«By this means, I inform you that I denounce the letter of the Organization of American States in accordance with the provisions of Article 143, with immediate effectiveness»
Only this I lacked, to have to open a category for politics and international law, because the issue goes for long. I spoke to them yesterday of the possible options, and four, the election was the third both by what Insulza insinuated as or by which the State decided.
The world will have dawned with the news that Honduras denounced the letter of the Organization of American States OAS, with immediate effect. And before what this implies, we will make some reflections:
1 Why does Honduras like this
It should be remembered that the member is the State of Honduras, not its authorities, so that although the OAS does not recognize the authorities, they can act on behalf of the state and denounce the letter.
Then, the government insists that there has been no breakdown of the constitutional order, an aspect that they justify according to their legislation although after the visit of Insulza, who did not come to ask what happened but to ratify if they are willing to reinstate President Zelaya. The issue becomes complex ... very complex.
According to what the media mention, there is a certain predisposition on the part of the Secretary General, who is in the process of re-election, who is also a militant of the left and who wants to look good with the ALBA sympathizers. Reason that would make that before the threats discharged by Hugo Chávez to intervene as of place, no reaction has been listened to.
Although the interim government, for giving it a name even though internationally it has been called coup, bases its actions on the acts of Zelaya towards the Chavismo guidelines, the big blunder of taking the president to the beast to Costa Rica as if outside a package has no rational explanation and will be an act that the whole world will not forget so easily. If there were acts that weighed on this, it was to seize it, to communicate to the world ... at least that is the way most people agree; It would have been much easier to justify the next act to the world.
2. That implies denouncing the letter of the OAS
According to article 143 of the letter, a member state can denounce it by means of written communication to the General Secretariat, who will communicate to the other members. However, there remain two years from that date, time in which the letter ceases, and from that time that would be 3 of July of 2011 the country would be separated from the Organization. Although the fact of manifesting "immediate effect" lends itself to doubt whether the two years apply or not.
Behind the subject there is a brain, which I hope to know enough of the subject, if they notice, who gave the announcement was the deputy chancellor, who is a member of the government of Zelaya, in case they appear that the new chancellor is not recognized by the OAS; apparently the intention is to pass the storm of the six months that are missing for the elections called by the Supreme Electoral Tribunal, or even to advance them, to hope that Insulza will not be re-elected as General Secretary and try to return again.
Insulza also said that the OAS does not practice intervention in the states, that is, that practice of blue helmets that were to restore order by force as it was not a good experience.
3 What can we expect?
The measure is reckless, especially with international relations, because although in the case of the UN and the OAS, which are multilateral relations, these tend to be a frame of reference or condition for bilateral relations. It would imply that many countries that have cooperation agreements could decide to break or suspend the nexuses and the international credits would be blocked.
But internally there is a crisis of polarization, by supporters of Zelaya and who are against the act and call it a coup d'état. Stop this pressure is not so simple, the door of a civil war is imminent, especially, as I said last time, if there is support from the three sources to which an economically limited state can not survive for long: Support Chavismo, inherence of drug trafficking and organized crime.
4 Alternatives of optimism
I only tell you what is heard in the media, impartial to this, it shocks me to know that everything could be avoided if there were less petty actions fighting power and more agile institutions in the performance of their duty. The denunciation of the OAS letter is irreversible, for now, perhaps the non-sectarian effort to seek internal dialogue through plebiscite, lead to decisions of the population to advance elections or even lead the population to vote on support Zelaya to stop once clear if the population that supports him is greater than the one that rejects him. After the elections this November, the state must justify that the new government is born of a democratic election ... who knows what resources will be here, tomorrow I will ask the man who is under the almond tree receiving the rain in Macondo.
There is also the option that the OAS reconsiders, under the proposal of council members, suggesting revising interline sentences of the Honduran letter, such as "unilateral decision of the OAS", as well as reviewing positions that have already mentioned international figures such as Hillary Clinton who said "call him differently, but make sure you see if the coup is really a coup". If so, it would be the first time in history, and explaining it to the world will not be easy.
We have to be optimists, to whom we dedicate ourselves to work, and hope that this bitter swallow produces urgent transformations in the participation of the population, the fight against corruption, reforms against political patronage, social compensation policies, among others. If these crises do not arise, there are no changes in countries with such weak institutions in this area.
I wish the subject had never started, I miss talking about technologies.