On June 28, 2009, there was a military coup in the state of Honduras, where the military detained president Manuel Zelaya and exiled him to Costa Rica. This occurrence re-sparked the military control over the country and ended the 27 years of democratic governance in Honduras. This coup occurred because of the president’s intention to hold a non-binding vote to eventually amend the constitution. The Honduran National Congress replaced Zelaya with the president of congress, Roberto Micheletti, and seven months later, Porfirio “Pepe” Lobo Sosa. The US and the rest of the international community, disagreed with Zelaya’s expulsion but some, such as the US and Canada, agreed to recognize the election of Lobo as president (Meyer, 2010). Throughout this coup, Canada continued to provide military aid to Honduras and continued to provide training to members of the Honduran army (Ditchburn, 2009). The question is then, why did Canada continue to support and provide military aid to Honduras even during this coup that ended the democracy they had in the country for the past 27 years?
The answer to this question goes back to 1998, when hurricane Mitch struck Honduras. In 1998, hurricane Mitch created a significant amount of destruction in Honduras which left Honduras with $3 billion USD in damages causing economic devastation. Ottawa responded to this disaster with a “long term development plan” that offered the Honduran government $100 million USD and included the introduction of forty Canadian companies into Honduras for investment purposes, which allowed them to claim Honduran land and mineral assets. Canadian developers also helped to re-write the Honduran general mining law and created the National Association of Metal Mining of Honduras, which allowed foreign mining companies to access land rights and tax breaks. Due to this law, mining by foreign capital has become the dominant industry in Honduras (Escalera-Flexhaug, 2014).
This relates back to the coup of 2009 because, before the coup occurred, Zelaya was trying to reform the mining sector which would include restricting foreign mining companies. Zelaya drafted a bill that would increase taxes on foreign mining companies, ban open-pit mining, and prevent the use of toxic substances in mining operations. The bill also would have required permission from communities before mining operations began. This would have caused a major problem for Canadian mining companies in Honduras and would cost them a significant amount of money. After the coup happened, Ottawa remained silent on the topic and Canadian media barely reported on the crisis. Even when the Organization of American States (OAS) got together to discuss the issue, most countries wanted the return of Zelaya, but Canada insisted that, “the international community had no grounds to intervene” (Escalera-Flexhaug, 2014).
When the commotion from the coup quieted down, Canada began discussing a free trade agreement with the Honduran government. The Canada-Honduras Free Trade Agreement became law on November 5, 2013, along with labor and environmental cooperation agreements. The agreement lowers taxes for Canadian corporations and encourages continued investment, which increases Canada’s power in Honduras.
All of the things that Canada did during the coup can be related back to Canada’s colonial roots. Before Canada was created, the British invaded the land now known as the Americas and colonized it. This included taking over land that was not theirs such as land where indigenous people lived. They also used the people as slaves or payed them very poorly. This was due to capitalism within their culture. The British wanted to increase their capital and using foreign land that they had stolen and foreign people as slaves. This decreased their expenses significantly since they did not have to pay wages or incur expenses for the land they were occupying. What Canada did, and is still doing in Honduras is similar.
When Canada first helped create the mining laws in Honduras, they were looking out for themselves. The laws allowed them to gain access to Honduran land and labour for a fraction of what it would cost them in Canada. In Canada, land is significantly more expensive than in Honduras. Also, in Canada, the companies would have to pay the workers fair wages that complied with Canadian laws. In Honduras the companies could exploit the Honduran workers and make them work more hours for less pay than in Canada. This goes back to capitalism. Canada wants to use Honduran labor and resources to increase income and decrease expenses in order to create profits for themselves and increase their capital.
When the coup occurred, Canada sided with the military and continued its support of the military (Ditchburn, 2009). This is due to the law that president Zelaya wanted to implement creating additional expenses for foreign mining companies in Honduras. This included Canadian companies. If Zelaya was put back into power, his law would be passed and it would create significant expenses for the Canadian companies in Honduras. This again goes back to the capitalism that occurred from the colonial roots of Canada. Canada wished to continue their operations in Honduras without being taxed and by exploiting the workers in Honduras. This allows Canada to maintain their current capital and increase it in the future.
The free trade agreement between Canada and Honduras was also intended to increase Canada’s capital. It allows for free trade between Canada and Honduras which greatly benefits Canadian companies as they will not have to pay any tariffs in order to do business in Honduras. This decreases expenses for Canadian companies which allows for an increase in capital, which is clearly Canada’s main goal.
Recently, the Canadian government and Canadian operations continue to support the new Honduran government and Honduran military in their governance of the country in a non-democratic, dictatorship. Canada supports this government as they continue to allow free trade between the two countries which allows Canada to continue taking advantage of their economic system and abuse the workers they hire (Russell, 2012). Canadian organizations are able to increase their capital in Honduras by gaining a cheap place to operate and taking advantage of the workers and their lack of rights within the country. In Honduras, Canadian companies have to pay only minimal taxes and are able to take advantage of their employees due to their lack of rights and the low wages they are required to pay them compared to Canadian citizens.
Overall, the actions of Canada in association with Honduras can be traced back to their colonial roots. Even from its roots, Canada has been taking advantage of different societies in order to increase their capital. What they are doing in Honduras is similar to what the British settlers were doing in the Americas all those years ago. They are taking advantage of the situation without caring for who will be hurt in the process. In conclusion, Canada’s colonial roots are shown in their dealings with Honduras during the 2009 political crisis through their capitalist actions that are solely self-promoting.