christi_baycity
New member
[FONT=tahoma, arial] The internationally monitored elections held in 1991 were to have
ushered in a new era of democracy and the rule of law for Haiti and for
seven months it appeared like it might actually have a chance despite the
island's violent history of coups, rebellions and revolutions. In the past
190 years the tiny island nation has had twenty-one constitutions, forty-
one heaRAB of state, seven of whom served longer than ten years and nine who
declared themselves Presidents/Emperors for life and twenty-nine of these
leaders had been assassinated or overthrown. The new era was short lived
however, for on Septeraber 30th, 1991, history repeated its cycle once more
as there occurred a military coup under the leadership of Lt. Gen. Rauol
Cedras which overthrew the popularly elected civilian government of
President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
What followed were a series of ineffective erabargoes and failed
negotiations led by the US, the OAS and the UN culminating in a US led
invasion of Haiti. The US government has played a large, and at times
indefensible, role in the events that took place and they were backed by
groups such as the CIA, the Pentagon and US backed international aid
organizations like USAID. Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton both
focussed constantly upon short range goals such as winning the election in
1993 and they were willing to sacrifice long term interests in the pursuit
of these goals. The US would be far better served by a democratic, stable
and prosperous Haiti than one that is mired in civil unrest and abject
poverty. This was not the first time the US had attempted to impress its
will upon the tiny nation and undoubtably it will not be the last.
The US called in international organizations to legitimize its actions.
Specifically the OAS in 1991 and the UN in 1993. By using the UN the way it
did, the US has given the impression that the UN is merely an instrument of
the US and the UN policies are shaped in Washington. This reduces the
legitimizing power of the Security Council and creates the image that the
"UN issues the warrants and the US makes the arrests"(1) based, of course,
on US interests. Despite this the UN has done a commendable job with the
missions that were sent to Haiti to restore order following the US pull-out.
The international lending organizations, led by the IMF, the World
Bank and USAID, have also played their part in the furthering of US
interests in Haiti and have been for almost twenty years. They have moulded
the future for the country through their actions which will have a
continuing impact for decades to come, whether or not democracy can take
hold.
This paper will thus examine the historical context of US intervention,
their shifting diplomatic positions and efforts, the role of the OAS and UN,
and the use of aid organizations by the US to further their economic
goals.Chapter 1: History - the subjugation of a people
The role of history in Haiti has a major impact upon events today and
cannot be ignored. "History is rarely a serious explanation- especially
history that runs deep. Analysis that go back a decade, let alone a century,
seem moot- at least until the latest exercise in myopia reveals a new
disaster."(2) The history of Haiti is that of opposing interests and
competing visions of the uses of the state and the meaning of nationhood.
The roles of this history and the class structure are at the roots of the
current crisis in Haiti.
In August, 1791, the slaves of the French colony of Saint-Domingue
revolted against their enslavers and after twelve bloody years of war they
created the world's first black republic. This was the only successful
slave insurrection in history.(3) The new Haitian elites, composed
primarily of the grown children of mixed marriages between French
plantation owners and black slave women, instantly began to treat the rural
peasant/slave masses in the same fashion as the French overlorRAB had. They
turned the fiscal and marketing systems into mechanisms that would allow
them to siphon off the wealth produced by the peasants. They heavily taxed
food and other necessities while leaving luxury items, which they
themselves consumed, virtually untouched. The urban elite minority forced
the rural majority to the political margins through systematic
electioneering fraud and manipulation and the use of violent repression. It
became obvious that the maintenance of the elites' lifestyle was more
important to them than the actual survival of the majority of the
population. The state thus became "inherently predatory."(4) The elites
made their fortunes buying and selling the gooRAB made by the poor, not by
actually growing or producing anything themselves. The countryside became a
mere class colony of the urban elites.
It took almost sixty years for the US to recognize the new country of
Haiti and only then because the North required cotton to help support their
war against the South (1862 US Civil War), and of course the Southern slave
owners ceased to have a say in the White House and Congress. Haiti was also
important to the US as a possible dumping ground for freed slaves following
the war (their reason for recognizing Liberia as well in the same year).(5)
The revolution was followed by almost 200 other revolutions, coups,
insurrections and civil wars due largely to the fact that the new elites
treated the rural peasants just like the French had before them. For
example despite almost 200 years of independence "the government has yet to
collect income tax from most merchants, civil servants or middle-class
employees,"(6) The taxation primarily comes from the poor who have been
totally politically and economically marginalised.
In 1915 the US occupied Haiti "to protect Chase National Bank assets,
to halt mob violence, or to prevent the German community there from
extending its influence at a time when war with Germany seemed more and
more likely."(7) Which of these was the prime motivating factor is still a
matter of debate. The occupiers undertook to develop Haiti by doing things
such as road building ( using forced labour) which caused many deaths and a
revolt against the US Marines which cost thousanRAB of lives. On a more
positive note they also built schools, hospitals and an agricultural school.
Unfortunately these were coupled with the training of a new Haitian army
created specifically to fight Haitians(8), as well they created a new
centralized state power structure. This was accomplished by the reinforcing
of the fiscal and economic power of the capital, Port-au-Prince, through
the centralization of the customshouses. This corabination proved lethal to
any hopes of a democratic system taking hold and it also removed the
"tenuous right of the majority to revolt."(9) In 1934, after Senate debate
as to why they were really there in the first place, the US pulled out its
troops, but this was not to be the end of US influence. The new military
became the only way other than priesthood for the poor to rise within the
society and it altered the political lanRABcape completely.
Up to the present the Haitian Army (FAdH) has not fought anyone except
the Haitian people. In this they have had a lot of practice. The cadets of
the Military School, set up by the US Marines, ousted President Elie Lescot
(1941-1946), nominated and removed his successor, Dumarsaus Estime (1946-
1950) and finally put one of their own in charge, Paul Magloe (1950-1956).
The FAdH had become the political arbiter of Haitian politics.
Francois 'Papa Doc' Duvalier was installed by the military as well but
he had read Haitian history. He gradually dismissed most of the senior
officers and closed the Military School in order to stave off a potential
coup. Unfortunately for the Haitian people, the US kept its hand in Haitian
affairs. In 1962 US Army doctors revived Papa Doc from a coma, thus
prolonging the suffering of the people. This was the same year that US
President Kennedy funnelled in large amounts of military aid and financed
the Francois Duvalier International Airport in return for Haitian support
in the Organization of American States (OAS) vote to expel Cuba from their
ranks.(10) In 1971 the US Arabassador to Haiti, Clinton Knox, personally
supervised the transition from Papa Doc to his son Jean-Claude'Baby Doc'
Duvalier. Both of the Duvaliers used the power of the centralized state to
formalize a system of absolute individual power. It was a system where one
man ran almost everything in the country from military training to the
writing of school exams.
Papa Doc created the Tontons Macoute, a secret police force that acted
as his own personal death squad, as well as the Volontaires de la Securite
Nationale (VSN) to act as his personal militia that was more loyal then the
FAdH to Duvalier. He also took control of exports, increased taxation and
took control of the import and distribution of basic commodities such as
oil, flour, matches and tobacco. He made "their personal fortune the very
raison d'etre of state revenues."(11) Some of these fortunes came with the
advent of American light manufacturers being successfully wooed by Baby Doc
in the late 1970s and 1980s.
By 1986 the country was ripe for a popular revolution again, in spite
of, or because of, massive state repression and human rights abuses. To
avoid his own seeming demise, Baby Doc was whisked away to France on a US
Jet on February 7th, 1986. He passed the leadership baton on to the
National Governing Council (CNG), a six man junta led by General Henri
Namphy. Grassroots and peasant organizations sprang up immediately seeking
to eliminate the brutal section-chief structure which had been used to such
effect throughout the two Duvalier's regimes. As well students began to
fight for the end of the state control of the University. By 1987 tensions
between the revolutionary militants and the petite bourgeois merchant
reformers began to tear apart their once united front. For the merchant
bourgeois "democracy was a way to overcome the Duvalierists and at the same
time channel the revolutionary anger of the slum dwellers and
peasantry."(12)
The first post-Duvalier elections culminated in a massacre of voters
by the FAdH. By 1990 the situation in Haiti had become almost completely
untenable. The country had little to no natural resources left, little to
export, the fertile soil had been destroyed by erosion caused by the
cutting down of the forests for charcoal, there was an AIRAB epidemic with
the only medical care coming from foreign charities and the gap between the
elite and the poor was getting ever wider with 90% of the countries wealth
in the hanRAB of 10% of the population in a system based upon "personal
loyalties, opportunism and terror."(13) The absolutely predatory nature of
Duvalier's policies accelerated the environmental degradation.
Between the end of the brutally repressive Duvalier regimes in 1986
and the elections in 1990 Haiti had seen eleven governments come and go as
well as having two coups and one fake election before the popular movement
began to march again to remove General Prosper Avril. Following Avril's
removal, the interim President Ertha Pascal-Trouillot, a Duvalierist, set
up new elections to be held in 1991. The revolutionary segment of the
popular movement was held in check by the merchant-bourgeois who wanted
free elections and not a bloody revolution.
The initial candidates up for the UN supervised 1990 Presidential
elections were Roger Lafontant: a former head of the Tonton Macoute
(Duvalier's personal death squad), Marc Bazin: a former World Bank official
whose campaign was financed by the US (to the tune of $36 million mostly
from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)(14)) and Professor Victor
Benoit: a compromise candidate with little popular support. Bazin was
considered by the masses as a "front man for military and business
interests."(15) With these to choose from the electorate was looking at a
US/Duvalierist government being formed and because of this Jean-Bertrand
Aristide, a charismatic Salesian priest, entered the race in place of
Benoit under the 'Lavalas' or 'flood' banner. This was a biblical reference
conveying "the purifying and sweeping nature of the popular uprising that
would rid the country of the twin evils of the Duvalierist terror and
foreign domination."(16) Within a week of Aristide announcing his candidacy
the electoral rolls doubled.
Aristide's doctrine was a mix of democracy, nationalism and liberation
theology. He was an enigma, making "vague metaphoric and mystical
pronouncements."(17) Aristide promised land redistribution and an end to
favouritism, corruption and violence. He was an opponent of US economic
'cures' for Haiti such as privatisation of state-run enterprises, reduction
of taxes and wages to help foreign investors, cutting social programs to
insure debt repayments and creating an export economy. Aristide instead
wanted to support national industry, create a self-sufficient land use
system, cut contraband imports (especially the drug trade), raise the
minimum wage and overhaul the government bureaucracy to root out corruption.
Aristide was supported by the merchant-bourgeois under groups such as
the National Front for Change and Democracy (FNCD). As well he drew support
from grassroots workers, peasant farmers, student organizations,
ecclesiastical committees, labour unions and neigrabroadourhood associations.
Haiti was "perhaps the greatest malfunction of all the US election
engineering done since the early 1980s throughout Latin America."(18) Their
candidate Bazin (12% of the vote) and all other candidates lost to the
lanRABlide of support given to Aristide (67% of the vote).
Aristide's Presidency showed the lowest level of state sponsored human
rights abuses in recent Haitian history but behind the scenes there was a
major power struggle going on. After his election, Aristide made clear his
intention to build an independent political structure around the mass
support of the people and not around the FNCD. The erabittered organization
then preceded to actively undermine and destabilise the government.(19)
Added to this was the state of tension within Port-au-Prince with a nervous
minority desperately trying to hold on to its privileges facing a huge
majority of some 1.2-1.8 million people with little, if anything, to lose.
There was the perception among the elites that Aristide "might not even try
to control Port-au-Prince's masses if that human flood decided to take the
law in its hanRAB."(20) The security forces were especially afraid of
reprisals by the mob led by Aristide due to their role in the numerous
murders of his followers and the three attempts on Aristide's life.
Haiti's 'second independence' was short-lived however, as Aristide was
only in power from February 7th , 1991, to Septeraber 29th , 1991. Lt. Gen.
Rauol Cedras led a military coup which installed itself on Septeraber 30th
of that year. The coup successfully drove the masses away from the
political arena. The attempts to get rid of Duvalierism by legal means had
failed. The 1987 constitution barred Duvalierists from power but it was
ignored and the 1987 elections were a massacre. The people finally were
allowed to vote in a relatively free election and the results were
overturned by yet another coup. It was into this situation that the US, the
UN and international aid organizations entered in the Fall of 1991.
Works Cited
1. 'The Expanding Role of the United Nations and its Implications for
United Kingdom Policy' 3rd Report of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs
Committee.vol.1, London: HMSO, June 1993.
2. Ramesh Thaker and C.A. Thayer (ed) A Crisis of Expectations, Boulder:
Westview, 1995, p.46.
3. Robert Debs Heinl Jr. and Nancy Gordon Heinl Written in Blood. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1978.,p.6.
4. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol.XVII, no.4, Jan/Feb (1994), p.49.
5. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm
6. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of
History'NACLA Report on the Americas.vol XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.47.
7. Sidney W. Mintz 'Can Haiti Change?'Foreign Affairs.vol 24 no
1(1995).,p.84.
8. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no. 4, (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.49.
9. Michel-Rolph Trouillot, Ibid., p.49.
10. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm, p.4.
11. Michel-Roplh Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.51.
12. Kim Ives 'The Lavalas Alliance Propels Aristide to Power' NACLA Report
on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994), p.18.
13. Pamela Constable 'Haiti: A Nation in Despair, A Policy Adrift' Current
History.,(Mar 1994).,p.110.
14. Kim Ives 'The Unmaking of a President' NACLA Report on the Americas.
vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994), p.18.
15. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm, p.14.
16. Kim Ives 'The Lavalas Alliance Propels Aristide to Power 'NACLA Report
on the Americas. vol XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.19.
17. Pamela Constable 'Haiti: A Nation in Despair, A Policy Adrift' Current
History. (Mar 1994).,p.111.
18. Kim Ives 'The Unmaking of a President 'NACLA Report on the Americas.
vol. XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.19.
19. Marx V. Aristide & Laurie RicharRABon 'Haiti's Popular Resistance' NACLA
Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.34.
20. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.51.
[/FONT]
[FONT=tahoma, arial]WorRAB: 2863 [/FONT]
ushered in a new era of democracy and the rule of law for Haiti and for
seven months it appeared like it might actually have a chance despite the
island's violent history of coups, rebellions and revolutions. In the past
190 years the tiny island nation has had twenty-one constitutions, forty-
one heaRAB of state, seven of whom served longer than ten years and nine who
declared themselves Presidents/Emperors for life and twenty-nine of these
leaders had been assassinated or overthrown. The new era was short lived
however, for on Septeraber 30th, 1991, history repeated its cycle once more
as there occurred a military coup under the leadership of Lt. Gen. Rauol
Cedras which overthrew the popularly elected civilian government of
President Jean-Bertrand Aristide.
What followed were a series of ineffective erabargoes and failed
negotiations led by the US, the OAS and the UN culminating in a US led
invasion of Haiti. The US government has played a large, and at times
indefensible, role in the events that took place and they were backed by
groups such as the CIA, the Pentagon and US backed international aid
organizations like USAID. Presidents George Bush and Bill Clinton both
focussed constantly upon short range goals such as winning the election in
1993 and they were willing to sacrifice long term interests in the pursuit
of these goals. The US would be far better served by a democratic, stable
and prosperous Haiti than one that is mired in civil unrest and abject
poverty. This was not the first time the US had attempted to impress its
will upon the tiny nation and undoubtably it will not be the last.
The US called in international organizations to legitimize its actions.
Specifically the OAS in 1991 and the UN in 1993. By using the UN the way it
did, the US has given the impression that the UN is merely an instrument of
the US and the UN policies are shaped in Washington. This reduces the
legitimizing power of the Security Council and creates the image that the
"UN issues the warrants and the US makes the arrests"(1) based, of course,
on US interests. Despite this the UN has done a commendable job with the
missions that were sent to Haiti to restore order following the US pull-out.
The international lending organizations, led by the IMF, the World
Bank and USAID, have also played their part in the furthering of US
interests in Haiti and have been for almost twenty years. They have moulded
the future for the country through their actions which will have a
continuing impact for decades to come, whether or not democracy can take
hold.
This paper will thus examine the historical context of US intervention,
their shifting diplomatic positions and efforts, the role of the OAS and UN,
and the use of aid organizations by the US to further their economic
goals.Chapter 1: History - the subjugation of a people
The role of history in Haiti has a major impact upon events today and
cannot be ignored. "History is rarely a serious explanation- especially
history that runs deep. Analysis that go back a decade, let alone a century,
seem moot- at least until the latest exercise in myopia reveals a new
disaster."(2) The history of Haiti is that of opposing interests and
competing visions of the uses of the state and the meaning of nationhood.
The roles of this history and the class structure are at the roots of the
current crisis in Haiti.
In August, 1791, the slaves of the French colony of Saint-Domingue
revolted against their enslavers and after twelve bloody years of war they
created the world's first black republic. This was the only successful
slave insurrection in history.(3) The new Haitian elites, composed
primarily of the grown children of mixed marriages between French
plantation owners and black slave women, instantly began to treat the rural
peasant/slave masses in the same fashion as the French overlorRAB had. They
turned the fiscal and marketing systems into mechanisms that would allow
them to siphon off the wealth produced by the peasants. They heavily taxed
food and other necessities while leaving luxury items, which they
themselves consumed, virtually untouched. The urban elite minority forced
the rural majority to the political margins through systematic
electioneering fraud and manipulation and the use of violent repression. It
became obvious that the maintenance of the elites' lifestyle was more
important to them than the actual survival of the majority of the
population. The state thus became "inherently predatory."(4) The elites
made their fortunes buying and selling the gooRAB made by the poor, not by
actually growing or producing anything themselves. The countryside became a
mere class colony of the urban elites.
It took almost sixty years for the US to recognize the new country of
Haiti and only then because the North required cotton to help support their
war against the South (1862 US Civil War), and of course the Southern slave
owners ceased to have a say in the White House and Congress. Haiti was also
important to the US as a possible dumping ground for freed slaves following
the war (their reason for recognizing Liberia as well in the same year).(5)
The revolution was followed by almost 200 other revolutions, coups,
insurrections and civil wars due largely to the fact that the new elites
treated the rural peasants just like the French had before them. For
example despite almost 200 years of independence "the government has yet to
collect income tax from most merchants, civil servants or middle-class
employees,"(6) The taxation primarily comes from the poor who have been
totally politically and economically marginalised.
In 1915 the US occupied Haiti "to protect Chase National Bank assets,
to halt mob violence, or to prevent the German community there from
extending its influence at a time when war with Germany seemed more and
more likely."(7) Which of these was the prime motivating factor is still a
matter of debate. The occupiers undertook to develop Haiti by doing things
such as road building ( using forced labour) which caused many deaths and a
revolt against the US Marines which cost thousanRAB of lives. On a more
positive note they also built schools, hospitals and an agricultural school.
Unfortunately these were coupled with the training of a new Haitian army
created specifically to fight Haitians(8), as well they created a new
centralized state power structure. This was accomplished by the reinforcing
of the fiscal and economic power of the capital, Port-au-Prince, through
the centralization of the customshouses. This corabination proved lethal to
any hopes of a democratic system taking hold and it also removed the
"tenuous right of the majority to revolt."(9) In 1934, after Senate debate
as to why they were really there in the first place, the US pulled out its
troops, but this was not to be the end of US influence. The new military
became the only way other than priesthood for the poor to rise within the
society and it altered the political lanRABcape completely.
Up to the present the Haitian Army (FAdH) has not fought anyone except
the Haitian people. In this they have had a lot of practice. The cadets of
the Military School, set up by the US Marines, ousted President Elie Lescot
(1941-1946), nominated and removed his successor, Dumarsaus Estime (1946-
1950) and finally put one of their own in charge, Paul Magloe (1950-1956).
The FAdH had become the political arbiter of Haitian politics.
Francois 'Papa Doc' Duvalier was installed by the military as well but
he had read Haitian history. He gradually dismissed most of the senior
officers and closed the Military School in order to stave off a potential
coup. Unfortunately for the Haitian people, the US kept its hand in Haitian
affairs. In 1962 US Army doctors revived Papa Doc from a coma, thus
prolonging the suffering of the people. This was the same year that US
President Kennedy funnelled in large amounts of military aid and financed
the Francois Duvalier International Airport in return for Haitian support
in the Organization of American States (OAS) vote to expel Cuba from their
ranks.(10) In 1971 the US Arabassador to Haiti, Clinton Knox, personally
supervised the transition from Papa Doc to his son Jean-Claude'Baby Doc'
Duvalier. Both of the Duvaliers used the power of the centralized state to
formalize a system of absolute individual power. It was a system where one
man ran almost everything in the country from military training to the
writing of school exams.
Papa Doc created the Tontons Macoute, a secret police force that acted
as his own personal death squad, as well as the Volontaires de la Securite
Nationale (VSN) to act as his personal militia that was more loyal then the
FAdH to Duvalier. He also took control of exports, increased taxation and
took control of the import and distribution of basic commodities such as
oil, flour, matches and tobacco. He made "their personal fortune the very
raison d'etre of state revenues."(11) Some of these fortunes came with the
advent of American light manufacturers being successfully wooed by Baby Doc
in the late 1970s and 1980s.
By 1986 the country was ripe for a popular revolution again, in spite
of, or because of, massive state repression and human rights abuses. To
avoid his own seeming demise, Baby Doc was whisked away to France on a US
Jet on February 7th, 1986. He passed the leadership baton on to the
National Governing Council (CNG), a six man junta led by General Henri
Namphy. Grassroots and peasant organizations sprang up immediately seeking
to eliminate the brutal section-chief structure which had been used to such
effect throughout the two Duvalier's regimes. As well students began to
fight for the end of the state control of the University. By 1987 tensions
between the revolutionary militants and the petite bourgeois merchant
reformers began to tear apart their once united front. For the merchant
bourgeois "democracy was a way to overcome the Duvalierists and at the same
time channel the revolutionary anger of the slum dwellers and
peasantry."(12)
The first post-Duvalier elections culminated in a massacre of voters
by the FAdH. By 1990 the situation in Haiti had become almost completely
untenable. The country had little to no natural resources left, little to
export, the fertile soil had been destroyed by erosion caused by the
cutting down of the forests for charcoal, there was an AIRAB epidemic with
the only medical care coming from foreign charities and the gap between the
elite and the poor was getting ever wider with 90% of the countries wealth
in the hanRAB of 10% of the population in a system based upon "personal
loyalties, opportunism and terror."(13) The absolutely predatory nature of
Duvalier's policies accelerated the environmental degradation.
Between the end of the brutally repressive Duvalier regimes in 1986
and the elections in 1990 Haiti had seen eleven governments come and go as
well as having two coups and one fake election before the popular movement
began to march again to remove General Prosper Avril. Following Avril's
removal, the interim President Ertha Pascal-Trouillot, a Duvalierist, set
up new elections to be held in 1991. The revolutionary segment of the
popular movement was held in check by the merchant-bourgeois who wanted
free elections and not a bloody revolution.
The initial candidates up for the UN supervised 1990 Presidential
elections were Roger Lafontant: a former head of the Tonton Macoute
(Duvalier's personal death squad), Marc Bazin: a former World Bank official
whose campaign was financed by the US (to the tune of $36 million mostly
from the National Endowment for Democracy (NED)(14)) and Professor Victor
Benoit: a compromise candidate with little popular support. Bazin was
considered by the masses as a "front man for military and business
interests."(15) With these to choose from the electorate was looking at a
US/Duvalierist government being formed and because of this Jean-Bertrand
Aristide, a charismatic Salesian priest, entered the race in place of
Benoit under the 'Lavalas' or 'flood' banner. This was a biblical reference
conveying "the purifying and sweeping nature of the popular uprising that
would rid the country of the twin evils of the Duvalierist terror and
foreign domination."(16) Within a week of Aristide announcing his candidacy
the electoral rolls doubled.
Aristide's doctrine was a mix of democracy, nationalism and liberation
theology. He was an enigma, making "vague metaphoric and mystical
pronouncements."(17) Aristide promised land redistribution and an end to
favouritism, corruption and violence. He was an opponent of US economic
'cures' for Haiti such as privatisation of state-run enterprises, reduction
of taxes and wages to help foreign investors, cutting social programs to
insure debt repayments and creating an export economy. Aristide instead
wanted to support national industry, create a self-sufficient land use
system, cut contraband imports (especially the drug trade), raise the
minimum wage and overhaul the government bureaucracy to root out corruption.
Aristide was supported by the merchant-bourgeois under groups such as
the National Front for Change and Democracy (FNCD). As well he drew support
from grassroots workers, peasant farmers, student organizations,
ecclesiastical committees, labour unions and neigrabroadourhood associations.
Haiti was "perhaps the greatest malfunction of all the US election
engineering done since the early 1980s throughout Latin America."(18) Their
candidate Bazin (12% of the vote) and all other candidates lost to the
lanRABlide of support given to Aristide (67% of the vote).
Aristide's Presidency showed the lowest level of state sponsored human
rights abuses in recent Haitian history but behind the scenes there was a
major power struggle going on. After his election, Aristide made clear his
intention to build an independent political structure around the mass
support of the people and not around the FNCD. The erabittered organization
then preceded to actively undermine and destabilise the government.(19)
Added to this was the state of tension within Port-au-Prince with a nervous
minority desperately trying to hold on to its privileges facing a huge
majority of some 1.2-1.8 million people with little, if anything, to lose.
There was the perception among the elites that Aristide "might not even try
to control Port-au-Prince's masses if that human flood decided to take the
law in its hanRAB."(20) The security forces were especially afraid of
reprisals by the mob led by Aristide due to their role in the numerous
murders of his followers and the three attempts on Aristide's life.
Haiti's 'second independence' was short-lived however, as Aristide was
only in power from February 7th , 1991, to Septeraber 29th , 1991. Lt. Gen.
Rauol Cedras led a military coup which installed itself on Septeraber 30th
of that year. The coup successfully drove the masses away from the
political arena. The attempts to get rid of Duvalierism by legal means had
failed. The 1987 constitution barred Duvalierists from power but it was
ignored and the 1987 elections were a massacre. The people finally were
allowed to vote in a relatively free election and the results were
overturned by yet another coup. It was into this situation that the US, the
UN and international aid organizations entered in the Fall of 1991.
Works Cited
1. 'The Expanding Role of the United Nations and its Implications for
United Kingdom Policy' 3rd Report of the House of Commons Foreign Affairs
Committee.vol.1, London: HMSO, June 1993.
2. Ramesh Thaker and C.A. Thayer (ed) A Crisis of Expectations, Boulder:
Westview, 1995, p.46.
3. Robert Debs Heinl Jr. and Nancy Gordon Heinl Written in Blood. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1978.,p.6.
4. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol.XVII, no.4, Jan/Feb (1994), p.49.
5. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm
6. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of
History'NACLA Report on the Americas.vol XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.47.
7. Sidney W. Mintz 'Can Haiti Change?'Foreign Affairs.vol 24 no
1(1995).,p.84.
8. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no. 4, (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.49.
9. Michel-Rolph Trouillot, Ibid., p.49.
10. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm, p.4.
11. Michel-Roplh Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.51.
12. Kim Ives 'The Lavalas Alliance Propels Aristide to Power' NACLA Report
on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994), p.18.
13. Pamela Constable 'Haiti: A Nation in Despair, A Policy Adrift' Current
History.,(Mar 1994).,p.110.
14. Kim Ives 'The Unmaking of a President' NACLA Report on the Americas.
vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994), p.18.
15. Noam Chomsky 'Democracy Enhancement Part II: The Case of Haiti' Znet @
www.lbbs.org/zmag/articles/chom3.htm, p.14.
16. Kim Ives 'The Lavalas Alliance Propels Aristide to Power 'NACLA Report
on the Americas. vol XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.19.
17. Pamela Constable 'Haiti: A Nation in Despair, A Policy Adrift' Current
History. (Mar 1994).,p.111.
18. Kim Ives 'The Unmaking of a President 'NACLA Report on the Americas.
vol. XVII no 4 (Jan/Feb 1994).,p.19.
19. Marx V. Aristide & Laurie RicharRABon 'Haiti's Popular Resistance' NACLA
Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.34.
20. Michel-Rolph Trouillot 'Haiti's Nightmare and the Lessons of History'
NACLA Report on the Americas. vol. XVII, no.4, (Jan/Feb 1994)., p.51.
[/FONT]
[FONT=tahoma, arial]WorRAB: 2863 [/FONT]