Why is it that the world has rallied behind Zelaya?
Because he was the democratically elected leader and technically what happened could be construed as a military coup by those people around the world, by world "leaders" mind you who probably couldn't even find Honduras on a map, let alone tell you anything about it's history.
Media outlets the world over keep using rhetoric to make the event sound like a military coup. Here's a question though: Doesn't the military need to take over and keep power for it to really be a military coup? This seems more like a method of maintaining constitutional integrity and removing from power and ineffective and unloved leader.
Micheletti isn't a new dictator. He just happened to be the next in line, and has thus far found approval from every branch of government and the military. There is also an understanding that he will not stand for election come January. He doesn't sound like a military dictator in the sense of past favorites like Gaddafi or Pinochet.
Then there is the popular notion that the overthrow was committed illegally. This seems difficult to prove for some. The Supreme Court of Honduras issued an order for the military to remove Zelaya from office. The National Congress duly swore in Micheletti after Zelaya was removed to Costa Rica (with no physical harm coming to the man.) So, we have the Supreme Court issuing an order to remove a dangerous leader from power... and somehow this is illegal?
It's not like they removed Zelaya because he was a populist and was attempting to turn the country into a dictatorship. He wasn't even popular with an estimated 30% approval rating. He was however attempting to thwart legal channels. A popular referendum is no way to change a constitution. There are too many things that can go wrong with them, for example- fraud, ignorance of the electorate, fraud and of course the old time favorite for democracies- fraud.
Now, we have an argument from some that is sound. They say that Zelaya should have been tried in court instead of being forcibly removed from office. That sounds great on the surface, but with elections coming up in January the remainder of his term would have been bogged down in legal battles. With the forcible removal, the country can continue not wasting a lot of congressional time trying to wrap their minds around the legality of Zelaya's proposal.
It was a bad idea to try and change the constitution. It was a bad idea to forcibly remove Zelaya from power. It would be a terrible idea to allow him back as president. However, the EU and President Obama are trying to get him put back into power. They are ignoring the mood of the Honduran people- most of whom say that while it was probably wrong to remove Zelaya, bringing him back would cause turmoil and it shouldn't happen.
On the sidelines we also have Hugo Chavez. He is rooting for the return of his pal Zelaya. There is even an underlying threat of military intervention. How would Obama react to that? Mr Chavez has already denounced the weak response by the US. That's a leader I can get behind. With one face he is saying the US needs to leave Latin America alone, with the other face he denounces them for not doing more. Ah Chavez, you make me glad I live in America.
But, with the help of Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, it seems that there might be an end in sight. Arias is an amazing leader and I truly hope that a good biography of him comes out in the near future, in English mind you so we can issue it to students and tell them, "This guy is the kind of guy we should respect." He managed a difficult situation but it seems Zelaya will be allowed back into Honduras, but taken directly to the courts. So, I guess we won't avoid the disgusting legal battles after all. We will avoid Mr Chavez doing anything stupid militarily though. I hope.
Micheletti also removed the de facto Foreign Minister after he called Obama a "negrito." This is a derogatory term translated roughly as "little black man." In case we couldn't figure that out.
So, the changes that took place will stand, but Zelaya gets to be put on trial. He still won't be president, Micheletti will retain that position. But now Zelaya has the opportunity to be imprisoned. I would much prefer that than to having the world as my oyster.
Honduras is still struggling to overcome a crippling drug-gang epidemic and I think the populace will show that they want a strong leader in office the next go-round. So, keep your eyes on Honduras and look for the elections in January, because until then its just going to be one ridiculous legal accusation after another.
Peace.
Showing posts with label international news. Show all posts
Showing posts with label international news. Show all posts
Saturday, July 11, 2009
Tuesday, April 28, 2009
Albania Applies to EU
Albanian Prime Minister Sali Berisha officially submitted the country’s application for EU candidacy status during a visit in Prague to the rotating Czech presidency of the European Union.
This is a big step for this small Balkan country. They still have much to do in the way of reforms in order to bring themselves in line with the EU's standards. Most of the reforms in need of change fall under the categories of justice, freedom and security. These are pretty important categories, but they are also broad and subjective. How do you measure freedom? I'm sure the EU has a very scientific method of devising a citizenry's freedom, but...
Justice is a little easier to define, but it is still a rather vague category. For example, in the US, justice in one state/region can be defined differently in another state/region. Gay marriage in Iowa? Legally approved, so here it's considered just that same sex couples can marry. But in New York? Not so much. Justice varies quite a bit within each region due to different feelings of what constitutes it. It's very subjective, but you can measure "justice" by legal standards, which I'm sure the EU has another awesome scientific/statistical method to devise this.
Security is a tough one. Especially for the region. After all, one would hardly consider Greece "secure" with all of the riots and bombings, but they are a prominent member of the EU. How can you reconcile this? Albania is a relatively secure nation for the region. They are also luckier than neighboring Macedonia, as Greece isn't debating their legal name.
The bid to join the EU comes on the heels of Albania's admittance into NATO as full member on April 1st. Proof that they are making strides in their international relations, and their desire to be accepted by the West.
This is a big step for this small Balkan country. They still have much to do in the way of reforms in order to bring themselves in line with the EU's standards. Most of the reforms in need of change fall under the categories of justice, freedom and security. These are pretty important categories, but they are also broad and subjective. How do you measure freedom? I'm sure the EU has a very scientific method of devising a citizenry's freedom, but...
Justice is a little easier to define, but it is still a rather vague category. For example, in the US, justice in one state/region can be defined differently in another state/region. Gay marriage in Iowa? Legally approved, so here it's considered just that same sex couples can marry. But in New York? Not so much. Justice varies quite a bit within each region due to different feelings of what constitutes it. It's very subjective, but you can measure "justice" by legal standards, which I'm sure the EU has another awesome scientific/statistical method to devise this.
Security is a tough one. Especially for the region. After all, one would hardly consider Greece "secure" with all of the riots and bombings, but they are a prominent member of the EU. How can you reconcile this? Albania is a relatively secure nation for the region. They are also luckier than neighboring Macedonia, as Greece isn't debating their legal name.
The bid to join the EU comes on the heels of Albania's admittance into NATO as full member on April 1st. Proof that they are making strides in their international relations, and their desire to be accepted by the West.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Milosevic-Era Serb Intelligence Chief Worked with CIA
Balkan Insight Article
LA Times article by Greg Miller
A brief synapsis of this story could go like this: Stanisic worked with the CIA in order to bring a quicker end to the troubled Balkan region during Milosevic's reign. He claims to have never taken money from the CIA. The reason all of this came up? The CIA is attempting to reduce his sentence at the Hague. They submitted a dossier that shows what "help" he was, and a list of all the "good" things he did. Never mind the death squads he established, he was helping the CIA. He is currently back in Belgrade for health reasons, strange how that works.
A brief excerpt from the LAT:
"For eight years, Stanisic was the CIA's main man in Belgrade. During secret meetings in boats and safe houses along the Sava River, he shared details on the inner workings of the Milosevic regime. He provided information on the locations of NATO hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for grave sites and helped the agency set up a network of secret bases in Bosnia."
So the question is this I guess: Did he aide the CIA and NATO enough to warrant regard in his case? Or, will this be passed over?
If it is passed over and ignored by the Tribunal, what will that mean for future CIA operations? Will the CIA lose possible contacts in the future? What would have happened in Yugoslavia had Stanisic not been a crucial element in the CIAs plans?
How will the outcome of this case affect our sources in Afghanistan and other regions where intelligence will be crucial to victory?
I leave you with those questions to ponder. Especially considering the weak economic state of most of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, we need all the stability and intelligence we can get if something goes amiss. Like, if Serbia gets pissy enough to attack Kosovo, then Albania rides to the rescue or something like that.
Thanks for listening to the rant, and I hope you enjoyed the other articles more than you enjoyed this one.
Peace.
LA Times article by Greg Miller
A brief synapsis of this story could go like this: Stanisic worked with the CIA in order to bring a quicker end to the troubled Balkan region during Milosevic's reign. He claims to have never taken money from the CIA. The reason all of this came up? The CIA is attempting to reduce his sentence at the Hague. They submitted a dossier that shows what "help" he was, and a list of all the "good" things he did. Never mind the death squads he established, he was helping the CIA. He is currently back in Belgrade for health reasons, strange how that works.
A brief excerpt from the LAT:
"For eight years, Stanisic was the CIA's main man in Belgrade. During secret meetings in boats and safe houses along the Sava River, he shared details on the inner workings of the Milosevic regime. He provided information on the locations of NATO hostages, aided CIA operatives in their search for grave sites and helped the agency set up a network of secret bases in Bosnia."
So the question is this I guess: Did he aide the CIA and NATO enough to warrant regard in his case? Or, will this be passed over?
If it is passed over and ignored by the Tribunal, what will that mean for future CIA operations? Will the CIA lose possible contacts in the future? What would have happened in Yugoslavia had Stanisic not been a crucial element in the CIAs plans?
How will the outcome of this case affect our sources in Afghanistan and other regions where intelligence will be crucial to victory?
I leave you with those questions to ponder. Especially considering the weak economic state of most of Eastern and Southeastern Europe, we need all the stability and intelligence we can get if something goes amiss. Like, if Serbia gets pissy enough to attack Kosovo, then Albania rides to the rescue or something like that.
Thanks for listening to the rant, and I hope you enjoyed the other articles more than you enjoyed this one.
Peace.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
World Bank still Screwing!
BalkanInsight Article
Brief summary of the article.
The World Bank finally admitted that a project meant to safeguard Albania's coastal zones was used to selectively demolish houses in Jale, Albania. It's going to be launching an investigation into the handling of the project. An earlier investigation by the International Development Organization showed that it seemed likely that the project was being abused to develop the land into resorts. This all took place back in April 2007, and since then several families have had to struggle with displacement and homelessness.
Brief summary of my reaction to World Bank's reaction.
Um... how did this not a bigger splash? Can we get any decent coverage of events like this in the states? Not that it really matters because homelessness is becoming pretty trendy here as well. But this seems like something that should have been noticed as it was happening (back in April 2007) and at least a minor uproar heard by someone.
If VP Biden plans to make an impact in the Balkans, the first step might be to prevent the World Bank from completely screwing these people to set up resorts for rich snobs to come and enjoy the beautiful beaches.
But hey, we have Hillary Clinton as Sec of State, and we all know how much the Balkans looooove her! That whole campaign lie about bullets flying past her head, that didn't ruffle any feathers...no...
Oh right, the World Bank's statement issued on the whole thing- TA-FREAKING-DA
My reaction to that? Mostly swearing.
In it, the President of the Bank, Robert Zoellick, himself states that the handling of the situation was "appalling." You'd think the president of an organization that powerful would be able to stop this kind of crap from happening right? Then I get more ranty, because I want to know who these Presidents and CEOs and COOs are! How do such incompetent people get into places of such power. It's like giving the keys to a Bugatti to a five year old and turning them loose on the freakin' Autobahn!!!
I digress.
Peace.
Brief summary of the article.
The World Bank finally admitted that a project meant to safeguard Albania's coastal zones was used to selectively demolish houses in Jale, Albania. It's going to be launching an investigation into the handling of the project. An earlier investigation by the International Development Organization showed that it seemed likely that the project was being abused to develop the land into resorts. This all took place back in April 2007, and since then several families have had to struggle with displacement and homelessness.
Brief summary of my reaction to World Bank's reaction.
Um... how did this not a bigger splash? Can we get any decent coverage of events like this in the states? Not that it really matters because homelessness is becoming pretty trendy here as well. But this seems like something that should have been noticed as it was happening (back in April 2007) and at least a minor uproar heard by someone.
If VP Biden plans to make an impact in the Balkans, the first step might be to prevent the World Bank from completely screwing these people to set up resorts for rich snobs to come and enjoy the beautiful beaches.
But hey, we have Hillary Clinton as Sec of State, and we all know how much the Balkans looooove her! That whole campaign lie about bullets flying past her head, that didn't ruffle any feathers...no...
Oh right, the World Bank's statement issued on the whole thing- TA-FREAKING-DA
My reaction to that? Mostly swearing.
In it, the President of the Bank, Robert Zoellick, himself states that the handling of the situation was "appalling." You'd think the president of an organization that powerful would be able to stop this kind of crap from happening right? Then I get more ranty, because I want to know who these Presidents and CEOs and COOs are! How do such incompetent people get into places of such power. It's like giving the keys to a Bugatti to a five year old and turning them loose on the freakin' Autobahn!!!
I digress.
Peace.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
