The Haitian crisis: A replay of Venezuela?

Violence erupted across Haiti in anti-government protests last week. Or were those pro-government rallies?

by L Jara Diaz

Haiti is back in the news due to increasing levels of street violence unleashed in that country in the last two months. It is difficult to have a clear picture of what exactly is going on in the only country in the Western Hemisphere founded by African slaves.

President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a former priest who followed liberation theology, is not a bloody dictator, as he is often depicted by the mainstream media, but a highly popular leader amongst Haiti's poor, He was elected twice to the presidency with an overwhelming majority.

In the 1980s, because of his commitment to the poor and to the defense of their human rights, Aristide became known countrywide and, at the same time, as the natural leader of a massive popular movement Lavalas. Father Aristide, as he was known until the Church stripped him from his robes, was chosen by his people to lead them.

(Pope John Paul II has never approved leftist priests in politics, much less those who profess to the liberation theology, so they are given a choice between the robe or the door, and like Aristide, most choose the latter.)

As has happened to almost all countries in the Caribbean and Central America during the 20 th century, Haiti was invaded by US marines, their turn coming in 1915. The US occupied it for 20 years and at their withdrawal left a dictator behind: Francois "Papa Doc" Duvalier, followed, after his death, by Jean-Claude "Baby Doc" Duvalier, his son. Baby Doc was forced out of power in 1985 after massive protests against his repressive and corrupt 50-year-old US-backed regime.

But not much changed for the poor in Haiti, so in 1990 Father Aristide, supported by the Lavalas Movement, became the first democratically elected president of Haiti with a landslide victory. The remnants of the feared "Toton Macutes", Duvalier's special military forces, were finally defeated, or so it seemed.

The US was not happy with such a development. The Lavalas Movement platform spoke of social justice, wealth re-distribution, social reform and the dismantling of the bureaucracy built by the two Duvaliers to buy support. Within six month of his election, the Aristide government was toppled by a coup d'etat lead by a right-wing military Junta supported by the US. Meanwhile, death squads carried out a rampant campaign of assassination and massacres against Lavalas supporters.

Despite all efforts, the US and the Haitian establishment could not regain control over the country. Lavalas couldn't be defeated by force. Finally, Bill Clinton announced in 1994 the "Restoring Democracy" operation, which brought Aristide back to the country, but not to real power. A neo-liberal program was forced upon the leader, who might have signed it, observers said, as the only way to return to his country and stop the bloodshed. Aristide was not the US's first choice, but its only choice.

Although Aristide was no longer the threat he had been, which was to become another Fidel Castro, he wasn't a US sacrificial lamb either. Under pressure from his Lavalas supporters, he slowed as much as it was possible the implementation of the neoliberal economic program. Because of this, Haiti has suffered embargo after embargo of international loans and assistance, creating a serious economic crisis, which is at the root of today's political unrest. In addition, in the eyes of the US, Haitians keep on supporting the wrong man as their leader.

US-supported embargoes are not news for Latin Americans. They tend to coincide with periods in which any country tries to become economically independent. The latest embargo over Haiti came because the present Bush administration did not recognize the 2000 elections in which Aristide won again with an overwhelming majority, although international observers declared the elections to be fair. Only the minute right wing party Convergence Democratic claimed fraud.

After the restoration of Aristide, the US and multilateral organizations promised $500 million in aid to rebuild the country. Nothing much has come of it. Even humanitarian loans are held back. The Inter American Development Bank held back a loan for US$146 million for health sector improvement, education reform, potable water enhancement, and road rehabilitation. On the other hand, millions of US dollars in military aid and loans flowed easily when the brutal Duvaliers and the Junta that replaced Aristide were in power.

What is not surprising but is interesting is that the political choice made by Haitians, which displeases the giant to the North so much, not only brings US embargoes, but also similar consequences with multilateral aid agencies, which cannot be explained in any way but politically.

Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere. Its unemployment rate reaches 70% and the average income is $1 per day. The average life expectancy is 50 years. Since one percent of its population own all its wealth, that $1 and 50 year average are highly deceiving. Moreover, Haiti's debt amounts to 300 percent of its exports: for each dollar in sales, it owes $3.

Haiti's debt ratio would qualify it for the World Bank's Heavily Indebted Poor Countries Initiative (HIPCI)-to qualify, a country's debt ratio must be 150 percent of its exports sales. This would mean that Haiti should be receiving aid from the World Bank (not loans) and be part of the debt re-assessment leading to debt forgiveness. However, for obscure reasons, the World Bank has yet to consider Haiti for its HILIC. Could it be that it's because the World Bank's president is appointed by the US? Aha! Leftist conspiracy theories: you cannot stop them from popping up!

Consequently, the economic crisis provoked by the lack of access to loans, aid relief and the low prices for its main exports, has produced a political crisis. However, many observers believe that the size of the crisis is being overplayed by the media and US interests in the Island. They see Haiti echoing the Venezuelan crisis last year, when the opposition to President Hugo Chavez staged a coup d'etat, to be overturned immediately after by the overwhelming number of supporters Chavez has amongst that country's poor.

Encouraged by overt and covert signals from the US administration, the opposition in Haiti, similar to their Venezuelan counterparts, refuses to budge no matter what the Aristide administration offers it. In 2003, the legislative elections were cancelled due to this intransigence. An OAS probe into the suspension supported the government decision.

On January 16 this year, the Haitian leader called for new legislative elections in six months to return the country to normal. The opposition refused to participate because it does not believe there could be fair elections anymore, and besides six months was too little time for campaigning.

Also mirroring Venezuela, the opposition's demonstrations against Aristide are widely covered by the mainstream press while no coverage is given to the even larger pro-government rallies. Nothing will satisfy the "Group 148" coalition formed explicitly to oust the government, short from Aristide resigning, of course. However, analysts point out that the Group has no clear alternative to offer to the majority of Haitians, and that it isn't outrageous projecting another Aristide landslide, if he were to run again.

The violence in Haiti today is the product of clashes between pro-Aristide supporters and his foes and, needs to be stopped. Assistance in this regard should not mean, once again, robbing its inhabitants from having the leader they want. After all, it has been the historically rampant US intervention in that country's affairs which has produced the violent Haiti of today, not the efforts of the majority of its people to change their reality.

****