U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

66–899PDF 2011

HOLDING HONDURAS HOSTAGE:

REVOKED VISAS AND U.S. POLICY

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON 

THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JUNE 14, 2011

Serial No. 112–55

Printed for the use of the Committee on Foreign Affairs

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.foreignaffairs.house.gov/

(II)

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS 

ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida, Chairman 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

DAN BURTON, Indiana 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

STEVE CHABOT, Ohio 

RON PAUL, Texas 

MIKE PENCE, Indiana 

JOE WILSON, South Carolina 

CONNIE MACK, Florida 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

TED POE, Texas 

GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

BILL JOHNSON, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

MIKE KELLY, Pennsylvania 

TIM GRIFFIN, Arkansas 

TOM MARINO, Pennsylvania 

JEFF DUNCAN, South Carolina 

ANN MARIE BUERKLE, New York 

RENEE ELLMERS, North Carolina 

VACANT 

HOWARD L. BERMAN, California 

GARY L. ACKERMAN, New York 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

BRAD SHERMAN, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

GREGORY W. MEEKS, New York 

RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

GERALD E. CONNOLLY, Virginia 

THEODORE E. DEUTCH, Florida 

DENNIS CARDOZA, California 

BEN CHANDLER, Kentucky 

BRIAN HIGGINS, New York 

ALLYSON SCHWARTZ, Pennsylvania 

CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut 

FREDERICA WILSON, Florida 

KAREN BASS, California 

WILLIAM KEATING, Massachusetts 

DAVID CICILLINE, Rhode Island 

YLEEM D.S. POBLETE, Staff Director 

RICHARD J. KESSLER, Democratic Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CONNIE MACK, Florida, Chairman 

MICHAEL T. MCCAUL, Texas 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

DAVID RIVERA, Florida 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey 

ELTON GALLEGLY, California 

ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York 

ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey 

ENI F.H. FALEOMAVAEGA, American 

Samoa 

DONALD M. PAYNE, New Jersey 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Page

WITNESSES 

The Honorable Roberto Micheletti Baı ́n (via video conference), former President of Honduras .................................................................................................. 8

The Honorable Cresencio S. Arcos, Jr., senior political advisor, National Defense University’s Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies (former U.S. 

Ambassador to Honduras) ................................................................................... 16

LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC., SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING 

The Honorable Roberto Micheletti Baı ́n: Prepared statement ............................. 11

The Honorable Cresencio S. Arcos, Jr.: Prepared statement ............................... 18

APPENDIX 

Hearing notice .......................................................................................................... 32

Hearing minutes ...................................................................................................... 33

The Honorable Connie Mack, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Florida, and chairman, Subcommittee on the Western Hemisphere: 

Prepared statement .............................................................................................. 35

Material submitted for the record ...................................................................... 37

The Honorable Donald M. Payne, a Representative in Congress from the 

State of New Jersey: Material submitted for the record ................................... 46

(1)

HOLDING HONDURAS HOSTAGE: REVOKED 

VISAS AND U.S. POLICY 

TUESDAY, JUNE 14, 2011

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE, 

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:10 p.m., in room 

2172, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Connie Mack (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. 

Mr. MACK. The subcommittee will come to order. 

I first want to thank everyone, especially our witnesses, for joining us here today. 

After recognizing myself and the ranking member, Mr. Engel, for 

5 minutes each for our opening statements, we will then proceed 

directly to testimony from our distinguished witnesses. The full 

text of their written testimony will be inserted into the record. 

Without objection, members have 5 days to submit statements and 

questions for the record. 

After we hear from our witnesses, individual members will be 

recognized for 5 minutes each to question our witnesses. 

As you all can tell, we have a special guest with us here today, 

the chair of the full committee of Foreign Affairs; and in deference 

to the chairman of the full committee, without objection, Chairman 

Ros-Lehtinen is recognized to make a brief statement at this time. 

Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN. Thank you so much, Chairman Mack. It is 

an honor and pleasure to be here at your subcommittee. 

I wanted to take just a minute to join you this afternoon to underscore my deep disappointment at the Obama administration’s 

overall ongoing punitive policy toward the people of Honduras who 

opposed Manuel Zelaya’s attacks on their country’s Constitution 

and the rule of law and to express my grave concern that the Department of State appears to have actively stood in the way of having Mr. Micheletti and others participate in today’s hearing. 

We faced similar stonewalling when the State Department initially refused to provide requested information to the Government 

Accountability Office in response to an investigation that it was 

carrying out at the request of several Members of Congress, including me. 

The GAO investigation, which will be released in the next few 

months, was to focus on the State Department’s involvement and 

particularly on U.S. Ambassador Llorens’ role in promoting a specific pro-Zelaya political outcome for Honduras. 

2

Also, with respect to today’s hearing, it is deeply troubling that 

the Department of State would take steps to thwart at every turn 

the prerogative of Congress and this committee in their oversight 

of U.S. policy toward Honduras, especially as I believe this policy 

has undermined U.S. national security and foreign policy objectives. 

I want to thank Congressman Mack, the chairman of this subcommittee, for holding this important hearing as well as for his 

leadership on behalf of U.S. national security interests and vital interests in the region and also for bringing attention to this concerning policy of this administration. 

So I thank the gentlemen and I thank the chairman and the 

members for this opportunity. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Madam Chair. It is a delight to have you 

with us today, and thank you for helping us highlight the point 

that you made. It is very important. 

Before I move on, I want to obviously thank the Ambassador for 

being here with us. 

I also want to take this opportunity to thank President 

Micheletti for joining us. As you can see, he has to join us by video 

conference. Why? Because the State Department refuses to give 

him a visa to testify here in person. So the State Department is 

blocking the oversight of this committee by refusing to have President Micheletti join us. 

President Micheletti, thank you so much for being with us here 

today. Thank you for taking the time, and I know it wasn’t easy. 

But, as you know, I consider you to be a hero in Latin America for 

standing up for freedom and democracy. So thank you. 

The State Department has gone to great lengths to try to stop 

this hearing from happening, whether it was refusing visas to people who we have asked to come and testify in front of the committee, or wouldn’t even let President Micheletti into the State Department—into the Embassy in Honduras. So we had to find another place for him to do the video conference. I think that is 

shameful on the State Department’s side. They should welcome the 

opportunity for this committee to do its oversight. 

I now recognize myself for 5 minutes. 

The real coup and the only coup that occurred in Honduras that 

the Obama administration has failed to address is the coup attempted by former President Zelaya with the support of Hugo Chavez. Zelaya attempted to change the Honduran Constitution by all 

means possible, including the use of the military. 

In May, 2009, President Zelaya, working with his friend Hugo 

Chavez, ordered a referendum to take place on November 29, 2009, 

that would have removed Presidential term limits. The Honduran 

Constitution specifically prohibits this; and, thus, Zelaya violated 

Article 239 of the Honduran Constitution, which includes a selfexecuting clause of removal from office. 

Now you all know the ALBA nations. The ALBA playbook, led 

by Hugo Chavez, was followed closely. We have seen it in Bolivia, 

Nicaragua, and Ecuador. But the courageous Honduran people 

stood firmly behind their Constitution, behind the rule of law, and 

for their democracy. The intent of Zelaya, under Chavez’s guidance, 

3

was to become President for life. I don’t know about you, but I call 

that a dictator. 

On May 29, 2009, the Attorney General recommended that the 

Honduran courts hold that Zelaya’s referendum was illegal and unconstitutional. In late June, the Supreme Court ordered the Honduran forces not to provide support for the referendum. 

Zelaya continued to utilize the resources of his friend Hugo Chavez, who printed the ballots and flew them to a military base in 

Honduras. On June 27, in opposition to the Supreme Court order, 

Zelaya led a violent mob to seize and distribute the ballots for the 

referendum. On June 28, the Supreme Court issued an arrest order 

for Zelaya and formally removed him as President. The brave Honduran military was also placed in a difficult position, forced to 

stand up to their President in order to support their Constitution. 

On June 28, the Honduran military, acting on a warrant from 

the Honduran Supreme Court, removed Zelaya from power. He was 

later put on a plane out of the country for his own protection as 

well as other security reasons. 

On June 28, President Obama issued a statement calling the removal of Zelaya illegal and a coup. How in the world, after looking 

at the facts, could you describe what happened in Honduras as a 

coup? At no time did the military take control of the country. At 

no time was force used to take over the country. And, in fact, Honduras did everything that you would ask from a country in Latin 

America to do. They stood up for their Constitution. They stood up 

for the rule of law. They stood up for their democracy. They fought 

for their freedom. 

Later, the Honduran Congress, pursuant to the Honduran Constitution, voted Roberto Micheletti in as President. By the way, 

Micheletti was constitutionally next in line for succession and assumed the Presidency on an interim basis. Again, the military was 

never in control of Honduras. President Micheletti never interfered 

with the ongoing Presidential campaign nor interfered with the 

previously planned November 2009 Presidential election. 

On November 29, 2009, Hondurans voted in the Presidential 

election. Pepe Lobo won with 56 percent of the vote. On December 

2, in accordance with the San Jose Accord, the Honduran Congress 

voted 111–14 to not reinstate ousted President Zelaya. The Supreme Court and the Attorney General also recommended this outcome. 

On January 27, President Micheletti stepped down from power in 

accordance with the Constitution and handed over power peacefully 

to a democratically elected President-elect Pepe Lobo. 

What were the U.S. responses to these actions? 

After harshly labeling the situation a coup, the State Department cut funding for Honduran military and law enforcement programs. Since then, the homicide rate in Honduras has become one 

of the highest in the world. 

So where are we today? 

Zelaya is back in the country. The Obama administration 

capitulated to Chavez’s demands when accepting Honduras back 

into the OAS, a flawed and ineffective institution that has failed 

to uphold its own democratic charter; and the brave Honduran heroes are still being punished by this administration today, as witVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:20 Sep 20, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00007 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\061411\66899 HFA PsN: SHIRL
4

nessed by our witness having to speak to you today not from our 

subcommittee hearing room. 

In a hearing before this subcommittee on February 15, 2011, Assistant Secretary Valenzuela said the State Department was, and 

I quote: ‘‘Looking into how the visas that were taken away will be 

restored.’’ It has been 4 months since that statement, 15 months 

since the U.S. Government recognized the new President of Honduras, and almost 2 years since the first visas were revoked. 

As Assistant Secretary Valenzuela, Ambassador Llorens, and the 

Obama administration continue a policy of meddling in Honduran 

affairs, it is time we hear from the Hondurans themselves. It is important that everyone understands the degree to which U.S. policies have negatively impacted the country of Honduras and the region. 

It is time for the U.S. administration to move on, specifically, 

Ambassador Llorens who, through abuse of power, has manipulated and intimidated the Honduran people. This is not the role of 

the U.S. diplomatic community. 

Let me just add, I hope that Ambassador Llorens is watching 

this today and I hope he feels shame for not participating in what 

should have been held up as what we would expect from countries 

in Latin America, but for trying to dictate and manipulate an outcome that supports an attempted coup by Zelaya on the country of 

Honduras. 

Hondurans deserve to move forward without the counterproductive interference from the State Department. It deserves to 

have every one of its revoked visas reinstated, to have a second 

MCC Compact, and an assistant secretary in the United States 

State Department who believes in providing the same kind of assistance the United States provides other free countries. 

In a hemisphere dangerously influenced by anti-democractic 

forces—Hugo Chavez—Honduras deserves to have the kind of ally 

that will allow it to determine its own secure and prosperous future. 

I want to conclude by saying this: I was in Panama a couple of 

weeks ago where I met with President Martinelli. During the meeting, completely unprovoked, the President of Panama requested our 

help in getting the good people of Honduras their visas back. This 

is a serious issue. This is a regional issue, and this is an issue that 

must be solved without further delay. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses and their testimony. 

I will conclude with this: When we look at foreign policy in Latin 

America, it is time that the United States stands on the side of our 

allies. It is time that we stand with those who defend their Constitution and the rule of law. It is time that we stand with the allies of Panama and Colombia and pass their free trade agreements. 

It is not a time to appease Hugo Chavez and the ALBA countries. 

We need to stand strong in support of our friends and allies and 

the actions by this President and the State Department are not 

supporting the security of this country. 

I now would like to recognize the ranking member, Eliot Engel, 

for his opening statement. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I don’t know where to begin. There is so much to say. 

5

First of all, I wish that we were looking forward, rather than 

backwards. I think we need to ask ourselves some important future-oriented questions and not focus on yesterday’s news. I am not 

sure that we help Honduras and its citizens advance in today’s society by focusing on the unfortunate events of 2009. 

I know that you feel strongly about it because when I was chairman, we talked a lot about it and I don’t think that our reading 

of this is tremendously different. I think we all want to help Honduras and we all—at least I supported the elections in Honduras 

to move forward; and, frankly, I am delighted with the leadership 

that Pepe Lobo has provided for Honduras. 

I have a different feeling about the U.S. State Department. I 

don’t know about the visas, but I think basically the State Department handled it rather well. I think that it is clear to me that Mr. 

Zelaya was illegally trying to run for another term, something 

which has been done by a lot of the despots in the region, like 

Hugo Chavez and others and I think what he was doing was illegal. 

However, I think the way he was removed was also illegal. I 

don’t think that you rout someone out of their bed in their pajamas 

and whisk them away at gunpoint. I don’t really think that is the 

right way to do it either, as well. 

So I think what the State Department had to do was walk a delicate line. It doesn’t bother me whether it is called a coup or not. 

Frankly, the bottom line is: Where do we go from here? That is 

what I think we need to be focusing on. 

I think that Mr. Micheletti was running the country during a 

very difficult time, a difficult time for him, a difficult time for Honduras. I think, by and large, he had an admirable record. 

But I do think that we should be talking about looking forward. 

We have just witnessed being a party and we were a party to a 

stunning display of multilateral diplomacy as OAS members nearly 

unanimously agreed to welcome Honduras back into the OAS. I 

would hope that we could have a hearing at some point about that 

because I think that is something I had been pushing for. I thought 

it made no sense to not allow Honduras into the OAS when you 

have an invitation to Cuba to come in. You have Hugo Chavez and 

others in there and I thought it made no sense to not have Honduras there. We were able to get that and I think that is something 

that this committee needs to look at. 

I think it is a successful example of multilateral diplomacy. It 

emphasized cooperation over antagonism and I think it should be 

applauded and emulated. Because this goal is testament to the 

progress that can and is being made throughout the region, despite 

the despots that we have in the region. 

So I think what we should be doing today is asking the questions 

that need asking: How do we help President Lobo advance this 

country to qualify for a new Millennium Challenge Corporation 

Compact? How do we help President Obama advance his Central 

American Citizen Security Partnership and assist Honduras and its 

neighbors in the drug- and violence-ravaged northern triangle? 

How do we help Honduras address its human rights record and 

take serious steps to improve the rule of law? 

6

I think those are better things to focus on than visas that should 

or should not have been granted a couple of years ago. I mean, as 

far as I am concerned, I see no reason why Mr. Micheletti shouldn’t 

be allowed in this country, but I think that there are more important things to concentrate on. 

So, as Honduras tackles these challenges, one way we can increase confidence in its adherence to the rule of law is to deal with 

the claims of American citizens whose business or assets were lost 

in Honduras due to a corrupt judicial process or collusion by government-owned or controlled companies. We raise this again. I 

have raised this before. Mr. Rohrabacher has raised it, and others 

have raised it. And, Mr. Chairman, you and I have discussed it. 

The owner of one of these companies was illegally driven out of 

business and he is sitting in the hearing room today. And he is an 

American citizen. It is the same claim that has been dragging on 

for too long, and I urge the Government of Honduras to resolve this 

dispute without delay. We cannot sit here and allow American citizens to be treated in such terrible fashion. That needs to be addressed. 

That is why I have invited Ambassador Cresencio Arcos to testify 

today. Ambassador Arcos was U.S. Ambassador to Honduras from 

1989 to 1993. Subsequently, he served as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs and International 

Narcotics and Law Enforcement. He has also served as an Assistant Secretary in the Department of Homeland Security and is currently a senior advisor at the Center for Hemispheric Defense 

Studies at the National Defense University. He is the ideal person, 

I believe, to address the challenges facing Honduras in the days 

ahead. 

So, Mr. Chairman, to be sure, Honduras has work yet to be done. 

There are outstanding concerns about American citizens’ business 

interests in Honduras. There are obvious human rights concerns in 

Honduras, including recently a rising number of journalists being 

killed. 

When I was chairman of this subcommittee, I visited Honduras 

in 2009 for the OAS General Assembly. That gathering occurred on 

the eve of a dark chapter in Honduras’ history. I hope and I strongly believe that by asking the right questions, having the right discussions, and looking forward, not backward, we can close that 

chapter and help Honduras as it moves into the future. 

I thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. I want to thank the ranking member. 

I think we will allow the members 2 minutes for an opening 

statement. 

Mr. Rivera is recognized for 2 minutes. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for your indulgences. I thank the witnesses for testifying today before our 

committee. 

Like Chairman Mack and Chairman Ros-Lehtinen, I, too, am 

deeply disappointed with the State Department’s actions regarding 

today’s hearing and in their continued poor response and policy toward Honduras. 

When Assistant Secretary Arturo Valenzuela testified before this 

committee a few months ago, he stated that the State Department 

7

was looking into restoring the visas of Honduran Government officials whose visas were unjustifiably revoked for being leaders in 

fighting an unconstitutional takeover of their homeland. Nearly 11⁄2

years after the democratic election of a new President, we still see 

no progress from the State Department on this issue, as is evident 

today. I believe this is outrageous, considering the fact that we 

allow terrorist government leaders from around the world, like 

Fidel Castro and Ahmadinejad, to come into this country, but yet 

not a democratically elected leader from Honduras. 

In addition, the suspension of assistance to Honduras throughout 

the last 2 years has been detrimental to the well-being of the democratic Honduran Government and people, especially with the growing threat of drug cartels throughout Central America. 

Since the expulsion of Manuel Zelaya and the democratic Presidential election which followed, the Obama administration’s policy 

toward Honduras has focused more on appeasing the region’s leftist 

leaders. This was evident with the administration’s continued lobbying for the return of Zelaya to Honduras, an action which Hugo 

Chavez and Daniel Ortega had long been advocating. I cannot help 

but ask myself if this administration understands what is going on 

in Honduras and the challenges facing this ally nation, especially 

after the Honduran Constitution, court, and people helped solidify 

democracy. 

We all know what Zelaya did and the amount of corruption in 

his leadership and the constitutional crisis he created with the 

Honduran people. Why would the Obama administration force the 

Honduran people, who were hurt during this crisis, to accept once 

again a Communist puppet of Chavez that the Honduran courts 

and people constitutionally removed? 

As soon as Zelaya returned a few weeks ago, he began inciting 

violence by calling for resistance. It is no secret that Hugo Chavez 

and other leftist leaders are continuing to move to consolidate their 

hold on Honduras in order to continue facilitating drug trade 

routes to the north and to continue supporting leftist terrorist organizations. 

I look forward to the testimony of President Micheletti and Ambassador Arcos. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Rivera. 

Now I would like to recognize Mr. Payne for 2 minutes for an 

opening statement. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. I appreciate this hearing. 

The title of the hearing could not, in my opinion, be further from 

the truth. In short, Honduras is not under hostage and the United 

States has greatly contributed to Honduras’ current standing with 

the international community. The United States urged allies in 

South and Central America to restore relations with Honduras and 

lift the country’s suspension from the Organization of American 

States. In fact, on July 1, 2011, every OAS member state, with the 

exception of Ecuador, voted to lift Honduras’ suspension from the 

organization. This is a far cry from hostage treatment. You must 

correctly characterize our current relationship with Honduras before discussing further U.S. policy. 

8

That being said, our U.S. policy concerning Honduras must remain focused on addressing the numerous challenges Honduras 

faces, including the deteriorating human rights climate; First 

Amendment violations, particularly toward journalists and those 

with differing political views; narcotrafficking; and serious corruption in the economic sector. Furthermore, Honduras currently has 

inequitable levels that are among the highest in the Western Hemisphere. 

I look forward to the hearing and I agree we need to look forward 

rather than back. 

We have a letter I would like to submit, Mr. Chairman, for the 

record sent to Mrs. Clinton and signed by 68 Members of the U.S. 

Congress requesting to look into these allegations. 

Mr. MACK. Without objection. Thank you, Mr. Payne. 

I would now like to introduce our witnesses. 

First, again, on the video screen, the former President of Honduras, Roberto Micheletti. 

Before serving as President, Mr. Micheletti was the President of 

Honduras National Congress and has been a deputy in Congress 

since 1982. In January, 2010, President Micheletti was granted the 

status of ‘‘Legislator for Life’’ by the Honduran Congress. I again 

appreciate President Micheletti being with us. 

Second, we have Ambassador Arcos. I would introduce you, but 

I think the ranking member must have read my notes. He introduced you for me. So we appreciate you being here as well, Mr. 

Ambassador. 

I now would like to recognize President Micheletti for 5 minutes 

for his testimony and again thank him for joining us via video conference. Again, I think it is just flat wrong that the United States 

wouldn’t let you come and testify here. 

Mr. Micheletti, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE ROBERTO MICHELETTI 

BAI ́N (VIA VIDEO CONFERENCE), FORMER PRESIDENT OF 

HONDURAS 

[The following testimony was delivered via video conference and 

through an interpreter.] 

Mr. MICHELETTI. Thank you for the chance of allowing me to provide my testimony before this honorable committee, giving the society of Honduras the chance to speak through me and all the 

Hondurans. 

What happened on June 28 was the arbitrary and illegal behavior of President Zelaya. We acted according to our legislation. I assumed the Presidency by a mandate of the National Congress, a 

decision which was ratified by the Congress 6 months later at the 

petition of the international community. As President, I accepted 

the commitment of protecting the democratic process and guaranteed the electoral process which was in jeopardy. 

The elections held on November 29, 2009, where Hondurans 

elected our current President was not backed up by any of the 

international community agencies, nor by the administration of the 

United States of America. It was my administration who made the 

effort to find a solution to this crisis. That is why I defended and 

9

complied with my commitment to hold free and transparent elections. 

Notwithstanding, Zelaya opposed general elections. He made a 

call not to vote and also even to boycott the elections. After the 

election, he requested not to recognize the President, Pepe Lobo. 

Thank God and the effort of the Honduran people, the elections 

were transparent and with extraordinary results. There is no dictator or someone who overtakes a government who only stays 7 

months in government and doesn’t go against the laws of the Honduran Constitution. 

I feel proud that I defended alongside the Hondurans and thank 

God that I was able to protect the democracy which I believe so 

heartily in. I complied with the oath I took before the honorable 

Congress that I was going to respect the law and handle the elections on November 29 to elect a new government, a new administration. 

I would like to remember that I am personally and the country 

of Honduras a friend of the United States and I wish that this 

friendship will be held forever and would not be destroyed. 

It is ironic that the life to be protected, when he was the one promulgating hate between Hondurans and against the United States 

and he was the one who still was carrying and to this day promoting hatred among Hondurans. 

Everybody knows that Hugo Chavez is an employee—that Zelaya 

is an employee of Hugo Chavez. He has a salary from Hugo Chavez 

and he is here to promote—he is here to fight against democracy. 

He is promoting the meeting with Sol Pablo which promotes the 

ALBA countries which are against democracy. Zelaya has always—

he was alongside the socialist dictators of Latin America. He received a prize for being with the left of Latin American countries. 

I was 1 day before the events of 2–28 with Ambassador Llorens 

in his residence, and we talked about Hugo Chavez, Zelaya’s closeness with Hugo Chavez, and I informed him personally of that relationship. 

I would like to point out something really strong, according to my 

judgment, and to define who is who in Honduras. 

The previous Secretary of State of Zelaya, Patricia Rodas, ideologue of the socialist movement, advisor of Zelaya, a militant of 

Sandinista, a political activist of Castro and who lived in Cuba for 

many years, she had meetings with Iranian diplomats. That is why 

in my administration we had immediately to cancel visas for people 

from Iraq, Iran, Libya, and other African countries because there 

was a large flow of these people, terrorists, from Venezuela to Nicaragua and they wanted to come into Honduras. We are very preoccupied because we know Hugo Chavez still has an influence and 

has power over those countries. 

I want to set the record clear. I am going to send several documents for your perusal from before, during, and after the events of 

June 28. 

I want to state that I support all of the efforts to have reconciliation in this country, but that reconciliation must not break our 

Constitution, not to allow impunity, not to allow those who committed crimes against the laws of this country walk on the streets 

free of punishment. 

10

I want to tell you that we are under the position to continue defending the democracy of this country. The last favor I am going 

to ask from you, who are the fathers of democracy in this world, 

to please look out for this democracy, these Presidents who come 

overnight and who intend to stay as Presidents, violating the democracy of the people in those countries. 

I am gratified that it is the opinion of the majority of Hondurans 

that OAS committed a crime against our country because they sent 

observers to the court, after knowing that it was declared illegal. 

They sent Mr. Insulza, condemned Honduras, and gave us 72 hours 

to bring Zelaya back to the country. 

I also want to claim from the United States, of the administration——

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, if I may interrupt for a minute, we 

have kind of a standing time limit here of 5 minutes. We have let 

your statement go for 15. I am thankful for the members, but we 

wanted to accommodate both you and the interpreter. 

If you don’t mind, Mr. President, I would like to move to our second witness and then we will have time for questions. Is that okay? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. Yes. Thank you, sir. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Micheletti follows:]

11


66899a-1.eps
12


66899a-2.eps
13


66899a-3.eps
14


66899a-4.eps
15

[NOTE: The unofficial English translation of this statement appears 

in the appendix of this transcript.]


66899a-5.eps
16

Mr. MACK. Now I would like to recognize Ambassador Arcos for 

his opening statement and testimony. 

STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CRESENCIO S. ARCOS, JR., 

SENIOR POLITICAL ADVISOR, NATIONAL DEFENSE UNIVERSITY’S CENTER FOR HEMISPHERIC DEFENSE STUDIES 

(FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO HONDURAS) 

Mr. ARCOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the kind invitation 

today to address this distinguished body. 

During the last 30 years, I served for 8 years as a U.S. diplomat 

in Honduras. Throughout this period, Honduras has taken significant strides to become a modern, democratic society. Honduras 

was, in fact, a loyal and commited friend of the U.S. in the final 

chapter of the Cold War when both Soviet and Cuban efforts were 

successfully thwarted. I must say, Honduras was key to this. So I 

am heartened by the whole fact that the OAS has deemed it correct 

to return Honduras to its ranks of the OAS. 

Unfortunately, since the 2009 crisis, Honduras has seen organized crime flourish, accompanied by a weakening of the rule of 

law. I would personally like to comment on the Honduran legal system. 

If Honduras could manage to successfully apply its laws, it would 

be much easier to attract investment. That is the enforcement of 

contractual rights as well as human rights, which are both vital to 

the rule of law. 

The Honduran justice system is too often found to be flawed in 

its process. Property and investment disputes, like the CEMAR 

case, which Mr. Engel alluded to, continue to illustrate how Honduras often lacks the political grit to address the complaints of foreign investors. Lacking trust in the Honduran justice system, they 

turn to international arbitration or similar credible processes. The 

justice system plainly lacks credibility and trust in the proper application of the law. This is the reason why investors do not seek 

resolution through the local judicial system. The legal system 

plainly does not inspire confidence. 

Unfortunately, the current institutional weakness, along with the 

scant political will, encourages impunity. By impunity I mean the 

lack of accountability, which is the greatest weakness of the Honduran legal system. Yet there is no consensus on how to end it. 

Honduras’ laws regulate the state’s obligations to execute actions 

to prevent unfair competition and monopolistic practices. Different 

Honduran administrations have either found themselves unwilling 

or unable to apply the law correctly. This undermines the rule of 

law. 

Moreover, it has become commonplace for some to engage in 

predatory pricing with the intent to eliminate foreign investment 

competition. This has encouraged influential groups to continue 

with impunity. It has underscored the government’s inability to 

handle investment disputes properly. 

The 1992 Honduran investment law sought to improve the country’s ability to compete. Its objective was to enact a framework for 

foreign investment with transparency to implement good practices 

and allow for due diligence. 

17

Though corruption and abuse of power are typified under Honduran law as criminal, they continue to hobble business. Some U.S. 

firms have resolved their cases through the Honduran courts, nonetheless. Recently, however, I provided advice to a foreign investment firm which subsequently was awarded an official contract in 

a true climate of transparency. This was most welcomed as a refreshing, positive development. 

There are other factors that cause Honduras’ investment climate 

to be hampered. The Honduran Government does not customarily 

publish regulations before they enter into effect. The country does 

not count with a formal mechanism to seek public commentary for 

proposed regulations. To complicate matters, Honduras lacks an indexed legal code. That means that lawyers and judges themselves 

have to maintain the index publication of laws. While a few U.S. 

firms have satisfactorily navigated through the Honduran court 

system, the majority have serious challenges. 

The current alarming levels of criminal activity, low educational 

levels, and inadequate infrastructure serve to exacerbate the investment climate. The Honduran court system’s opaqueness and 

slow administration have been underscored as primary obstacles 

for attracting investment. The U.S. has spent millions of tax dollars training prosecutorial staff in the Honduran justice system. 

Yet, recently, many U.S.-trained prosecutors have found themselves out of a job due to their commitment to a fair and equal administration of law. 

The Honduran Government and its private sector must ensure 

that those interested in conducting business in Honduras are able 

to in a transparent environment and given a level playing field. We 

must energetically demand fair treatment of U.S. investors. 

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Arcos follows:]

18


66899c-1.eps
19


66899c-2.eps
20

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. Thank you for your testimony. 

I now would like to recognize myself for 5 minutes for questions. 

President Micheletti, again, I want to thank you for joining us. 

I agree with the sentiment here that we wish we were talking 

about moving forward, but it is hard to move forward when the 

United States Government continues to wrongly punish people for 

doing exactly what it is we would want them to do: Stand up for 

their Constitution; stand up for the rule of law. 

So I ask you this: Do you believe that Ambassador Llorens and 

the State Department are continuing to put pressure or punish 

those who stood up for their Constitution? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. I am completely sure that there is still pressure, especially for Mr. Llorens, trying to put pressure on people 

who participated in defending democracy in this country. 

Mr. MACK. I don’t think that it is a secret that this was personal 

to Ambassador Llorens in some way. Instead of acting on the behalf of the United States and its diplomatic effort, somehow this 

was personal. This has become personal to him, so much so that 

he visibly gets angry when talk about restoring visas comes up. 

Can you tell us a little bit about your dealings with the Ambassador? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. There is an action which I am going to make 

public at this time. Mr. William Holt Micheletti had his visa suspended. He is a businessman who has nothing to do with what 

happened on June 28. 

When he went to the U.S. Embassy, he had an interview with 

Mr. Llorens and a consul who was there at that time and they told 

him that they were doing that to put pressure on me so I would 

quit my administration. And like with many other figures of this 

country, they put pressure on me so I would abandon the administration, my post as President, and hand it over to Zelaya, knowing 

that Zelaya has no sympathy for the democracy of the United 

States. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

Mr. Ambassador, do you believe that the State Department was 

right in revoking these visas in punishment to government officials, 

business leaders who supported their rule of law and their Constitution? 


66899c-3.eps
21

Mr. ARCOS. Mr. Chairman, while I was Ambassador, fortunately, 

I did not have to deal with the sort of arbitrary cancellation of 

visas as we have seen in recent times. 

Let me say this: I think that Mr. Llorens, who in fact worked for 

me at one time, is a dedicated public servant and a dedicated U.S. 

diplomat. I think whatever actions that were taken, there was a reflection of larger policy and of the policy of the United States at 

that time, whether we agreed with it or not. 

I feel that, first of all, we have to understand this visa issuance 

is somewhat a quandary to most people. There is no such thing as 

a right to a visa. It is very arbitrarily given by consular officers to 

begin with. And I think that now we are seeing an arbitrary cancellation not just in this case that you are talking about, Honduras, 

but worldwide. 

It seems to me that it would be useful at one point to have perhaps a discussion specifically on the procedures because they cause 

enormous confusion to many people. I feel in this case I don’t know 

what process the Embassy used exactly, or the State Department, 

but, clearly, the reflection was one of punitive action, I must say. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. My time is up. 

By the way, the State Department would not tell us what their 

procedures are. So maybe we will have that hearing. 

I would now like to recognize the ranking member, Mr. Engel, 

for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

President Micheletti, please correct me if I am wrong, but it is 

my understanding that you supported adding Honduras to 

Chavez’s ALBA group of nations; is that true? Did you ever support 

that? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. We approved the ALBA but with the condition 

of not including the phrase from Chavez of supporting Chavez politically and militarily, that aspect of ALBA. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

I am no fan of Zelaya and certainly no fan of Hugo Chavez, and 

I believe that Mr. Lobo is doing a good job. But I also believe that 

our State Department took a middle-of-the-road position that I 

think is proving to be a good position. We believed that the elections in Honduras, the elections that elected Mr. Lobo, should be 

respected and approved when other countries like Brazil and Argentina were saying no; and I know that we exerted a lot of pressure on that. 

So I guess my question is this: When you deal with any dispute 

that went on and nerves are raw and all sides feel that they were 

not treated properly—as I said before, I don’t think the way Mr. 

Zelaya was forced out of the country at gunpoint was the proper 

thing to do. I don’t think his trying for a second term was the proper thing to do. 

But I seem to remember when you were President there were negotiations going on to see if a compromise somehow could be resolved. I know the OAS and others were trying, and each time we 

would get reports that a compromise was about to be agreed to and 

signed off on, only to have you, the way it appeared to me—and 

correct me if I am wrong—have you back off and not support the 

compromise. 

22

Today, I hear you say that people who did all of these things 

should not get impunity or anything like that. I know people on the 

other side might say the same thing about you, particularly with 

visas and other things like that. So aren’t we just better off to try 

to put the unfortunate events behind us and look toward the future? And should we not be concentrating on the future for Honduras, not what, unfortunately, went on in the past? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. I feel it is necessary to concentrate on the future. At no time have we obstructed the actions of this President, 

current President. To the contrary, we always have supported the 

actions of President Pepe Lobo but with the fear of his getting close 

to Chavez. But we have no fear that President Lobo will not change 

our relation with the United States. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you. 

Mr. Ambassador, I am wondering if I can quickly ask you a question. As you know, I have been particularly involved with the 

CEMAR case claim in the past several years; and to review the 

facts, it is my understanding that CEMAR was driven out of business due to the collusion of two Honduran cement companies, one 

which was controlled by the government. And this case has been 

a serious thorn in the side of U.S.-Honduran relations for the last 

several years and needs to be resolved. 

So let me ask you, how do you think the CEMAR claim should 

be resolved? What are the facts? I think you alluded to it when you 

said that you have to have confidence in the judicial system. 

I have spoken with Mr. Cerna, who is the President; and when 

people from Honduras said to me, ‘‘Well, what Mr. Cerna has to do 

is go into our courts and get a judgment on the courts and then 

we can deal with it. We can’t deal with it since he hasn’t gone to 

the courts.’’

Well, Mr. Cerna—and I hope I am not putting words in his 

mouth, but I know the case very well—doesn’t go into the courts 

because he doesn’t have any confidence that he is going to get a 

fair hearing in the Honduran courts. And the mechanisms that 

have been set up for him globally to appeal would essentially bankrupt him. It is a large corporation to be able to afford that and is 

not for an individual business person. 

So what do you think here? What do you think our friends in the 

Government of Honduras should do? After all, they are asking for 

help from us and we want to protect our American citizens. We 

would like to see some help from them. 

Mr. ARCOS. Mr. Congressman, let me say that, as I understand 

the facts of the CEMAR case, it predates the current administration of Lobo and the one before it, as I understand it. So it has 

been around a while. 

Let me just say that I had a similar problem when I walked into 

the Ambassador’s office back in 1989 with a complaint from an 

American investor, and it was a sizeable complaint in terms of 

money. Quite frankly, the Honduran law does not provide for an 

easy process in these sorts of claims, as I understand. 

What I would suggest is that there be a discussion, as there was 

in my time, with the claimant and come to some agreement. There 

was no judicial agreement at that time or should I say resolution 

or an arbitration. There were just some discussions that made 

23

sense, and they were wisely taken by the then administration in 

Honduras and the U.S. investor. And, quite frankly, it worked out. 

We were able to resolve this step-by-step. 

So it can be done, but there has to be some willingness on both 

sides. 

Mr. ENGEL. Thank you, Mr. Ambassador. 

I just want to add, Mr. Chairman, another 10 seconds. 

This isn’t only something that I have been concerned with. Congressman Rohrabacher has actually put in a bill to cut U.S. aid to 

Honduras because he is so angry over the way Mr. Cerna and others—there are Cortez Byrd and Andreas Kafati and others. So this 

is something that is festering in a bipartisan fashion here on Capitol Hill. And I would hope that the Honduran Government would 

settle these cases. 

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. 

And I now recognize Mr. Rivera for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. RIVERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I want to share in the sentiments of all my colleagues who 

think it is important to move forward in U.S.-Honduran relations, 

but it is difficult for those bilateral relations to move forward as 

long as this administration keeps trying to punish a democratic 

ally. 

I want to start my questions with Ambassador Arcos. Can you 

give us a little bit of an insight in terms of what your opinion is 

or what you can tell us from your experience for the administration’s decision of not officially calling what happened in Honduras 

a coup? 

Mr. ARCOS. As I understand you, sir, you are asking me if it was 

correct——

Mr. RIVERA. Why you believe the administration would not officially say—use that term, ‘‘coup.’’

Mr. ARCOS. I should say, fortunately perhaps, I wasn’t a member 

of the administration at that time. 

Let me say this. When I was Assistant Secretary of Homeland 

Security, I accompanied the then Attorney General of the United 

States to the inauguration of Mr. Zelaya. And on the eve of his inauguration, I was asked to meet privately and basically give some 

advice on how to deal with the then administration, the American 

administration. And I said to Mr. Zelaya—and I reminded him 

after the June 8th events of that, what I said then when he—on 

the eve of his being sworn in. 

I said, you must distance yourself from Mr. Chavez. It is not productive. It won’t do you any good. Honduras is too close to the 

United States and has been for so many years that that optic is 

not acceptable. You are asking me in terms of Washington, and he 

said yes. And I reminded him afterwards that I had told him that 

three times. So I think that Mr. Zelaya knew exactly what he was 

doing. 

Now, with the interpretation of the State Department in terms 

of why he was removed, why wasn’t it called a coup, because I 

think that there was a doubt. I personally think they questioned 

whether the process—I think they were looking for—the State DeVerDate 0ct 09 2002 14:20 Sep 20, 2011 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 F:\WORK\WH\061411\66899 HFA PsN: SHIRL
24

partment, Mr. Rivera, is subfused with process. We used to say, if 

they don’t get you on substance, they get you on process. 

So I think that the process was very important to the State Department; and I think they looked at the process and separated it 

somewhat from the substance, perhaps. But the fact of the matter 

is they came to the conclusion it was a coup at one point. Because 

of the process, they regurgitated the whole process, and I think 

they came to that conclusion. But I think initially they had great 

doubts. 

Mr. RIVERA. President Micheletti, is it true that Assistant Secretary Valenzuela has made several trips to Honduras during his 

tenure? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. I have no personal knowledge. I know that he 

came once or twice through the media, but private trips I have no 

knowledge of that. 

Mr. RIVERA. Can you tell me, President Micheletti, in your opinion, the suspension of assistance to Honduras in 2009 by the 

United States, can you tell me how you believe that has affected 

the Honduran people? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. It causes a lot of harm to Hondurans who truly 

believe in democracy. In Honduras, while I was in the administration, crime rates went down except for the followers of Zelaya and 

the attempts of President Zelaya and other Secretaries of State and 

Presidents to bring Zelaya illegally into Honduras. We feel Honduras has received a very hard blow for certain characters from the 

United States administration. 

I want to read something that is very important which is the belief of a—people who were judged, sentenced, and condemned 

Hondurans for their—termination of defending democracy. You 

don’t imagine the damage caused and what still can happen because—due to unthoughtful and quick actions. 

Fortunately, the Library of Congress of the United States of 

America made a legal study that assures that in Honduras there 

was no coup; and that was good news for Honduras. But that did 

not change the attitude of some members of the U.S. administration to the Honduran people. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. President. 

Mr. Payne is recognized for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. PAYNE. Thank you very much. 

For us to say that it is unusual that the United States breaks 

relations with a country that has a coup is the practice that we 

have, and I think it is good practice. 

In Africa, Mauritania had a coup d’etat. They didn’t even put 

their President out of the country. The United States ended assistance, other than humanitarian assistance. They had an MCA account and it was doing a great job in the environment. It was suspended. 

And so to have people say that it is unusual that assistance is 

cut, that is what we do, to discourage. As a matter of fact, the Organization of African Unity even suspends its relationship just like 

the OAU did. 

And I know that there was the talk about this was a constitutional issue, that the courts voted on something. Half the countries 

in Africa have constitutional issues between the executive and the 

25

legislature and so forth. But it is not the practice to take people 

out. 

Now, they say it wasn’t a coup; it was maybe following the mandate of the General Assembly. The General Assembly didn’t take 

the President out, from what I understand. There were soldiers 

with guns and bayonets that drove him to the border that said 

don’t come back. 

Now, if it is a duck, it is a duck. A coup d’etat is a coup d’etat, 

regardless of what the court says. When you take a gun and tell 

a person to get out and don’t you come back and they try to come 

back, you drop block them at the airport. 

And I think that the new President, Lobo, from what I have been 

given, is trying to do a decent job. He is trying to do some good 

things. I don’t know how you—on what scale—you know Dante’s 

Inferno had seven levels of purgatory. So I don’t know where a better job is as relates to what is happening. But I think that for us 

to——

And visas, I can give you some visa stories. Some countries never 

get a visa because it is a privilege. And in Nigeria, you know what 

you get? About 1 minute to give your case. And they just say, go, 

next, next, next, next because there are so many people applying. 

You have to pay a big fee. And 90 percent, 95 percent are rejected. 

It is hard to get in this country today because of national security 

and other things. 

So to make this is a special case—I just maybe ask the former 

President, Micheletti, there was an interest that I have had in a 

medical facility and there was a medical school, the first Garifuna 

people’s hospital in Honduras. This is a group of doctors who are 

in the very poor area. They were granted a hospital license under 

President Zelaya’s government. 

Since the coup came in—and these are people who serve an underserved area. They serve the people of African descent, the 

former Carib, the Carib, and the Arawak Indian people. Since the 

new government came in, the military came in, changed the status 

of the hospital to a medical center, broke in one day and said they 

were looking for arms or something and arrested people. Three 

army patrols on October the 7th broke into the hospital. 

And now this hospital that is servicing poor native people, people 

of African descent, these are African descent doctors that were fortunate enough to get their education in Cuba because that is the 

only place that gives free education to poor people—If you could 

just quickly—if you know about this incident or are familiar with 

it, could you give me a quick—since my time has expired—I think 

you did it on purpose. Well, if he gets back on—okay. Thank you. 

Mr. MACK. I now will recognize Mr. Smith for 5 minutes for 

questions. 

Mr. SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Should I wait? 

Mr. MACK. Go ahead. 

Mr. SMITH. Okay, thank you. 

Ambassador Arcos, thank you for your testimony and I really appreciate your insights. 

Let me just ask you—first, I want to associate myself with Elliott 

Engel with regards to Oscar Cerna and his wife and their ongoing 

efforts to get justice and relief from their illegally stolen cement 

26

factory. And I would encourage the Hondurans, with whom I have 

a great deal of respect for, to resolve this and to do so immediately. 

And I think your comments, Ambassador, were right on point. It 

ought to be done, and it ought to be done immediately. 

Secondly, let me just ask you a question, if I could. What message regarding the consistency of U.S. foreign policy or the lack of 

it does the Obama administration send to a new democracy in the 

hemisphere and elsewhere in the world when it revokes visas to 

some 14 Supreme Court Justices, key leaders, including President 

Micheletti, and yet bestows huge honors and praise, including a 

steak dinner for Hu Jintao, the unelected President of the People’s 

Republic of China? 

President Hu, as we know, is directly responsible for the murder 

of hundreds of Tibetans as the Communist leader back in 1989. 

There is no statute of limitations on murder. He was the man in 

charge. He ordered those killings. He also ordered the brutality and 

the use of torture, arbitrary detention, and executed many of the 

Tibetan nuns, as well as the Tibetan monks. And yet that helped 

him rise to power. And now, as we all know, he is the President 

of China. 

Today, Hu Jintao rules with an iron fist over a Gulag state; and 

he and his fellow rights abusers not only get visas, he gets a steak 

dinner. 

What message does that send to people who believe in democracy? Mr. Ambassador. 

Mr. ARCOS. Thank you, Mr. Congressman. 

Let me say that, having been in the Foreign Service for about 27 

years, that was clearly a sort of gnawing question we had as a career Foreign Service officer, how to explain the inconsistencies of 

policies such as that. 

Well, obviously, foreign policy to the United States includes its 

interests; and, clearly, China is of great interest to the United 

States. Honduras was of great interest to the United States when 

I first served there because of the position and our policy of rollback and what have you, as well as when the Soviets were in Nicaragua and the Cubans were trying to topple the Salvadoran Government. So we had interests. 

Unfortunately, I think in foreign policy, we don’t have consistency in terms of our ethical or moral viewpoint. We certainly try 

to bring in—in every administration it seemed to me that I was familiar with—trying to reconcile that problem. But it is very difficult because of the larger interests and constituencies that we 

have in this country. 

Having said that, let me say that my own personal opinion is I 

congratulate each and every member of this subcommittee. Because, quite frankly, I feel Latin America is left out and ignored 

too often. Not just this administration but in many administrations. And, frankly, it is basically given to the daily routine of the 

State Department to have its say. 

It is not really the policymakers at the top involved on a daily 

basis, unfortunately, I would venture to say. We do not have energy. We do not have great lobbies for Latin America. We don’t 

have the banking interests, the defense industry, or any of that, or 

ethnic lobbies. Because certainly the Hispanic lobby or Latino lobby 

27

is not very interested in foreign policy, from my perspective. But 

certainly those lobbies, those constituencies are missing for Latin 

America. 

So, consequently, when—even Africa has a very significant NGO 

constituency in this country that is very, very significant; and it 

makes a difference. And I would just say that Latin America lacks 

that. So, consequently, it even gets more befuddled, sir. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. 

And going out of order very quickly—and I want to thank the 

gentleman, Mr. Faleomavaega, but Mr. Gallegly is recognized for 

30 seconds. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. I would, first of all, thank my good friend, Eni 

Faleomavaega. And I do have a meeting, so I will make my question very short and to the point. 

To the President and associating myself with the question that 

Mr. Engel posed to our distinguished Ambassador. While I agree 

that what happened in Honduras in 2009 resulted from the arbitrary and unlawful behavior of President Zelaya, I would, however, 

like to ask the President—since I cannot see that he has done anything to rectify the problem with U.S. businesses operating in Honduras illegally driven from the market or illegally losing their investment, specifically companies like CEMAR—I would like to 

know if the President has, in fact, done anything to correct this or 

if he intends to. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you. 

And just to remind you, he is no longer the President. He is the 

former President. 

Mr. GALLEGLY. While he was President, did he do anything? And, 

if so, if he is aware of any attempts to rectify the issue. If during 

his Presidency——

Mr. MACK. Yeah, I got it. 

So, President Micheletti, are you familiar with the case that the 

Congressman is talking about? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. First, to answer the question of Congressman 

Payne about the coup d’etat, here I have in my hand a telegram 

from John F. Kennedy, the President, October 9, 1963, where he 

finishes the relationship with Honduras due to a coup d’etat and 

Hondurans—thank God the United States never broke the relationship with Honduras. 

In reference to ethnic groups during my administration——

Mr. MACK. Mr. President, if I may ask you to pause for a minute. 

We had a question about the U.S. cement company in Honduras. 

The question is, while you were President, did any of the issues 

surrounding that cement company come to your attention? 

Mr. MICHELETTI. At no time I remember any American company 

seeking for our help. At this time, I have no recollection of such a 

request. 

Mr. MACK. Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. President. 

And I would now like to recognize Mr. Faleomavaega for——

I am sorry. Was there a—which one? 

So if you will finish answering the question about the hospital 

closing down during your administration. 

28

Mr. MICHELETTI. To the contrary. We opened the department of 

the government, which was headed by a member of the Garifuna 

community; and I recall giving no instruction to close no hospital 

to the country. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you, Mr. President. 

Now I recognize Mr. Faleomavaega for 5 minutes, and thank you 

for your patience. 

Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I do want to say that, in fairness to President Micheletti, I 

hope that he gets the gist of the members’ concerns about the 

American businesses that do business in Honduras, that they be 

treated fairly and on an equal basis. I think that is the gist of what 

we are trying to pursue here. 

But, Mr. Chairman, I think there is a deeper issue here that you 

brought to light over the course of this hearing for which I really, 

really think it is a great thing that has been brought to the attention of this subcommittee. To the effect that it is not Honduras that 

is in question here, the question is the kind of laws that our country has passed when there is a military coup. 

And the reason for my suggestion, Mr. Chairman, is that a classic example of a military coup that took place was in Chile with 

Pinochet and Allende, with the socialist-Marxist government and 

how that came about and some of the activities that took place on 

the part of our Government when Pinochet took over the government in that country for some 14 years. 

And then there is the question of Thailand. There was a military 

coup in Thailand. We also put sanctions and all kinds of revocations of visas and everything that we did in that country. 

And then there was also Pakistan, also a military coup by this 

fellow named Musharraf who took over the government that was 

duly elected by the people under Musharraf. And for some 10 years 

we have had to put up with that because the administration put 

a waiver on the sanctions law that we had for those countries that 

do commit military coups. 

We have the same problem with Fiji. Fiji had four military 

coups, three Constitutions, all within 20 years; and we put sanctions on that country and some of the problems we are faced with. 

So there is a deeper issue here that I want—and, hopefully, Mr. 

Chairman, that maybe in the coming months that we ought to have 

an oversight hearing on all the series of military coups that took 

place in Latin America. And maybe we ought to learn about the inconsistencies. 

And the problem here is that sometimes when we give the administration—not just this administration—any administration discretionary authority, just like the issue that we are discussing here 

about denying visas for some of these people who participated in 

this coup—what is interesting with my friend, Mr. Payne, we are 

looking at a situation that looks like a duck, acts like a duck, 

quacks like a duck, but never clear if it really was a duck to suggest that there ever really was a military coup that took place here. 

And, to this day, the administration denies that there was a military coup. But in every form and substance of what we have done 

against Honduras, substantively we have really put the stops on 

29

the ability of some of these officials or former officials of the government to come to this country. 

And I just wanted to second what Ambassador Arcos said. You 

are absolutely correct. Latin America—and I want to say that this 

is not anything to you, Mr. Chairman, or our previous chairman or 

Mr. Engel. Both gentlemen have been very proactive and very 

much wanting to participate and to make sure that our Government is involved with the affairs of the Western Hemisphere, as we 

should. But we have not done so for all of these years, and I know 

that for a fact as a member of this subcommittee for all these 

years. 

And I am so sorry. I have about 100 questions that I wanted to 

ask, and I only have 1 minute left. But I will want to thank Ambassador Arcos for his expressions here. And also, President 

Micheletti, I have one question. 

But I just want to suggest again, Mr. Chairman, it would be nice 

that we hold an oversight hearing about the series of military 

coups that have taken place in Latin America. And maybe we need 

to review more closely the substance of how we have gone about 

putting restrictions on visas and all of this, giving it to the administration, if we have been inconsistent in doing these things. 

Because Honduras is a classic example of this. We do it for some 

countries, and then we don’t do it for others. And after spending 

about $8 billion in helping Musharraf with his military coup, where 

does it put us as far as our foreign policy toward Pakistan is concerned? It is nothing but a mess. 

And I wish I had more questions, Mr. Chairman, but thank you. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much. 

I would now like to recognize Mr. Rohrabacher from California 

for 5 minutes for questions. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I am sorry that I didn’t get here earlier. As usual, we have about 

20 different things to do at one time here in Congress. 

And just one comment about my good friend Mr. Payne’s description about what happened in the so-called coup. The description 

that my good friend provided left out one important factor in terms 

of escorting the President to the border. And the important factor 

that you left out is the people who were escorting him to the border 

had a court order from the Supreme Court and permission from 

both houses of their legislature and was acting totally within the 

law. Whereas the Supreme Court had found that President Zelaya 

now had taken actions which put him in a position of being a 

threat to democracy for their country. 

Mr. PAYNE. To be escorted out of the country by guns. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Yeah, by a gun in one hand and a court order 

in the other. Just like in our country, every time the police do 

something, they have a gun, but they also have to follow the law. 

Mr. PAYNE. But not by putting him out to another country. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me just note they were following the law 

in every way in which we follow the law in our country with people 

who have guns. 

And let me just note President Zelaya talked like a would-be caudillo, and was taking actions like a would-be caudillo, and was actually palling around with caudillos like Mr. Chavez. And thus, if 

30

he acts like a would be caudillo or a want-to-be caudillo and talks 

like one, maybe he should be treated like one. Meaning people 

should worry about whether or not he was trying to establish a 

non-democratic rule of Honduras, which is what he had planned 

and which he was stopped from doing by a lawful action that was 

taken with the approval of the Supreme Court of that country and 

the Parliament of that country. 

So let us just note that I don’t think that what we have is a coup 

anywhere near the definition—for example, when Mr. Chavez tried 

to do a coup in Venezuela early on with his military fellows and 

was stopped and thrown into jail, certainly what was happening in 

here was—certainly when Mr. Chavez tried to do that, he didn’t 

have a court order. So I think that the word ‘‘coup’’ does not refer 

to this type of action. Instead, this was an action trying to save democracy, rather than to extinguish it. 

One note just for our witnesses and for those people who are listening, I would naturally try to come to the defense of people who 

believe in democracy, who are under attack like President Lobo is 

under attack and naturally want to help Honduras, but I cannot 

bring myself to get engaged in helping Honduras if they are not 

doing right by American citizens. 

And when we look at this whole CEMAR Cement Company, that 

is just one example of where American companies have claims and 

these American companies are not being treated with justice. And 

if that continues not only are they going to lose my support, but 

we will ensure that Honduras, no matter who is President of that 

country, does not receive the benefits of American largess if they 

do not follow the law in trying to ensure that American companies 

are treated fairly, justly, and within the law. And we have looked 

at these cases and they are not being treated, especially this 

CEMAR case, which is a blatant disregard for the legal rights of 

an American citizen. 

With that said, I would like to congratulate you, Mr. Ambassador 

and former President. You have both been leaders in a very volatile 

area of the world, and you have both been friends with the United 

States. And, to me, that means I should be grateful to you; and I 

am. So thank you both for participating today. And I want to thank 

the chairman for trying to refocus American attention on Latin 

America and using our influence in the right direction. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. MACK. Thank you very much, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

And that concludes the hearing. 

I want to end by, first of all, thanking both of our witnesses. 

Ambassador, thank you so much. 

Mr. President, again, I consider you to be a hero in Latin America for standing up for your Constitution and rule of law. No one 

in their right mind can look at the facts on the ground and compare what happened in Honduras to a coup. And so thank you for 

putting up with the State Department’s continued efforts to try to 

keep you from speaking to Members of Congress in this Congress. 

And I hope to see you here in the United States soon. 

That concludes the hearing. I want to thank all the members for 

their participation, and the subcommittee is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 4:44 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

(31)

A P P E N D I X 

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING RECORD

32

f


66899n.eps
33


66899m-1.eps
34

f


66899m-2.eps
35


66899e-1.eps
36

f


66899e-2.eps
37

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE CONNIE MACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND CHAIRMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WESTERN HEMISPHERE

THE UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH-TRANSLATED VERSION OF MR. MICHELETTI’S PREPARED

STATEMENT


66899b-1.eps
38


66899b-2.eps
39

[NOTE: The Law Library of Congress’ Report for Congress, August 2009, entitled 

‘‘Honduras: Constitutional Law Issues,’’ submitted for the record, is not reprinted 

here but is available in committee records.] 


66899b-3.eps
40


66899f.eps
41


66899g.eps
42


66899h.eps
43


66899i.eps
44


66899j-1.eps
45

f


66899j-2.eps
46

MATERIAL SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD BY THE HONORABLE DONALD M. PAYNE, A

REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY


66899k-1.eps
47


66899k-2.eps
48


66899k-3.eps
49


66899k-4.eps
50


66899k-5.eps
51


66899k-6.eps
52


66899k-7.eps
53


66899k-8.eps
54

[NOTE: Material submitted for the record by the Honorable Roberto Micheletti Baı

f  ́n, 

former President of Honduras, is not reprinted here but is available in committee 

records.]

Æ


66899k-9.eps