El Riesgo de Ser Defensora de Derchos Humanos en Honduras

por Keith Roberts

Durante una visita reciente de una delegación a Honduras, nos encontramos con una joven activista de 27 años. Es una feminista y socióloga. Cada mañana, después de vestirse, toma un selfie con su celular y lo envía a su padre, para que él sepa lo que ella viste. Por qué hacer eso? Porque ella teme por su vida, y supone que al acabarse el día, es probable que no esté viva y quizás su cuerpo sea mutilado y por lo tanto irreconocible. Por ello, su papá tiene que saber lo que llevaba puesto ese día, tanto su ropa como su joyería. En su trabajo, a menudo se encuentra denunciando a la policía por esconder información sobre crímenes y actos de violencia cometidos por militares hondureños y estadounidenses contra las mujeres. La violencia en Honduras afecta a todos, pero son las mujeres especialmente las que sufren y son mas vulnerables a la violencia sexual y a la violencia doméstica.

La militarización ha propiciado que los hombres anden con armas pequeñas, y las utilicen con frecuencia para cometer violencia contra la mujer, incluyendo violaciones. Las mujeres que denuncian violaciones por militares no obtienen justicia; hay una tasa de impunidad del 97%. Sólo el tres por ciento de estos delitos cometidos contra las mujeres llega a un proceso. Si uno reporta un crimen, con frecuencia termina con un homicidio - o a la mujer que lo reportó, o algún miembro de la familia.

La militarización de Honduras - financiada en gran parte por EE.UU. - contribuye a la violencia contra las mujeres. Cuando se militariza un país, la joven socióloga nos dijo, la tasa de violaciones aumenta dramáticamente. ¿Realmente queremos que nuestros impuestos apoyen este fenómeno, para que las corporaciones estadounidenses obtengan mas ganancias?

aprendiendo sobre la actualidad hondureña durante la delegación

Los niños de la Doctrina Monroe: las raíces militarizadas de la calamidad fronteriza de EE.UU.

por Arturo J. Viscarra y Michael Prentice

- No se puede resolver la crisis de la frontera EE.UU.-México a menos que EE.UU. acepte su papel en la creación de las condiciones terribles de las que l@s refugiad@s están huyendo.

"[E]n el hemisferio occidental la adhesión de EEUU a la Doctrina Monroe puede obligarlos ... al ejercicio de un poder de la policía internacional". -Theodore Roosevelt, 1904.

photo credit: Matthew Cole/Shutterstock.com

Es imposible entender las causas fundamentales de la ola actual de centroamerican@s que llegan a EE.UU., y encontrar la respuesta adecuada de dicho país, sin reconocer la relación histórica entre EE.UU. y América Central. Por desgracia, el debate en el Congreso y en los medios de comunicación convencionales no han considerado un cambio en su política exterior, sino se han centrado en la cuestión de que si EE.UU. tenga o no tenga nuevas obligaciones en virtud del derecho internacional humanitario o el deber moral de tratar a l@s niñ@s indocumentados con respeto. El Vicepresidente Biden se refirió a ell@s recientemente como "nuestr@s niñ@s," enfatizando la importancia del debido proceso en cuanto a sus solicitudes de asilo, pero al mismo tiempo, él propuso una repetición del fallido "Plan Colombia" en Centroamérica. Antes de apresurarse a más militarización dentro del marco de la Guerra Contra las Drogas, EE.UU. tiene que asumir su parte de la responsabilidad en haber creado las condiciones políticas, sociales y económicas actuales de las que l@s refugiad@s están huyendo.

La Doctrina Monroe de 1823, que declaró a EE.UU. como el único poder en el Hemisferio Occidental, allanó el camino para el control estadounidense en Centroamérica, tanto histórico como actual, a través de las intervenciones militares y por financiar, armar y entrenar las élites locales pro-EE.UU. y sus fuerzas armadas. En las décadas siguientes, muchas repúblicas de América Central y el Caribe se redujeron a "protectorados o estados clientes de facto" de EE.UU. según el historiador John Coatsworth. Durante las Guerras Bananeras, el ejército estadounidense intervino en Honduras siete veces en doce años. El golpe de estado guatemalteco, orquestado por la CIA en el 1954, provocó una guerra civil que duró hasta el 1996. En la década de los 80, El Salvador, Honduras y Guatemala fueron inundados con ayuda y asesores militares, lo que resultó en una matanza masiva, igual que una migración masiva a EE.UU. La "república bananera” de Honduras se convirtió en una plataforma para las fuerzas armadas entrenadas por EE.UU. en su lucha contra los izquierdistas en los tres países que lo bordean, ganándose el apodo "USS Honduras.”

La Escuela de las Américas (SOA), establecida en 1946, encarna la política tradicional de EE.UU. hacia Centroamérica: la aplicación de soluciones militares a los problemas sociales y económicos. Los egresados de la SOA incluyen a los más notorios violadores de derechos humanos de América Central: los miembros del Batallón 316 en Honduras; los asesinos del arzobispo Oscar Romero, de cuatro religiosas estadounidenses y de más de 900 civiles en El Salvador; y los presidentes de Guatemala conectados a las campañas militares genocidas. A pesar de las afirmaciones del Pentágono sobre un cambio y más transparencia, se han negado a publicar los nombres de los egresados de la SOA durante los últimos 10 años. Tratese de la Guerra Fría o la Guerra Contra las Drogas, la SOA continúa permitiendo que los aliados de EE.UU. puedan cometer violaciones de los derechos humanos en nombre de la democracia.

El 28 de junio del 2015 se cumplio el sexto aniversario del golpe de estado militar (dirigido por graduados de la SOA) que derrocó al presidente hondureño Manuel Zelaya, un líder democráticamente elegido. Miles de opositores al golpe han sido amenazad@s, golpead@s, torturad@s, desaparecid@s o asesinad@s. Mientras tanto, EE.UU. trabajaba diligentemente para garantizar que el régimen golpista se mantuviera en el poder, y rápidamente reconoció los resultados de las dos elecciones contaminadas que pusieron en el poder a Porfirio Lobo y a Juan Orlando Hernández. Las fuerzas de seguridad hondureñas pos-golpe han recibido más ayuda y entrenamiento militar de EE.UU., a pesar de su historial bien conocido de violaciones a los derechos humanos y a la infiltración por los cárteles que supuestamente combaten. Además, el Pentágono ha construido al menos tres nuevas instalaciones militares de EE.UU. en Honduras desde el golpe, revelando el motivo estadounidense en sus acciones: su apego al "USS Honduras."

No debe ser ninguna sorpresa que Honduras, el país del origen del 29% de l@s menores no acompañad@s que se entregaron a la Patrulla Fronteriza en 2014, ha llegado a ser por primera vez la fuente principal de la migración centroamericana, cuando los regímenes hondureños apoyados por EE.UU. han exacerbado el desorden, la violencia y los problemas económicos en los últimos cinco años. En sus relaciones con América Central, los EE.UU. colabora militarmente con las oligarquías locales para reforzar las desigualdades políticas y económicas, o sea, el staus quo. La ola actual de niñ@s y adultos que huyen de América Central es debida, al menos en parte, a la continuación de la supremacía de los caprichos del Pentágono en cuanto a las necesidades básicas de la mayoría pobre de América Central.

Es importante tener en cuenta por qué l@s nicaragüenses no están emigrando en masa a pesar de enfrentar obstáculos históricos, económicos e imperialistas parecidos a los de los otros países de América Central. Después de décadas de gobiernos brutales apoyados por EE.UU., el gobierno de Nicaragua actual ha sido capaz de escapar, en gran medida, al control de EE.UU. y formar sus propias políticas de seguridad. Los resultados son niveles mucho más bajos de violencia y de migración forzada que sus vecinos, a pesar de niveles similares de pobreza. EE.UU. puede aprender del éxito de Nicaragua en áreas tales como la vigilancia para resolver la crisis migratoria de l@s niñ@s, pero sólo con un cambio fundamental de la cultura de seguridad promovida por las fuerzas estadounidenses en los países vecinos.

Desde el 2008, EE.UU. ha gastado más de 800 millones de dólares en “ayuda para la seguridad” de Honduras, Guatemala y El Salvador a través de la "Iniciativa Regional Centroamericana de Seguridad" (CARSI), así como millones más en la ayuda bilateral al ejército y a la policía en cada país en nombre de la Guerra Contra las Drogas. Pero cuando ese dinero se destina a los políticos infiltrados por los cárteles y las fuerzas de seguridad, como en Honduras, ¿es sorprendente que la ley se deteriore aún más? Los adultos centroamericanos arriesgan sus vidas y las de sus hij@s para escapar del sistema histórico y de la violencia actual en cuya creación EE.UU. ha tenido un papel importante, aunque lo niegue. ¿Quién es más irresponsable, los padres o el Pentágono? ¿Quién es más racional, los padres o el Congreso de Estados Unidos?

En el 2013, después de casi 200 años, el Secretario del Estado, John Kerry, declaró que la época de la Doctrina Monroe había terminado. Sin embargo, parece que el Pentagono sigue con lo de siempre con sus aliados corruptos en Honduras y Guatemala. Mientras una cantidad récord de refugiad@s centroamerican@s son detenid@s en la frontera, los medios de comunicación y los políticos deben reconocer que est@s niñ@s son el resultado de los conflictos armados financiados por l@s contribuyentes estadounidenses. Las reevaluaciones honestas, audaces, y fundamentadas sobre la política exterior en la región deben llevarse a cabo e implementarse para que las condiciones en Centroamérica mejoren dentro de poco.

Arturo J. Viscarra emigró a los EE.UU., de El Salvador, durante la guerra civil. Él es un abogado de la inmigración y el Coordinador de la Abogacía para SOA Watch.

Michael Prentice es un estudiante en Vassar College y era pasante en SOA Watch. 

Únete a Arturo, Michael y miles de personas más para la vigilia en la SOA este noviembre: http://soaw.org/november.

"Our conflict is not internal, but imposed": Lessons from Colombia for U.S. aid to Central America

By Julia Duranti, Witness for Peace Colombia

In a January op-ed for the New York Times, Vice President Joe Biden called for $1 billion in aid to Central America to address the migration and human rights crisis, citing Colombia as a successful example of U.S. intervention in Latin America. More details on the State Department’s proposal for the Northern Triangle have since emerged, and it appears that social, economic and development aid programs comprise 80 percent of the requested funds—a perfect inversion of Plan Colombia’s counternarcotics and counterinsurgency aid approved 15 years ago. While deemphasizing military aid is a positive development, the current proposal from the Department of State would maintain military and security funding for Central America at current levels, in addition to the separate Department of Defense budgets for foreign military aid.

There is also troubling language about “trade promotion” and economic development that is code for Washington Consensus policies of free trade, privatization and foreign investment.  The current fraught reality in Colombia, a partial result of Plan Colombia and its successor programs and a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the U.S. implemented in 2012, demonstrates that throwing money at the related issues of organized crime, violence and forced displacement – instead of addressing how the same policies actually drive those phenomena – does not solve human rights crises in Latin America.

U.S. intervention in Colombia has been expensive, costing U.S. taxpayers over $9 billion since 2000, not to mention the enormous human cost of the militarization of Colombia’s countryside. Of the seven million victims of the conflict registered since 1954, 5.9 million victimizations have occurred since 2000, when U.S. funding began to support Colombian security forces already known for collaboration with brutal paramilitaries. While paramilitaries officially demobilized in 2005, many simply reformed into loosely organized criminal structures that the Colombian government calls BACRIM, or criminal gangs. The BACRIM act as guns-for-hire involved in drug trafficking, illegal mining, extortion, human trafficking, and protection services for wealthy land and business owners along with multinational corporations.

Now the biggest threat to citizen security, the BACRIM carry out threats, forced disappearances and assassinations against members of Colombian social movements. In January they were responsible for a wave of threats against Colombian journalists and human rights defenders, as well as the 2014 spike in death threats against more than 150 human rights workers, activists and politicians, dubbed “Black September.” The splintering and reclassification of the paramilitaries as BACRIM allows their activities to be painted as a “climate of lawlessness” that justifies U.S. intervention and support for the Colombian state—as if both states had not tacitly encouraged the creation of these groups in the first place via proxy financial support to corrupt armed forces and neoliberal economic policies that decimated economic opportunities outside the informal or illegal sectors.

At six million people, Colombia’s internally displaced population is the second largest in the world. Some are rural farmers driven from their land by Plan Colombia-funded militarization and aerial herbicide fumigations intended to eradicate coca crops. In other cases, powerful monoculture palm oil and banana operations have collaborated with legal and illegal armed actors to force communities off their land. Additional examples of this type of development include sugar cane production for ethanol that has all but replaced agriculture in southwestern Colombia, while the cut flower industry heavily promoted by USAID has devastated food security in the savannah region surrounding the capital of Bogotá.

Even as the U.S. government has promoted these industries in Colombia, it has protected U.S. corporate interests by privileging U.S. corn, ethanol and other agricultural exports to Colombia under the FTA. In the three years since the FTA was implemented, U.S. exports to Colombia have skyrocketed and Colombia has seen its trade surplus of $8.7 billion evaporate and balloon into a trade deficit of $2 billion. Unable to compete with the flood of subsidized U.S. imports, small-scale producers have been driven out of the market, prompting thousands of Colombians to take to the streets in protest of the FTA and related policies in 2013 and 2014.

Violent displacement, the proliferation of paramilitarism via BACRIM, some of the highest corruption in Latin America, widespread impunity for human rights violations and one of the largest gaps between rich and poor in the world continue to haunt Colombia as problems that Plan Colombia successor programs and the FTA failed to address, or even exacerbated. Implementing the same strategy in Central America — already reeling from high violence and crime along with its own FTA with the U.S., DR-CAFTA — is unlikely to lead to better results. If the Obama Administration wants to get serious about a plan for Central America, it should pressure Congress to fund policies that address the true drivers of organized crime and forced migration, like U.S. demand for drugs and harmful trade agreements that privilege large corporations and the wealthy elite at the expense of local economies and communities. 

"Nuestra guerra no es interna, sino impuesta": Lecciones desde Colombia sobre la ayuda EE.UU a América Central

Por Julia Duranti, APP Colombia

En un editorial que escribió en enero para el New York Times, el Vice Presidente estadounidense Joe Biden solicitó mil millones de dólares de ayuda para América Central con el propósito de abordar las crises de la migración y de los derechos humanos, nombrando a Colombia como un ejemplo exitoso de la intervención estadounidense en América Latina. Desde entonces se han dado a conocer más detalles de la propuesta del Departamento del Estado para el Triángulo del Norte, y pareciera que los programas de desarrollo social y económico representarán el 80 por ciento de los fondos pedidos – una perfecta versión a la inversa de la ayuda antinarcóticos y contrainsurgencia que fue aprobada hace 15 años como parte del Plan Colombia. Aunque la reducción de la proporción del presupuesto que representa la ayuda militar es un paso positivo, la propuesta del Departamento del Estado mantendrá los fondos de carácter militar o de seguridad en sus niveles actuales para América Central, que se suman al otro presupuesto de ayuda militar extranjero que maneja el Departamento de Defensa.

Existe también un discurso preocupante alrededor de la “promoción del comercio” y el desarrollo económico que quiere decir las mismas políticas del consenso de Washington que son el comercio libre, la privatización y la inversión extranjera. La complicada realidad actual de Colombia, un resultado parcial del Plan Colombia y sus programas sucesores y de un Tratado de Libre Comercio (TLC) con los EE.UU  implementado en el 2012, demuestra que tirar más dinero a la basura en las problemáticas interrelacionados del crimen organizado, la violencia y el desplazamiento forzado – en lugar de abordar cómo esas mismas políticas empujan esos fenómenos – no resuelve las crises  de los derechos humanos en América Latina.

La intervención estadounidense en Colombia ha sido cara, costándole a los contribuyentes estadounidenses más de U$9 mil millones desde el 2000, sin mencionar el enorme costo humano de la militarización del campo colombiano. De los siete millones de víctimas del conflicto armado que se han registrado desde 1954, 5,9 millones de las victimizaciones han ocurrido desde el 2000, momento en el que los fondos estadounidenses comenzaron apoyar a las fuerzas públicas colombianas, algunas de las cuales ya eran conocidas por su colaboración con los brutales paramilitares. Oficialmente los paramilitares se desmovilizaron en el 2005, pero muchos simplemente se integraron a diversas estructuras criminales que el estado colombiano ahora llama BACRIM, o bandas criminales. Las BACRIM funcionan como armas contratadas involucradas en el narcotráfico, la minería ilegal, la extorción, el trato humano, y la prestación de servicios de seguridad privada para ricos latifundistas y empresarios junto con empresas multinacionales.

Ahora las BACRIM son la amenaza más grande a la seguridad ciudadana y llevan a cabo amenazas,  desapariciones forzadas y asesinatos en contra de los miembros de los movimientos sociales colombianos. En enero fueron responsables por la onda de amenazas contra varios periodistas y defensores de derechos humanos colombianos, además del aumento de amenazas contra más de 150 defensores de derechos humanos, activistas y políticos en el 2014 conocido como Septiembre Negro. La fracturación y reclasificación de los paramilitares como BACRIM permite que sus actividades sean ilustradas como parte de un “clima de ilegalidad” que justifica la intervención y el apoyo estadounidense al estado colombiano – como si ambos estados no hubieran ya promocionado tácitamente la creación de estos grupos en primer lugar por medio del apoyo financiero a unidades corruptas de las fuerzas públicas y las políticas económicas neoliberales que diezmaron las oportunidades económicas fuera de los sectores informales o ilegales.

Con seis millones de personas, la población internamente desplazada de Colombia es la segunda mayor en el mundo. Algunas son personas de zonas rurales sacadas de sus tierras por la militarización y las aspersiones de áreas con herbicidas que pretenden erradicar cultivos de coca, financiadas por el Plan Colombia. En otros casos, poderosos proyectos de monocultivos de palma y banano han colaborado con los actores legales e ilegales para despojar a las comunidades de sus tierras. Otros ejemplos de esta clase del desarrollo incluyen la producción de la caña de azúcar para etanol que casi reemplaza a la agricultura en el suroccidente de Colombia, mientras la floricultura promocionada por USAID ha devastado la soberanía alimentaria en la sabana alrededor del capital, Bogotá.

A la vez que el estado estadounidense ha impulsado aquellas industrias en Colombia, ha protegido intereses empresariales estadounidenses a través del privilegio de las exportaciones estadounidenses de maíz, etanol y otros productos agrícolas a Colombia bajo el TLC. En los tres años desde que el TLC fue implementado, las exportaciones estadounidenses a Colombia han subido vertiginosamente y Colombia ha visto su superávit comercial de $8,7 mil millones evaporarse y convertirse en un déficit de $2 mil millones. Sin la capacidad de competir con la inundación de las importaciones subsidiadas de los EE.UU, los productores y productoras de pequeña escala han sido expulsados del mercado, lo cual inspiró miles de colombianos y colombianas salir a las calles en protesta por el TLC y las políticas relacionadas del 2013 y el 2014.

El desplazamiento violento, la proliferación del paramilitarismo a través de las BACRIM, una de las tasas de corrupción más alta en América Latina, la impunidad para las violaciones de los derechos humanos y una de las brechas más amplias en el mundo entre ricos y pobres continúan afligiendo a Colombia como problemas que los programas sucesores del Plan Colombia y el TLC no lograron solucionar, o incluso exacerbaron. Es poco probable que la implementación de la misma estrategia en América Central – que ya está lidiando con altas tasas de violencia y crimen además de su propio TLC con EE.UU, DR-CAFTA – produzca mejores resultados. Si el gobierno de Obama quisiera hacer un plan serio para América Central, debería presionar al Congreso de EE.UU para que financie políticas que abarquen las causas verdaderas del crimen organizado y la migración forzada, como la demanda estadounidense de drogas y los dañiños TLCs que privilegian a las empresas grandes y a las élites a costa de las económicas locales y de las comunidades. 

Ciudades Modelos: El nuevo experimento neoliberal en Latinoamérica

Por Elizabeth Perkins, Equipo de APP Honduras

La competición. Es un concepto inherente a la meritocracia estadounidense, la mentalidad que uno se puede zafar de cualquier situación difícil con suficiente determinación. La política económica del neoliberalismo promueve la competición como herramienta para promover el desarrollo económico. Se fundamenta en la suposición (hipótesis?) de que la competición incrementa la calidad y eficiencia. Para que un país ‘en desarrollo’ pueda crear trabajos desesperadamente necesitados, es necesario competir con otros países en atraer inversión extranjera. Esta ideología se manifiesta en los Programas de Ajustamiento Estructural (enlace en ingles), los tratados de libre comercio (enlace en ingles) como DR-CAFTA (enlace en ingles), y el establecimiento de zonas francas. Más recién, el proyecto de las Ciudades Modelos en Honduras ha capturado la imaginación de los economistas que promueven el libre comercio y la inversión extranjera como la forma de salir de la crisis económica del país.

Las promesas de desarrollo no son nuevas para Latinoamérica. Hace casi una década, DR-CAFTA consolidó políticas neoliberales que ya estuvieron puestas en práctica. Cuando CAFTA fue firmado en 2006, se le dijo al pueblo de Centroamérica que un incremento al comercio, a la inversión extranjera directa, a la disponibilidad del trabajo, y a la exportación provocaría un aumento de los ingresos y de la calidad de vida. En 2010, cuando Honduras decidió aumentar el salario mínimo 6.5%, 16 maquilas se mudaron a Nicaragua, donde el salario mínimo estaba a la mitad del de Honduras. Este es solo un ejemplo de la manera en que este tratado prioriza las corporaciones estadounidenses ante de los derechos de los trabajadores. Parece que el próximo paso en una progresión de políticas neoliberales impuestas en Centroamérica es la ley de ciudades modelos en Honduras, recientemente aprobada bajo el nombre: Zonas de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico (ZEDE).

Desde los finales de 2010, Honduras se encuentra debatiendo la cuestión de las ciudades modelos en su territorio. En su encarnación mas recién, las ciudades son definidas como divisiones administrativas del país, sujetas al gobierno central pero con autonomía en cuanto a los sistemas políticos, económicos y judiciales, con reglas claras del mercado que permiten un alto nivel de competición. Dicho en otras palabras, son regiones dentro de un país con poco control o regulación gubernamental. La meta es atraer inversión y generar empleo en regiones deshabitadas del país o en municipalidades solicitando la conversión por consulta popular.

Ha sido un debate intenso promovido principalmente por los representantes del Partido Nacional Porfirio Lobo Sosa (ex presidente ‘elegido’ después del golpe de 2009) y Juan Orlando Hernández (ex líder del Congreso Nacional y Presidente actual). Para que Honduras pudiera acomodar esta idea nueva, primero tuvieron que cambiar la constitución, y luego fue necesario aprobar la ley por un voto mayoritario por parte del Congreso. Aunque esencialmente igual, dicha ley ha pasado por varias encarnaciones. Nació como las ciudades modelos (enlace en inglés) de Paul Romer, luego se redactó como ley, la propuesta conocida como Regiones Especiales de Desarrollo (RED), y actualmente la ley se conoce bajo el nombre de las Zonas de Empleo y Desarrollo Económico (ZEDE). Al inicio, la Corte Suprema de Justicia declaró que la ley de las RED fue inconstitucional en octubre de 2012. Solo dos meses después en lo que ahora se conoce como un ‘mini-golpe,’ 4 del lxs 5 jueces que rechazaron la ley fueron destituidxs de sus puestos. La ley de las ZEDE fue aprobada el siguiente año. El mes pasado nombraron Choluteca como el primer sitio ZEDE.

“Ciudades modelos = Expulsión del pueblo Garífuna de Honduras.” Grupos de resistencia protestan las ciudades modelos frente el Congreso Nacional en Tegucigalpa en enero de 2013. Foto por Elizabeth Perkins
 

Los grupos de la resistencia hondureña citan “una enorme inequidad y brecha social, la cual se incrementó a partir del golpe de estado.” La desigualdad socioeconómica se hace cada vez más drástica, mientras el Congreso Nacional impone más y más leyes neoliberales, como la ley ZEDE. Representantes del FNRP presentaron argumentos en la Corte Suprema de Honduras en febrero pidiendo que lxs jueces declaren la ley ZEDE inconstitucional, como es básicamente la misma ley de RED declarada así en 2012.

Mark Klugmann (enlace en inglés), un norteamericano nombrado por Juan Orlando como el promotor de las ZEDE en el exterior, recientemente dio una entrevista al periódico hondureño El Tiempo. El mismo dijo: “Creo que CAFTA abrió nuevas posibilidades y Honduras, con las ZEDE, se convierte en el lugar más atractivo de la zona CAFTA. Estamos escuchando que personas que tienen empresas en los países vecinos y que están exportando bajo CAFTA, quieren trasladarse a Honduras.” Sostienen, que la ley de las ZEDE ayudará a disminuir la migración (enlace en inglés) porque ofrece varias oportunidades de trabajo.

La Organización Fraternal Negra de Honduras (OFRANEH) comentó en su blog, “La palabra empleo se ha convertido en el señuelo para capturar la imaginación de un pueblo pauperizado y sumido adrede, en la ignorancia y desinformación.” Uno de los problemas más grandes con este plan es que no hay un pedazo de tierra suficientemente grande para acomodar una ciudad de millones de personas. Comunidades campesinas e indígenas como OFRANEH, cuyas comunidades han sido nombradas como sitios posibles de ZEDE, están preocupadas.

Según OFRANEH, la Comisión para la Erradicación del Racismo y Discriminación (CERD) de las Naciones Unidas en su informe de febrero expresó preocupación sobre el impacto que va a tener esta ley ZEDE en grupos indígenas y afrodescendientes. El informe urge el gobierno hondureño a reevaluar la compatibilidad de la ley con tratados internacionales de derechos humanos cuya ratificación protegen a los grupos indígenas y afrodescendientes.

“El partido nacional desde su fundación se ha distinguido por una actitud paradójicamente antinacionalista, siendo en estos períodos donde han manejado las riendas del poder, que se han caracterizados en la entrega de territorio nacional y la subordinación a las compañías bananeras,” dice OFRANEH. Según los intereses de las grandes corporaciones, no los del pueblo, el gobierno hondureño sigue adelante con las ZEDE. Aunque el gobierno estadounidense no está directamente involucrado en este proyecto, promoverá intereses inversionistas de EE.UU., ampliando la brecha cada vez más grande entre los ricos y los pobres en Honduras y el mundo entero.

Charter Cities: The new neoliberal experiment in Latin America

By Elizabeth Perkins, WfP Honduras Team

Competition. It’s an inherent concept of U.S. meritocracy, the ‘pull yourself up by the bootstraps’ mentality. (That’s assuming everyone has boots in the first place). Neoliberal economic policy promotes competition as a tool for economic growth. It is based on the assumption that competition improves quality and efficiency. For a ‘developing’ country to create desperately needed jobs, it must compete with other countries to attract foreign investment. This ideology is manifested in Structural Adjustment Programs, free trade agreements like DR-CAFTA and the establishment of free trade zones. Most recently, Charter Cities in Honduras have captured the imagination of economists touting free trade and foreign investment as the country’s way out of financial crisis.

Promises of development aren’t new to Latin America. Nearly a decade ago, DR-CAFTA consolidated neoliberal policies that were already in place. When CAFTA was passed in 2006, Central Americans were told that increases in trade, foreign direct investment, job availability, and exports would raise incomes and standards of living. In 2010, when Honduras decided to raise its minimum wage 6.5%, 16 textile factories picked up and moved to Nicaragua, where minimum wage was half that of Honduras. This is just one example of how this agreement prioritizes U.S. corporations over the rights of workers. The next step in a progression of neoliberal policies being forced on Central America seems to be Charter Cities in Honduras, recently passed into law with the name Zones for Employment and Economic Development (ZEDE).

Since the end of 2010, Honduras has been debating the idea of charter cities in its territory. In the most recent incarnation, the cities are defined as administrative divisions of the country, subject to central government but given autonomy with political, economic, and judicial systems with clear market rules that allow high levels of competition. In other words, they are regions within a country with little governmental control and regulation. The goal is to attract investment and generate employment in uninhabited regions of the country or in municipalities applying for conversion by referendum.


It has been an intense debate pushed primarily by National Party representatives Porfirio Lobo Sosa (former president ‘elected’ after the 2009 coup) and Juan Orlando Hernandez (former leader of the National Congress, and current President). For Honduras to accommodate this new idea, first the constitution had to be changed, after which the law needed a majority vote in Congress. Though essentially the same, it has passed through different incarnations – born as Paul Romer’s charter cities, then drafted into law as Special Development Regions (RED), and most recently passed as the Special Economic Development Zones (ZEDE) law. The first time around, the Honduran Supreme Court of Justice declared RED’s unconstitutional in October 2012. Just two months later in what became known as a ‘mini-coup,’ 4 of the 5 justices who passed the ruling were removed from their posts. ZEDE’s were passed into law the following year. Last month Choluteca was declared as a site for the first ZEDE.

“Model Cities = Expulsion of Garífuna People of Honduras.” Resistance groups protest model cities outside National Congress in Tegucigalpa in January 2013. Photo by Elizabeth Perkins

Resistance groups cite “an enormous inequality and social divide, which has been increasing since the 2009 coup d’état.” Socioeconomic inequality is becoming more drastic, as the National Congress pumps out more and more neoliberal laws, like the ZEDE. National Front of Popular Resistance (FNRP) representatives presented arguments to the Honduran Supreme Court in February (link in Spanish) requesting the justices declare the ZEDE law unconstitutional, as it’s essentially the same RED law that was declared so in 2012.

Mark Klugmann, named by Juan Orlando as the North American representative to promote the ZEDE externally, was recently interviewed by Honduran newspaper El Tiempo (article in Spanish). He says, “CAFTA opened up new possibilities and Honduras becomes the most attractive place for investment with the ZEDE. Investors in neighboring countries are looking to relocate to Honduras.” He argues that the ZEDE will help slow migration because it will offer a variety of jobs.

The Black Fraternal Organization of Honduras (OFRANEH) commented on their blog (link in Spanish), “The word employment has become the lure to capture the imagination of a people made poor and intentionally sunk into ignorance and disinformation.” One of the biggest problems with this plan is that there is no piece of uninhabited land large enough for a city of several million people. Small farming communities and indigenous groups like OFRANEH, whose homes have been named as potential ZEDE sites, are worried.

According to OFRANEH, the United Nations Commission for the Eradication of Racism and Discrimination (CERD) in their report (in Spanish) last month expressed concern for the impact the ZEDE law will have on indigenous and afro-descendant groups. The report urges the Honduran government to reevaluate the compatibility of the law with international human rights treaties it has signed protecting these groups.

“The National Party, since it’s founding, has distinguished itself with a paradoxical anti-nationalist attitude, the periods in which they’ve been in power being characterized by the turning over of national territory and subordination to the banana companies,” states OFRANEH. In the interest of big business, not that of the people, the Honduran government is moving forward with the ZEDE law. Though the U.S. government is not directly involved in this project, it will serve to further U.S. investment interests, widening the ever-growing gap between rich and poor in Honduras and the rest of the world.

Election Blog Series - Honduras: Why U.S. Policy Needs a Re-Set

-by Witness for Peace Honduras/Nicaragua Team

Why U.S. Policy in Honduras Needs a Re-Set

Although neither candidate mentioned Honduras in the last presidential debate on foreign policy, Mitt Romney has cited the Obama administration’s reaction to the coup in Honduras as an example marking Barack Obama's failure in Latin American policy.

He is not alone in criticizing the Obama administration’s response to the 2009 coup in Honduras. For reasons starkly different than Romney's, ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Rep. Howard Berman, wrote in a recent letter to Secretary Clinton: “U.S. policy in Honduras needs a re-set.” The current policies overlook the human rights crisis that has erupted in Honduras over the past few years. Out of concern for the alarming rate of human rights abuses and repression, almost 100 members of Congress have called for a suspension of U.S. military aid.

The example of Honduras can say a lot about the presidential candidates’ positions on Latin America. Historically the United States has intervened heavily in Honduras. The former "banana republic" played a key role in Reagan’s Cold War-driven mission to crush revolutionary movements in Nicaragua and El Salvador in the 1980s by providing a haven for U.S.-funded military operations.  More recently it was brought to the international radar when the Honduran military ousted democratically-elected President Manuel Zelaya on June 28, 2009.

So, what do the two major party candidates have to say about the Honduran coup d’état and human rights crisis?

Obama:

The Obama administration provided a lukewarm response to the 2009 coup. While Obama condemned the coup and called it illegal, the State Department avoided using the term “military coup” in order to maintain greater control over its funding to Honduras. As negotiations about Zelaya’s return to Honduras dragged out, the U.S. government stated it would recognize elections even if Zelaya were not returned beforehand-- which is exactly what it did.

The 2009 elections in Honduras were heavily boycotted by civil society, and well-respected election observation bodies like the E.U. and the Carter Center refused to participate. In the weeks leading up to the elections, the coup regime cracked down of freedom of speech and assembly. Resistance members were detained and beaten by security forces.  While the overwhelming majority of Latin American countries rejected the elections, the U.S. immediately recognized them as free and fair, and reinstated military and police aid soon after the inauguration of Porfirio Lobo Sosa.

Obama was left with a difficult legacy from the Bush years. He attempted to step back from the military interventions and “nation-building” under the Bush era. Obama promised that his foreign policy would re-focus on diplomacy and working within the international community. 

However, in the aftermath of the Honduran coup, the ambivalent U.S. response diverged greatly from other countries in the hemisphere that were calling for Zelaya’s unconditional return and a rejection of the dubious elections. Leaders from other countries that make up the Organization of American States were critical of the U.S.’ position.

In response to criticism that the administration didn’t take a strong enough stance in Honduras, Obama responded:

 “The same critics who say that the United States has not intervened enough in Honduras are the same people who say that we're always intervening and the Yankees need to get out of Latin America. You can't have it both ways.”

Rhetorically, the U.S. did take a step back.  In practice, the U.S. has intervened. Three years later, Honduras is becoming the newest epicenter for the War on Drugs. The U.S. has focused its attention on training and equipping the Honduran police and military, as narco-trafficking has been somewhat pushed from Colombia and Mexico into Central America. In addition, the U.S. has plans to increase military bases in Honduras. The Pentagon increased its contract spending in Honduras to $53.8 million in Fiscal Year 2011, up by 71% from the previous year.

For Hondurans involved in the opposition movement against the coup and post-coup governments, the increased presence of military and police does not make them feel safer. In the words of a member of a Garífuna community that has seen increased military and police presence: “It actually creates fear. It is destroying our communities.” Many indigenous and Afro-indigenous communities as well as small farmers are in the midst of land disputes with large landowners that supported the military coup. They witness collaboration between state forces and private security guards to harass, repress and even murder community members in disputed territories.

From the millions given in security assistance and construction of military bases, to the presence of embedded U.S. officials in Honduran agencies, the U.S. has clearly taken a position.

Romney:

While Obama’s administration has failed to get Honduras policy right, Romney would bring us even further backwards. Romney’s position on Latin America is full of Manifest Destiny and Monroe Doctrine discourse that also borders on invoking Cold War-era warnings of socialism creeping in from our Latin American neighbors.

Romney’s campaign states:

“[Obama] has allowed the march of authoritarianism to go unchecked. In some cases, he has actually encouraged it, as when he publicly backed former Honduran president Manuel Zelaya—a Hugo Chavez ally—despite Zelaya’s unconstitutional attempt to extend his term as president in defiance of the Honduran Supreme Court and legislature.”

Romney’s characterization of the coup misrepresents the facts. Leading up to the coup, Zelaya was promoting a non-binding referendum asking Hondurans whether they wanted include a ballot measure in the upcoming elections that would allow them to vote for an assembly to reform the constitution. The spin perpetuated in U.S. media painted Zelaya in a similar way that Romney has- that he was trying to stay in power indefinitely, thereby insinuating or stating that that warranted the illegal coup. In reality, if Zelaya were hoping to change the constitution so that he could have had another term as president, he was many steps removed.  After the coup, the resistance movement collected 1,250,000 signatures in support of a national constitutional assembly.

If Zelaya were authoritarian, as Romney believes, what does that make the U.S.-trained military generals who kidnapped Zelaya from his home and wrecked havoc on civilian protests? What does that make the Lobo administration, which took power under highly-contested elections and has done little to change the pattern of repression? 

Romney’s response to Obama’s policies grossly misses the mark and does not discuss the realities of Obama’s policies in Honduras. If Honduras is an example of how Obama and Romney approach Latin American policy, one thing is clear: no matter who wins the elections on November 6^th, the U.S. needs to drastically change its course. The War on Drugs and militarization in Latin America is a human rights disaster throughout the region.

Join the voices calling for change now! Click here to send a letter to your Senator and Representative asking them to support real change in Honduras policy that promotes human rights and an end to the militarized approach to the War on Drugs.

"The bullets fell from above like rain:" accounts from the Ahuas tragedy

“The bullets fell from above like rain.”


Recently, Witness for Peace partnered with PROAH, which provides International Human Rights Accompaniment in Honduras, to accompany a group of Honduran human rights defenders from COFADEH (Committee of Families of the Detained and Disappeared of Honduras), on an investigative mission to La Moskitia. One of the nights that I spent in there, I dreamt that I was being shot at by machine guns. It was dark and all I could see were bright lights showering down like fireworks. For a passenger boat in the Patuca River a few weeks ago this nightmare was their reality. Early in the morning on May 11th helicopters from a DEA supported drug raid opened fire onto the canoe. Among the victims who lost their lives were two pregnant women and a 14 year old boy.

Hilda, a survivor who I met in the local hospital earlier that day, said that she had fallen asleep on the boat and woke to bullets falling like rain. One of those bullets left her with a grave wound in both of her legs.  She recounted from her hospital bed that she went into the water to try to escape the overheard attack, but her injury and the continued gunfire prevented her from getting out of the river for almost two hours. Hilda’s family had gone out to search for her as soon as they heard the news of the attack, but they too were stalled for hours by the violent raid. Hilda’s wounds became seriously infected, likely due to the amount of time she was stuck in the water before being rescued. As she lay bandaged in the hospital she recalled no warning from the DEA helicopter; no lights shone down from above. She lamented that if they had, they would have seen that the small boat was filled with innocent women, children and men. Rather all she remembers was waking up to a barrage of bullets.

The next day I shared my dream with one of the members of the group of human rights defenders and journalists that I was accompanying on their mission to investigate the deadly attack. He responded that he’d had a similar nightmare. I wondered if we were so affected by these events, how the victims and survivors manage to cope with this trauma.

After that conversation I met a two year old girl who had been another passenger on that boat while she was sitting on the wooden steps of her home with her 11 year old sister who also survived the botched raid. The toddler watched us curiously as her sister shyly described how they managed to reach land that morning. The youngest sister rode on her mother’s back to shore; the oldest fended for herself even though she doesn’t know how to swim. They appeared physically unscathed but looking into the young girls’ eyes I asked myself what kind of dreams they have at night and what kind of memories they will carry with them throughout the rest of their lives.

Other nights since Ahuas when I close my eyes I see the face of the 14 year old boy who was killed. Sadly I don’t see a smiling young teenager. I see the image of his recovered body that his older sister showed me when we visited their home. His body was missing for almost two days before it was found.

For me the pain of the survivors and families of the victims is tangible and visceral, because I saw the tears, the wounds, the canoe with 20 bullet holes, the grief and indignation. But it should not just be the international accompaniers, the Honduran human rights defenders, and journalists who see this first hand in order to piece together who was responsible for that fatal morning. Where is the official investigation?

The official U.S. government line is that the Honduran authorities are investigating the events. Due to the level of U.S. involvement in this incident and the State Department’s own human rights reports documenting the rampant impunity in Honduras, why is the U.S. not conducting its own investigation or at the very least providing more direct support to the Honduran investigation?  It would only be fitting since the U.S. DEA was “supporting” the operation.

Over a week after the attack the investigation that the U.S. government is putting all its faith into was sitting in Puerto Lempira with the Direccion Nacional de Investigacion Criminal (DNIC). COFADEH found that no official autopsies had been done and important pieces of evidence had not been collected. While some witnesses and families of the victims that COFADEH and the journalists spoke with had been interviewed by the DNIC commission, others had not.

The truth is that it is much more convenient for the U.S. to allow the memories to fade, the evidence to disappear, and the investigation to drag out indefinitely like thousands of others. That way they can more easily evade answers to questions about what type of support and advice the DEA gave, what role they actually played in the operation, and why the U.S. are supporting Honduran security forces that have been implicated in human rights abuses.

It is time for the U.S. government to look into the eyes of the survivors and families of victims themselves.

*WFP partnered with PROAH which provides International Human Rights Accompaniment in Honduras

The DEA killed the Hopes of Hasked Brooks Wood

Ahúas, Gracias a Dios

Wednesday, May 23, 2012

By: defensoresenlinea.com

Translation by the Witness for Peace Nicaragua Team

For the original version in Spanish please visit Defensores en Linea

A team of human rights defenders of the Committee of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared (COFADEH) reports the deep pain of family members of the 14 year old boy, Hasked Brooks Wood, victim killed in the reckless attack lead by forces of the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) in which two pregnant women and the best friend of Hasked, Wilmer Walter (14) and Emerson Martiínez also died.

Defensoresenliena.com interviewed Hasked Antonie Brooks Symore, Hasked’s father who, upon learning of the fateful news traveled from the island of Roatán to find that he had been missing for 48 hours. 
Brooks Symore expressed himself with distress and anguish, “I feel terrible because I didn’t know that something like this would happen in this life, but we’re always here hoping that human rights organizations will come and help us (referring to COFADEH).”

“Upon seeing you all I feel a little better because I know that you will help us to pressure the government.  I feel accompanied by COFADEH,” explained the father of the adolescent who lost his life in the brutal attack.

Brooks Symore commented that his pain was even stronger because he knew the other people who had died and because various members of their families live in his home community and because of his wife, Clara Wood Rivas, who survived by throwing herself from the pipante (boat) into to the great waters of the Patuca River.

Choking on her words, Clara Wood Rivas said that upon hearing the bursts of gunfire she jumped into the river to get to the coast.  She heard the buzzing of the projectiles that passed closely by her body.

Swimming as rapidly as she could, when she got to the coast she screamed as loud as she could, “Hasked!…Hasked!...” but her son did not respond.  She woke up on Saturday and had no news of her son until many hours later.  The young boy had disappeared.

Upon hearing the news that Hasked was dead, the only thing she cried out was, “They have killed my baby…they have killed my baby!”

It is known that  when the attack began, a helicopter was seen  descending rapidly in the dark early morning in the community of Paptalaya and that it pointed itself directly at the pipante in which at least 15 people were being transported.  Hasked heard the detonations and one of those shots penetrated his mouth, another his head and a third projectile hit his abdomen and a fourth struck one of his legs.

That day the young Hasked was very happy because he was coming back to live in the community El Naranjal in Ahúas, where he was born.  This place is inhabited by a few wood houses built on stilts; Families plant basic grains, vegetables, raise cows and each family has one horse.

Hasked brought with him his fifth grade report card, a ball, a pair of cleats and his pet named Dragon (his little dog).  Dragon has not wanted to eat anything while staying Brooks Wood’s house, his family commented.

His happiness was greater because during the trip from the Barra Patuca to Paptalaya where the small boat was headed, he was seated next to his best friend Wilmer Walter, 14 years old who  received a grave injury to one of his hands.  The human rights defenders at COFADEH visited him in the Regional Hospital in Atlántida and confirmed that the condition of his hand has a reserved prognosis and that it needs the attention of specialists.
Accompanying Hasked, Clara and Wilmer was Vera Gonzáles, a relative of Brooks Wood and her daughters Chantel who recently turned two and 11 year old Alana; all three  survived the attack unharmed.

Brooks Symore has made his life in shrimp boats that fish the Roatán and also as a cook.  Part of the year he works in Islas de la Bahía and the rest he spends with his family which is composed of nine members.

He commented that the events of Friday the 11^th of May of 2012 in Ahúas leave an impression that “one doesn’t know what will happen in life and without expecting it, one is attacked like that.  I didn’t think that that would happen because things like that never happen in these parts.”

Brooks Symore appreciated the visit and company of COFADEH whose human rights defenders came to visit this far-off community that has been forgotten and that currently faces serious threats from narco-trafficking.

Severe Injuries Suffered By Victims On Boat Attacked By DEA Agents

La Ceiba, Atlantida

By: defensoresenlinea.com

Translation by the Witness for Peace Nicaragua Team

For the original version in Spanish please visit Defensores En Linea

A team of human rights defenders from the Committee of Family Members of the Detained and Disappeared in Honduras (COFADEH) with international accompaniment confirms the grave physical and emotional consequences suffered by two of the victims who were injured as a result of an attack carried out from a helicopter by United States Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) troops on the 11^th of May near Ahúas, in the Honduran Mosquitia.

It has become known that DEA forces used automatic weapons to attack a “cayuco” (a small motor boat) that was transporting 15 people along the waters of the Patuca river.  Of the 15 people, 2 fisherman and 2 pregnant women were killed when hit with rapid gunfire from a helicopter that attacked the boat presuming that it was involved in drug-trafficking.

The tragic incident occurred on the 11^th of May around 3:00 in the morning.  The passengers were riding from Roatán (Islas de la Bahía) in the boat named “DAGO” that took them to the Barra of the Patuca River, where in the early morning hours they boarded the cayuco motorboat that had arrived at the Barra del Patuca to drop off some divers.

Passengers on this boat were  people from various communities in the municipality of Ahúas and Brus Laguna in the department of Gracias a Dios in the Honduran Mosquitia.

The COFADEH team visited 22 year old Lucio Adán Nelson Queen in his hospital bed at the Atlántida Regional Hospital.  He had received 3 bullet-wounds in different parts of his body.

Lucio Adán has a serious wound in his left arm with the projectile still in his arm; the other injuries are localized in his back,  side, and  gluteus.

While the young man found it difficult to talk due to his critical condition,he told us that he had been sleeping in the small boat when he saw intermittent lights coming from the helicopter.  The small lights were nothing more than the bursts of gunfire that hit  his body.

In spite of being injured, and using only one arm he swam to the edge of the river and ran through bushes until arriving at a small house close to the community of Ahúas where a woman helped to take him to the clinic of the Moravian Church where he received his first round of medical attention.

Dannjy Nelson Escoto, Lucio Adán’s uncle, who has stayed in the medical center every day accompanying his family member, demanded an exhaustive investigation to clarify the unjustifiable attack perpetrated by DEA agents against defenseless people.

Lucio Adán has been hospitalized for 9 days and still hasn’t been scheduled for surgery.  Furthermore, his financial limitations prevent him from buying the pins needed to fix his injured arm.

Another survivor is the 14 year old boy, Wilmer Lucas Walter, a resident of Roatán, Islas de la Bahía, who, on the day of the attack, was on his way  to visit his grandmother in the community of Barra Patuca.

On the 11^th of May, Wilmer was traveling to Ahúas to visit his grandmother Aura Estela Cooper, taking advantage of the fact that his mother’s friend was already making the trip with her youngest 14 year old child, a classmate of Wilmer’s, who died in the shower of bullets directed by foreign military personnel against the small boat.

Wilmer was asleep in the small boat, just like the other passengers, when he was suddenly thrown into the water when the boat was hit by bursts of machine gunfire from the helicopter that shot without warning.

The young child swam with difficulty until he came to the edge of the river where he quickly ran through the dense vegetation when he felt that his left arm weighed tons.  It was only then that he realized that the shots had seriously damaged one of his wrists.  He then went further into the jungle, listening to the blasts of projectile bullets fired by military personnel from the helicopter.

According to the specialists the condition of his hands has a guarded prognosis.  Wilmer’s mother, Sabina Romero expressed to defensoresenlinea.com that she is very worried for her son, seeing that they don’t have sufficient economic resources to take her son to a private clinic.

Both Wilmer and young Lucio are hospitalized in the Regional Hospital in Atlántida in the city of La Ceiba.  After the fatal attack first-aid was administered by medical personnel at the clinic of the Moravian Church in Agúas and then the injured were  transferred by plane to the city of La Ceiba.

It is worth pointing out that no government authorities have visited the medical center in person to inquire about the condition of the injured victims of this grave error committed by agents of the DEA that operate in the zone and whose presence was rejected by the Miskito communities following the incident.

Also, it was verified that Hilda Lezama Kenneth, whose legs were  injured  during the attack, was admitted into the Vicente D’Antoni Hospital on the 12^th of May and released on the 17^th since  her family could’t  pay  for her stay in the private hospital.

The COFADEH team along with various people who are part of the international accompaniment will head to Brus Laguna and Ahúas on Monday to document the testimony of the other victims of the attack suffered by various people at the hands of DEA agents from the United States.  It is now known that this team will also meet with journalists from the Associated Press (AP).

Lessons from Iraq in Honduras and the Attack against the Miskitos

By: OFRANEH (Organizacion Fraternal Negra Hondureña) 

Translation by Witness for Peace Nicaragua Team

For the original version in Spanish please visit OFRANEH’s blog.

The massacre perpetrated in the Patuca River in the early morning last Friday, May 11th, when a canoe from Barra Patuca was approaching the Miskita community, Ahuas, is an indicator of the violence to which  the Miskita people of Honduras are subjected. The attackers shot their machine guns from helicopters presumed to be from the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), resulting in four deaths and four injured Miskito people.

Among the victims are Emerson Martínez, Chalo Brock Wood, Candelaria Tratt Nelson and Juana Banegas; the two women who passed away were pregnant. Furthermore, as a result of the attack, Melanio Eulopio, Hilda Lezama de Eulopio, Wilmer López and Lucio Adán are hospitalized in La Ceiba. 

The National Police Director, Commissioner General Ricardo Ramirez del Cid, in a press conference indicated that “while respecting human rights…there was an exchange of gunfire at the scene.” However, the versions of the hospitalized survivors indicate that they received an indiscriminate shower of fire from machine guns and grenades. 

The Miskito people of Honduras for years have found themselves between the crossfire of narco-traffickers and state “security” agents. Furthermore, from the prevailing feudalism in this region of the country, the Miskito people have been subjected to extreme poverty, at the mercy of the masters of narco-trafficking and the exploitation of the divers; of whom 1700 have been left injured and an enormous quantity dead. 

Lessons from Iraq and the War Against Drugs in Honduras

The New York Times in its May 5th edition published an article that stated in its first paragraph: “The United States military has brought lessons from the past decade of conflict to the drug war being fought in the wilderness of Miskito Indian country, constructing this remote base camp with little public notice but with the support of the Honduran government.”

The Iraqization of Honduras is more evident than ever: the induced failed state has a script fabricated in the U.S. Southern Command, having among other results, a Honduras submerged in violence to the point of occupying the denigrating first place in homicides in the world, in addition the unstoppable arms trafficking, an example of which is the Castaway Operation, promoted by the Department of Justice. 

The low intensity war and the implementation of terror are strategies that the United States has imposed far and wide across the globe, with the purpose of cementing its hegemony and subsequent plunder of resources. 

Noam Chomsky recently delivered a series of commentaries in which he points out that the failed consequences of the fight against drugs are intentional.

To date it has been 40 years of the same recipe, defining its failure more clearly every day.  However, [the recipe] on a military level authorizes the United States to fumigate, jail and even gun down innocents.

Moskitia and the MesoAmerican Corridor of Biofuels

Every day the social and economic conditions of the Miskito people worsen. From the prohibition of diving for lobster in the year 2013, to the accelerated degradation of their soils, to the destruction of their wetlands due to the construction of three dams in the Patuca River. 

As an accomplishment of the “glorious” joint operation of Honduras and the United States, a voluntary curfew in the Moskitia has been decreed: traveling at night is at their own risk for the Miskito people, who always had been accustomed to using their territory without fearing for their lives. 

The result of the high cost of living and the absence of job sources, for many years has been a heavy migration of the Miskitos to other areas of the coast and to the nation’s urban centers. The inexistence of a national border policy has maintained their isolation, even more so due to the high transportation costs in the zone. The violence that is being imposed will probably entail a mass exodus, which will serve to invade Moskitia with African palm.  

From the deposit of oil and natural gas that exist both in the continental shelf and the wetlands, to the expansion of the corridor of biofuels, and the construction of mega-dams in the rivers that run towards the coast, form part of the National Plan the Lobo administration is promoting. 

There even exists a call for a consultancy on the part of the PNUD, titled An Analysis and Appraisal  of the effects of the African palm in Moskitia, and another about the definition of the mechanisms for free and informed prior consent  by the Miskito people.  

The militarization and aggression against the Miskitos will facilitate the imposition of the Mesoamerican corridor of biofuels, which replaced the expired MesoAmerican Biological Corridor. It will limit any claim about the royalties of the hydrocarbons of the territory, which possibly in the future will be the American version of the Niger delta. 

To demand justice for the murders committed by the occupying forces, in a country where seven out of 100 murders are tried, more than a dream, it is a nightmare.

La Ceiba, Atlantida, May 15, 2012, OFRANEH

“We do it knowing what can happen”, Interview with Gilda, Honduran Journalist Under Threat

by the Nicaragua International Team

Honduras is one of the most dangerous places in the world to be a journalist. On March 11th, Honduran Journalist Fausto Evelio Valle was murdered. Evelio Valle was a news anchor for a radio program in the Honduran municipality of Sabá. This is the 24th journalist to be killed in the last 3 years.

In our recent visit to Honduras the Nicaragua International Team spoke to Gilda Silvestrucci, a Honduran independent journalist, about being a journalist in Honduras and the role of United States policy in the current situation there. Gilda and her children have been subject to death threats and intimidation. In January of this year, over 1,000 Witness for Peace members wrote to the U.S. State Department demanding that the U.S. put pressure on the Honduran government to provide protection.

What is the situation like for journalists in Honduras?

It depends on what type of journalist we are talking about. There are two types of journalists: the journalists who work for the large media companies in this country who are obligated to work according to the instructions they are given by the owners of these media. The majority of these owners are business men, the majority of them are politicians, or peers of politicians in this country. For this reason, in these news companies there is a lot of censorship in covering certain issues…

And there is the other sector of journalists who don’t work in these large news firms but rather work in what one could call “alternative media.” I place myself in this camp. …I buy time on a radio station each month to be able to work and I do this, more than anything, to address those issues that are not represented by the interests of the owners of the large media companies. For example, they do not report on the case of the campesinos of the Bajo Aguan and all of their problems. They don’t have it on their agenda in comparison to us, independent media, independent journalists. We do it knowing what can happen to us.

When did you start receiving threats?

… In the month of December the “Journalists for Life” brought forth a demand against President Porfirio Lobo Sosa, president of this country; against the Commander of the Honduran Armed Forces; and the Chief of the Honorary Presidential Guard. We have this denouncement against them for their abuse of authority, for mistreatment, and for negation of the fundamental rights of citizens…

Later that month I was followed after I got in a taxi that came to take me home. After a little while the taxi driver tells me, “I don’t know if you’ve noticed but they’re following us.” I forgot about it; I thought that the incident was just a coincidence. Then, on the 20th of January, my mother received a call to the house from a guy who said that he wanted to know where I was to give me some documents and that he wanted to know my schedule, when I arrive, where he could find me throughout the day... Next, the following Monday, I left with my son from his school and that day on my radio program I addressed mining issues, the violations that mining companies are committing and all of the corruption that is linked to the national congress in order to pass the new mining law that favors the mining companies. When we left the program the people I had invited to speak crossed the street from the radio station and there was a police officer taking photos… I stayed inside because I wanted to eat breakfast with my son. I received a call from a guy who told me the ages of my children and that he knew I was with my son and that they were going to send someone to kill me.

They continued to call me through the middle of the night to my cell phone. I didn’t answer, I just reported the numbers to be investigated by the district attorneys of human rights who took protective measures but those measures don’t really do anything. They want the police to go with someone from their house to their work but that doesn’t represent security. Why would someone want to accept police protection when there are signs of corruption and links with so many murders? You can’t. So up until this moment that is where my case is.

Could you tell me more about Journalists for Life and Free Expression?

This is a group of journalists who came together because of the deaths that were happening, the assassination of fellow journalists that increased after the coup d’état in this country. Before the coup d’état they had reported only one murder of a journalist. After the coup d’état we have seen 18 murders of journalists.

We came together to protest, to go to the government and demand that they investigate these cases of assassinations of our colleagues. …They tried to attribute the deaths of these journalists to personal issues, saying that it was for personal reasons that they were victims of hitmen. But really, still today these cases haven’t been investigated, nor is there documented proof from the police that can affirm that these fellow journalists were assassinated for personal circumstances rather than because of their work.... So Journalists for Life protested last year outside of the president’s residence.

…We went to the president’s residence, they didn’t let us pass, they threw teargas at us. Some of us were beaten. The majority of us were women because we were protesting the death of the journalist Luz Marina Paz. We were a group of about 40 women and we went with our voice recorders, cameras, banners and we tried to read a statement outside of the president’s house. The response of the government was repression…

As a journalist what do you think about the aid that the United States gives to the police and military?

I think that historically this is one of the biggest things that supports the violations of human rights in this country. Even though the United States government says that it helps or asks for the respect of human rights on one hand, on the other hand…it promotes training and gives funds to the armed forces.

In our country the military isn’t necessary. Our country needs education. What we need is food, job opportunities, dignified health care centers for our people, dignified hospitals for our people. We don’t need a military, we don’t need warplanes, we don’t need weapons for war, we don’t need tear gas. I think that the United States is one of the accomplices in the violation of human rights in our country.

Gilda Silvesstruchi hosts the radio program “En La Plaza” daily on Radio Globo. She also has worked with Radio Progresso.