_-_copia.jpg?w=800&resize=800,500&ssl=1 "Nobel Peace Prize awarded to María Corina Machado")
The awarding of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado sparked an immediate and controversial reaction from former Honduran president José Manuel “Mel” Zelaya Rosales and the LIBRE party. Zelaya described the award as “an affront to history and to the peoples who fight for their sovereignty” and accused the Nobel Committee of turning the prize into an “instrument of modern colonialism.”
In his message posted on social media, Zelaya called Machado a “coup leader” and “ally of the financial elites and foreign interests,” arguing that awarding her the prize represents an “affront to the Latin American peoples.” These statements sparked intense political debate inside and outside Honduras, placing the country at the center of the discussion on the ideological orientation of its political actors.
Domestic responses and the governing party’s viewpoint
At the national level, opinions on the Nobel Prize were divided between liberal and opposition sectors. While some celebrated the recognition as a endorsement of human rights and democracy, ruling party leaders supported Zelaya’s position. Congresswoman Maribel Espinoza stated that Zelaya is “a friend and associate of a narco-dictator” and added that his speech “rejects the authentic struggle for freedom in Latin America.”
Analysts believe that the LIBRE party’s rejection of the award demonstrates ideological affinity with Venezuela’s Chavista political model. This perception is linked to fears about the possible replication of authoritarian and populist practices in Honduras, which could affect the country’s governance and institutional balance.
Regional implications and María Corina Machado’s message
From hiding, María Corina Machado dedicated the Nobel Prize “to the Venezuelan people and to all those who have fought against tyranny.” Her statement was praised by democratic leaders in Latin America and strengthened the narrative of opposition to regimes allied with Chavismo.
The incident has garnered global scrutiny regarding the political stance of LIBRE, intensifying debates concerning the sway of regional paradigms on Honduran governance and how these affiliations shape views on democratic processes and public involvement.
Political tensions and institutional perspectives
The debate generated by the reaction of Zelaya and his party highlights a political environment marked by polarization. The discussion about the Nobel Peace Prize takes place in a context of growing scrutiny of the parties’ positions on democracy, the autonomy of institutions, and external influence on national processes.
The recognition of Machado, the support of some sectors, and the rejection by LIBRE underscore the tension between positions that prioritize the defense of rights and freedoms and those aligned with specific regional regimes. This contrast poses challenges for institutionality, governance, and political stability in Honduras, keeping the country under both internal and international scrutiny.