Images of Honduran soldiers sending renegade president Manuel Zelaya into exile late last month brought back bad memories, and regional diplomats might be forgiven their rush to judgment based on the most superficial impressions. What is inexcusable, however, is that most of them have used the last three weeks to level demands rather than to study how Zelaya, quite literally, forfeited his office under the Honduran constitution by trying to grab a forbidden second term. Willfully disoriented, the international community now is seeking to impose remedies that would compound the damage done by Zelaya to the rule of law in Honduras.  

On Wednesday, the mediator, Costa Rican President Oscar Arias, set today as a deadline for Zelaya to return to Honduras to lead a “government of unity and national reconciliation,” buttressed by a general amnesty for “political crimes.” A simple reading of the facts on the ground explains why this plan is unrealistic.

In the interest of unity and reconciliation, the plan proposes to replace an interim government that enjoys historic support among the country’s political parties with a polarizing figure who is less popular today than when he was voted out of office by a near-unanimous Honduran congress.

Zelaya said in an interview that he would welcome a constituent assembly that could afford him a second term—repeating the very offense that cost him his legitimacy in the first place.

In the interest of a democratic transition, an interim president who has pledged to turn over power to an elected successor in January would be replaced by a man who lost his job for refusing to make that commitment.

In the interest of democratic institutions, the proposed plan would discredit the lawful decisions made by Honduras’s free congress and independent courts to defend the constitutional order. It would presume to extend an amnesty to judges and other elected officials who did nothing wrong, as part of a deal to restore a president who committed the most grievous constitutional crimes.

In the interest of justice, a proposed amnesty would treat as moral equivalents soldiers who admit they may have broken the law and a caudillo (strong man) who just told a Brazilian paper, in an interview published this past Sunday, that he intends to repeat his crimes. Zelaya said that he would welcome a constituent assembly that could afford him a second term—repeating the very offense that cost him his legitimacy in the first place.

The possibility of mob violence, egged on by Zelaya and bankrolled by foreign meddlers, grows every day.

Yesterday, Zelaya began a dramatic march home from Nicaragua, in a move that could spark a violent confrontation and lead to his arrest. It is hard to imagine that many Hondurans would welcome Zelaya back to power after he wished economic sanctions, foreign military intervention, and violent “insurrection” upon his countrymen. The possibility of mob violence, egged on by Zelaya, grows every day. Frankly, if the man had an ounce of sympathy for his people, he would set aside his cynical quest for vengeance rather than risk one more Honduran life.

Ironically, at a time when U.S. journalists were wondering about the clout of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, she stepped forward to endorse a review of the facts and a negotiated solution. More than once, she has urged Zelaya and his sponsor Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez to call off the dogs. Hondurans could seize this political space by taking measures that uphold their constitution and strengthen their democracy. Here’s how:

•    One step may be advancing the scheduled November elections to September and inviting independent international groups to observe the process.

•    The leading presidential candidates could be encouraged to launch a “campaign for national unity” and begin a healthy debate on their plans for the country’s future.

•    The Honduran congress and the supreme court could form a commission of eminent Hondurans to hold individuals responsible for overstepping their authority in sending Zelaya into exile. These institutions could invite their counterparts from other countries to visit Honduras to study how Zelaya forfeited his legitimacy, and why the constitution should be interpreted to bar him from holding public office for at least 10 years.

•    The interim president, Roberto Micheletti, could submit his cabinet and a national unity plan to a vote of confidence by Honduras’s democratically elected congress, offering to give up the job he never sought if the people’s elected representatives so decide.

•    Honduras’s law enforcement agencies should reveal everything they know about Zelaya’s ties to drug cartels, rendering those arguing for his return complicit in his crimes.

Hondurans may have to accept that outsiders are ignorant about their constitution and about how Zelaya forfeited his legitimacy. But outsiders have no right to ask Hondurans to play dumb. On the contrary, before the international community abets mob violence, political polarization, foreign bullying, and economic sanctions to force Zelaya back into power, Hondurans have a right to ask if the international community has the good will to do the right thing and the good sense to know what that is.

Roger F. Noriega, a senior State Department official from 2001 to 2005, is a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and managing director of Vision Americas LLC, which represents foreign and domestic clients. The firm recently worked for a Honduran private sector group.

FURTHER READING: Noriega has also written “Slouching to Populism” on how embattled democrats in Latin America read the State Department’s reticence as weakness and indifference, and “From Democracy to Dictatorship” on Chávez’s march toward dictatorship.

Image by Darren Wamboldt/Bergman Group.