TransAfrica Statement On Haiti

WASHINGTON - February 17 - In recent weeks, the Haitian crisis has been deepening. In addition to mass protests against President Aristide, demanding his resignation, there have been military assaults in several cities and what appears to be a move toward insurrection. The alleged rebels have been described in different ways, but they appear to be the armed wing of at least a section of the opposition. It is in light of this worsening situation that we feel compelled to speak out clearly and broadly.

Our starting point is and has been that the people of Haiti should determine their own destiny. For nearly 200 years, the United States government has taken a different approach. After the successofthe Haitian Revolution, the United States imposed a policy of isolation on the island. This policy was not only about restricting the ability of the Haitian people to truly exercise self-determination. The policy was also about neutralizing the influence of the Haitian Revolution, particularly with regard to African slaves in the USA and the rest of the Caribbean. Since 1804 the USA has done what it could to undermine efforts at genuine independence, including through military interventions, threats, and the support of corrupt puppet regimes. When Haiti has attempted to stand, its legs have been cut from under it by its arrogant northern neighbor.

President Aristide was duly elected by the Haitian people. In fact, he was elected twice. In the most recent election there is no credible source that questions the legitimacy of the election. There is no credible allegation that the election was stolen or that methods of intimidation were utilized. In fact, the cries about electoral irregularities have focused almost entirely on several parliamentary seats, the results of which, even if overturned, would not have changed the balance of power in government.

Therefore, we at TransAfrica Forum hold that a duly elected leader, irrespective of one's opinion, should be permitted to peacefully complete his or her term of office unless one has violated the constitution. In the case of an alleged constitutional violation, in keeping with democratic and legal practices, formal procedures should be pursued with regard to removing any elected leader from office. This does not mean that protests have no place. Protests, however, are not the same as constitutional procedures for challenging an elected leader and removing him or her from office. We believe that President Aristide should complete his term. At that juncture any of the opposition forces can choose to run its own candidates for office and articulate their own vision of the future.

We believe that there are legitimate criticisms of President Aristide. There have been criticisms of the penetration of his political party-Famli Lavalas-by opportunist elements from the old regime who have utilized political power in order to run roughshod over the rights of the people. We have been perplexed and disheartened by the apparent inability of President Aristide to identify and exclude such elements from his party, particularly given the damage that they cost him. While such elements are no where near in the majority of the party, their impact has been noted.

There have been additional criticisms of human rights abuses allegedly carried out by the government and/or its allies, as well as the failure of the government to fully investigate such abuses. Some Haitian trade unionists, for example, have faced repression from the government, a development that does not match the verbal commitment of President Aristide to champion the rights of the dispossessed. Such actions have apparently resulted in the alienation of many former allies of the President.

These are all serious concerns, but as the former President of TransAfrica Forum, Randall Robinson, has noted, the forced resignation of President Aristide will do nothing to advance democracy. It is more than clear that the opposition is extremely diverse, held together by little more than their demand for President Aristide's removal. What, then, comes next? What will be the program for Haiti should President Aristide be forced from office? Given the association of the so-called rebels with the old regime, are we not on a slippery slope toward a Duvalier-ist future if President Aristide is driven from office? In fact, given the strong support that President Aristide continues to enjoy in much of Haiti, is not the scenario of civil war more likely than civil peace if President Aristide is compelled to step down due to extra-legal (if notillegal) pressure?

In this situation the Bush administration, predictably, is playing a less than honorable role. The multi-year restriction on the release of badly needed loans worsened the internal situation in the Western Hemisphere's poorest country. Now the Bush administration is implying that it is time for President Aristide to leave, while at the same time having Secretary of State Powell state that a coup would not be acceptable. One gets the feeling of a good cop/bad cop scenario. None of this should come as a surprise to us in light of world events as well as the policy and practice of hostility by this administration toward President Aristide since the beginning.

Haitians must solve the political crisis. It appears that at least some elements of the Haitian opposition are less interested in resolving the crisis than in bringing the country to the brink of disaster. Despite repeated concessions by President Aristide, elements of the opposition continue to raise the bar, making a peaceful, Haitian-centered and driven resolution of the crisis difficult, if not impossible.

Outside forces should not be interfering. There have beenquitecredible allegations that the Bush administration is far too involved in supporting the opposition. Statements by its spokespersons lend such allegations credibility when inferences can be drawn to the effect that the Bush administration wishes President Aristide's departure.

Along with many other friends of Haiti our position is thattheBush administration should not consider intervening in Haiti. No US troops should go to Haiti. The US should, however, provide material assistance in order to improve the basic living conditions of the Haitian people. If Secretary of State Powell's words from February 13th are to be received as credible, then the US can assist mutually acceptable third party mediators help to bring the government and the opposition to a peaceful resolution of the political crisis.

The Bush administration should restrain itself from itsimperialarrogance that has so alienated countries around the world. Their contempt for the United Nations in the dash to war with Iraq; their support of the coup in Venezuela in April 2002, and the continuing hostility toward President Chavez; the pressure on nations of the world to exempt the US from the International Criminal Court, now joined by their contemptuous attitude toward President Aristide must be halted. It is time for the people of the USA to make this point clear even if the administration continues to walk around with wax in its collective ears, with eyes closed, and ranting about its version of the world as defined by Bush.

http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0218-03.htm