In response to an article published last week in The Nation asking Hillary Clinton if the former Secretary of State “is still proud of the hell she helped routinize in Honduras” as a result of the country’s 2009 coup, a spokesperson for the Clinton campaign told Latino USA that such characterizations and questions are “simply nonsense.”
“That charge is simply nonsense,” Director of Hispanic Media Jorge Silva wrote in an email to Latino USA. “Hillary Clinton engaged in active diplomacy that resolved a constitutional crisis and paved the way for legitimate democratic elections.”
The Nation story, written by Greg Grandin, revisited Clinton and her role in Honduras after the murder of indigenous and environmental rights leader Berta Cáceres made global headlines last week. In his piece, Grandin, who covered the 2009 coup, wrote:
In a 2015 op-ed for Al Jazeera America, Weisbrot referred to what Clinton wrote about Honduras in her memoir, Hard Choices:
In “Hard Choices,” Clinton describes her role in the aftermath of the coup that brought about this dire situation. Her firsthand account is significant both for the confession of an important truth and for a crucial false testimony.
First, the confession: Clinton admits that she used the power of her office to make sure that Zelaya would not return to office. “In the subsequent days [after the coup] I spoke with my counterparts around the hemisphere, including Secretary [Patricia] Espinosa in Mexico,” Clinton writes. “We strategized on a plan to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”
This may not come as a surprise to those who followed the post-coup drama closely. (See my commentary from 2009 on Washington’s role in helping the coup succeed here, here and here.) But the official storyline, which was dutifully accepted by most in the media, was that the Obama administration actually opposed the coup and wanted Zelaya to return to office.
A 2015 report from The Intercept published more details about the 2009 coup and reported how Clinton ally Lanny Davis was brought into back-channel discussions:
At a time when the State Department strategized over how best to keep Zelaya out of power while not explicitly endorsing the coup, Clinton suggested using longtime Clinton confidant Lanny Davis as a back-channel to Roberto Micheletti, the interim president installed after the coup.
During that period, Davis was working as a consultant to a group of Honduran businessmen who had supported the coup.
Last year, Salon also published a detailed story about the Clinton-Davis connection in Honduras. That Salon story linked to a 2009 article about Davis from journalist Roberto Lovato, who said the following to Latino USA: “Beginning with the link some of us found between coup plotters and Lanny Davis, the public record is more than clear about the definitive link between Clinton and the coup in Honduras.”
Lovato shared a 2014 video in Spanish, where Cáceres made specific reference to Clinton’s Hard Choices comments about Honduras. In an interview from Buenos Aires, Cáceres said that the 2009 policy decisions by Secretary Clinton and the United States only led to more repression, militarization, increased migration and political corruption in her country.
The U.S. and Hillary Clinton have a lot of blood on their hands for what has happened in Honduras since the 2009 coup. At the very least, all Honduran immigrants should be granted refugees status here, U.S. support for the murderous regime should end and there should be a full independetn investgation of the repression in Honduras including but not limited to the assassination of Berta Caceres.
“Supported a right-wing junta’s overthrow of the elected president” = “engaged in active diplomacy.”
Wow. Just wow.
Article & interview with the activists on the ground in Honduras: https://consortiumnews.com/2016/03/08/the-honduras-killing-field/
“Active diplomacy that resolved a constitutional crisis and paved the way for legitimate democratic elections” is something literally no one outside the Clinton camp could believe.
Clinton paints herself as champion of the downtrodden but in reality she’s part of the political-military-industrial complex, and has benefitted handsomely from such association as she’s now a multi-millionaire.
All power corrupts, and the US is just as affected by that problem as anywhere else. The worry is that the current electoral system in the US means that the most likely candidates for President have already been corrupted. A far cry from government by the people I fear?
The Clinton duo is the most successful because their supporters believe in the right wing conspiracy and they can do no wrong no matter how wrong – the conspiracy is the 2 party system and the appearance that they agree on nothing. They agree on a lot – it just doesnt make the news for some reason.
https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/statistics
Publicly opposed, but privately supported. https://twitter.com/JeanetteJing/status/679885942979604480
The so called “article” above is a complete distortion of the facts. Zelaya wanted to perpetuate himself in power, a-la-Hugo-Chavez/FidelCastro, and have Honduras join the anti-America ALBA coalition. The peace-loving people of Honduras were terrified at the prospect because they did not want to end up like Venezuela. Zelaya’s own party took him out of the country before he conducted an illegal vote that would enable him to remain in power indefinitely. Millons of Hondurans took to the streets to peacefully demonstrate in support of this and against bringing Zelaya back. It took a while for the Obama administration to come around to understand this because they initially joined the chorus of ALBA countries asking to “restore Zelaya.” Once they understood the situation, they came around and supported new elections. Hillary Clinton happened to be the Secretary of State during that time and did her job helping restore constitutional order and like the majority of the world, support new and free elections. People voted massively and elected a new president replacing power-abuser Zelaya. If Berta Caceres was pro-Zelaya, that was her personal political preference and she had every right to protest. Blaming Hillary Clinton for Berta’s fate many years later is totally ludicrous. Berta’s death has nothing to do with the Honduran crisis of 2009. She was killed recently as a righteus fighter for the indigenous people, protesting and sabotaging the construction of a local dam. She provoked the anger of the local government since her activities were successful in interfering with the construction project. She got many death threats and eventually was assassinated. They found the killer. It was linked to the construction project. None of this has anything to do with the United States, Obama or Hillary Clinton. The above writing is irresponsible. For reference, among the many papers, see article published in Honduras’ prominent newspaper, La Prensa, where Berta’s own daughter points to those responsible for her mother’s death. Linking the USA gov’t to this is preposterous, and those who perpetuate this lie should be held liable. http://www.laprensa.hn/honduras/936287-410/hija-de-berta-c%C3%A1ceres-ella-era-una-luchadora-firme — During the Honduras coupe in 2009, I was actively involved in tweeting against the misinformation war and lies spread by the Hugo Chavez accolytes. As someone born and raised part of my life in Latin America, I have first hand comprehension of local politics. Berta’s death has nothing to do with what happened in Honduras in the summer of 2009, and everything to do with her recent activities against the construction project of the local dam. Pls read it & research it.
We want this role of Secretary Clinton widely publicized, don’t we. Everyone should know. And to remind voters of the US involvement in Venezuela, as well.
Thank you, Latino USA! Great reporting!
Its a shame that the sheep in the u.s. votes for her. Its hard for me to even talk to people in my own country, especially family. a vote for hillary is a vote for idiocy. I was born in america but my family is from belize….i even have honduran relatives…..and they vote for her. Bernie or bust….. Then obama and hillary turn central americans around at the border….while hillary’s chronies are implicated in the panama papers. smh