Democracy appears the loser in Haiti

National Catholic Reporter, March 12, 2004 by Jeff Guntzel

Haitian president Jean-Bertrand Aristide--swamped in controversy and political paralysis since his reelection in 2000--was forced into exile last week in what some are calling Haiti's liberation and others, a tragedy.

In 200 years of independence, the people of Haiti have voted into their presidential palace exactly two men, on three occasions. Twice they chose the former priest, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, and once his prime minister. The rest came to power by force. In Haiti, coup d'etats--often bloody--seem as much a political certainty as presidential elections in the United States.

Haitians have just seen their country's 33rd coup. At least that's the word Aristide is using from exile in Africa. He blames the armed rebels who spent most of February fighting their way to Port-Au-Prince, demanding his resignation. He blames his political opposition that has forced a political freeze since his inauguration.

And he blames the United States.

His friends, colleagues and supporters concur. Others who have known him for a long time, however, say he became enamored of power and began acting like the dictators he once worked to overthrow.

Reconciling the many takes on Aristide may be a puzzle forever unsolved. And it is a distraction from the big question to emerge from events in Haiti: Why did the United States support--covertly or overtly, implicitly or explicitly--the forced resignation of a democratically elected leader?

There is, of course, speculation. The United States was sending a message to other populist leaders in the region, goes one theory. And another: The United States saw an opportunity to rid itself of a man no American president ever really liked with hopes of exchanging him for somebody more like the man U.S. officials wanted him to be for more than a decade.

"The United States could have stopped this at any time," said human rights lawyer Michael Ratner, president of the New York-based Center for Constitutional Rights.

The armed rebels' first success in their push towards Port-Au-Prince was the taking of the seaside city of Goinaves. "All the Bush administration had to do," Ratner said, "was say to the opposition, 'We're going to land 100 Marines in Goinaves'--and that's the ball game. We all know that."

Instead, administration officials offered statement after statement that to some seem hollow in the face of recent events.

Decision not to defend Aristide

Just days into the rebel push, Secretary of State Colin Powell told reporters, "President Aristide was elected by the Haitian people and his departure from the scene as president can only be by democratic, constitutional means. And it would not be appropriate ... to force him from office against his will."

Aristide's will is a contentious subject. Haitians woke up Feb. 29 to news that their president had resigned and fled the country under cover of darkness. The next day, Aristide claimed the event had been a U.S.-led "kidnapping."

Colin Powell called Aristide's assertions "absurd."

Still, the United States made a clear decision not to defend Aristide--militarily or otherwise. And that is what frustrates many observers.

"The entire world should be condemning U.S. behavior in allowing this removal of somebody who was a democratically elected leader," said Melinda Miles of the Quixote Center, a U.S.-based Catholic justice and peace organization that has been working in Haiti for more than a decade.

Just back from Haiti, where she experienced the undoing of Aristide's presidency from a rural area in the south, Miles is not nostalgic about the fallen leader.

She acknowledges "inadequacies of Aristide's rule," placing at the top of the list Aristide's reliance on patron age--a tradition tracing back to the days of dictator Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier. But she believes Aristide tried in his final embattled months to compromise, agreeing to a power-sharing plan that his opposition rejected outright.

Still, she is cautious. "I think we have yet to see the true story on what steps Aristide and the government had taken in the last few months to try to retain power. I'm afraid some of those stories will be damning."

It is talk of a-corrupted Aristide that dominates popular discourse. But some are still protective of the man who was once considered by many a savior.

Ratner has known Aristide and his wife, Mildred--a Haitian-American lawyer--for years.

"It would be so unlike his character to be involved in what I read in the papers," Ratner said. "Drug dealing? No way in the world. And it would be hard for me to believe that he would actually send people out to kill people.

"We're not talking about a blood-thirsty dictator here," Ratner said. "We're talking about a guy who tried to rule in a very difficult situation. Amazing contending forces. And the U.S. like a millstone around his neck."

On the millstone, Miles agrees. "The U.S. had a policy of withholding all international assistance from the government of Haiti," Miles said, explaining that some funds were funneled through nongovernmental organizations and nonprofits working inside Haiti.