Jul 6, 2009

For U.S. and OAS, New Challenges to Latin American Democracy

By Mary Beth Sheridan
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 6, 2009

The Obama administration has signaled its support for democracy in Latin America by condemning the coup in Honduras, reducing military cooperation and joining with other countries in the hemisphere yesterday in a rare suspension of a nation from the Organization of American States.

But bayonet-wielding soldiers are not the biggest threat to democracy in the region, where more than a dozen presidents have been removed prematurely since 1990. In recent years, a crop of elected, authoritarian-minded leaders has packed courts with supporters, held dubious elections and curtailed press freedoms. Legislatures have also pushed the boundaries of democratic order, giving legal cover to "civilian coups" in which protest groups have forced the ouster of presidents.

"The threats against democracy in Latin America, and I don't in any way minimize what's happened in Honduras . . . are not those coming from military coups, but rather from governments which are ignoring checks and balances, overriding other elements of government," said Jeffrey Davidow, a retired U.S. ambassador who served as President Obama's special adviser for the recent Summit of the Americas.

But it has been difficult for the U.S. government and regional bodies to respond to constitutional crises that fall short of a coup. Although the OAS has launched a determined effort to reinstate Manuel Zelaya as Honduran president, it has reacted more mildly to other irregular changes of power and to abuses by presidents and congresses.

Zelaya set out in a plane for Honduras yesterday, ignoring warnings from U.S. diplomats and representatives of many Latin American countries that his arrival could provoke a clash. The Honduran government declared it would not let him land, and his plane instead went on Nicaragua. Zelaya is likely to return to Washington soon to discuss further efforts to end the standoff, U.S. officials said.

The Honduran crisis began as a clash among institutions. Zelaya defied his country's Supreme Court by proceeding with a non-binding poll on writing a new constitution that many believed would scrap term limits, allowing him to seek a second term next year.

The coup that removed him brought back ugly memories of the 1960s and 1970s, when Latin American generals seized power and ruthlessly repressed opponents. But events in Honduras reflected how that old model has changed: The military quickly recognized a new civilian president sworn in by the country's Congress. Honduran lawmakers overwhelmingly voted June 28 to remove Zelaya after he was bundled onto a plane to Costa Rica.

Jennifer McCoy, head of the Americas Program at the Carter Center, said the international community has rarely insisted on the reinstatement of a toppled president in Latin America in recent years, with the United States and other countries generally calling for new elections or other constitutional mechanisms.

This time, though, the sight of soldiers hauling off a pajama-clad president was too much. The Obama administration joined the chorus of condemnation, despite its frustrations with Zelaya, who belongs to a group of vociferously anti-American leaders allied with Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez.

The strong reaction to the coup might "put to rest the temptation to resort to the military, once and for all," McCoy said. "But we're now in a different context of democratic frameworks in Latin America. It doesn't mean a crisis won't arise. It's just the nature of the crises are different. And we haven't figured out how to deal with them."

The Obama administration's reaction reflects lessons learned in a 2002 coup against Chávez. The Bush administration was widely seen as tacitly welcoming that maneuver. But the coup collapsed within two days, and U.S. proclamations of support for democracy in the hemisphere suddenly rang hollow.

"We were on the wrong side. We paid for it in a host of ways, both bilaterally, in the region, but also in the OAS," said Peter Romero, a former assistant secretary of state in charge of Latin America.

Obama's declaration last week that the Honduran coup was "illegal" and a "terrible precedent" won him plaudits in a region where the U.S. government has been losing influence. Obama has been courting Latin America and the Caribbean, pledging an "equal partnership" with them at the hemispheric summit in April, instead of the United States playing its traditionally dominant role.

The U.S. government response to the Honduras crisis has been nuanced, however. It has not withdrawn its ambassador, and the administration did not grant Zelaya a White House meeting during his visits to Washington last week.

In a boost for U.S. policy, the OAS handled the crisis by turning to the Inter-American Democratic Charter it adopted in 2001. The charter commits countries to elections, press freedoms and human rights, but it has often been ignored. U.S. diplomats fought an uphill battle last month in an OAS assembly to have the document shape the decision on whether to readmit Cuba after a 47-year ban.

With the Honduran crisis, the OAS for the first time invoked a part of the charter that can suspend a country for an interruption of democratic order.

"This is a dramatic move by the OAS. It underscores its commitment to democracy," said a senior U.S. official who took part in the marathon OAS sessions last week.

Some critics question why the OAS did not do more in recent months when Zelaya plunged ahead with an illegal referendum, even firing the military chief for refusing to order soldiers to hand out ballots.

"There doesn't seem to be any political will to confront the caudillismo that is re-emerging in the hemisphere," said Roger Noriega, a senior policymaker on Latin America under the Bush administration, using the Spanish term for strongman tendencies. The Bush administration sought to give the OAS a bigger role in monitoring democratic practices, but member countries rejected it, concerned about interference in their internal affairs.

The region's strong reaction to the Honduran coup contrasts with its limited response to the situation in Venezuela. Over the past decade, Chávez has taken control of the courts, the armed forces and all oversight agencies; curtailed anti-government media; and launched criminal investigations of opposition politicians.

Ecuador has gone through a string of constitutional standoffs, with three presidents ousted between 1996 and 2006 by a combination of public protests and dissident soldiers and lawmakers. Nicaragua was stuck in political gridlock for months after local elections in 2008 that were considered fraudulent by the opposition and were criticized by international monitors.

"This is what we're facing in Latin America today -- as their democracies mature, we're seeing these conflicts between institutions of government," McCoy said. "We need to deal with that before they turn into these full-blown crises. We still have not learned to do that successfully."

No comments:

Post a Comment