Second, I appeciate the argument that Obama’s approaches toward Iran and Honduras could be interpreted as undercutting the efforts of the Iranian regime and the Chavez axis to use anti-Americanism as a political & strategic weapon (see: R. Amsterdam link above). However, any possible benefits accrued from the Obama administration’s apology tour diplomacy are not achieved in isolation. If we want to evaluate the pros and cons of such an approach we’d have to tally up not just one possible benefit, but all the plusses and minuses. For example, apology tour diplomacy could also undercut liberal elements within the Middle East and Latin America. Also, in the past, detente tended to strengthen the hands of thug dictators more than it weakened them. As an American thug once said, “It’s the economy, stupid.”

There were, and he did. When the military refused to fill their usual role of monitoring the proposed referendum vote because the referendum itself was explicitly illegal under the Honduran constitution, Zelaya fired the head of the military and pushed on regardless.

I should point out that governments the world over have condemned the coup, but their criticism seems to be somewhat instinctual and not appreciating of all factors. I guess they would rather have non-physical solutions that would prevent any kind of power abuse or coagulation of undue power in the hands of the few. Still, Zelaya seemed incredibly stubborn, so it didn’t make sense to wait considering he had been told by other democratic institutions to give it up.