. |
November 2009 “Dialogue” with the Coup Regime
and Its Yankee Godfathers Is a Trap
The
San José-Tegucigalpa Accord: No to the Imperialist Edict! The Civic Council of
Popular and Indigenous Organizations of Honduras (COPINH) calls the San
José-
Tegucigalpa Accord a trap. Photo: Indymedia Honduras Fight for a Workers and Peasants Government! 1.
The San José-Tegucigalpa Accord, supposedly the result of the
Guaymuras Dialogue
(after the original Spanish name for Honduras) between representatives
of
Honduran president Manuel Zelaya and the puppet “president” of the coup
regime,
Roberto Micheletti, is actually an imperialist diktat.
It came about as a result of the arrival in the Central
American country of U.S. Assistant Secretary for State for Latin
American
Affairs Thomas Shannon, and was signed under the watchful gaze of
Shannon and
the U.S. ambassador, Cuban gusano
(reactionary exile) Hugo Llorens. This
agreement does not mean the restoration of “constitutional order,” and
even
less does it represent a victory for “democracy”; rather, it is a
victory for
the blood-soaked coup plotters.
2.
Shannon is the same sinister official who met with Micheletti, General
Romeo
Vásquez y Valásquez and the rest of the conspirators
during the week before
June 28 when they were preparing their coup d’état. At that
time, speaking for
Hillary Clinton, the godmother of the putsch, he counseled the plotters
on how
to get rid of the democratically elected president by “legal” means.
Now he is
advising them to accept an empty “restoration” of Zelaya, leaving the
decision
in the hands of the legislature controlled by the National Party and
Liberal
Party (the twin parties who run the country in tandem), in exchange for
stripping
all his powers and for a guarantee that the “international community”
would
recognize the phony elections which the de facto government plans to
hold on
November 29. 3.
The mafia which seized the helm of the Honduran state, while they are
flunkies
of Yankee imperialism (many of them hold permanent residency in the
United
States), have their own interests as a semi-colonial bourgeoisie. As
they have
done over and over during the last four months, they are angling to buy
time to
prolong their dictatorship. Currently the pro-coup Congress is refusing
to
“restore the head of the Executive Branch” until it has an opinion from
the
equally pro-coup Supreme Court. They did the same thing in July over
the
“dialogue” agreed upon in San José. In response to their latest
refusal,
Shannon said that restoring Zelaya is only “a possibility,” and that
Washington
would give its backing to the fictitious elections even if the
constitutional
president is not reinstated. Zelaya pathetically asked for a
“clarification.” 4.
Zelaya’s supporters hailed the signing of the Accord as a victory.
There was
cheering in the streets of Tegucigalpa in anticipation of the return of
Zelaya,
currently confined to the Brazilian embassy. This is a major error,
although
quite consistent with their policy of centering the struggle on the
reinstatement of Zelaya. One of the spokesmen for the resistance to the
coup,
union leader Juan Barahona, resigned from the president’s team of
advisors the
week before the Accord was signed, saying he was not prepared to drop
the
demand for a constituent assembly. However, the National Front Against
the Coup
d’État (FNCGE) in its Communiqué No. 32, dated October
30, celebrates the
accord, terming it “a popular victory over the tawdry interests of the
coup-mongering
oligarchy.” 5.
Signing the San José-Tegucigalpa Accord not only meant dropping
the demand for
a constituent assembly, one of the issues that set off the coup on the
part of the
bourgeoisie, which saw this as a threat to its tight control of the
state
apparatus, which it feeds off, and of the armed forces, which guarantee
its
rule over the impoverished working masses that it mercilessly exploits.
The
text states that the signers will abstain “from calling for the
institution of
a constituent assembly, either directly or indirectly, as well as
refraining
from promoting or supporting any popular poll” aimed at “modifying the
form of
government or contravening any of the unreformable articles of our
Basic
Charter.” 6.
The signers thereby commit themselves to accepting the coup-makers’
myth that
there are articles of the Constitution that are “carved in stone,”
which cannot
be modified, an inherently anti-democratic stipulation. Moreover, the
Accord
mandates the formation of a government “of unity and national
reconciliation”
which would include ministers from the criminal de facto regime; it
adopts the
budget imposed by the coup-makers; and it requires signers to denounce
“any
sort of demonstrations opposed to the elections or their result, or
which
promote insurrection,... civil disobedience or other acts which could
produce
violent confrontations or breaking the law.” Thus Zelaya is committed
to
condemning anyone who calls for boycotting the elections that serve to
prettify
the coup regime, as well as those who base themselves on Article 3 of
the
Honduran constitution, which states: “No
one owes fealty to a usurping government or to those who assume
functions or
public positions by the force of arms.... The people have the right to
resort
to insurrection in defense of the constitutional order.” 7.
While the bulk of the resistance forces have given their support to the
San
José-Tegucigalpa Accord as a bitter necessity, some left groups
reject this
ignominious pact and speak of the “betrayal” of Zelaya. However,
Zelaya, as a
bourgeois politician, always proclaimed his desire for a “dialogue”
with the
murderers who until recently were his party colleagues. Already in his
appearance before the United Nations in early July he agreed to return
with
reduced powers and gave up the demand for a constituent assembly. The
fact is
that the leaders of the popular front resistance fed illusions in
Zelaya, with
slogans such as “Mel, our friend, the people are with you.” To claim to
fight
for a constituent assembly and at the same time declare that the
ill-fated
Accord is a victory, rather than opposing this straitjacket, is
spreading
confusion among the masses and thereby assuming joint responsibility
for a
terrible defeat. 8.
The League for the Fourth International, which from the very first day
has
called to defeat the
civilian-military coup, fighting alongside the Zelaya supporters who
resisted
it, has insisted that the workers must be mobilized on an independent,
class-struggle basis. We did not join in the deceptive popular-front
chant,
“the people united, will never be defeated,” when the experience of the
Chilean
Unidad Popular which coined this slogan shows exactly the opposite. Nor
did we
proclaim reinstatement of the bourgeois president as the goal. We
emphasized
that a revolutionary constituent assembly could only be the result of a
successful insurrection that establishes a regime based on workers and
peasants
councils. At the same time, we fight for such a workers
and peasants government to expropriate the capitalist
ruling class and extend the revolution to a Central
American federation of workers republics. In accordance with this
Bolshevik
policy, we denounce this Accord which would codify a victory of the
coup-makers. 9.
It would also formalize Honduras’ status as a semi-colony of the United
States,
with the Accord and the elections to be supervised by a Verification
Commission
headed by the Obama administration’s Secretary of Labor, Hilda Solis,
and by
Chile’s former president, Ricardo Lagos, an unconditional supporter of
the U.S.
From the outset, we warned against any appeals for U.S. intervention,
demanding
“Yankee Imperialism, Hands Off!” However, the bourgeois and reformist
supporters of Zelaya, and the ousted president himself, insistently
solicited
Washington’s support. Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez begged,
“Obama, do
something.” In the U.S., the International Action Center issued a
petition on
September 23 calling on the Obama administration to “insist that the
military
regime ... restore President Zelaya to office,” and urged calls to the
White
House and State Department to “demand an end to ... the Micheletti
fraud
government.” Such dangerous calls on the imperialists – the godfathers
of the
coup! – requesting their intervention in the name of democracy, led to
the
fatal October 30 Accord. 10.
Whether or not to participate in elections is often a tactical question
for
revolutionaries. We have always stressed that the ritual of going to
the polls
every so many years to cast a ballot with the illusion that one is
choosing
which of the competing bourgeois politicians will head the capitalist
state –
whose soldiers and police, courts, prisons and congresses constitute a
whole
apparatus to repress the exploited and oppressed – does not constitute
the rule
of “the people” (demos). If we run
candidates or give critical support to others, we do so to expose the
fraud of
bourgeois elections and in full awareness that we are fighting on enemy
territory, which is hardly neutral. If there is no candidate that
represents a
class opposition to capitalism, we may call for abstention. But in the
present
case, the rigged elections of November 29 are nothing but a farce which
cannot
express the massive resistance of the Honduran masses and will only
serve to
put a pretty face on what at bottom is a bonapartist (police/military)
dictatorship. 11.
The popular-front resistance to the coup ties the working masses to
minority
sectors of the bourgeoisie, in particular the Liberals in Resistance
(whose
red-white-red banners are quite visible in the demonstrations), the
Democratic
Unification Party (UD), sectors of the Innovation and Unity Party
(PINU), and
above all President Manuel Zelaya himself. UD is the product of a
fusion of
several groups with roots in the armed struggles of the 1980s, and in
this
respect is similar (although on a far smaller scale) to the Salvadoran
FMLN and
the Nicaraguan FSLN, former guerrilla groups that have transformed
themselves
into bourgeois electoral parties. In addition, there is a slate headed
by
Carlos H. Reyes, president of the bottling plant workers union STIBYS,
which
although formally independent has been politically allied with the
Zelaya
supporters. The alliance with these parties and candidacies serves to
limit the
actions of the working masses in the resistance to the framework of
bourgeois
politics. Trotskyists, in contrast, fight to break with the bourgeois
popular
front and to form a revolutionary workers
party. 12.
Concretely at this time it is necessary to unmask the electoral farce
of the
coup regime. The parties and electoral slates linked to the FNGCE have
adopted
an equivocal position as to their possible participation in the
elections,
limiting themselves to declarations that they will not run if the
constitutional
president is not reinstated. Given the foot-dragging policies of
Micheletti
& Co., it is possible that they will be forced to withdraw, even
under the
dictatorship’s threat of four to six years in jail for any candidates
who pull
out. In any case, even if they continue to run, revolutionaries and all
class-conscious workers should oppose this dictatorial plebiscite. To
the
extent possible, it would be appropriate to call for an active
boycott to prevent the
electoral farce; or if conditions prevent this, to cast a blank or
spoiled
ballot. 13.
Whatever is the outcome of the current frantic maneuvers over the San
José-Tegucigalpa Accord, it is urgently necessary to intensify
the struggle to
mobilize the working class. A general
strike in this country with a combative labor movement would be the
most
powerful weapon against a coup regime based on the employer class. But
this
would have to go hand in hand in hand with preparations for worker
and peasant defense guards. Internationally,
the struggle for active union support continues to be a priority,
including
calls for labor boycotts of Honduran cargos by transport workers unions. 12.
The paramount task, particularly outside Honduras, is defense of the
resistance
fighters against the deadly repression. Honduras today is under a state
of
siege, as it has been since June 29. The death squads have been
reactivated.
They have even used sports stadiums as jails, recalling the Pinochet
coup in
Chile on that fateful 11 September 1973. At least a dozen Honduran
trade-unionists
have been murdered, above all teachers; resistance leaders like Carlos
Reyes
have been injured while others have received death threats. Even before
the
coup there were assassination attempts against leaders of unions and
mass
organizations. In April 2008, Rosa Altagracia Fuentes, general
secretary of the
Honduran workers Federation (CTH), one of the three union federations
in the
country, was murdered. It is necessary to organize a class-struggle
defense of
the thousands of detainees and to provide material support to the
workers
organizations in struggle. For workers mobilization to defeat the
first coup of the Obama administration, and to head off the others
which are
already being plotted! League
for the
Fourth International
5 November 2009 To contact the Internationalist Group and the League for the Fourth International, send e-mail to: internationalistgroup@msn.com |
|