| 1250 Connecticut Ave. NW, |
|
| Council On Hemispheric Affairs |
|
| Monitoring
Political, Economic and Diplomatic Issues Affecting the Western Hemisphere |
|
| Memorandum to the Press 04.98 |
|
Word Count: 1800
Thursday, 16 December 2004
• President Bush’s Haiti Policy undermines his proclaimed ideal of valuing democracy as well as stability.
• As Kofi Annan comes to Washington to meet with Secretary of State Colin Powell, among others, he is prepared to do Washington’s bidding regarding Haiti.
• Most likely, the interim government of Prime-Minister Gerard Latortue will indefinitely postpone, sabotage or find some other pretext to ban the pro-Aristide Lavalas party from participating in the 2005 presidential election.
• Among the responsibilities of MINUSTAH, the UN Peacekeeping force in Haiti, is to ensure the safety of the polling stations and the integrity of the electoral process. This means the UN peacekeeping mandate must prohibit Latortue and interim Justice Minister Bernard Gousse from further brutalizing Lavalas supporters.
• Though it remains unclear who is to blame for the four deaths on December 15 in the pro-Aristide slum of Cite Soleil, MINUSTAH’s actions there could eventually provide part of the basis for banning Lavalas.
• The head of the UN Peacekeeping Mission, Brazilian Lieutenant-General Augusto Heleno, should be replaced given his deference, in word and deed, to Latortue’s excesses.
• President Lula is ultimately responsible for Heleno’s reckless actions. Does Lula know he is sacrificing Haiti’s poor for his international ambitions?
In a speech
to the National Endowment for Democracy on November 6, 2003, President Bush
stated, “Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack
of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe - because in the
long run, stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty.” But while
the administration appears earnest about promoting democracy in Iraq it has
made little progress - in fact it has even regressed - in promoting democracy
among America’s southern neighbors. While its relationship with most of Latin
America has centered exclusively on trade agreements and, to a lesser extent,
drugs and terrorism, its hardline anti-Aristide policy has led to overturning
the same democratic principles it claims to be espousing in Baghdad.
Indeed, in Port-au-Prince, the Bush administration has shown that it strongly
believes stability can only be purchased at the expense of liberty.
In a stunning reversal of the administration’s pre-coup Haiti policy, Secretary
of State Colin Powell went from denouncing the opposition as a gang of “thugs”
to maintaining that Aristide had to reach political agreement with some of
its elements. Powell’s flip-flop signaled the end of the constitutional government,
since it then became clear to the opposition that the US would not hinder
its openly stated strategy of non-negotiation with Aristide.
Regarding Kofi Annan, he comes to Washington today struggling to hold on to his job which is at risk over his son’s involvement in the Iraq oil-for-food scandal. To strengthen his position as Secretary-General of the United Nations, he will be prepared to make many concessions. One of the items of discussion with Secretary of State Powell will be the UN’s role in Haiti. Annan has, so far, been utterly compliant with the Bush administration’s efforts to marginalize ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. In the days preceding the February 29, 2004 de-facto ouster of Aristide and his U.S. arranged flight into exile, Annan echoed U.S. policy in condemning Aristide as Haiti’s “failed” president and Powell’s cynical scenario that international peacekeepers would be sent to Haiti, but only if Aristide abrogated most of his constitutionally mandated authority. Annan’s backing of Powell’s strategy legitimated Washington’s goal of ridding itself of Aristide. At today’s talks, a politically weakened Annan is likely to discuss next year’s Haiti elections and how to minimize a role for the pro-Aristide Lavalas party.
Dark
Days for Lavalas
The second coup d’etat launched against Haiti’s first democratically-elected
leader achieved its goal of removing the former president – once again – from
office and has since embarked on what is shaping up to be a scorched earth
policy towards Lavalas supporters. Former Prime Minister Yvon Neptune, former
Interior Minister Jocelerme Privert, Senator Yvon Feuille and former Deputy
Rudy Herivaux are still being held in prison without any charges while pro-Aristide
demonstrators, who constitute the overwhelmingly majority of the poor, are
regularly rounded up or shot in the street by the rebel gangs or the ill-trained
police force. The interim government even had the audacity to imprison the
country’s most revered Catholic priest, Father Jean-Juste, though he was recently
released.
Prior to the coup, the opposition groups - mainly the Group of 184 and the
Democratic Convergence - refused to negotiate with Aristide. At the time,
Democratic Convergence leader Evans Paul stated, “We are willing to negotiate
through which door [President Aristide] leaves the palace, through the front
door or the back door.” We have yet to see if Latortue will formally ban the
Lavalas party: however, current trends suggest that the interim government
will continue to tolerate extra-constitutional paramilitary units, such as
members of the former army disbanded by Aristide, to repress Lavalas supporters
both in their neighborhoods and at the polls. Ultimately, he may move to incorporate
the ex-military into a still-to-be reconstituted armed force.
UN
Legitimacy at Risk
What can the international community and MINUSTAH, the UN’s peacekeeping force,
do to ensure that Aristide’s supporters will be allowed to participate in
the next election, scheduled for November 2005? At a minimum, there are two
tasks confronting UN Special Representative to Haiti and MINUSTAH head, Chilean
diplomat Juan Gabriel Valdes. First, MINUSTAH must begin to enforce its mandate,
which states that the first duty of the UN force is to provide support for
the transitional government, “to ensure a secure and stable environment within
which the constitutional and political processes in Haiti can take place.”
Currently the UN force, led by General Augusto Heleno of Brazil, is highly
prejudiced in the use of its power. Far from abiding by the impartial language
of the mandate “to support the constitutional and political processes under
way in Haiti . . . and foster principles and democratic governance and institutional
development,” MINUSTAH continually sides with the inherently lawless Haitian
police during the latter’s repeated raids on Aristide supporters, and with
a Justice Minister who has no regard for due process. As described by Chief
of Mission of the Haiti embassy in Washington, Raymond A. Joseph, to COHA,
“a situation of war exists in Haiti. In war a lot of things are not quite
legal, but you have to take measures to protect yourself.”
But often these measures go much too far. As reported by the Haiti Accompaniment
Project, a coalition of US-based organizations devoted to documenting human
rights violations in Haiti, in the lead up to the February 2004 coup and immediately
afterwards, “there were large-scale killings and the systematic burning of
the homes of people identified as members or supporters of Fanmi Lavalas.
The cities of Petit Goave, Gonaives, and Cap-Haitian have been particularly
hit hard by the violence.” For MINUSTAH to be perceived as a legitimate peacekeeping
force, General Heleno must address the egregious human rights abuses perpetrated
daily by the rebel gangs and anti-Aristide factions, as well as those by pro-Aristide
vigilantes. Haitians, the majority of whom supported Aristide (in the elections
of 1990 and 2000 he won two thirds of the vote), will never view the UN force
as anything but the international wing of Latortue’s oppressive regime until
it metes out justice impartially, regardless of one’s suspected party affiliation.
The second task of the UN is to put much more pressure on Latortue and his
rogue Justice Minister Bernard Gousse to release political prisoners and respect
due process. This action would satisfy a necessary, but by no means sufficient,
condition for the upcoming elections. Nevertheless, the situation looks grim
for the inclusion of the majority Lavalas party in next year’s elections.
As noted by the Haiti Accompaniment project, “Fanmi Lavalas has experienced
the brunt of repression since the coup. Many leaders have left the country
or are in internal exile. Many Lavalas members and supporters have had their
homes burned, have lost jobs, and have been separated from their families.”
MINUSTAH must be as diligent in protecting pro-Lavalas groups and human rights
organizations, like the Aristide Foundation for Democracy, Lafanmi Selavi
and the Coordination des Femmes Victimes d’Haiti (COFEVIH), as it gives the
appearance of slavishly acting as Latortue’s hit squad. Perhaps a constructive
first step in this direction would be replacing General Heleno, who has displayed
neither particular competence in the field nor sufficient diplomatic tact,
as head of MINUSTAH mission.
Latortue’s
Stooge
In an interview with Haiti’s Radio Metropole on October 8, General Heleno,
during what must have been an unguarded moment, declared: “We must kill the
bandits, but it will have to be the bandits only, not everybody.” This statement
might even be comforting if we knew it were directed at the roving rebel gangs,
former death squad members and rapists - released or broken out from prison
following the chaos brought on by the pre-coup turbulence - who terrorized
the country throughout the rule of the military junta (1991 – 1994). As one
COFEVIH member claimed, “the same people who raped us in 1991 are again in
power. All those prisoners who were let out are raping women.” Unfortunately,
the general was not referencing such brigands but rather the pro-Lavalas,
poor urban youths. His focus on Aristide’s supporters as the alleged culprits
of the violence sweeping the country is also seen in the following imprudent
interview he gave to the Brazilian state news agency: “Statements made by
[John Kerry] created false hopes among pro-Aristide supporters. His statements
created the expectation that instability and a change in American policy would
contribute to Aristide's return." Heleno was referring to Senator Kerry’s
remark last March that he would have intervened militarily in order to protect
President Aristide.
Clearly, Heleno was eager to place blame for inciting the shootings and unwarranted
arrests carried out in raids in the pro-Aristide slums of Port-au-Prince at
the feet of John Kerry. But even more ominously, he implies what the Security
Council has never said; that advocating Aristide’s return to Haiti would be
illegal. Essentially, Heleno was saying that had Kerry not exhibited the sheer
audacity of suggesting that the Haitian people should be led by their democratically-elected
president, the violence could have been avoided. Given that the Brazilian
commander apparently sees his mandate extending only to aiding the current
regime’s suppression of the Lavalas democracy movement, he needs to be withdrawn
for the sake of the Haitian people, the sake of the UN’s credibility and,
lastly, for the sake of Lula’s democratic credentials.
This
analysis was prepared by COHA
Senior Research Fellow, Seth R. DeLong, Ph.D.
December
16, 2004
COHA HOME PAGE
The
Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit,
non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been
described on the Senate floor as being “one of the nation’s most respected
bodies of scholars and policy makers.” For more information, please see our
web page at www.coha.org; or contact our Washington offices by phone (202)
223-4975, fax (202) 223-4979, or email coha@coha.org.