Paradox and Hypocrisy
Published in La Prensa
(Honduras ) on 12 August 2009
by (link to original)
(Honduras ) on 12 August 2009
by (link to original)
Translated from
by Ashley Bell .
Edited by Alex Brewer.
Paradox and hypocrisy: this was the response the United States President Barack Obama gave to Manuel Zelaya in a press conference in Mexico during the summit of North American countries regarding his demand for the presidency. Also in the Aztec country last week, Zelaya signaled that it was enough for the White House to press a button and “in five minutes” the Honduras government would be done. So simplistic and contradictory was the president’s view that even if he had the north, he lost.
“The same critics who say that the United States didn’t intervene enough in Honduras are the same people who say that we are always intervening and that the Yankees need to leave Latin America,” reminded Obama. This was directed at those with short memories or “mental lapses,” and those who often make claims against the “empire” in their speeches.
“If these critics think that it is appropriate for us to suddenly act in a way which they themselves in other contexts would consider inappropriate, I think that then this means that maybe there is hypocrisy…and certainly this is not going to direct the policies of my administration.”
Try as they might, no one was able to bring Obama to a call to arms. He consistently reiterated that dialogue and negotiations are the ways to bring the parties nearer to a lasting solution with full participation and inclusion of all sectors of Honduras.
The president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, who recently met with Zelaya, referred to the pressure from the few who are pushing for unilateral action, who, until yesterday, were on the other side of the discussion.
“I agree with the paradox that President Obama mentioned that those who most rejected and argued against the North American intervention in the region are those who are calling for the U.S. to intervene, even though in this case it is legitimate.”
The Aztec president capped off his speech with something characteristically Mexican and nationalistic that is sure to irritate those who hold the solutions for others’ problems: “I am not of the opinion that the United States is built as the grand judge and the final resolver of problems through their intervention in the affairs of our countries.”
At the end of his declarations he expressed that “in any case we could constitute a group of countries friendly to Honduras that helps in the mediation efforts of Oscar Arias much like in the Organization of American States.”
Positions have clarified ever since the deadlines for compliance without intervention have passed. Things are looking up. The governments of the hemisphere are recognizing that the political crisis of Honduras was not limited to the expatriation of one person. Non-intervention, as opposed to the interference of “hypocrites,” is gaining ground.
“The same critics who say that the United States didn’t intervene enough in Honduras are the same people who say that we are always intervening and that the Yankees need to leave Latin America,” reminded Obama. This was directed at those with short memories or “mental lapses,” and those who often make claims against the “empire” in their speeches.
“If these critics think that it is appropriate for us to suddenly act in a way which they themselves in other contexts would consider inappropriate, I think that then this means that maybe there is hypocrisy…and certainly this is not going to direct the policies of my administration.”
Try as they might, no one was able to bring Obama to a call to arms. He consistently reiterated that dialogue and negotiations are the ways to bring the parties nearer to a lasting solution with full participation and inclusion of all sectors of Honduras.
The president of Mexico, Felipe Calderon, who recently met with Zelaya, referred to the pressure from the few who are pushing for unilateral action, who, until yesterday, were on the other side of the discussion.
“I agree with the paradox that President Obama mentioned that those who most rejected and argued against the North American intervention in the region are those who are calling for the U.S. to intervene, even though in this case it is legitimate.”
The Aztec president capped off his speech with something characteristically Mexican and nationalistic that is sure to irritate those who hold the solutions for others’ problems: “I am not of the opinion that the United States is built as the grand judge and the final resolver of problems through their intervention in the affairs of our countries.”
At the end of his declarations he expressed that “in any case we could constitute a group of countries friendly to Honduras that helps in the mediation efforts of Oscar Arias much like in the Organization of American States.”
Positions have clarified ever since the deadlines for compliance without intervention have passed. Things are looking up. The governments of the hemisphere are recognizing that the political crisis of Honduras was not limited to the expatriation of one person. Non-intervention, as opposed to the interference of “hypocrites,” is gaining ground.
Previous article![]( "The Limitations of the Obama Method")
Next article![]( "Don Hewitt: Television Director Who Pioneered 60 Minutes")
