Anyone familiar with the Honduras crisis can be forgiven for being skeptical about the viability of last week's agreement to end the four-month deadlock between opposing political forces in that shaken Central American nation.

This drama has had many bizarre twists and turns. From now until the Nov. 29 elections, and when a new government begins in January, anything can happen.

Nonetheless, the accord is a heartening development. It provides a way for Honduras to emerge from the deep hole in which it was thrust on June 28, when President Manuel Zelaya was forcibly ousted from the country and an interim government was installed. The deal is rightly focused on the upcoming elections, whose outcome both Zelaya and acting President Roberto Micheletti have pledged to honor.

As a result of the rupture of the democratic order and the ensuing international opprobrium, Honduras has paid huge economic and political costs. With a credible election that will be supported and recognized, it now has a clear path back to normal life.

The question of Zelaya's return to power before this month's elections -- the key sticking point from the outset of the crisis -- will be determined by the Honduran Congress, after getting legal opinions from the country's Supreme Court and attorney general.

Zelaya is pressing hard for a quick decision.

U.S. diplomatic push

Though the contours of the accord were set in July with the involvement of Costa Rican President Oscar Arias in a process led by the Organization of American States, it took a deft diplomatic push by a senior U.S. delegation, headed by Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Tom Shannon, to help close the deal.

The Obama administration conveyed that it was serious: Without an agreement, it would not be prepared to recognize the Honduran government elected later this month. The United States also probably assured Micheletti that it would remain engaged and supervise the implementation of the agreement.

Such guarantees were critical to assuage suspicions that, if Zelaya returned to office -- even with his authority sharply curtailed and as part of a national unity government -- he would attempt a power grab similar to the one that helped provoke the crisis to begin with.

Labor Secretary Hilda Solis and former Chilean president Ricardo Lagos are part of a four-member (the other two come from Honduras' main political parties) verification commission of the power-sharing arrangement.

While the agreement has been widely applauded, distrust and bitterness between both sides in Honduras persist. Carrying out the accord will call for restraint and adroit orchestration by domestic and international actors. The extreme positions that have often burst forth during the four-month drama could still derail the latest effort.

It would help if the fierce partisanship on Honduras in Washington would recede. Some congressional Democrats and Republicans have staked out positions on either side of the Obama administration's middle ground stance. They have engaged in endless debates about whether Zelaya was the victim of a military coup, and have confidently shown their expertise on the Honduran constitution.

Contrasting views about how best to deal with Venezuela's Hugo Chávez -- Zelaya is an ally -- have fed the partisan discord.

The feuding has taken nasty turns and has been costly to Washington's agenda in the region.

As a result of the Honduras dispute, Republican Sen. Jim DeMint of South Carolina put a hold on two important positions on Latin American policy: Arturo Valenzuela, as assistant secretary, and Shannon, nominated ambassador to Brazil.

Collaboration, leadership

Achieving bipartisanship won't be easy. But what Washington should take away from the Honduras agreement is that supporting regional, multilateral efforts does not mean staying on the sidelines and hoping that things somehow get worked out.

There is no contradiction between collaborating with Latin American allies and exercising leadership to shape a positive outcome.

Defining the right role for what Washington has traditionally regarded as its ``backyard'' also demands adjustments by Latin Americans. Most have embraced President Obama's calls for a new partnership. Yet some regional leaders felt he hasn't been aggressive enough in bringing Zelaya back to power.

In August Obama noted the ``irony that the people that were complaining about the U.S. interfering in Latin America are now complaining that we are not interfering enough.''

Whether or not the Honduras accord sticks, the joint, U.S.-Latin American task of forging a more-constructive approach to hemispheric affairs has barely begun.

Michael Shifter is vice president for policy at the Inter-American Dialogue in Washington, D.C.

Join the discussion

The Miami Herald is pleased to provide this opportunity to share information, experiences and observations about what's in the news. Some of the comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. We encourage lively, open debate on the issues of the day, and ask that you refrain from profanity, hate speech, personal comments and remarks that are off point. In order to post comments, you must be a registered user of MiamiHerald.com. Your username will show along with the comments you post. Thank you for taking the time to offer your thoughts.

     Showing: Oldest first Newest first Most-recommended first Least-recommended first

@Nyx.AuthorDisplayName@ wrote on @Nyx.PostedAtTime@:

@Nyx.repliedToText@

@Nyx.replyAnswerText@

Reply to this Comment @Nyx.Recommender@ @Nyx.AbuseReporter@