Instead of condemning the figures behind the uprising, suspending support to the illegitimate government of Zelaya’s successor, Roberto Micheletti, and demanding a restoration of the democratically elected Zelaya, Secretary Clinton decided to move on. In her memoir “Hard Choices,” Clinton wrote that after the coup, she went about hatching a plan with other leaders in the region “to restore order in Honduras and ensure that free and fair elections could be held quickly and legitimately, which would render the question of Zelaya moot.”
It quickly became clear that the pop singer-turned-candidate Michel Martelly, whom The Post in 2002 characterized as “favorite of the thugs who worked on behalf of the hated Duvalier family dictatorship before its 1986 collapse,” was Washington’s pick to win. Though the voting was badly marred by irregularities (the United States had pushed for quick polls), the OAS went even further and declared — without evidence — that Martelly had qualified for the final round over the incumbent party’s candidate.
Clinton has a LOT to answer for.
It's unusual to see the media pointing this out.
TRAD
Il ya une quantité de réponses auxquelles Clinton devrait répondre.
C'est inhabituel que les media se penchent sur la question.
/https%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fblogs%2Fpost-partisan%2Ffiles%2F2016%2F03%2FUS-Haiti-Clinton_20_0_2651143522.JPEG-03fba.jpg)
Hillary Clinton needs to answer for her actions in Honduras and Haiti
If there was anything refreshing about Wednesday's Democratic debate in Miami, it was that for once, questions on foreign affairs centered on a region other than the Middle East, China or Russia ...
Commenter cet article