, Honduras - October 22, 2009
Executive Summary of COFADEH report on Human Rights Abuses
PostDateIcon Fri, 10/30/2009 - 8:22pm | PostAuthorIcon toml
“Statistics and Faces of the Repression”
Violations of Human Rights in the framework of the coup d’état in Honduras.
Tegucigalpa, Honduras - October 22, 2009
I am a veteran human rights defender. As I prepared this second human rights report since the coup in Honduras, I have felt profound distress. Perhaps because I had begun to think that during the long process of the last decades, we had made some small advances in the area of human rights.
Perhaps it is because I look to the past in order to see the future, and to evaluate and to value the present - - that today, over 100 days since the fateful coup on June 28th, I realize that something has shaken the Committee of Families of the Detained and Disappeared of Honduras, COFADEH to the core, and nothing is the same. Immediately after the coup we knew that we had regressed 25 – 30 years, maybe more.
As the impact of the blow set in, we realized that we are now in the midst of a modern Military Coup d’état in the 21st Century.
Unfortunately, we are well versed in the effects of military dictators and we understood that what we were witnessing was not an isolated act but an entire strategy to seize and hold power for the long term; in other words, the dictatorship intends to stay in the Region.
We realized that if such an offense could be committed against the person who holds the highest office in the country, what would happen to the rest of the population. We began to prepare ourselves. The military dictatorship wasted no time. Today, just as in the past, we are the depository for tears, anguish, pain and hopelessness.
The military dictatorship that we live under today is very similar to that of the decade of the 1980s, however, there is an important difference. During the 1980s, those who repressed the people hid their faces and their names. Today, those who repress the people have names, faces and uniforms: “blue-green – olive and white.”
In our second human rights report we have focused our concerns on the actions that the X Battalion, based in Marcala - La Paz, has carried out against members of the Resistance against the Military Coup throughout the zone, including the region of Colomoncagua. Similar levels of persecution are also being suffered by people in the Department of Santa Barbara on the part of authorities of the de facto regime in this Department.
Another of our primary concerns is the strategy employed by the military dictatorship against teachers in the country which includes illegal and arbitrary retention of salaries, profiling, legal suits brought against them by the Public Ministry, persecution, illegal detentions and even assassination.
With indignation and pain we must condemn and repudiate the persecution unleashed on the youth of our country. To some we have had to say, “until we meet again in another country” in order to prevent them becoming victims of kidnapping, torture and assassination…And to other young people we have said, “goodbye, we will meet again in the next world.”
This second report documents an accelerated Deterioration of Human Rights in the context of the coup d’état:
• Between June 28th and October 10, 2009, COFADEH has registered over 4000 violations of human rights. The most grievous include 108 violations of the right to life, including 21 assassinations and violent deaths.
• The coup regime is consolidating with the goal of remaining in government beyond the defacto government. This process relies on the use of excessive force on the part of military and police, control of the media and closure of media outlets that are not allies of the regime, use of paramilitaries to intimidate, threaten and kidnap those opposed to the coup, and the emission of illegal decrees that suspend the exercise of fundamental rights.
• It is clear that a repressive apparatus is being mounted to intimidate and annihilate resistance to the coup. In the 115 days since the coup, thousands of human rights violations have been registered that reflect the evolution of state violence and the rupture of institutionality.
As of June 29th, COFADEH began to register violations of human rights directly related to peaceful demonstrations on the part of the population. This violence has taken different forms and patterns: generalized violence, violence targeting particular sectors, and selective violence targeting journalists and leaders of the resistance. In addition, judicial intimidation is being used as a tool to demobilize the opposition.
Based on proof and documentation in our possession, we affirm to the world that we are living a situation of NATIONAL EMERGENCY in Honduras. We appeal to the International Community to stay vigilant and observant in order to assume the challenge of bringing those who perpetrate crimes against humanity to justice.
Bertha Oliva de Nativi
General Coordinator, COFADEH
More...
[0] comments (213 views) | link