Global Policy Forum

By Rickey Singh

As Haitians continue to die in armed conflicts in post-Aristide Haiti, that was still without a legitimate government up to yesterday, following the removal from power of the Haitian President on February 29, the George Bush administration is trying hard to clothe itself in questionable legal garb over its military involvement, along with France, while flattering CARICOM in order to deceive international opinion.

It says, controversially, for instance, that "principles" of CARICOM's 'Action Plan' on the governance crisis "continue to guide efforts for forming a new government" in Port-au-Prince. This intriguing claim has already been challenged by CARICOM which had as a fundamental aspect of its 'Action Plan' that Aristide complete his presidential term that expires in February 2006, with reduced powers. But Aristide was forced out of office. So whose 'Action Plan' is really being implemented?

It would be some time yet before we get through the fog of political somersaults and the deceit spun by the USA and France in relation to CARICOM's Action Plan and Aristide's "resignation" that was quickly followed, within 24 hours, by American, French and Canadian troops on Haitian soil.

Already, however, comparisons are being made between what happened in Haiti on February 29, 2004---when a hastily-installed Chief Justice as interim President hurriedly "requested" a foreign military presence, and what had occurred in little Grenada on October 25, 1983 when a United States military invasion was reportedly "invited" by the then Governor General---after a "revolution" devoured itself.

Let it be said at the outset, that what follows is neither a rationalisation for the crimes of the Aristide presidency, including political assassinations throttling of media freedom and poor governance; nor the crimes, including mind-boggling executions, carried out in a short-lived coup by a so-called "Revolutionary Military Council" in Grenada

But there would have been a convergence of interests by both the USA and France that have nothing to do with the endless official chatter about "democracy and the rule of law". Those now cynically dismissing as "too late" CARICOM's collective decision to request UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to carry out an independent investigation into the circumstances of Aristide's dramatic loss of power on February 29, should know that such an initiative simply could not have been exercised before his claim of having been the victim of a coup involving France and America.

They also need to refresh their memories about the CARICOM intensive efforts over a two-month period, following earlier initiatives, in co-operation with the Organisation of American States, to promote a compromise plan of action involving Aristide and his Lavalas Party, opposition parties and civil society representatives.

When that plan was eventually hammered out, and with representatives of the USA, France, Canada, European Union and the Organisation of American States in attendance at strategic meetings, it was officially endorsed at a meeting in Washington on February 13, presided over by Secretary of State Colin Powell.

Principles of the CARICOM-initiated "action plan" were predicated on Aristide remaining in office until the expiry of his presidential term in 2006, but with reduced powers; appointment of a new Prime Minister acceptable to the opposition; help from the international community for new electoral arrangements and the reorganisation of the Police Force and with a UN-sanctioned multi-national force helping to keep the peace.

It was no less a voice than that of the US Secretary of State that made it clear following the February 13 Washington meeting involving representatives from CARICOM, France, Canada and the OAS, that there would be no question of "regime change" in Port-au-Prince since Aristide, for all his faults, was the elected President of Haiti.

However, political subterfuge resulted in things quickly falling apart. The anti-opposition forces in Haiti, by then unofficially embracing criminals and armed rebels on the anti-Aristide warpath, rejected the CARICOM Action Plan. They became more vociferous for Aristide's resignation when France, through its Foreign Minister, openly suggested that the Haitian President should seriously reconsider remaining in office.

Not a word of rebuke from France or the USA for the intransigent opposition whose only common goal was ousting Aristide from power that they have never been able to achieve from the electorate. By then the USA was no longer singing either from the same hymn sheet on the CARICOM Action Plan, and Canada was to fall in line while avoiding any public rhetoric.

Up to Thursday, February 26, when CARICOM anxiously waited for the expected UN Security Council decision on a multi-national peace keeping-force, a key component of its Action Plan, the foot-dragging process continued, while the USA and France vacillated in the face of spiralling political violence, killings and mayhem in Haiti. Then, on the afternoon of Sunday, February 29, and hours after Aristide was flown into exile, the UN Security Council hurriedly approved, at an emergency session, a resolution authorising military intervention in Haiti. Guess who were ready and waiting? USA, France and Canada.

The Haitian Chief Justice, Boniface Alexandre, who reportedly signed the letter as interim President to request the multi-national military force, was still not lawfully functioning in that capacity. His endorsement as interim Head of State must come from the Haitian parliament. But no such parliament is in place.

Incidentally, amid all the talk, in and out of the Caribbean region, about help for crisis-ridden Haiti, it is Castro's Cuba that has had in Haiti, for the past three years, more than 500 (five hundred) doctors and nurses spread across the country, providing desperately needed medical attention. Also in Haiti are Cuban technical experts in various fields, including agriculture, engineering and education, with the latter focused on promoting literacy.

A question of immediate relevance is whether America under Bush, would want in Haiti what America under Reagan had forced in Grenada-getting rid of all Cubans-doctors, nurses, construction workers, or else. In the meanwhile, we await on the emergence of CARICOMS's case for UN probe into the circumstances of Aristide being out of power.