Fred Steeves
3rd February 2019, 13:47
With meddling being America's new favorite buzzword for the last two years, I thought this brief history of our own meddling might be of interest to some. This list only goes up to 1996, and only applies to Latin America, but I think it serves to show that we are hardly the ones to be wagging our self righteous finger at anyone.
As an aside, how much border security would the U.S. really need were it not for all of our "meddling" down there in the name of business interests, and national security?
https://www.zompist.com/latam.html
And with the current hoopla of "build that wall" and "caravans" from Honduras, the most recent U.S. meddling I could find there was 2009 under Obama. Might that have something to do with this mess?
Sadly that question, and this bitter history, will never be allowed to surface into public discourse. Just wave that flag and support the troops!
Evidence described in the article suggests that the Pentagon's main interest was in maintaining relations with a close military ally, rather than in overturning the coup. Though the battle over Honduras appeared to be fought along partisan lines, in the end it was the Obama administration's State Department that sabotaged efforts to have Zelaya restored to the presidency, as statements by former Secretary Clinton and other high-level officials admit.
Since the coup, the militarization of Honduras has increased. While human rights abuses continue to shock the public, US security assistance and military training continue unabated. Under President Trump and the coterie of military officers surrounding him, including former SOUTHCOM commander and now White House chief of staff John Kelly, US-backed militarization appears likely to deepen in Honduras and elsewhere throughout the region.
"What this reveals are behind-the-scenes aspects of an episode that profoundly damaged the US relationship with Latin America as a whole, as the US was an outlier in supporting the coup, and opposition to the coup among Latin American governments was led by Brazil," Johnston says. "In the end, the US State Department quietly allowed the military and other hard-line factions to determine policy and support the coup's success."
This story is especially relevant for the current moment, as the hard-line, military factions who prevailed in shaping the US response to the Honduran coup are now in senior positions in the Trump administration, raising troubling prospects for what the US reaction to another military coup d'etat would be under Trump.
http://cepr.net/press-center/press-releases/investigation-reveals-new-details-of-us-role-in-2009-honduras-military-coup
As an aside, how much border security would the U.S. really need were it not for all of our "meddling" down there in the name of business interests, and national security?
https://www.zompist.com/latam.html
And with the current hoopla of "build that wall" and "caravans" from Honduras, the most recent U.S. meddling I could find there was 2009 under Obama. Might that have something to do with this mess?
Sadly that question, and this bitter history, will never be allowed to surface into public discourse. Just wave that flag and support the troops!
Evidence described in the article suggests that the Pentagon's main interest was in maintaining relations with a close military ally, rather than in overturning the coup. Though the battle over Honduras appeared to be fought along partisan lines, in the end it was the Obama administration's State Department that sabotaged efforts to have Zelaya restored to the presidency, as statements by former Secretary Clinton and other high-level officials admit.
Since the coup, the militarization of Honduras has increased. While human rights abuses continue to shock the public, US security assistance and military training continue unabated. Under President Trump and the coterie of military officers surrounding him, including former SOUTHCOM commander and now White House chief of staff John Kelly, US-backed militarization appears likely to deepen in Honduras and elsewhere throughout the region.
"What this reveals are behind-the-scenes aspects of an episode that profoundly damaged the US relationship with Latin America as a whole, as the US was an outlier in supporting the coup, and opposition to the coup among Latin American governments was led by Brazil," Johnston says. "In the end, the US State Department quietly allowed the military and other hard-line factions to determine policy and support the coup's success."
This story is especially relevant for the current moment, as the hard-line, military factions who prevailed in shaping the US response to the Honduran coup are now in senior positions in the Trump administration, raising troubling prospects for what the US reaction to another military coup d'etat would be under Trump.
http://cepr.net/press-center/press-releases/investigation-reveals-new-details-of-us-role-in-2009-honduras-military-coup