Caribbean Matters: Intervention or no intervention? That is the Haiti question

For those who haven’t been following happenings in Haiti, some excellent recent articles tackle current events on the island, and review the history leading up to where things stand today.

RELATED: Caribbean Matters: The New York Times ‘gets woke’ to the Haitian history it has ignored in the past

After several mainstream media giants recently called for a “Haitian intervention,” journalist Jane Regan raised questions about just who speaks for Haiti on Oct. 25, writing for Fairness and Accuracy in Media (FAIR).

The Washington Post (10/11/22) ran an editorial: “Yes, Intervene in Haiti—and Push for Democracy.” That followed on the heels of a piece in the other big opinion-maker, the New York Times (10/7/22), whose tall title read: “Haiti Appeals for Armed Intervention and Aid to Quell Chaos.”

Is “Haiti” the current occupant of the prime minister’s chair?

The myriad and sometimes violent demonstrations against the illegitimate and unelected man suggest that, no, Ariel Henry is not “Haiti.” The New York University law clinic attorney and human rights advocate Pierre Esperance (Just Security, 7/22/21) called the Biden administration’s support for Henry, who stepped into power after President Jovenel Moise was assassinated, another “bad choice.” Instead, Esperance said, the US should back “a transitional government.” But that was over a year ago. And that did not happen.

Another reason Henry’s request for intervention does not represent “Haiti” is the fact that the idea seems to actually have been gestated afar. Organization of American States chief Luis Amargo put it pretty bluntly in a tweet on October 6: “I called on Haiti to request urgent support from international community to help solve security crisis and determine characteristics of the international security force.”

Contrary to the interventionist opinions expressed by the Post and the Times, others hold opposing positions.

One of the most vocal advocates opposing U.S. policy and intervention is former United States Special Envoy for Haiti Dan Foote, who resigned his position in the Biden administration in September 2021. He has continued to speak out on Twitter, and amplify the voices of Haitians. Below, he translates to English for his followers a thread written in Haitian Kreyol, from independent Haitian media outlet AyiboPost.

Foote also adds a helpful little “tip” of his own. 

RELATED: Caribbean Matters: Time to push against Haiti hate yet again, and learn some hidden U.S. history

Journalist Jonathan M. Katz, author of The Big Truck That Went by: How the World Came to Save Haiti and Left Behind a Disaster, penned a critique of intervention for Foreign Policy.

The United States must break the habit of disastrous intervention.

Two years after the last U.N. mission left, in July 2021, Haitian President Jovenel Moïse was assassinated at his home in a suburb of Port-au-Prince. Moïse was the hand-picked successor of Michel “Sweet Micky” Martelly, a popular singer-turned-right-wing nationalist who became president thanks to the electoral interference of the Obama administration in the post-2010 earthquake election. (Martelly had been allowed to go through to the second round after then-U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton accused the sitting president of fraud to benefit his own protégé.) Though the plot that led to Moïse’s assassination remains unsolved, this much is clear: He was killed by a group of gunmen, mostly consisting of Colombians and claiming to be agents of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA). Indeed, at least two of them were in fact former DEA informants. A New York Times investigation found evidence that the men may have been looking for a list of drug traffickers Moïse was intending to expose. The Intercept reported that several had received U.S. military training.

By the time of his death, Moïse, with the tacit support of the Trump administration, had allowed Haiti’s already hollowed-out government to effectively collapse around him. There was no functioning parliament or plans to elect one. He had overstayed the end of his constitutional term and was ruling by decree. Gangsters, along with elements of the Haitian police and the reconstituted Haitian army, carried out a series of massacres; a Harvard Law School study detailed “a widespread and systematic pattern that further state and organizational policies to control and repress communities at the forefront of government opposition.”

[…]

Moïse’s death left an inescapable power vacuum. Institutionally, it was filled by then-71-year-old Ariel Henry, a neurosurgeon who entered politics as part of the coalition that fomented the 2004 coup against the leftist Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Moïse had announced his intention to nominate Henry as his prime minister (the No. 2 role in the Haitian system), but given the lack of a parliament, that nomination was never confirmed. Instead, Henry was installed by press release: an announcement from the so-called Core Group (a consortium of ambassadors headed by the United States, France, and Canada that includes representatives of the United Nations, European Union, and Organization of American States), which called on Henry to form a government—despite his lack of a democratic mandate.

Also writing for Foreign Policy, professor John D. Ciorciari, associate dean for research and policy engagement at the University of Michigan’s Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy, cautions that intervention is unwise, unless there is a process in place to move toward democratic elections.  

Without a credible and locally owned political road map, another intervention will do little to strengthen Haiti.

Haiti faces acute hardships and needs international assistance. Without a credible and locally owned political road map, however, another intervention will do little to strengthen Haiti’s sovereign institutions. At best, a rapid reaction force will provide a Band-Aid, not a lasting remedy. At worst, a new intervention would deepen domestic divisions in Haiti, as has so often occurred in the past, and could even inflict further abuses on a vulnerable population.

The only sustainable way to fill Haiti’s sovereignty gap is through domestic development. That requires supporting domestically rooted political processes. The most promising at present is the Montana Accord, devised by Haitian civil society leaders to guide a transition toward new national elections. An updated version of this plan could provide the necessary political foundation for an international security mission.

Without such a road map, many Haitians would see a foreign force as yet another international effort to buttress an illegitimate but compliant government in Port-au-Prince. By contrast, a force linked to an agreed road map is more likely to be welcomed and earn the public cooperation it will need to succeed.

One suggestion is to promote the Montana Accord—linked here (in French) at The Haitian Times, which notes that “[I]t is not yet known if translated versions are available.”

The Montana Accord is an approach proposed in August 2021 by the Commission for a Search to a Haitian Solution to the Crisis, a group of civic, religious and political organizations and leaders that assembled after the assassination of Jovenel Moise left Haiti without a head of state. Among the accord’s major provisions is a call for a provisional government to take over from interim Prime Minister Ariel Henry and hold elections. The committee, called the Montana Group because it held its planning meetings at the Montana Hotel in Port-au-Prince, later named Fritz Jean as president of the provisional government. 

Caribbean historian Dr. Claire Antone Payton covers the history of past interventions in Haiti, and issues a warning about doing it yet again, in analysis published by The Conversation that revisits the 13-year United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH).

Conditions in Haiti today are alarming, but as a scholar of 20th-century Haitian history, I am concerned that foreign intervention runs the risk of making a bad situation worse – as has happened repeatedly there for more than 100 years. I believe any response should carefully consider how past aid and military interventions have shaped the dire situation Haitians face today.

[…]

MINUSTAH and the Obama State Department oversaw Haiti’s 2010 presidential elections and had a major hand in securing the victory of President Michel Martelly, a pop star-turned-politician who quickly gained a reputation for corruption. He was succeeded by his chosen successor, Jovenel Moïse, who dissolved parliament in 2020. According to human rights agencies, he worked with local gangs to terrorize his opponents. Moïse was assassinated in July 2021 – a murder that has yet to be solved. Without a parliament, there is no constitutional line of succession. Haiti’s government has since lurched forward under the leadership of Henry, an unelected and unpopular official who has been linked to Moïse’s alleged assassin.

[…]

Despite these concerns, Henry has enjoyed the backing of the U.S. over his rivals. A coalition of Haitian civil society groups drafted a proposal for a new interim government to take power and organize elections. But negotiations with Henry’s government have gone nowhere. Given the vacuum of legitimate  authority, the gangs Moïse empowered have begun asserting themselves as independent political actors. Chérizier has joined many local leaders in demanding Henry either resign or share power. Critics are worried that Henry, unrestrained by a democratic mandate or a functioning parliament, plans to use foreign troops to reinforce his political position. And while past foreign interventions in Haiti have often been launched in the name of stability and democracy, they have not proved capable of providing either.

As of this writing, the latest “nay” to U.S.-U.N. intervention can be found in The Hill, reported by journalist Rafael Bernal.

A broad coalition of civil society groups called on President Biden to permanently discard the possibility of a military intervention in Haiti as the country descends further into chaos.

In a letter to Biden Tuesday, the groups also called on the president to “reevaluate” his administration’s support for acting Prime Minister Ariel Henry, who has clung to power since July of 2021, even as conditions in Haiti have deteriorated. “We were heartened to see in your 2022 National Security Strategy a commitment to ‘not use our military to change regimes or remake societies,’ and we encourage you to follow through on that commitment in Haiti,” wrote the groups.

The coalition expands beyond Haitian advocates, including more than 90 civil society, faith-based, humanitarian, peacebuilding and diaspora groups ranging from the Washington Office for Latin America to the Chicago-based civil rights group Mi Villita Neighbors and the Quaker pro-peace lobby Friends Committee on National Legislation.

Personally, I fall into the “non-intervention” end of the spectrum. What are your thoughts?

Join me in the comments for more on the situation in Haiti, and for the weekly Caribbean News Roundup.

Time is running out before the midterm election on Nov. 8, but there’s still plenty of ways to help get out the vote, no matter where you are.