Honduran President Roberto Micheletti persuasively argues that the removal of his precedessor, Mel Zelaya, was legal (“The Path Forward for Honduras,” op-ed, July 27). But even if he was wrong, what happened in Honduras was not a “coup.”
A coup is the sudden, illegal removal of a legitimate government by a small group. President Zelaya was removed with the unanimous support of Honduras’s Supreme Court, and strong congressional backing—not by a “small group.” He was no longer a “legitimate” part of the government, having lost his right to rule by using intimidation and aid from Venezuela’s dictator to push an unconstitutional referendum.
Mr. Zelaya’s removal, far from being illegal, was consistent with Articles 239 and 272 of his country’s constitution.
When the English Parliament kicked out King James II in 1688, using an army, it was called a “Glorious Revolution.” So why is it called a “coup” when Honduras does something similar?