I don’t claim for a second to be an expert on Honduras, but it’s difficult not to read the earlier posts around here and, indeed, this piece by Tyler Montgomery from the New Majority and not feel somewhat concerned that the conventional wisdom on this topic is not as complete as it should be:

The military intervention in Honduras last Sunday was democratic. The military expelled President Manuel Zelaya on orders from the Supreme Court and a unanimous Congress. The military then immediately returned executive power to Roberto Micheletti, the then president of the Honduran Congress and member of the same party as Zelaya. Both the judiciary and legislature remain intact.
The military intervention was precipitated by Zelaya’s refusal to halt a referendum on constitutional change, an act that had not been countenanced by Congress and was declared illegal by the courts. When the military refused to help Zelaya strong arm the referendum he sacked the joint-chiefs-of-staff chairman, General Romeo Vasquez, and resolved to ride a wave of popular enthusiasm to the polls (or so he thought).
In sum, the military, obeying a judicial order, averted a serious crisis by removing Zelaya from power because he was unconstitutionally overriding legislation passed by Congress, ignoring Supreme Court rulings and illegally dismissing the head of the armed forces.

But is this, in turn, the whole story? I doubt it.

It looks to me as if this situation is crying out for some masterly inactivity on Washington’s part.