Reply #8: You know, I was thinking about Zelaya and how he could have had a comfortable [View All]

[Peace Patriot]

exile in any number of countries, and could have written pamphlets against the coup from a distance, and not bothered to go back to Honduras at risk of his life and liberty. That he chose the path of Simon Bolivar--the path of serving the people, and putting himself on the line for the future of Honduras--is very, very impressive. Honduras will never be the same because of his decision to go back--whatever happens in the immediate future. Honduras will be reformed, as he wished. The people themselves will reform it, as they are doing in Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, Paraguay, Nicaragua, El Salvador and Guatemala. He has galvanized the forces of change, by not retreating. And he could well have made a different choice. It would have been very understandable if he had chosen exile.

Chavez faced a similar choice, during the 2002 coup in Venezuela. His kidnappers tried to force him to sign a letter of resignation. (In fact, RCTV, on behalf of the coup, lied to the public that he had resigned--one of the reasons the Chavez government pulled their license. By this and other deeds, they actively supported the coup.) Chavez did not sign--though his life had been threatened. He could have resigned, thinking maybe that they would spare him and let him go into exile. But he refused. He thus ripped the mask of legitimacy from them. He also managed to get the word out that he had not resigned--and this was the motivating force for tens of thousands of Venezuelans who poured into the streets and surrounded Miraflores Palace demanding his return. The news was spread by word-of-mouth--"Chavez did not resign!" It was also very important to the military who changed sides. Chavez was the legitimate president, and was asserting that point, even under threat. The military had to decide whether or not to support the Constitution and the rule of law. and Chavez's courage helped them make that decision.

This was THE turning point in the recent history of South America that has resulted in the extraordinary success of the leftist democracy movement throughout South America and into Central America. And it may be that Zelaya's similar decision--not to yield, not to give up his presidency, and to return--will be THE moment of the final solidification of that movement, making it a rock solid advance in human progress that cannot be overturned.

The military in Honduras is rather a different matter than the military in Venezuela. But the Honduran military will not be able to play its typical role in the face of a courageous president and a popular uprising. The Honduran coupsters are much more isolated than the Venezuelan coupsters were. Honduras is now surrounded by countries with leftist governments, including its three immediate neighbors in Central America and most of South America. And, unless Negroponte & cabal intend, at this moment, to start their oil war--which I cannot rule out--the Honduran coup cannot survive. The Venezuelan coup had the Bushwhacks in the White House, and no great democracy movement bursting out all around them--and still they failed. The Honduran coupsters have far less advantage. I certainly hope that the coup and its backers here have made a fatal mistake, in precipitously ousting Zelaya, in this overwhelmingly democratic context in Latin America. They've turned a moderate leftist who had little time left in office to pursue modest reform into a blazing revolutionary hero. And he has chosen to be a hero.