Haiti: Aiding Oppression Latortue’s Jackal Regime
Aiding Oppression in Haiti: Kofi Annan and General
Heleno’s Complicity in Latortue’s Jackal Regime
• 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.