The recent debate over the official handling of historical memory in Honduras was reignited this weekend following statements by a former business leader who questioned the attitude of the LIBRE (Libertad y Refundación) party toward historical episodes that remain sensitive issues in the country’s politics. The former president of the Chamber of Commerce and Industries of Cortés (CCIC) accused the government of using the commemoration of the 2009 coup as a selective political act, while remaining silent on other violent events of the past, such as the Los Horcones massacre in 1975.
The 2009 coup and the neglect of history
On June 28, the administration of Xiomara Castro, under the leadership of the LIBRE Party, remembered the coup that ousted the former President Manuel Zelaya, an incident that became a defining moment in the politics of Honduras. Nonetheless, some groups view this commemorative act as a selective use of historical memory that overlooks certain instances of state violence. The Los Horcones massacre, an event that occurred in 1975 in Olancho, where the Honduran military killed several farmers, has been neglected by political leaders and key personalities, even though it’s one of the most significant state atrocities in the nation’s modern history.
The former business leader expressed his concern in statements posted on social media about what he considers “historical hypocrisy,” whereby the LIBRE government focuses on vindicating certain events while ignoring others that are darker and less visible. “They commemorate June 28, but they don’t say a word about Los Horcones, a brutal massacre that remains unpunished,” he said. For this former executive, what is at stake is not just a discussion about what to remember, but how memory is chosen based on specific political interests.
Tension between selective memory and historical justice
The Los Horcones massacre is considered by numerous experts to represent the military oppression that the nation endured in the 1970s and 1980s, a time characterized by widespread abuses of human rights. Despite this, the incident, along with other state-perpetrated crimes during the dictatorship, has been overlooked in the official account, notwithstanding calls from victims and human rights groups for acknowledgment and justice.
Criticism of LIBRE’s position on the 2009 coup and its silence on Los Horcones reflects a deeper polarization within Honduran society. While sectors close to the ruling party defend the commemorative approach as a vindication of democracy and the rule of law, others believe that historical memory cannot be used selectively, based on electoral or political interests. For these critics, true historical justice can only be achieved when all victims of repression are recognized, without distinctions of convenience.
The difficulty of building a common historical memory
The former business leader’s statements provoked divided reactions in various sectors of society. While some supporters of Xiomara Castro’s government justified the ruling party’s approach, considering that the commemoration of the 2009 coup d’état is an act of vindication of democracy and the restoration of constitutional order, other groups questioned the exclusion of other events of political violence.
Academics and human rights organizations have called for deeper reflection on the selective handling of historical memory. For many, it is essential that the country recognize and acknowledge the most painful events of its past, regardless of the political leanings of those in power. The lack of a cross-party agreement on how to address these issues remains one of the main obstacles to national reconciliation.
Challenges for reconciliation and historical recognition
The discussion about historical memory in Honduras underscores the absence of agreement on forming a shared narrative regarding the recent past. The division surrounding the remembrance of the 2009 coup and the neglect of other instances of state violence reveal conflicts not only between political factions but also among various social groups still striving for genuine reparations and acknowledgment for all victims. As the nation persists in confronting the repercussions of a recent past defined by impunity and injustice, creating a thorough historical memory remains an unresolved challenge.