|
Edited on Tue Oct-20-09 08:57 PM by Peace Patriot
NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE STATEMENT (OF THE) CONSTITUTIONAL (GOVERNMENT OF) PRESIDENT Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales
The dialogue, which we have been representing (as) part of the constitutional (government of) President Manuel Zelaya Rosales, began the seventh day of October under the auspices and with the accompaniment of the Organization of American States (0EA).
The first meeting ... adopted the agenda by consensus, the first explicit point was the signing of the San Jose Agreement, which clearly indicates that dialogue could only take place around the spirit and essence of the Agreement.
Under the state of obstruction and relative stagnation (of) that dialogue, we regret that it is now necessary to (issue) the following statement: . FIRST: We reiterate that dialogue is the appropriate tool to find a political solution to the crisis being experienced by our country in the context of fulfilling the resolutions of the OAS, the UN and the San Jose Accord, but it is indispensable that it be accompanied by the necessary political will and firm(ness). The bargaining committees showed willingness to move forward and sign seven of the eight key points in the final agreement, which implicitly recognizes the authority of President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales. Regrettably, last Friday 16, the de facto Vice Minister Marta Alvarado announced publicly that our Committee (the Zelaya side?) had broken (off?) the dialogue, thus introducing ... lies and confusion within the negotiating process.
Mr. Roberto Micheletti has not shown the political will and remains committed to use dialogue as a simple political distraction mechanism and calculated delay to gain time and prolong their illegal stay in the arbitrary exercise of government.
SECOND: As our delegation (has shown) undeniable evidence of their political will to reach agreement and find a solution to the crisis, Mr Roberto Micheletti implements obstruction, ... purely formalistic, unacceptable proposals and, in some cases, insulting and provocative .
THIRD: For the above reasons, we reiterate that (the) dialogue, although (we have not broken it off, and it has not been declared broken off), has entered a phase of apparent obstruction.
The permanent council of the Organization of American States (OAS), meeting in Washington on Wednesday 21 of this month, will examine and rule on the current state of blockage that is the process of dialogue.
The Constitutional President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales has made every possible concession to ensure the success of (the) dialogue and political solution to the crisis. As a result, we were able to agree and sign the ninety-five percent of the content of the San Jose Agreement, the remainder depends only on the political will of Mr. Micheletti. It is we who must take political responsibility and historical guilt for having prevented the successful completion of this generous effort of dialogue, which has always been and will be strongly endorsed by the Constitutional (government of) President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales and the delegation that represents it.
Tegucigalpa, October 19, 2009
------------------------------------
This statement strikes me as IMPORTANT! We've been waiting for this--and here it is--the upshot of the Monday deadline, that the Zelaya Committee has concluded that the Junta is merely obstructing and not engaging in the dialogue in good faith. And--very important also--the OAS is meeting TOMORROW and the Zelaya Committee expects them to condemn this obstructionism.
I've done a bit of transliterating, to make this Google translation more coherent. I couldn't make out what was meant by this: "It is we who must take political responsibility and historical guilt for having prevented the successful completion of this generous effort of dialogue, which has always been and will be strongly endorsed by the Constitutional (government of) President Jose Manuel Zelaya Rosales and the delegation that represents it. "
Does this mean, not "guilt for having prevented" the success of the dialogue, but rather "failure" at not having achieved success, and this is the Committee speaking, on its own behalf, separate from Zelaya? Yes, I think that's it. They are saying that any failure is theirs; Zelaya remains committed to the dialogue. Maybe they wanted to quit in disgust, but he said 'no, don't shut off all hope'? Perhaps someone with better Spanish skill that I have could translate this sentence, and correct any errors that I or Google have made.
The Junta is following James Baker's game plan, obviously (WaPo op-ed, this week)--hold out until the rigged, 'martial law' election, and we corpo/fascist fuckers here in the US will break Obama's elbows to get him to go along with it.
|