[Marxism] NY Times editorial: "Hard Realities in Haiti"

Walter Lippmann walterlx at earthlink.net
Thu Mar 4 08:19:21 MST 2004

(The NYT isn't opposed to the overthrowing of governments
which the US doesn't like. It only is objecting to the 
dirty job being done too crudely for the NYT's taste.

(They are also oblivious to the racist aspect of the Bush
administration overthrowing a democratically-elected BLACK
government. Washington used thugs like Guy Phillipe and
etc, to soften Haiti up so it [Washington] could then go
ahead and make Aristede an offer he couldn't refuse.

(Then it went in for the kill. What other types of people
would lend themselves to such an enterprise? And now Baby
Doc is planning to return to Haiti. And the drug dealers
and mass murderers of the past are alive and well in the
Haiti under Uncle Sam's tutelage. Look at the Batista
types who run the politics of the wealth right wing of
Cuban exiles in Miami? Terrorists like Bosch, Posada
Carriles, etc. They are kith and kin, brothers under the 
skin, turds of a feather to the Guy Phillipes of Haiti.

(This is why the leaders of CARICOM aren't backing up
Washington's enterprise as their future is being shown 
in Haiti now should the US turn against them tomorrow.

(This is another example of where Cuba's friendly ties
with CARICOM, and its modeling of the proper way that
larger and more powerful states [like Cuba] should
relate to its weaker neighbors in the Caribbean give
an eloquent demonstration of how to do things right.

(To paraphrase Bertolt Brecht, inversely, the counter-
revolution will be made by the people who happen to
be there...<g>)

Listen instead to Francisco Aruca's interview with
Ira Kurzban on Radio Progreso in Miami March 2, 2004:

Hard Realities in Haiti

Published: March 4, 2004

Rescuing Haiti from a crisis Washington too long ignored
and then badly mishandled is going to take a lot more than
whisking its democratically elected president,
Jean-Bertrand Aristide, off to Africa and gingerly
deploying a few hundred United States marines. Yesterday,
those marines rightly moved beyond their original mission
of safeguarding only American lives and property, and began
patrolling the tense streets of Port-au-Prince. Earlier in
the day, fierce gun battles raged in the capital's strongly
pro-Aristide slums, where rampaging rebel bands battled
Aristide supporters.

The Bush administration's belated and ham-handed
intervention last weekend practically delivered Haiti into
the hands of an unsavory gang of convicted murderers and
former death squad officers under the overall command of
Guy Philippe, whom American and Haitian officials believe
to be a drug trafficker. Mr. Aristide's opponents also
include plenty of nonviolent democrats, but they are weak
and divided and have so far been easily pushed aside. Their
most significant act to date was torpedoing an
American-proposed compromise last month that might have
strengthened Haiti's anemic democratic institutions.

Now those institutions have all but collapsed. The Supreme
Court justice hastily sworn in on Sunday as interim
president has kept out of public view, limiting himself to
a single radio address. Mr. Philippe has threatened to
arrest the prime minister, now under the Marines'
protection. Other ministers have gone into hiding. It looks
as if Washington will have to pry power away forcefully
from Mr. Philippe, who proclaimed himself leader of a
reborn Haitian Army on Tuesday, reviving a military force
that long dominated and terrorized Haiti. Yesterday, he
promised to disarm his followers. Washington needs to make
sure that he keeps his word.

The United States has compelling reasons for involving
itself again in Haiti, the hemisphere's poorest nation,
which American troops occupied twice in the 20th century.
After intervening to restore Mr. Aristide, the first
democratically elected president in Haitian history, to
office in 1994, Washington failed to do enough to help
develop strong institutions, like an independent police
force and judiciary, to sustain democratic rule. These
high-minded arguments for continued involvement are
supplemented by less-refined political considerations.
Continued disorder in Haiti would propel thousands of
desperate refugees toward nearby Florida, something Mr.
Bush surely does not want in a presidential election year.

Yet after costly nation-building stumbles in Afghanistan
and Iraq, it's astonishing to see the administration assume
responsibility for yet another failed state with so little
forethought or serious planning. In a sadly familiar
pattern, the White House again seems to have convinced
itself that with the departure of a leader it detested and
the arrival of American troops, political bitterness built
up over generations would evaporate, hardened fighters
would simply lay down their arms, and effective, popular
pro-American politicians would emerge to run a newly
functional government.

Administration officials may already be starting to
recognize that a far more active, lengthy and expensive
American role will be required.

More information about the Marxism mailing list