Category: Haiti Post-Coup

Haiti’s democracy was overthrown in 2004 and hasn’t been restored since.

Peter Hallward!

The best analysis of the 2004 coup in Haiti, in my opinion, was by Peter Hallward’s “Option Zero in Haiti” in New Left Review. That article anchored my own analysis of what happened in Haiti and I found it immensely helpful in all the work I did. I thought there was a need for a longer analysis and I set about writing one in 2005. Other things intervened and I didn’t end up completing it, and I was very excited to learn that Peter Hallward’s book, “Damming the Flood”, will be coming out soon. That is a book I am really looking forward to getting, the more so because the concluding chapter has come out already and I got a great deal out of that. And still more so because of his interview with Aristide, in which every question I would have wanted to ask Aristide is asked, and answered extremely well. I wrote him to tell him so over email, but I realized that doing so wouldn’t encourage others to read it quite as well as posting it here, so I’m doing that too.

A Dishonest Case for a Coup

http://www.zcommunications.org/a-dishonest-case-for-a-coup-by-justin-podur

[Note: This is a rejoinder to Michael Deibert’s reply to Podur’s review]

I reviewed Michael Deibert’s book in an article titled “Kofi Annan’s Haiti” in New Left Review (NLR 37, Jan-Feb 2006). That review summarized Deibert’s book and its major flaws, while providing some relevant context and a picture of Haiti since the February 2004 coup against the elected government.

Deibert has replied to the review.

Why I did not want to debate Deibert

Continue reading “A Dishonest Case for a Coup”

UK Independent: Davison and Buncombe

Another nice blog brought to you by Joe Emersberger. Read his letter to the UK Independent with his brief introduction, below.

Sometimes the media will be honest about an issue, then disregard what it
has documented at a future time when the information becomes much more
embarrassing to Power.

The case of Luis Posada Carriles comes to mind.

It’s possible that sometimes this happens because journalists don’t bother
to research a topic in their own newspaper. The drive for profits results in
two scenarios – sloppy low cost work that relies on quick government or
corporate handouts, or conscious self censorship. [Maybe some combo of the two would be a third scenario]

I don’t recall ever seeing a situaton as occured over the past few days with
Independent’s reporting on Haiti. An article by Andrew Buncombe was about as
good as you’ll ever see in the corporate press. The day before an article by
Phil Davison that was horrible – a regurgitation of propaganda by the
Haitian elite and their foreign backers.

Here is what I wrote to Davison:

RE: Independent: UN’s chief peacekeeper is found dead in Haiti hotel:
9/1/2006

Mr. Davison:

Your article relies on the Haitian police, MINUSTAH and the Haitian business
community to inform your readers about Haiti. With such a one-sided choice
of sources it is no surprise that there is no mention of the widespread human
rights violation which these groups have committed. There is no mention of
their victims, no mention of political prisoners.

Why do refer to members of the business community as “some political
leaders”? The business elite called for a strike to prod the UN to be even more
brutal in their attacks on Haiti’s poor. Why is that obscured?

Do you know about any of this? If not, I suggest you read today’s article on
Haiti by Andrew Buncombe. [1] In fact, you could have learned much by reading articles by Buncombe written months ago. [2] He gave voice to political
prisoners, to MINUSTAH;s victims, to independent filmmaker, activist (and Haitian resident) Kevin Pina. Did it ever occur to you that there was another side to the story? Did it ever occur to you to read your own newspaper?

Joe Emersberger

[1http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article337553.ece
[2] INdependent: UN admits Haiti force is not up to the job it faces
: Andrew Buncombe: July 30, 2005

_http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article302259.ece_
(http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article302259.ece)

_http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article297624.ece_
(http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article297624.ece)

_http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=630156_
(http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=630156)

Aristide the Film

Review: Aristide and the Endless Revolution. 2005. Baraka Productions. 83 min. Movie site: www.aristidethefilm.com Available from www.firstrunfeatures.com

Each fact is disputed. Haiti’s President, Jean Bertrand Aristide, was overthrown in a coup and kidnapped by the United States on February 29, 2004, says Aristide himself. Aristide left voluntarily, say US officials Colin Powell and Roger Noriega.

Continue reading “Aristide the Film”

Sometimes Why is the Wrong Question

I’ve never met Joe Emersberger, but he’s a tireless letter-writer, relentlessly logical, interested in Canada’s role in the world and the Americas, and so I can’t help but encourage his move towards article-writing and blogging. Here’s a short one he sent as a guest blog for the Killing Train:

WHY WOULD CANADA HELP HAITI’S POOR?
by Joe Emersberger

I’ve often stumbled over a simple question about Haiti – and I’ve seen others either struggle with it or evade it. Why is Canada involved with trampling over democracy and human rights in Haiti? Similar questions about the UN and US role in Haiti have left me sputtering. I haven’t been prepared for the question. I’ve underestimated the importance people would attach to it. Even when you provide compelling evidence of Canada’s crime people still look for a motive. That’s surprised me. Wary of giving a longwinded (and inevitably speculative) reply I’ve been tempted to respond “Why worry so much about the motive when guilt is so evident? If you catch murderers in the act do you worry about establishing their motives more than you do about stopping them?” But a reply like that is condescending and ineffective – as is an overly detailed history or economics lesson. I’ve decided to try something that I hope will make me more succinct and effective by appealing to common sense. I’m going to try to answer the question “why?” with “why not?”.

Why is Canada on the side of a brutal regime in Haiti?

Why would Canada defy the US over Haiti? If the US were willing to let Haitian democracy develop then so would Canada. But in the absence of serious opposition – as existed against the Iraq war or against co-operation with US missile “defense” – Canada will do the bidding of the US. Thanks to the mainstream media, among other actors, Canada pays a negligible price as it helps its largest trading partner crush Haiti. Canada isn’t going out of it’s way. It is following the path of least resistance. Reversing course, especially now, would be costly. It would take quite a public outcry to bring about.

Why does Canada’s mainstream news media cover up what’s going on?

Why wouldn’t they? Why would they stand up for the rights of millions of Haitians who make less than $2 per day, who don’t buy their newspapers, or buy what advertisers sell? Why would they anger wealthy owners and advertisers who are members of the class that is pushing for deeper integration with the US? The media doesn’t even have to put out a large quantity of biased reports to cover things up. It isn’t a story, like the war in Iraq, that is too big to bury. Ignoring Haiti is fairly easy.

Why is the US so eager to support repression in Haiti?

Why should the US allow meaningful democracy to develop in Haiti? Why would the US risk having such a development get out of hand and spread to other poor countries? The bargaining power the US (and Canadian) elite have over their workforce depends largely on the poverty and desperation of people in poor countries. Why would the US elite risk losing any bargaining power because of the dangerous example set in small countries like Haiti? Why take that risk, even if it’s minimal, if they can very inexpensively back the Haitian elite who pose no threat at all? They’ve backed them for over a century. Why stop now? Who is going to stop them?

I’m happy to report that people, even very conservative people, that I’ve encountered aren’t naive about what the Canadian government is capable of. However, they (and I) can easily lose sight of the fact that our government, like any other that exists, is a repression maximizing institution (part of being accountable mainly to profit maximizing institutions). It doesn’t need to be strongly coerced or enticed to do horrible things. All it needs is for the public to look the other way.