PAGES SOMBRES DE L'HISTOIRE D'HAITI

Se konsa yo pral di pou zèv Tutud yo. Menm jan ak zèv papa Dok. Lesansyel se retni saki bon ki jete saki pa kanpe sou anyen.

Pi fo se estatistik jounal lavalasyen tankou Haiti en Marche ak Haiti Progèsde Ti Ben Mephisto. Kote pwoblèm lan.

La trahison d'Aristide



A l'heure du bicentenaire de l'indépendance, le «président des pauvres» affiche un piètre bilan. Dans un pays à la dérive, marqué par la violence et le non-droit, il est toujours président et les pauvres n'ont jamais été si pauvres.

'est un infâme cloaque. Un fatras de tôles rouillées, flottant sur des flaques irisées et verdâtres. Dans une puanteur tenace, des gamins nus ou en haillons pataugent sur des amas d'immondices, tandis que leurs aînés, souillés jusqu'au torse, s'échinent à curer un égout engorgé. Bienvenue à Ti'Ayiti, l'une des enclaves les plus sordides de Cité-Soleil, l'immense bidonville de Port-au-Prince. Assourdis par le vent de fronde qui balaie depuis un mois Haïti, les échos du bicentenaire du seul Etat souverain né d'une révolte d'esclaves, célébré le 1er janvier, n'ont guère égayé ce bourbier. Pour autant, nul ici n'accable Jean-Bertrand Aristide, le président que défient dans la rue les campus et les élites. Rien, chez les humbles, ne paraît ternir l'aura du prêtre défroqué. «On lui ment, tranche Noëlsaint Dieufait, maire adjoint de Cité-Soleil. Au Palais national, Aristide me reçoit comme un prince. Mais une muraille de Jéricho a surgi entre nous.» Alors, Noëlsaint embouche la trompette du complot. La misère? L'effarante mortalité infantile, les ravages du sida, le chômage, dont pâtissent les trois quarts des actifs, l'analphabétisme, qui entrave un adulte sur deux? Tout ça, c'est la faute aux colonialistes - Américains et Français en tête - que hérisse la fierté de la «première République nègre»; aux patrons mulâtres, exploiteurs impénitents; aux étudiants manipulés; voire aux ministres et conseillers, «qui nous paient pour qu'on chante leurs louanges». «Titid» (Aristide), il va de soi, ne peut être partout. «Sur un appel de lui, claironne un caïd du quartier, gabardine kaki et cagoule de laine retroussée sur le front, on fonce par milliers au Champ-de-Mars», terminus de tous les défilés.


En partie régentée par des gangs armés, Cité-Soleil reste l'un des ultimes bastions du mouvement Lavalas - en créole, l'avalanche - la nébuleuse militante dévouée corps et âme à l'ancien curé salésien de Saint-Jean-Bosco. C'est dans ces taudis que le pouvoir recrute les «chimères», jeunes nervis lancés aux trousses de l'ennemi. A l'heure des comptes, ces héritiers des tontons macoutes de l'ère Duvalier et des «attachés» apparus au temps de la junte de Raoul Cédras (1991-1994) viennent empocher sur le seuil du ministère de l'Intérieur les quelques billets de 25 gourdes (un demi-euro environ) que mérite leur zèle. Le 5 décembre dernier, on a ainsi vu une cohorte de chimè, convoyés et guidés par des policiers en tenue, donner l'assaut à la faculté des sciences humaines, théâtre d'un meeting pacifique. Dans leur sillage, des locaux dévastés et une trentaine de blessés, dont le recteur Pierre-Marie Paquiot, les deux jambes fracturées à coups de barre de fer. Les errements de la police nationale (PNH), bricolée voilà dix ans sur les décombres d'une armée putschiste dissoute, reflètent la dérive d'un régime enclin, pour survivre, à orchestrer la violence. Ses unités antiémeutes peuvent tout autant protéger une foule de marcheurs des rafales d'un commando de chimères que harceler les manifestants ou les livrer aux casseurs. «Une police politisée, passive ou complice», accuse Hérold Jean-François, directeur de Radio Ibo. «Un corps mal formé, mal payé, mal équipé, infiltré par les macoutes, perméable à la corruption et rongé par l'argent de la drogue, admet en écho une ministre d'Aristide. Jamais nous n'avons pu en faire un instrument d'ordre et de sécurité.» Sur injonction du magistrat français Louis Joinet, expert nommé par le secrétaire général de l'ONU, les autorités ont promis en août dernier de démanteler les «brigades spéciales», milices supplétives opérant en tee-shirts noirs. «On les a vus à l'œuvre trois semaines plus tard», soupire un avocat de Cap Haïtien (nord).


Un pays qui a secoué le joug de l'esclavage ne peut retourner à la barbarie

Dans ce commissariat de Cité-Soleil, deux agents tuent le temps. Désœuvrés, désabusés et, au sens propre du terme, désarmés. Cinq jours plus tôt, l'un d'eux s'est vu confisquer son revolver de service en pleine rue. La cellule de garde à vue est vide: coffrer un gars du cru requiert un mélange d'héroïsme et de folie. Quant aux deux véhicules garés dans la cour, ils sont paralysés par les pannes. Contraint de lâcher du lest, «Titid» a annoncé, voilà peu, une énième réforme de la PNH. Reste que, de l'aveu même d'un superflic haïtien, aucune mutation, fût-elle mineure, n'échappe à la présidence. Tout juste nommé à la tête de la police, Jean-Robert Faveur a fui aux Etats-Unis en juin 2003, écœuré par le clientélisme en vigueur. De fait, certaines promotions pour services rendus laissent pantois. Agent de base, un certain Jeanty Edner a ainsi gravi d'un coup huit échelons de la hiérarchie pour accéder au rang d'inspecteur général. Impliqué dans la liquidation d'un porte-flingue devenu encombrant, Harold Adéclat officie désormais à la direction de la logistique. Torture, extorsion, enlèvements: au péril de leur vie, les défenseurs des droits de l'homme dénoncent l'impunité déroutante dont jouissent d'autres protégés du pouvoir. Le commissaire Négupe Simon peut, sans nuire à son avancement, exécuter de quatre balles dans la tête une jeune femme coupable d'avoir, au plus fort d'une querelle conjugale, atteint d'une pierre mal ajustée son véhicule. De même, les proches de James Montas, policier violeur, ont saboté en toute quiétude une comparution, menaçant la victime et ses avocats. Quant à Josaphat Civil, il sait que ses collègues refusent d'exécuter le mandat d'arrêt que lui vaut le meurtre présumé de trois frères, commis en décembre 2002. L'exemple vient de haut. Washington suspecte plusieurs élus lavalassiens - tout comme un opposant de Cap Haïtien - de collusion avec les trafiquants de cocaïne. Ses agents ont d'ailleurs mis à l'ombre Jacques Ketant, dealer notoire familier du couple présidentiel.

Slogans anti-Aristide, lors d'une manifestation à Port-au-Prince, le 11 décembre 2003. «Trop de sang a coulé. Il faut qu'Aristide parte...»





A suivre

SUITE

Paru dans L'Express du 08/01/2004
La trahison d'Aristide

de notre envoyé spécial Vincent Hugeux


Traitement «zéro tolérance»

Même motif, même punition: le Palais national régit aussi les carrières de magistrats. Aristide a beau jeu de sommer les juges d'«assumer leurs responsabilités». «Au moins 70% d'entre eux sont muselés par l'argent ou les honneurs, objecte Renan Hedouville, animateur du Comité des avocats pour le respect des libertés individuelles (Carli). Les autres subissent de terribles pressions.» Au point d'en être réduits à choisir entre la révocation, la démission, le maquis et l'exil. Les justiciables, eux, rechignent à porter plainte, par peur des représailles. «Etre victime, confie l'une des sources de Louis Joinet, c'est déjà être coupable.» Cible favorite des porte-flingues de Lavalas, les médias indépendants collectionnent les dénis de justice. Près de quatre années après les faits, les assassins de Jean Dominique, directeur de Radio Haïti Inter, courent toujours. Juges terrorisés, lynchage ou décès inexpliqué de deux meurtriers supposés, mandats restés lettre morte: l'instruction est un modèle du genre. Rescapée de l'attentat qui coûta la vie le jour de Noël 2002 à son garde du corps, la veuve du journaliste, Michèle Montas, lauréate en décembre dernier du prix Reporters sans frontières, a dû trouver refuge à l'étranger puis, la mort dans l'âme, fermer la station. Le cas de Brignol Lindor, patron d'une radio de Petit Goâve massacré à la machette voilà plus de deux ans, paraît plus troublant encore. Membres d'une «organisation populaire» de la mouvance Lavalas, les dix tueurs inculpés ont avoué, sinon revendiqué leur crime. Qu'importe: aucun ne dort sous les verrous. Pis, le tribunal refuse à la famille, exilée en France, le statut de partie civile. Et ne retient aucune charge contre Dumay Bony, un élu aristidien qui avait préconisé d'appliquer au «terroriste» Lindor le traitement «zéro tolérance».

Zéro tolérance: la formule date du 28 juin 2001. Ce jour-là, Jean-Bertrand Aristide invite les Haïtiens à éradiquer l'insécurité. Fidèle à sa vieille fascination pour la justice populaire, il déclenche en fait une vague de règlements de comptes et d'expéditions punitives. Bien sûr, Titid voulait ainsi, à l'en croire, astreindre les délinquants aux seules rigueurs de la loi. Mais le mal est fait. Et ses effets perdurent. «Dans le mois écoulé, précise un prêtre, nous avons recensé une centaine d'assassinats, crapuleux pour l'essentiel. Dans ma paroisse, on a ramassé deux têtes coupées exposées à la vue de tous. Il s'agit d'entretenir un climat de terreur. De prouver que nul n'est à l'abri. Pas plus l'enfant des rues que la marchande ou l'homme d'affaires. Cette volonté de châtier soi-même, c'est aussi la rançon d'une justice discréditée.» La soif de jistis peut bien demeurer l'une des incantations rituelles du lexique aristidien: «Le pays, écrit Louis Joinet dans un rapport accablant, glisse de l'Etat de droit à l'Etat d'impunité.»A Port-au-Prince, lors des manifestations étudiantes anti-Aristide, en décembre, matées par les forces de la police nationale.

«Nous vivons sous une dictature hypocrite, avance Hérold Jean-François. Un despotisme épris du langage de la démocratie.» «Sous les Duvalier, renchérit l'avocat Renan Hedouville, le combat nous opposait à une tyrannie sans fard. Au fond, tout était plus simple.» A une nuance près: le téléphone cellulaire, le réseau Internet et les radios contestataires déjouent la répression. «D'autant, argue un activiste, que, depuis la déroute de Baby Doc [1986], nous avons pris goût à la liberté.» Evêque auxiliaire de Port-au-Prince, Mgr Pierre-André Dumas, exerce volontiers la sienne. Pour preuve, cette sainte colère relayée début décembre par Télé Haïti, la seule chaîne indépendante - et câblée - du pays. «Trop, c'est trop! tonne le prélat quadragénaire. Assez de meurtres, de viols, de brutalité, de gabegie, de corruption, de combines, de trafic de drogue et de mensonge. Assez de juges vendus ou bâillonnés, d'extorsions. Un pays qui a secoué le joug de l'esclavage ne peut retourner à la barbarie. Chaque fois qu'un être se croit investi de pouvoirs divins, l'humanité recule. L'heure de la délivrance approche.» Trois heures après notre entretien, une balle a traversé la voiture de l'évêque, sans l'atteindre. Depuis, il change d'abri chaque nuit.

Le naufrage de Haïti, ce bout d'île désolé des Caraïbes, est aussi celui d'un capitaine égocentrique et populiste. «Je croyais en Titid, confesse Gary, futur sociologue. Son élection, en 1990, m'a comblé. Tout comme son retour, quatre ans plus tard, lorsque les troupes américaines ont chassé la junte. C'était un homme d'Eglise. Il incarnait une exigence morale. Qu'est-il devenu? Un chef de bande, occupé à raviver les anciennes blessures sociales et raciales. Pauvres contre nantis. Noirs contre métis. Après deux cents ans d'histoire, un tel spectacle nous fait honte.» Reclus dans sa villa cossue de Tabarre ou dans un immense palais d'un blanc virginal, vainement rebaptisé «Maison du peuple», isolé par une coterie de courtisans médiocres souvent issus des services de sécurité, le frêle prêcheur au strabisme sartrien s'obstine à invoquer des valeurs dévoyées, usées jusqu'à la corde. La concertation, le dialogue, la dignité. On l'entend répéter à l'envi que la violence est «inacceptable», que l'université ou le droit de vote sont «sacrés». Et, puisque la magie du verbe s'étiole, puisque le charisme d'hier ne rassasie plus, et à grand-peine, que les crève-la-faim, l'ancien disciple de la théologie de la libération se tourne vers les divinités de ce vaudou dont les patriarches flétrissent les méfaits de l'Occident chrétien.

Le président Aristide, lors d'une conférence de presse au Palais national, le 10 décembre.


La rumeur, seule ressource inépuisable du pays, et les chancelleries prêtent à Sö Ann, prêtresse du culte ancestral, une influence croissante sur l'élu et son épouse Mildred, une avocate rencontrée au temps de l'exil à Washington. «Voilà son refuge, la matrice de l'identité haïtienne, constate un déçu. Il trône au centre de la toile qu'il a tissée. Au fil des ans, le pouvoir a amplifié ses travers mentaux.» Faut-il pour autant parier que les jours de celui que protège une escouade de gardes du corps américains sont comptés? «Pas si vite, nuance un envoyé du Département d'Etat. Certes, Aristide n'a jamais traversé une telle tempête depuis son retour, mais on aurait tort de sous-estimer l'habileté et l'instinct de survie d'un leader qui, dans le désert politique local, reste le plus populaire.» Sous le sceau de l'anonymat, un ponte de la police le dépeint sous les traits du cynique, «prêt à tuer père et mère pour sauver son fauteuil, dopé par les turbulences au point d'en inventer si besoin».

Le cimetière des illusions

Bien sûr, les défections affaiblissent un clan qui a perdu le monopole de la rue. Trois ministres - Education, Tourisme et Environnement - ont démissionné, effarés par le saccage de la fac de sciences humaines. «Une catastrophe», concède en privé le Premier ministre Yvon Neptune. Sentant le vent tourner, une poignée d'élus Lavalas ont fait de même. Mais il est des reniements dont on s'accommode, tel celui de Dany Toussaint, ancien chef de la police de la capitale. En refusant de lever son immunité, le Sénat lui a épargné une probable inculpation dans l'affaire du meurtre de Jean Dominique...

A Gonaïves (ouest), là même où fut proclamée en 1804 l'indépendance, les gangs armés qui tiennent les quartiers de Raboteau et Jubilé, jusqu'alors acquis à Titid, ont basculé après l'assassinat de leur chef Amiot Métayer, alias Cubain, victime d'un traquenard monté par un homme de main de la présidence. Quelques jours avant la découverte de son cadavre mutilé, le 23 septembre dernier, l'ambassadeur des Etats-Unis avait sommé Aristide de neutraliser ses sbires les plus voyants, à commencer par celui que ses partisans avaient à l'été 2002 libéré en défonçant au bulldozer le mur de la prison. Depuis, l'Armée cannibale de Cubain, devenue le Front de résistance de l'Artibonite, a juré la perte de l'idole déchue. En dépit d'incursions répétées et coûteuses, les troupes d'assaut de la PNH n'ont pu, à ce jour, réduire des insurgés prompts à riposter. Tout juste ont-elles réussi à incendier la maison du défunt et à raser le mausolée carrelé où trônait son buste, et sur lequel flottait la bannière étoilée et le bleu ciel des Nations unies. Bilan du dernier trimestre 2003: 36 morts et 85 blessés. On s'abstient d'ailleurs d'acheminer à l'hôpital ces derniers, touchés le plus souvent par des «tirs marrons», version créole de la balle perdue, de peur de les livrer ainsi à un pouvoir honni; des infirmières les soignent à domicile, avec les moyens du bord.

Des policiers antiémeutes, dans la capitale, le 17 décembre


«Twop san koulé/Fok Aristid alé/Ak tout akolit li yo.» Trop de sang a coulé. Il faut qu'Aristide parte avec toute sa clique. Prisé des étudiants, le slogan tient encore du vœu pieux. Il fédère pourtant le Groupe des 184, mosaïque de mouvements émanant de la «société civile», qu'anime Andy Apaid, 52 ans, patron prospère - textile et électronique - d'ascendance libanaise. Qui l'eût cru? Un tel pedigree déchaîne la rancœur des aristidiens. A les entendre, le nouveau venu, natif des Etats-Unis, n'est que l'ultime avatar d'une longue lignée de bourgeois prédateurs et apatrides, hier complices des putschistes galonnés, prêts à tout pour reconquérir les leviers du pays, perdus par les urnes. Un peu court. «Pourquoi lui refuser notre confiance? rétorque David, agronome en herbe. On a confié le pays au ''prophète des pauvres'' et voyez le résultat. Lui n'est plus prophète, mais les pauvres sont restés pauvres. Autant essayer un entrepreneur assez fortuné pour rester à l'abri de la tentation.» Plus que son caractère hétéroclite, deux périls guettent le vaste forum au sein duquel le diplômé côtoie le paysan, l'ouvrier, la féministe ou la star de la musique caraïbe. D'abord, son «nouveau contrat social», programme de transition idéaliste et flou, peine à séduire les plus humbles. «Il y a dans ce pays une misère noire et un fric fou, résume un curé, qui planque dans sa paroisse une demi-douzaine de rebelles traqués. Pas facile d'atteler l'une à l'autre.» Dans l'arène électorale haïtienne, où le compromis et le partage n'ont pas cours, le cœur et les tripes importent plus que la tête; et il ne suffit pas de déclarer un président élu «hors la loi» pour abréger son mandat; ni de louer la «maturité» du peuple pour engranger les suffrages. Ensuite, l'union sacrée scellée avec la Convergence démocratique, alliance de partis traditionnels, risque d'éclater dès que s'entrebâilleront les grilles du Palais national. Le cimetière des illusions haïtien regorge de leaders providentiels. «Il faut enfin, insiste un combattant des droits humains, sortir du messianisme pour entrer dans la modernité politique.» C'est mal parti. Echalas décharné et grisonnant de Ti'Ayiti, Camille jure que personne - «ni vous, ni moi, ni Titid» - «ne peut sauver la patrie. Seul Dieu le peut».



A Cité-Soleil, le bidonville de Port-au-Prince, immense bourbier qui reste l'un des ultimes bastions du mouvement Lavalas, toujours dévoué corps et âme au président Aristide.


Partout dans Port-au-Prince, des banderoles aux couleurs du drapeau exigent la Restitisyon. En clair, la restitution par la France des 90 millions de francs-or d'indemnités arrachés au jeune Etat souverain par les colons vaincus. Racket révoltant, mais qui alimente en haut lieu une frénésie démagogique sans bornes. Au prix d'un calcul d'actualisation aussi savant qu'énigmatique, Aristide estime à 21 685 155 571,48 dollars - soit environ 20 milliards d'euros - le montant dû. «Tout Haïtien ressent cette rançon coloniale comme une profonde injustice, qui a lourdement compromis l'envol du pays, admet un enseignant de Gonaïves. Mais la diversion ne trompe personne. Si la France a une dette morale envers nous, qu'elle l'acquitte en construisant des routes et des ponts, ou en dotant les bas quartiers d'eau courante et d'électricité. Mais surtout pas d'argent. Du cash, pour quoi faire? Pour remplir les poches des copains d'Aristide et payer les chimères? Pas question.» Empoisonné, le dossier a pesé sur les travaux de la commission conduite par Régis Debray, chargée par l'Elysée et le Quai d'Orsay de repenser les relations franco-haïtiennes à l'horizon 2020. Auteur d'une confession intitulée Les Masques, le philosophe savait-il qu'il trouverait à Port-au-Prince celui du malheur?

Haiti Democracy Project
From SourceWatch
Jump to: navigation, search
The Haiti Democracy Project is "a right-wing think tank founded by Republican State Department and other officials and by Haitian elites. I believe that the primary financing came from a guy named Rudolph Boulos (a doctor in Haiti, a very strong supporter of right-wing causes and a virulent anti-Lavalas activist), and is a large recipient of USAID funds." (Brian Concannon, Director of the Institute for Democracy and Justice in Haiti, Feb. 16, 2006).

HDP was launched on November 19, 2002 at the Brookings Institute, in Washington DC. (Broadcast by CSPAN). Attending the event are some questionable figures including Stanley Lucas and Olivier Nadal. Lucas is the point man in Haiti for the USAID-financed International Republican Institute, which is providing training and funds to anti-Aristide Haitian rebels in the Dominican Republic (2001-2004). Nadal is a Miami-based Haitian businessman and the former president of the Haitian Chamber of Commerce. (from news item: Haiti Democracy Project, Nov. 20, 2004) Nadal is implicated in a peasant massacre that occurred in the Haitian town of Piatre.[1]

Contents [hide]
1 Personnel and affiliated operators
2 Associates (as of April 2007)
3 Founders
4 Directors (as of April 2007)
5 Contact

[edit]Personnel and affiliated operators
Timothy Carney -- head of HDP (former US ambassador to Haiti; he then headed the Ministry of Mines in Iraq under the "Coalition Provisional Authority" to return as the current (2006) US ambassador to Haiti.) (his wife is also associated with HDP).
Vicki Butler [2]
Henry F. Carey Georgia State University [3]
Clotilde Charlot Former vice-president, Haitian Association of Voluntary Agencies [4]
Lionel Delatour Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy (CLED)[5]
Charles Manus [6]
Amb. Orlando Marville Chief, OAS electoral mission to Haiti, 2000[7]
James Morrell Project executive director [8]
Amb. Lawrence Pezzullo U.S. special envoy for Haiti, 1993-94[9]
Amb. Ernest H. Preeg U.S. ambassador to Haiti, 1981-83[10]
Amelia Shaw -- featured "journalist". All her articles about Haiti appear on HDP's website.
[edit]Associates (as of April 2007)
Monique Meleance, C.P.A., accountant
James R. Morrell, executive director. Co-founder and former research director of the Center for International Policy, Washington
Claire Sturm, associate.
Terry Thielen, associate. Former project director for Creative Associates in Haiti.
[edit]Founders
From HDP's website:

Rudolph Boulos -- Pharval Laboratories
Clotilde Charlot Former vice-president, Haitian Association of Voluntary Agencies
Lionel Delatour Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy (CLED)
Charles Manus
James Morrell Project executive director
[edit]Directors (as of April 2007)
Chairman - Amb. Ernest H. Preeg - U.S. ambassador to Haiti, 1981-83
Rudolph H. Boulos
Victoria A. Butler
Henry F. Carey - Georgia State University
Lionel Delatour - Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy (CLED)
Ira M. Lowenthal
Orlando Marville - Chief, OAS electoral mission to Haiti, 2000
James Morrell - Project executive director
Amb. Lawrence Pezzullo - U.S. special envoy for Haiti, 1993-94
Source

[edit]Contact
Web: http://www.haitipolicy.org

Retrieved from "http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Haiti_Democracy_Project"
Categories: Democracy | Haiti

Profile: Rudolph Boulos
Positions that Rudolph Boulos has held:
CEO of Pharval Laboratories
Related Entities:
Member Haiti Democracy Project
Shareholder PromoCapital
Rudolph Boulos was a participant or observer in the following events:
November 19, 2002 The Haiti Democracy Project (HDP) is formally established. At its official launching, which takes place at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., speakers warn that the current “crisis” in democracy in Haiti is worsening at an ever increasing pace. “… Luigi Einaudi opened the talks with dire predictions that Haiti was fast approaching a point where diplomatic means would no longer contribute to solve the crisis. According to Einaudi, those concerned about Haiti should at this time be gathering for a ‘wake.’ The rapidly deteriorating economic situation, the inability of the main protagonists to advance the negotiating process and the increasing protest demonstrations throughout the country made for a very bleak future.” US ambassador to the OAS, Roger Noriega also speaks at the ceremony. At one point, Noriega says, referring to the contested 2000 Haitian elections (see May 21, 2000), “We have to get them [The Haitian people] that opportunity as they will not participate in a farce.” [Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] Attending the event are some questionable figures including Stanley Lucas and Olivier Nadal. Lucas is said to be the point man in Haiti for the USAID-financed International Republican Institute, which is providing training and funds to anti-Aristide Haitian rebels in the Dominican Republic (see (2001-2004)). Nadal is a Miami-based Haitian businessman and the former president of the Haitian Chamber of Commerce. [Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] Nadal is implicated in a peasant massacre that occurred in the Haitian town of Piatre. In 1990, a group of peasants were killed by Nadal’s security after they squatted on unused land that he owned. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999; National Coalition for Haitian Rights, 4/24/2004] The prominent businessman Antoine Izmery said shortly before he was murdered that Nadal had been one of the financiers of the 1991 coup d’etat (see October 31, 1991-October 15, 1994) that ousted Aristide from office. And in 1994, the United States government froze Nadal’s assets because of his suspected involvement in the coup. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999] The Haiti Democracy Project is funded by the wealthy, right-wing Haitian Boulos family, which owns several companies including Pharval Pharmaceuticals, the USAID-funded Radio Vision 2000, the Delimart supermarket, and Le Matin. In February 2002, Rudolph Boulos was under investigation for his possible involvement in the assassination of Haitian journalist Jean Dominique who had been very critical of Pharval after contamination of the company’s “Afrebril and Valodon” syrups with diethyl alcohol had resulted in the deaths of 60 children. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999; Haiti Weekly News, 2/28/2002; Knight Ridder, 3/11/2004; Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] The project’s board of directors includes Rudolph Boulos, CEO of Pharval Laboratories; Vicki Carney of CRInternational; Prof. Henry F. Carey of Georgia State University; Timothy Carney, US ambassador to Haiti (1998-1999); Clotilde Charlot, former vice-president of the Haitian Association of Voluntary Agencies; Lionel Delatour of the Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy (CLED); Ira Lowenthal, an “Anthropologist”; Charles Manus; Orlando Marville, Chief of the OAS electoral mission to Haiti in 2000; James Morrell, the Haiti Democracy Project’s executive director; Lawrence Pezzullo, US special envoy for Haiti (1993-1994); and Ernest H. Preeg, US ambassador to Haiti (1981-1983). [Haiti Democracy Project, 3/26/2004]
Entity Tags: Stanley Lucas, Luigi Einaudi, Rudolph Boulos, Ernest H. Preeg, Lawrence Pezzullo, Roger Francisco Noriega, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, James Morrell, Orlando Marville, Charles Manus, Haiti Democracy Project, Olivier Nadal, Jean Dominique, Vicki Carney, Henry F. Carey, Timothy Carney, Ira Lowenthal, Lionel Delatour, Clotilde Charlot, Antoine Izmery
Timeline Tags: Haiti Coup

Profile: Rudolph Boulos
Positions that Rudolph Boulos has held:
CEO of Pharval Laboratories
Related Entities:
Member Haiti Democracy Project
Shareholder PromoCapital
Rudolph Boulos was a participant or observer in the following events:
November 19, 2002 The Haiti Democracy Project (HDP) is formally established. At its official launching, which takes place at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C., speakers warn that the current “crisis” in democracy in Haiti is worsening at an ever increasing pace. “… Luigi Einaudi opened the talks with dire predictions that Haiti was fast approaching a point where diplomatic means would no longer contribute to solve the crisis. According to Einaudi, those concerned about Haiti should at this time be gathering for a ‘wake.’ The rapidly deteriorating economic situation, the inability of the main protagonists to advance the negotiating process and the increasing protest demonstrations throughout the country made for a very bleak future.” US ambassador to the OAS, Roger Noriega also speaks at the ceremony. At one point, Noriega says, referring to the contested 2000 Haitian elections (see May 21, 2000), “We have to get them [The Haitian people] that opportunity as they will not participate in a farce.” [Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] Attending the event are some questionable figures including Stanley Lucas and Olivier Nadal. Lucas is said to be the point man in Haiti for the USAID-financed International Republican Institute, which is providing training and funds to anti-Aristide Haitian rebels in the Dominican Republic (see (2001-2004)). Nadal is a Miami-based Haitian businessman and the former president of the Haitian Chamber of Commerce. [Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] Nadal is implicated in a peasant massacre that occurred in the Haitian town of Piatre. In 1990, a group of peasants were killed by Nadal’s security after they squatted on unused land that he owned. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999; National Coalition for Haitian Rights, 4/24/2004] The prominent businessman Antoine Izmery said shortly before he was murdered that Nadal had been one of the financiers of the 1991 coup d’etat (see October 31, 1991-October 15, 1994) that ousted Aristide from office. And in 1994, the United States government froze Nadal’s assets because of his suspected involvement in the coup. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999] The Haiti Democracy Project is funded by the wealthy, right-wing Haitian Boulos family, which owns several companies including Pharval Pharmaceuticals, the USAID-funded Radio Vision 2000, the Delimart supermarket, and Le Matin. In February 2002, Rudolph Boulos was under investigation for his possible involvement in the assassination of Haitian journalist Jean Dominique who had been very critical of Pharval after contamination of the company’s “Afrebril and Valodon” syrups with diethyl alcohol had resulted in the deaths of 60 children. [Haiti Progres, 7/21/1999; Haiti Weekly News, 2/28/2002; Knight Ridder, 3/11/2004; Haiti Democracy Project, 11/20/2004] The project’s board of directors includes Rudolph Boulos, CEO of Pharval Laboratories; Vicki Carney of CRInternational; Prof. Henry F. Carey of Georgia State University; Timothy Carney, US ambassador to Haiti (1998-1999); Clotilde Charlot, former vice-president of the Haitian Association of Voluntary Agencies; Lionel Delatour of the Center for Free Enterprise and Democracy (CLED); Ira Lowenthal, an “Anthropologist”; Charles Manus; Orlando Marville, Chief of the OAS electoral mission to Haiti in 2000; James Morrell, the Haiti Democracy Project’s executive director; Lawrence Pezzullo, US special envoy for Haiti (1993-1994); and Ernest H. Preeg, US ambassador to Haiti (1981-1983). [Haiti Democracy Project, 3/26/2004]
Entity Tags: Stanley Lucas, Luigi Einaudi, Rudolph Boulos, Ernest H. Preeg, Lawrence Pezzullo, Roger Francisco Noriega, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, James Morrell, Orlando Marville, Charles Manus, Haiti Democracy Project, Olivier Nadal, Jean Dominique, Vicki Carney, Henry F. Carey, Timothy Carney, Ira Lowenthal, Lionel Delatour, Clotilde Charlot, Antoine Izmery
Timeline Tags: Haiti Coup

The Friendly Face of US Imperialism
USAID and Haiti
By SASHA KRAMER

On the ground United States foreign assistance projects often mean desperately needed food and employment for the poor, impossible to resist, difficult to critique. But from the vantage point of US foreign policy objectives a very different picture emerges and long-term and global outcomes often differ dramatically from the immediate consequences of relief efforts.

The United States International Development Agency (USAID) emerged as an arm of US foreign policy following the Second World War. The Agency was developed to provide foreign relief and development assistance in accordance with US policy objectives. According to the USAID website (www.usaid.gov) the organization operates under the following mandate.

"U.S. foreign assistance has always had the twofold purpose of furthering America's foreign policy interests in expanding democracy and free markets while improving the lives of the citizens of the developing world."

This dual mandate raises the important question of whether US policy interests generally result in improved living conditions for the majority of the world's poor? While it may occasionally be the case that the interests of the US government and the poverty stricken citizens around the world are aligned, more often than not, US economic and political interests are dependent on the exploitation and manipulation of workers and consumers in the developing world. It is this inherent contradiction within the USAID mandate that should cause skepticism among US taxpayers concerned with issues of social justice and self determination.

The fundamental problem with USAID's stated objectives is that it is not in the national interests of the US government to promote self sufficiency in developing countries. US economic interests are fed by foreign dependency on US imports and loans. Political interests are served by maintaining an economic stranglehold on foreign governments, and many a strategic alliance has been forged out of economic necessity. Among USAID's operating tenets are sustainability and local capacity building, noble goals but highly dependent on how these tenets are defined and the manner in which they are implemented. Sustainability of what, and which local capacities are being supported? Implementation is primarily shaped by another of USAID's governing tenets, selectivity, the allocation of resources based on foreign policy interests.

The recently released USAID Haiti Field Report provides an excellent case study for investigating the role of USAID in promoting US foreign policy objectives under the friendly guise of aid. Much of USAID's current work in Haiti is carried out under the umbrella of the Haiti Transition Initiative (HTI), a program developed by USAID's Office for Transition Initiatives (OTI) in May 2004 to "emphasize stability-building measures in key crisis spots."

The OTI was created within USAID in 1994 "to provide fast, flexible, short-term assistance to take advantage of windows of opportunity to build democracy and peace" in countries experiencing political turmoil. According to the OTI website the organization accomplishes its objectives by specifically encouraging "a culture of risk-taking, political orientation, and swift response among its staff and partners." The Haiti Field Report explores how short term assistance programs provided within a culture of political orientation can be used to distort international perceptions of Haiti's complicated political terrain, as the elections approach.

The United States is primarily concerned with Haiti's upcoming elections occurring on schedule, so that a new government can be in place by February 2006. In Haiti, as in Iraq and Afghanistan, the timeliness and appearance of legitimacy of the electoral process are of paramount importance for the Bush Administration's PR machine, which tends to equate elections with democracy, boasting that the United States is benevolently promoting "democracies" around the world. USAID describes their objectives as follows: "Haiti's future depends on elections that are considered free and fair to ensure the legitimacy of the new government and enhance their ability to govern effectively. The stabilization of the political and security environment in Haiti is central to U.S. foreign policy and USAID objectives."

What sort of democracy is the United States promoting in Haiti, where the duly elected president was spirited away on a US military jet against his will, as the country once again fell into the hands of the powerful elite and brutal former military? Haiti is now governed by a cadre of unelected officials overseen by Prime Minister Gerard Latortue, a Haitian businessman and former radio show host that lived in Boca Raton Florida for the 15 years preceding his unconstitutional rise to office. In direct contradiction to actual events and the laws of the Haitian Constitution, USAID describes Haiti's unelected Interim Government as "benefiting from the support of democratic institutions." They further state that the "political transition" of February 29, 2004 "created a new environment for collaboration with the Interim Government of Haiti," indicating their willingness to work closely with an illegitimate government accused of numerous human rights abuses over the past year in order to promote US interests.

USAID's Haiti Field Report, which can be found on the USAID website, presents a glowing image of US development efforts in this "troubled" country, through a carefully-crafted compilation of selective facts. In August alone, USAID invested over 4 million dollars towards projects in Haiti. These projects include road and canal clean-up projects, terracing of hillsides to prevent erosion and electricity projects. On the surface it is difficult to criticize the provision of badly needed clean-up efforts and employment opportunities and certainly these programs have had benefits within the community. The questions are: what is the long term viability of these projects, and who are the primary beneficiaries? A far more detailed on-the-ground investigation would be required to determine how these programs will differentially benefit various local and international interests in the short and long term.

Other USAID projects that have more obvious political implications are short term nutrition and recreational initiatives in "key crisis areas." The report outlines USAID's strategy for pacifying Haiti's largest political party, Lavalas through selective distribution of aid resources. In August the Haiti Transition Initiative set up 26 "Play for Peace" camps in Port au Prince, Cap Haitien, St. Marc and several other "target" cities. These camps are designed to provide food and activities to desperately poor communities; essential services, the importance of which is not in question.

What is questionable is the way in which these camps are used to undermine existing community programs in an attempt to de-legitimize the demands of the Lavalas movement in the eyes of the international community. This strategy is exemplified by USAID's description of their activities in Petit Place Cazeau, the community that is home to Father Gerard Jean Juste's parish of St. Claire. Father Jean Juste, illegally imprisoned since July 21, 2005, is a popular priest and outspoken opponent of the unelected interim government. USAID's Haiti Field Report describes their activity in Father Jean Juste's neighborhood as follows:

"OTI initiated a Play for Peace summer camp in Petit Place Cazeau, the Port au Prince stronghold of Lavalas party presidential candidate Father Gerard Jean Juste. [] The fruits of these efforts were seen during a recent demonstration attended by 200 people. At the same time that the demonstration was taking place, 300 people were enjoying the summer camp. It is believed that the camp prevented the demonstration from being larger and giving greater legitimacy to the protesters. The coming weeks will see a deepening of OTI activities in Petit Place Cazeau, where events like the summer camp will become increasingly important now that Father Jean Juste has been arrested. His imprisonment has inflamed pro-Lavalas fires in the area and made him a martyr to some Haitians."

This report presents a picture of US aid that is simultaneously disturbing and refreshingly honest. The fact that the "fruits of these efforts" are described as the camps' potential to de-legitimize protest as opposed to their success in providing basic services to the community, speaks volumes to USAID's primary motivations, motivations which will shape long term outcomes. USAID is an arm of the US State Department reporting directly to Condoleezza Rice and their stated objective is to use aid to pursue outcomes desired by the State Department. In this case the State Department is eager to for the upcoming elections to appear legitimate as evident in Condoleezza Rice's recent visit to Haiti in which she stressed the importance of timeliness and legitimacy.

In order for this goal to be achieved it is critical to stifle resistance to the elections. Resistance is being tackled on two fronts. In the past year, thousands of former elected officials and community organizers have been imprisoned, forced into hiding or killed, with many innocent civilians caught in the crossfire. This overt stifling of dissent is implemented by Haiti's unelected interim government through the Haitian National Police, a brutal police forced armed by the United States and under the control of the United Nations.

USAID uses a different tactic for pacifying the poor in Haiti who have been rightfully outraged by the destruction of their democracy, rise in the cost of living and ongoing government-sponsored repression. Understanding the level of desperation in these communities, short term provision of services is used as a way to draw people away from protesting these conditions with a warm meal. As people are fed they can be quietly indoctrinated with the notion that these camps provide an alternative to the "violence" of Lavalas. The provision of entertainment and meals may provide a temporary alleviation of suffering but they do nothing to address the underlying causes of that suffering which are deeply entangled in with the disruption of Haiti's democracy in 2004. A full stomach will not end the police killings, it will not free the political prisoners and it will not result in the reestablishment of social programs in Haiti; but it may give a hungry person a moment of peace. Full stomachs and soccer are excellent tools for temporarily easing suffering to pacify protest and give the country the appearance of calm in the run up to the elections but they are not a sustainable solution to the many problems that prevent these elections from being free and fair, nor will they promote a democracy that truly represents that Haitian people. The long term implications of installing an illegitimate government could far outweigh the short term benefits enjoyed by those attending the camps.

Other questions about these programs include: how long will these programs feed the hungry and what is their effect on pre-existing programs in Petit Place Cazeau, that were not mentioned in the report? Long before USAID initiated the Play for Peace camps in the neighborhood, Father Jean Juste and the St. Claire community were providing vocational training classes, recreational activities and meals to thousands of children in the neighborhood. Now with Father Jean Juste in prison these programs are at risk. Unlike Father Jean Juste's commitment to empowering the community, USAIDs stated goal of pacifying political protest through aid is decidedly a short term strategy, and these camps are not likely to provide a sustainable source of aid after political objectives have been met. If USAID were truly interested in improving the lives of poor people they would support the maintenance of existing programs by joining Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, 29 members of Congress, and over 400 religious leaders in calling for the release of Father Jean Juste, a cornerstone of many community development projects in Petit Place Cazeau.

As stated in the document, the coming weeks will see increased expansion of USAID programs in Petit Place Cazeau and in other key areas like Milot, where Lavalas remains strong. These developments are of interest not only for those concerned with US subversion of democracy in Haiti but also to those interested in understanding USAID's operations throughout the world. This explicit acknowledgement of the motivations underlying aid in Petit Place Cazeau provides and excellent case study and these developments deserve ongoing scrutiny. Despite its beneficent name, USAID is doing what it was designed to do, play off the hunger of the starving, and the boredom of the unemployed, to further US policy interests. In Haiti this means propping up and illegitimate foreign government in the face of massive resistance, a difficult task best carried out through a combination of violent repression and foreign aid, the friendly face of US imperialism.

Sasha Kramer is a PhD. candidate at Stanford University who has travelled to Haiti three times this year on human rights delegations. She can be reached at: sash@stanford.edu




























































































CLARIFICATION

ALEXANDER COCKBURN, JEFFREY ST CLAIR, BECKY GRANT AND THE INSTITUTE FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF JOURNALISTIC CLARITY, COUNTERPUNCH

We published an article entitled "A Saudiless Arabia" by Wayne Madsen dated October 22, 2002 (the "Article"), on the website of the Institute for the Advancement of Journalistic Clarity, CounterPunch, www.counterpunch.org (the "Website").

Although it was not our intention, counsel for Mohammed Hussein Al Amoudi has advised us the Article suggests, or could be read as suggesting, that Mr Al Amoudi has funded, supported, or is in some way associated with, the terrorist activities of Osama bin Laden and the Al Qaeda terrorist network.

We do not have any evidence connecting Mr Al Amoudi with terrorism.

As a result of an exchange of communications with Mr Al Amoudi's lawyers, we have removed the Article from the Website.

We are pleased to clarify the position.

August 17, 2005

Denial in Haiti
By Anthony Fenton & Dennis Bernstein
December 31, 2005


Editor’s Note: The independence of American journalism -- how free it is from government influence and control -- has emerged as a troubling issue in recent years. The Bush administration has admitted to paying some commentators, such as Armstrong Williams, to promote government policies. In other cases, pro-Republican groups have planted "journalists," such as Jeff Gannon, inside the press corps to pose friendly questions to Republicans.

Major U.S. news organizations, including the New York Times, also have had to grapple with star reporters, like Judith Miller, who shed professional skepticism and parroted administration propaganda as news. A similar issue has now arisen in Haiti, where a stringer for the Times and the Associated Press appears to have done work for the U.S.-funded National Endowment for Democracy. After the story broke, the AP severed its relationship with the stringer and the Times is investigating.

The following story was first published by Flashpoints! and is also available at http://www.haitiaction.net.

A by-lined freelancer for the Associated Press, who is also a stringer for the New York Times in Haiti, is moonlighting as a consultant for the US Government funded National Endowment for Democracy, according to an official at the NED, and several of the agency's grantees.

NED is funded annually by grants from the US Congress and State Department, with a 2006 global budget of $80 million, an increase of $20 million from 2005. For years the group has played a controversial role-with lopsided funding of elections in foreign countries-in promoting pro-US candidates and policies friendly to US interests. Most recently, the NED has been accused of attempting to destabilize the Venezuelan government.

Regine Alexandre, whose name appears as an AP by-line at least a dozen times starting in May of 2004, and appears as a contributor to two NY Times stories, is a part of an NED "experiment" to place a representative on the ground in countries where the NED has funded groups.

"This is almost like an experiment for us," said Fabiola Cordova, a Haiti program officer with the NED in Washington D.C. on December 6th. "The NED usually doesn't have a field presence and most of the work from our side takes place here in D.C. Then once the grants are approved it's really very much on the grantees' leadership and initiative to 'implement their programs.'"

Cordova said the NED tries to monitor the programs from DC and to provide some financial oversight, but "a lot of the organizations in Haiti really need a lot of hand-holding, so we hired this person to be part-time NED staff on the ground, and she's helped us, well, both identify new grantees and to respond to any specific questions they're going to have on the ground."

Cordova said the relationship between NED and Alexandre has worked out well. "I think it has been very helpful, and over time as they get more used to having her there, they will use her more effectively too. It works out well for us," said the NED program officer, "because we don't need a full time person. Like I said, it's an experiment, NED has never had like a field presence like this before, but we really wanted to expand our Haiti program so we thought it was really necessary to do this."

Cordova said that Alexandre "was already in Haiti doing some other freelance work" and the NED hired her part time where she "works as a consultant." As a follow up, NED's Haiti program officer forwarded in a December 6, 2005 eMail the direct contacts for Regine Alexandre including her phone and eMail address. "Nice talking to you today," wrote Cordova, "As promised, attached is the information on our Haiti grantees, and the contact information on our part-time field rep in Haiti. Her name is Regine Alexandre. I will drop her an e-mail and to let her know you might be in touch."

In recent years, NED funding for Haiti has skyrocketed from $0 in 2003, before the forced departure of elected President John Bertrand Aristide, to $149,300 in 2004 to its current level of $541,045 in 2005 (8 grantees). NED spending in Haiti is at its highest level since 1990, the year Aristide was first elected.

Alexandre denies working for the NED, but said she has met with several NED grantees and was considering working for NED but then decided not to. "All I can tell you," she said in a phone interview from Port-au-Prince on December 27th, "I met with NED, I was going to work for them, and I didn't know much about NED and I decided not to work for them. I remember meeting with two, maybe three of the grantees and that's it, but I do not work for NED."

In response to queries to AP about Alexandre's links to NED, Jack Stokes of the Associated Press, Corporate Communications, replied that "Regine Alexandre, a freelance reporter for AP, says that at no time has she been an employee of the National Endowment of Democracy. Alexandre, who is also a development consultant in Haiti, says that at the request of NED she did meet briefly with some Haitian non-government organizations to provide them with contact information for NED, and was reimbursed by NED for travel expenses. She says she was unaware that NED had any U.S. government links. The AP is continuing to look into the matter," the Stokes statement concluded.

For their part, the New York Times has been avoiding comment for days. After dozens of calls to several offices at the Times, we were told that they were still looking into it, and that their reporter in Haiti, Ginger Thompson, who used Alexandre as a stringer, had no information about whether Alexandre was working with the State Department. When I pointed out we were talking about the NED, and not the State Department directly, the deputy Foreign Desk Editor for the Times, Ethan Bonner, said the Times will look into the matter further and get back to us. Mr. Bonner acknowledged that it could present a "conflict of interest," depending on the situation, but he had no idea whether this particular case would be a problem, or whether the Times would be utilizing Regine Alexandre again or not.

In a follow up interview on 12/30/2005, Times Deputy Foreign Editor, Ethan Bonner, stated that Thompson had caught up with Alexandre for a brief cell phone conversation and Alexandre assured her, as in the case of AP, she received expenses for travel, which includeed air-fare to Washington D.C. for a job interview with the NED, but then turned it down. Bonner said that the NY Times believed that Alexander was not working or consulting with the NED when she was reporting for the paper. He said in her interview with Thomson that Alexandre denied being an employee for the NED, but the line went dead before Thompson could follow up as to whether Alexandre was on the NED payroll, either directly or as a consultant or being paid by NED grantees with NED monies.

"Conflict of interest" would be to put it mildly. "The NED was created in the highest echelons of the US national security state," writes William Robinson in Promoting Polyarchy: Globalization, US Intervention and Hegemony. "It is organically integrated into the overall execution of US national security and foreign policy. In structure, organization, and operation, it is closer to clandestine and national security organs such as the CIA than to apolitical or humanitarian endowments, as the name would suggest."

Other groups that have worked with Alexandre include RANCODHA, a Haiti-based group, also working around the elections. RANCODHA was the recipient of a $41,220 grant from the NED, according to documents obtained from the NED. Gadin Jean-Pierre, a spokesperson for the group, said in an interview from Haiti on December 27th that Alexandre has been in regular touch with the group, as a representative of the NED. "She's keeping in touch with us, and we keep her informed about our activities that we are doing now with the project. I have had a meeting with her already, and she keeps in touch with us."

In a second interview, Jean-Pierre again confirmed Alexandre's work for the NED. "NED is the organization funding our program...We get funding from NED and we are working in close collaboration with Regine Alexandre. She will meet tomorrow with us, at 9:00; we have the evaluation of the program of the last module we have done. She will be with us tomorrow (Thursday,December 29th)."

Hans Tippenhauer, director of Fondation Espoir (Hope Foundation), the recipient of a $132,970 NED grant, also confirmed that Regine Alexandre was working for the NED, and acted as a "contact officer" between his organization and NED. In an interview from Haiti Tippenhauer said "Yes, she is a contact person" for Fondation Espoir, and added that "the reality is our last program was approved before she was in charge, so now she is just a contact officer for us, but we are working directly with, I mean we had previous engagements with NED in Washington..."

Maryse Balthazar is the coordinator of the Association of Haitian Women Journalists or AMIFEH. The group received a $16,815 NED grant for 2005. Balthazar said she last met with Regine Alexandre on December 8th. She says that she first started working with Alexandre in September 2005. Part of AMIFEH's work is to train Haitian journalists how to cover elections. "Yes," she said in an interview on 12/29/2005, "I work with Alexandre." Balathazar said the last meeting she had with Alexandre was "before the Session of the North department," on December 8th, and that she had commenced working with her in September of 2005.

Flashpoints! UPDATE

After the original story broke, AP announced that it had severed ties with the free-lancer because she is on the payroll of the National Endowment for Democracy. The AP story stated in part that "AP employees must avoid any behavior or activities that create a conflict of interest or compromise our ability to report the news fairly and accurately," said Mike Silverman, the news agency's managing editor."
The AP story continued "Alexandre, who freelances for other news organizations, reported only one story for the AP - on the Dec. 24 killing of a U.N. peacekeeper in Haiti — after beginning her association with the NED. She first began reporting for the AP in 2004. After another freelance journalist raised questions this week about Alexandre and the NED, she denied she was an employee of the organization. She said she had made trips into the Haitian countryside to establish links between the NED and Haitian non-governmental organizations and was reimbursed for her expenses. When told later that the NED confirmed her employment, she continued to maintain she did not work for the organization."

The NED said it was unaware when it hired Alexandre that she worked for the AP or any other media organization.

Later, we received a phone call from New York Times Deputy Foreign Editor, Ethan Bonnar. He stated that a spokesperson for the NED confirmed that, in fact, Regine Alexandre is an employee of the NED. Bonnar asserted that it is his understanding that she was not an NED employee at the same time she was a stringer for the NYT.

When asked if she was paid indirectly - through another agency - Bonnar replied, "...that is a deeper question..." that he would have to look into it further:

Bonnar further stated that Regine Alexandre has been freelancing for the NYT for some time going back into the 1990's. Additionally, he suggested that she may have "fed into" stories filed by Lydia Polgreen and David Gonzales. Bonnar said that the NYT is not yet where the AP is in announcing that it is severing all ties, but he said that if the Times confirmed that Alexandre was in fact lying regarding her work with the NED, then they would not be able to work with her.

© 2005 Flashpoints!


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to Home Page

Reporters sans Frontières et les coups d’états de Washington : le financement par l’Institut Républicain International révélé
par BARAHONA Diana
1er août 2006
version imprimable


Par Diana Barahona et Jeb Sprague

Le magnat de la presse britannique Lord Northcliff avait dit "L’information c’est ce que quelqu’un, quelque part, veut vous cacher, tout le reste n’est que de la publicité." Dans ce cas, le financement de Reporters Sans Frontières par le gouvernement des Etats-Unis doit bien être une information, parce que cette organisation et ses amis à Washington ont tout tenté pour le cacher. Malgré 14 mois de fins de non recevoir opposés par le "National Endowment for Democracy" (NED) à notre demande formulée sous la loi de la Liberté d’Accès à l’Information ("Freedom of Information Act") et une dénégation nette de la part du directeur exécutif de RSF, Lucie Morillon, la NED a finalement admis que Reporters Sans Frontières avait bien reçu des dons au cours des trois dernières années de la part du "International Republican Institute".

La NED refuse toujours de fournir les documents demandés ou même de révéler les montants versés, mais ces dons sont identifiés par les références suivantes : IRI 2002-022/7270, IRI 2003-027/7470 et IRI 2004-035/7473. Le journaliste d’investigation Jeremy Bigwood a demandé le 25 avril au directeur exécutif de Reporters Sans Frontières, Lucie Morillon, si son organisation recevait de l’argent du IRI, et elle a dit non. Mais l’existence de ce financement a été confirmée par Patrick Thomas, adjoint du président de la NED.

Cette découverte met à nu un mensonge majeur de l’organisation qui, pendant des années, a nié recevoir de l’argent de Washington jusqu’à ce que certains montants relativement faibles - de la part de la NED et du "Center for a Free Cuba" - aient été découverts (1). Interrogée sur les origines de son important budget, RSF a affirmé que l’argent provenait de la vente de livres de photographies. Le chercheur Salim Lamrani a souligné l’incohérence d’une telle réponse. Même en considérant que ces livres avaient été imprimés gratuitement, il aurait fallu vendre 170200 exemplaires en 2004 et 188400 en 2005 pour obtenir les près de 2 millions de dollars que l’organisation affirme récolter chaque année - soit 516 exemplaires vendus par jour en 2005. A l’évidence, il devait exister d’autres sources de financement. Et il s’avère que c’est bien le cas.

Le IRI, une organisation du Parti Républicain, est spécialisé dans l’ingérence dans les élections de pays tiers, comme indiqué dans le rapport annuel de la NED et le site Internet de l’IRI. L’IRI est l’un des quatre principaux financeurs de la NED, une organisation fondée par le Congrès US en 1983 sous l’administration Reagan pour remplacer les programmes actions clandestines de la CIA envers les sociétés civiles, programmes révélés et démontés par la Commission d’enquête Church au milieu des années 70 (2). Les trois autres piliers du financement de la NED sont le "National Democratic Institute" (du Parti Démocrate), le "Solidarity Center" (du syndicat AFL-CIA) et le "Center for International Private Enterprise" (de la Chambre de Commerce des Etats-Unis). Mais de tous ces groupes, c’est l’IRI qui est le plus proche de l’administration Bush - selon un récent article du New York Times révélant le rôle de cette organisation dans le renversement du président haïtien Jean-Bertrand Aristide.

C’est le président Bush qui a désigné son président, Lorne W. Craner, pour diriger les programmes de l’administration destinés à instaurer la démocratie. L’institut, qui intervient dans plus de 60 pays, a vu son financement d’origine gouvernemental pratiquement tripler ces trois dernières années, passant de 26 millions de dollars en 2003 à 75 millions de dollars en 2005. Au printemps dernier (2005), lors d’une soirée de collecte de fonds pour l’IRI, M. Bush a qualifié la création de démocraties d’"industrie en croissance". (3)

Le financement par l’IRI constitue un problème important par rapport à la crédibilité de RSF en tant qu’organisation de "défense de la liberté de la presse" parce que cette dernière a été à l’origine de propagandes contre les mouvements populaires au Venezuela et Haïti au moment même où un de ses financeurs, l’IRI, tentait de les renverser. L’IRI a financé l’opposition vénézuelienne au Président Hugo Chavez (4) et a activement organisé l’opposition haïtienne à Aristide en coordination avec la CIA (3).

Le chaînon manquant entre RSF et ces activités s’appelle Otto Reich, qui est d’abord intervenu sur ces coups d’états en tant que premier secrétaire d’état adjoint pour l’Amérique latine et, à partir de novembre 2002, comme envoyé spécial en Amérique latine pour le compte du Conseil National de Sécurité. A part d’être un des administrateurs du "Center for a Free Cuba", financé par le gouvernement des Etats-Unis, et qui verse 50.000 dollars par an à RSF, Reich a travaillé depuis le début des années 80 avec le premier vice-président de l’IRI, Georges Fauriol, autre membre du "Center for a Free Cuba". Mais c’est l’expérience de Reich en matière de propagande qui est particulièrement intéressante ici. Dans les années 80, il a fait l’objet d’enquêtes sur la guerre illégale de l’administration Reagan contre les Sandinistes. L’enquête officielle avait révélé en 1987 que le "Bureau de Diplomatie Publique" de Reich avait "mené des actions clandestines illégales de propagande." (3). Au début de l’année 2002, après que George Bush l’ait engagé au sein de Département d’Etat, "Reich fut rapidement affecté à l’orchestration d’une campagne médiatique de diffamation massive contre Chavez qui n’a pas cessé depuis" (5).

Est-ce que Reich est à l’origine du financement de RSF par l’IRI ? Est-ce que Reich a dirigé les opérations de propagande de RSF contre Aristide, Chavez et Cuba ? Un examen des méthodes de l’organisation semble confirmer la thèse ; la propagande contre Aristide, un ancien prêtre, fut aussi grossière que n’importe laquelle des calomnies habituelles de Reich à l’encontre les dirigeants latino-américains. RSF qualifia le président haïtien de "prédateur de la liberté de la presse" après l’avoir impliqué, dans aucune preuve, dans les assassinats des journalistes Jean Dominique et Brignol Lindor. L’organisation présenta ostensiblement des photographies des cadavres des journalistes sur son site web, les transformant ainsi en icônes d’une répression présumée d’Aristide contre la presse.

En 2002, RSF écrivit "Le 3 décembre 2001, à Petit-Goâve, un bourg situé à 70 kilomètres au sud-ouest de Port-au-Prince, un journaliste a été battu à mort par une bande de tueurs liée aux autorités politiques locales et se réclamant du mouvement "Lavalas" (l’Avalanche) du président Jean-Bertrand Aristide.... Ce meurtre survient alors que la situation de la liberté de la presse ne cesse de se dégrader en Haïti depuis l’assassinat de Jean Dominique, directeur de Radio Haïti Inter, le 3 avril 2000" (6). Notez l’erreur de traduction intentionnelle de "Lavalas" (qui signifie inondation et non avalanche) et comment RSF lie le gang de tueurs au "mouvement Lavalas d’Aristide," sous-entendant par là que le gang était dirigé par le président lui-même.

L’article est parsemé de ce genre d’insinuations et contre vérités grossières. "Dans ce contexte, l’assassinat de Brignol Lindor est interprété comme un nouvel avertissement par l’ensemble de la profession". Ici, RSF a déjà condamné Aristide en laissant entendre que celui-ci a ordonné le meurtre des journalistes pour envoyer un avertissement aux média d’opposition et pour faire cesser leurs critiques à son égard. Mais Jean-Dominique fut assassiné en avril 2000, soit de nombreux mois avant l’élection d’Aristide, et il n’y a pas là non plus de preuve que le président ait un lien avec le meurtre de Lindor.

Dans le même article, RSF qualifie le gouvernement d’Aristide de "régime autoritaire" et l’accuse de lynchages par la méthode dite du "collier" (7), et décrit les partisans d’Aristide comme des "voyous" et conclut que toutes ces actions, imputées par RSF au gouvernement, "s’intègre dans une stratégie plus large des autorités de recourir à des milices para légales pour intimider la presse".

Cette propagande aurait été déjà suffisamment forte si RSF n’avait pas pris des mesures supplémentaires pour étrangler un pays désespéramment pauvre et dépendant de l’aide extérieur - tactique qui a aussi été employée contre Cuba (1). L’agence Associated Press cite le secrétaire général Robert Ménard, qui parlait de l’incapacité supposée du gouvernement haïtien de faire arrêter l’assassin de Dominique, "le Président Jean-Bertrand Aristide est responsable de cette obstruction, et nous allons le classer parmi les prédateurs de la liberté de la presse si aucun progrès n’est accompli dans les mois qui viennent" (. L’article se poursuit, "Ménard a dit qu’il espérait que cette liste, qui sera envoyée à des gouvernements et aux institutions financières, influencerait l’Union Européenne pour prolonger la suspension de quelques 100 millions de dollars d’aide." Les sanctions économiques imposées par les Etats-Unis ont provoqué une explosion de l’inflation et privé le gouvernement de l’argent indispensable à son fonctionnement et à sa défense. Pour illustrer le double standard appliqué par RSF, le bilan des journalistes assassinés en Colombie est impressionnant, mais Ménard n’a jamais fait pression sur les Etats-Unis ou l’Union Européenne pour couper les aides au gouvernement Uribe.

Mais Reporters Sans Frontières ne se contenta pas d’une simple suspension de l’aide. Au mois de janvier 2002, Ménard lançait un appel auprès du Congrès des Etats-Unis et de l’UE pour imposer "des sanctions individuelles" contre Aristide et le Premier Ministre Yvon Neptune, parmi lesquelles les "refus de visas d’entrée ou de transit" et "le gel de tout compte bancaire ouvert à l’étranger" (9)

Après le renversement d’Aristide le 29 février 2004, RSF a ignoré pratiquement toutes les violences et persécutions contre les journalistes critiques envers le gouvernement Latortue, imposé de l’extérieur, en affirmant au contraire que la liberté de la presse s’était améliorée. Les rapports 2005 et 2006 de RSF s’abstiennent de condamner l’exécution extrajudiciaire d’Abdias Jean qui, selon les témoins, a été tué par la police après avoir pris trois photos de trois jeunes que la police venait de tuer. RSF a aussi ignoré les arrestations de journalistes Kevin Pina (Pacifica Radio - radio progressiste US, ndt) et Jean Ristil, et s’est abstenu de mener une vraie enquête sur plusieurs attaques contre des stations de radio pro-Lavalas.

Interrogé sur la révélation de ces financements, Pina a déclaré : "Il fut rapidement évident que RSF et Robert Ménard n’étaient pas des gardiens objectifs de la liberté de l’information en Haïti mais plutôt des acteurs clés dans ce qu’il faut bien appeler une campagne de désinformation contre le gouvernement d’Aristide. Les tentatives d’impliquer Aristide dans le meurtre de Jean Dominique et leur silence lorsque le présumé assassin, le Sénateur Lavalas Dany Toussaint, a rejoint le camp anti-Aristide et se présenta aux élections en 2006 n’est qu’un des nombreux exemples qui révèlent le véritable rôle et la nature d’organisations telles que RSF. Elles diffusent de fausses informations et des rapports biaisés pour fabriquer une opposition interne aux gouvernements considérés comme incontrôlables et qui ne sont pas au goût de Washington tout en préparant le terrain pour leur renversement éventuel en fournissant une justification sous prétexte d’atteintes à la liberté de la presse."

Nous avons demandé à l’expert de Haïti chez RSF, à Paris, pourquoi l’organisation avait ignoré le meurtre d’Abdias Jean et il a répondu : "Nous avons interrogé la police sur la mort d’Abdias Jean et elle nous a répondu que l’attaque avait bien été effectuée par la police mais que celle-ci ne savait pas qu’il était journaliste. Il prenait des photos." Il avoua qu’aucun des témoins du meurtre n’avait été interrogé alors que tout l’information qu’il possédait sur ce cas était basée sur le témoignage de la police, connue pour ses assassinats et abus courants. En ce qui concerne l’arrestation de Pina et Ristil, il dit, "généralement lorsque quelqu’un est emprisonné, nous attendons pour savoir combien de temps... Ils ont été libérés alors nous ne sommes pas intervenus." Etant donné que RSF n’est jamais intervenue pour le cas de Abdias Jean, il est très peu probable qu’elle s’engage pour Pina, critique à la fois du gouvernement d’intérim et de RSF.

Celui qui paie décide. Prenant ses instructions auprès du Département d’Etat, RSF s’est rendue coupable de diaboliser les gouvernements que les Etats-Unis veulent renverser, tels que ceux de Cuba, Venezuela et Haïti, tout en minimisant les violations des droits de l’homme commises chez ses alliés stratégiques tels que le Mexique ou la Colombie. Parce que l’organisation a réussi à cacher le financement de l’IRI, ce qui aurait pu alerter l’opinion sur ses objectifs réels, RSF a joué un rôle efficace dans les agressions clandestines de l’administration Bush contre les chef d’états récalcitrants de l’Amérique latine. L’organisation a aussi réussi à se servir de son image d’organisation indépendante de défense de droits de l’homme pour faire passer son message dans les média US et les ouvrages universitaires. Un tel résultat pourrait passer pour un exploit de la part d’un petit groupe d’individus sans expérience réelle du journalisme si ces derniers n’avaient pas les parrains les plus riches et les plus puissants du monde.

Diana Barahona est journaliste indépendante, spécialisée dans la politique en Amérique latine. dlbarahona@cs.com

Jeb Sprague est journaliste free lance et correspondant pour Radio Pacifica. Sont blog http://www.freehaiti.net

Remerciements à Jeremy Bigwood et Michael D. Steger, avocat.

Traduction "on s’en doutait un peu" par CSP Diffusion autorisée et même encouragée Merci de mentionner les sources



Notes :

(1) Barahona : RSF : Les Fonds Gouvernementaux Ternissent L’objectivité d’une Organisation

Barahona, D. (2005, 17 mai). "Reporters Without Borders Unmasked : It’s Secret Deal With Otto Reich to Wreak Cuba’s Economy. Counterpunch.org."

en français : RSF un Accord Secret avec Otto Reich pour Ruiner l’Economie de Cuba

(2) David Ignatius (Sept. 22, 1991). "Innocence Abroad : The New World of Spyless Coups." The Washington Post. Extrait de la base de données ProQuest. “’Beaucoup de choses nous faisons aujourd’hui était faite clandestinement par la CIA il y a 25 ans," acquiesça (Allen) Weinstein "

(3) Bogdanich, Walt et Nordberg, Jenny (2006, 29 janvier). "Mixed U.S. Signals Helped Tilt Haiti Towards Chaos". The New York Times. Extrait de la base de données ProQuest.

(4) Barry, Tom (2005, 4 août). "Profile : International Republican Institute. International Relations Center." Extrait le 4 juillet, 2006, de

(5) Conkling, Will et Goble, Sam (2004, 13 juillet). "Otto Reich : A Career In Disservice. Council on Hemispheric Affairs".

(6) Lionet, Christian et Avila, Calixto (2002, 10 septembre). Zéro tolérance pour la presse : enquête sur l’assassinat du journaliste Brignol Lindor. Reporters Sans Frontières. Extrait le 7 juillet 2006

(7) Origine de la calomnie sur le "collier". Comme expliqué par Erwin Stotzky dans son livre " Silencing the guns of Haiti", Aristide prononça un discours à l’ONU dans lequel il promit que les "rues deviendront rouges" en employant la forme de protestation créole bien connue qui consiste à bruler des pneus, dans aucune allusion explicite au "collier" ou toute autre méthode de violence (ndt : collier, placer un pneu en feu autour de la victime). Peu après ce discours, "Haiti Observateur", journal d’opposition de droite, transforma le métaphore créole en un prétendu appel au "collier" ce qui fit mille fois le tour des média étrangers, des rapports de la CIA et les groupes de réflexion néo conservateurs tels que Heritage Foundation

( Norton, Michael (2001, Nov. 24). "International press freedom group blasts Haitian government for stalling progress in Jean Dominique murder investigation". Associated Press. Extrait le 7 Juillet 2006 de la base Lexis-Nexis. "accusation d’obstruction : Trois suspects (Ti Lou, Guimy et Markington) furent arrêtes sous le gouvernement d’Aristide pour le meurtre de Dominique mais purent mystérieusement s’échapper lors d’une "mutinerie de prison" sous le gouvernement Latortue au mois de février 2005 et ne furent jamais retrouvés."

(9) Norton, Michael (2002, 10 janvier). "Journalists Group Urges Sanctions for Haiti’s President". Associated Press. Extrait le 7 Juillet 2006 de Lexis-Nexis.

"Aristide est personnellement responsable de la dégradation de la liberté de la presse en Haïti et des sanctions devraient être prises contre lui personnellement," dit Ménard.

Les dessous du coup d’État américain en Haïti


par Pierre Dubuc

Mondialisation.ca, Le 4 mars 2004
L'aut' Journal - 2004-03-03


Envoyer cet article à un(e) ami(e)
Imprimer cet article


Pendant que nos médias nous présentent d’anciens tontons-macoutes comme des émules de Che Guevara et les troupes américaines, françaises et canadiennes comme des libérateurs, nos éditorialistes parlent de «l’africanisation» de Haïti pour décrire le marasme économique total qui étrangle le pays. Tout cela pue le racisme à plein nez et transpire le vieux discours colonial sur le «fardeau de l’homme blanc. »

Dans un dossier magistral, Michel Chossudovsky démonte, morceau par morceau, le mécanisme mis en place par les institutions internationales (FMI et Banque mondiale) et le gouvernement américain pour déstabiliser Haïti, chasser le président élu Jean-Bertrand Aristide et maintenir le pays comme zone de transit pour le trafic de la drogue entre la Colombie et les États-Unis.

Le professeur Chossudovsky rappelle le curriculum vitae des leaders des rebelles. Guy Philippe, la nouvelle coqueluche des médias, est un ancien chef de police et un membre des forces armées haïtiennes. Au cours des années 1990, il a suivi un entraînement prodigué par les forces spéciales américaines en Équateur.

Emmanuel «Toto» Constant et Jodel Chamblain sont deux anciens tontons-macoutes et membres du Front pour l’avancement et le progrès en Haïti (FRAPH), un paravent pour les escadrons de la mort qui ont assassiné des centaines de personnes lors du coup d’État militaire qui a déposé Jean-Bertrand Aristide en 1991.

Dans une entrevue à l’émission 60 Minutes du réseau américain CBS, diffusé en 1995, «Toto» Constant a reconnu qu’il recevait 700$ par mois de la CIA lorsqu’il a créé le FRAPH.

Le volet civil de l’opposition au président Aristide est regroupé sous l’enseigne de la Plate-forme démocratique. On y retrouve la Convergence démocratique de Evans Paul, l’ancien maire de Port-au-Prince, et le Groupe des 184 organisations de la société civile (G-184).

Ce dernier groupe est dirigé par André Apaid, qui est également citoyen américain. Apaid est propriétaire des industries Alpha, c’est-à-dire de sweatshops dans l’industrie textile et la sous-traitance pour des entreprises électroniques américaines comme IBM, Remington, Honeywell et Sperry/Unisys.

Apaid est le plus gros employeur industriel haïtien. Il exploite plus de 4 000 travailleuses et travailleurs à qui il verse un salaire aussi bas que 68 cents par jour, alors que le salaire minimum officiel est de 1,50$ par jour.

Apaid a soutenu le coup d’État de 1991 et des liens existent depuis longtemps entre l’opposition civile et militaire, même si les médias ont cherché à les camoufler. L’opposition civile est en bonne partie financée par l’Institut républicain international (IRI), qui reçoit beaucoup d’argent des pays de l’Union européenne, et par le National Endowment for Democracy (NED), une organisation américaine dont c’est un secret de polichinelle qu’elle travaille de concert avec la CIA.

Créée en 1983, au moment où la CIA était sous le feu des projecteurs pour avoir soudoyé des politiciens et créé des organisations-bidons à travers le monde, le NED a pour objectif, comme le reconnaîtra Allen Weinstein, responsable de sa mise en opération, « de faire beaucoup de choses qui étaient faites clandestinement auparavant par la CIA ». (Washington Post, 21/09/1991)

Il est de notoriété publique que c’est par le canal du NED que passe le financement des organisations de la «société civile» qui cherchent à renverser le président Hugo Chavez au Venezuela, comme cela a été le cas en Yougoslavie lors de la chute de Milosevics.

La gravité de la situation économique en Haïti ne peut se comprendre sans tenir compte des politiques imposées par le Fonds monétaire international (FMI) et la Banque mondiale, explique Michel Chossudovsky, auteur du best-seller La mondialisation de la pauvreté, un ouvrage publié en huit langues.

Après le renversement du premier gouvernement Aristide et son programme de mesures progressistes - seulement huit mois après son arrivée au pouvoir en 1990 - c’est un ancien fonctionnaire de la Banque mondiale et ministre des Finances sous Duvalier, Marc Bazin, qui deviendra premier ministre, nommé par la junte militaire. Bazin avait été le candidat de Washington qui sera défait par Aristide lors des élections de 1990.

Sous la gouverne de Bazin et de la junte militaire, de 1992 à 1994, plus de 4 000 civils sont assassinés par le FRAPH, 300 000 personnes sont déplacées à l’intérieur du pays, des milliers d’autres trouvent refuge dans la République dominicaine voisine et 60 000 s’embarquent dans des navires de fortune pour fuir le pays.

C’est pour prévenir une insurrection populaire contre la junte que Washington envoie 20 000 marines et gardiens de la paix en Haïti en 1994, et qu’ils ne quitteront pas avant 1999.

Le retour à un gouvernement constitutionnel est négocié en secret avec les créanciers de Haïti avant le retour d’Aristide en octobre 1994 pour la fin de son premier mandat. L’argent neuf avancé par la Banque mondiale, le FMI et la Banque inter-américaine de développement ne sert alors qu’à permettre à Haïti de rencontrer ses obligations avec ses créanciers étrangers.

Sous le gouvernement de la junte, le FMI avait exigé la réduction des services de santé et d’éducation, prétextant un « surplus » d’enseignants et de personnel hospitalier dans un pays où de tels services sont quasi inexistants.

Le FMI et la Banque mondiale forcèrent la levée des barrières tarifaires et l’ouverture du marché local au dumping américain de produits comme le riz, le sucre et le maïs, ce qui a pour effet de détruire l’économie paysanne dans un pays où plus de 75% de la population vit de l’agriculture. Haïti devient alors le quatrième importateur de riz américain, après le Japon, le Mexique et le Canada. Sous la junte, le produit intérieur brut a chuté de 30%.

À peine deux semaines avant les élections présidentielles de novembre 2000 - qui vont marquer le retour d’Aristide au pouvoir pour un deuxième mandat - alors que les États-Unis ont instauré un embargo sur l’aide à Haïti, le gouvernement sortant signe une Lettre d’intention avec le FMI.

Bien qu’Aristide ait promis de hausser le salaire minimum, de construire des écoles et mettre en place un programme d’alphabétisation, le nouveau gouvernement a les mains liées par la Lettre d’intention.

En 2003, le FMI impose un système de « flexibilité du prix de l’essence » qui provoque en deux mois une hausse de 130% du prix du carburant. Cette mesure entraîne une augmentation de 40% des prix à la consommation. Pour juguler l’inflation, le FMI exige alors un gel des salaires. Le salaire quotidien minimum, qui était de 3 $ en 1994, tombe aussi bas qu’à 1,50 $. Cette « flexibilité du marché du travail » devait selon le FMI attirer les investisseurs étrangers !

La dette extérieure s’emballe et les taux d’intérêt s’envolent. Dans le Nord et l’Est du pays, la hausse du prix du carburant provoque une quasi paralysie des transports et des services publics comme l’électricité et l’approvisionnement en eau. Toute ces mesures alimentent la grogne contre le gouvernement Aristide et servent la cause de l’opposition.

En février 2003, Washington nomme James Foley comme nouvel ambassadeur en Haïti. En 1999, Foley était l’envoyé du Département d’État américain au Kosovo. Il oeuvra à rendre « respectable » l’Armée de libération du Kosovo, qui était financée par l’argent de la drogue et la CIA, dans le contexte de la préparation de l’intervention américaine contre le gouvernement de Milosevics.

Dans des études antérieures, Michel Chossudovsky a démontré comment le Kosovo a été transformé en « narco-démocratie » sous la protection de l’Otan. La drogue, en provenance de l’Iran et de la Turquie, y transite pour prendre la direction de l’Europe. Aujourd’hui, Chossudovsky se demande si ce n’est pas ce modèle que Foley prépare, depuis 1999, pour Haïti.

Alors que l’économie réelle de Haïti est en banqueroute, le trafic de la drogue y est florissant. Selon la Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) américaine, Haïti demeure « le principal pays pour le transit de la cocaïne de la Colombie vers les Etats-Unis. »

La DEA estime que 14% de la cocaïne qui entre aux Etats-Unis passe par Haïti. Cela représente des sommes fabuleuses, lorsqu’on sait que le commerce global des narcotiques est évalué annuellement à 500 milliards $.

Les narco-dollars représentent aujourd’hui la principale source de devises pour Haïti. Ils servent à rembourser la dette et les intérêts de créanciers étrangers. D’ailleurs, la libéralisation du marché des échanges extérieures imposée par le FMI sert merveilleusement bien au blanchiment des narco-dollars.

Haïti ne touche qu’un très faible pourcentage des revenus de cette contrebande. Les principaux bénéficiaires en sont les intermédiaires criminels, les agences de renseignement qui protègent ce commerce, de même que les institutions bancaires et financières de Wall Street et d’Europe qui blanchissent cet argent.

Michel Chossudovsky souligne que le contrôle du marché de la drogue qui passe par Haïti est particulièrement important pour les Etats-Unis qui voient une bonne partie du commerce mondial de la drogue se transiger maintenant en euros plutôt qu’en dollars, sapant d’autant l’hégémonie du dollar américain.

La rébellion armée et la chute d’Aristide ne sont donc pas des événements spontanés. Ils ont été planifiés de longue main par les services secrets et le gouvernement américains. Bien que les membres des gouvernements Préval, et par la suite Aristide, se soient montrés complaisants à l’égard du FMI, Washington avait néanmoins inscrit Jean-Bertrand Aristide sur sa liste noire.

L’arrivée des militaires américains s’inscrit dans les plans de l’administration Bush pour la militarisation des Caraïbes. Elle vise à sécuriser les routes du trafic des drogues. Rappelons-nous également que Haïti est située stratégiquement entre Cuba et le Venezuela, deux pays où la Maison Blanche voudrait bien voir un changement de régime.

Media vs. Reality in Haiti
by Anthony Fenton
ZNet 13 February 2004
www.globalresearch.ca 17 February 2004
The URL of this article is: http://globalresearch.ca/articles/FEN402A.html


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Judging by the corporate media’s recent coverage of the crisis in Haiti, one might be led to believe that they are “aiding and abetting” an attempted coup d’etat aimed at the democratically elected Jean Bertand Aristide. On a daily basis, mainstream international media is churning out stories provided mainly by the Associated Press and Reuters that have little basis in fact.

On Feb. 10th, the Globe and Mail, Canada’s main national daily, reprinted an AP article that relied on Haiti’s elite-owned Radio Vision 2000. [1] This article contrasted the recent “violent uprising” in Gonaives, Haiti’s fourth-largest city, with the 1986 uprising that saw the overthrow of the oppressive Duvalier dictatorship. The inevitable conclusion that the Canadian readership is steered toward is that Aristide is, or could be, a dictator, who may or may not deserve what he is about to get. This is hardly the kind of context that will compel citizens to lend support to the embattled Haitians.

The Globe’s paul Knox has been reporting from Haiti since Feb. 11th, and has submitted two stories thus far, neither of which have strayed from the “disinformation loop” which sees the recycling of dubious elite-spawned information by the corporate press corps. [see Pina] The same context as above is given credence - that Aristide faces a legitimate opposition that has every right to support his violent overthrow. Knox quotes Charles Baker, a wealthy factory owner who says: “We are all fighting for the same thing. Aristide has to resign.” [2]

Canada’s other national daily, the National Post [also considered the more ‘right wing’ of the two dailies] has no problem running headlines like the one featured on February 13th website: “Rock-throwing Aristide militants force opponents to cancel protest march.” [3] Nowhere in the article is President Aristide’s press release mentioned, which condemned the obstruction of the protest, and called for the constitutional right of peaceful demonstration to be adhered to.

Interestingly, the corporate media has neglected to mention that the “opposition” to which they refer and repeatedly give legitimacy to, only represents a meagre 8 per cent of registered voters in Haiti, according to a US poll conducted in 2000. According to the Council on Hemispheric Affairs [COHA], “their only policy goal seems to be reconstituting the army and the implementation of rigorous structural adjustment programs.” [4] As corporate journalists rely on the opposition for little more than inflammatory soundbites, information that would otherwise be sought to lend their efforts credibility is repeatedly overlooked.

US Congresswoman Maxine Waters issued a press release Feb. 11th, on the heels of her recent visit to Haiti, that called on the Bush administration to join her in condemning the “so-called opposition” and, specifically, Andre Apaid Jr., who is a “Duvalier supporter” that, along with his Group of 184, is “attempting to instigate a bloodbath in Haiti and then blame the government for the resulting disaster in the belief that the U.S. will aid the so-called protestors against President Aristide.” [5]

She also took aim at the World Bank and IMF and their “continuing embargo” , which amounts to hundreds of millions of desperately needed funds. Rep. Waters outlined the following positive measures that Aristide has initiated:

“Under his leadership, the Haitian government has made major investments in agriculture, public transportation and infrastructure…The government [recently] doubled the minimum wage from 36 to 70 gourdes per day, despite strong opposition from the business community…President Aristide has also made health care and education national priorities. More schools were built in Haiti between 1994 and 2000 than between 1804 and 1994. The government expanded school lunch and school bus programs and provides a 70% subsidy for schoolbooks and uniforms”

Rep. Waters made clear assertions on Aristide’s behalf that are otherwise absent from Bush administration commentary and corporate media deceptions regarding Haiti. Waters completed her statement with an important appeal, which called on the corporate media to “discontinue the practice of repeating rumours and innuendos,” whereby they function as “international megaphones for the opposition. They lie shamelessly on a daily basis.”

Another Congresswoman, Barbara Lee, directly challenged Colin Powell in a formal letter to him February 12th, after Powell had announced that the US administration is “not interested in regime change” in Haiti. Said Lee: “It appears that the US is aiding and abetting the attempt to violently topple the Aristide government. With all due respect, this looks like “regime change”…Our actions – or inaction – may be making things worse.” [6]

In a press conference Wednesday, Aristide called for peace and a democratic resolution to the unrest ongoing in Haiti. He once again called on the opposition to rationally discuss things with his government so that they can work toward an equitable resolution.

Now would seem to be a good opportunity for broad-based social justice groups to galvanize around the critical issue of Haiti. Haitians are desperately in need of popular international support if they are to overcome the latest onslaught. With history as our guide, we should be extremely wary when one side of the US administration’s mouth promotes “democracy and freedom” and a “peaceful resolution” to the situation in Haiti, while out of the other they support the interests of such players as André Apaid Jr. The statements of some US representatives are encouraging. Others are somewhat flaky.

In a conversation today with Congressman Gregory Meeks, his slippery position was made quite clear. Meeks’s “primary concern is democracy” and the promotion of democracy does not entail “taking sides”. This is a familiar position that is being trumpeted, whereby the US supports democracy but is not willing to actively support the democratically elected leader. The Miami Herald made note today that the Congressional Black Caucus, whose position is supported by Meeks, “is calling for an end to the violence in Haiti but not repeating its traditional support of Aristide.” [emphasis mine]

These are some dangerous indications, considering that Haitian towns remain under illegal siege by former paramilitary members, who – according to Pina – “Gathered in the Dominican and are now brandishing brand new M16s.” Pina also made note that the Dominican Republic is known to have recently received a shipment of 20,000 American made M16s.

Since a great deal of the current problems plaguing Haiti stem from dire economic issues, we should now turn to these. In his 1997 book, “Haiti in the New World Order”, Alex Dupuy sums up the US disposition toward Haiti:

“For the foreign policy intelligentsia, the defense and promotion of democracy and the free market serve as the “grander vision” underlying U.S. policy objectives in the new world order…Democracy is not likely to take hold unless its corollaries – a free market economy and a free trade system – are also fostered.” [7]

The logic of the State Department, according to COHA, sees Aristide as “little more than a ‘beardless Castro’”, who was despised by Jesse Helms, a tradition that is being carried on by his “ideological heirs” in the State Department, Roger Noriega and Otto Reich. We should recall that this sort of attitude was prominent over a decade ago, when Aristide was first elected President.

In 1991, Aristide was overthrown by the brutal paramilitary, led by former CIA employees Emmanuel Constant and Raoul Cedras. The massive influx of refugees fleeing Haiti from the brutal FRAPH paramilitary regime, in addition to a groundswell of domestic support for Haiti, forced Clinton to “restore democracy” to Haiti in 1994. Aristide, having his way cleared by US troops, returned to Haiti recognized internationally as its legitimate leader.

Aristide’s return was only made possible when he “embraced the Haitian bourgeoisie and accepted a U.S. occupation and Washington’s neoliberal agenda.” As Noam Chomsky has detailed, “The Aristide government [was] to keep to a standard "structural adjustment" package, with foreign funds devoted primarily to debt repayment and the needs of the business sectors, and with an "open foreign investment policy." [8]

By then, the neoliberal agenda has become entrenched as part of the New World Order, which was designed to respond to “the South’s plea for justice, equity, and democracy in the global society.” This agenda has led others such as Susan George to sum it up as such:

“Neo-liberalism has become the major world religion with its dogmatic doctrine, its priesthood, its law-giving institutions and perhaps most important of all, its hell for heathen and sinners who dare to contest the revealed truth.” [9]

The World Bank predicted in 1996 that up to 70 per cent of Haitians would be unlikely to survive bank-advocated free market measures in Haiti. According to a 2002 Guardian article, by the end of the 1990’s “Haiti’s rice production had halved and subsidized imports from the U.S. accounted for over half of local rice sales.” [10] As Haiti became the “star pupil” of IMF and World Bank, such policies “devastated” local farmers.

Structural Adjustment Programmes [SAPs], which have been forced upon Haiti, have in traditional style promoted the privatisation of state industries. According to Aristide in his 2000 book “Eyes of the Heart”, privatisation will “further concentrate wealth” where 1 per cent of the population already controls 45 per cent of the overall wealth. As for why Haiti would agree to World Bank and IMF measures, Aristide provides context along a “dead if we do, dead if we don’t” line: “Either we enter a global economic system, in which we know we cannot survive, or, we refuse, and face death by slow starvation.” [11]

While keeping in mind that the US effectively controls the World Bank and IMF [12], we should consider Susan George and the Transnational Institutes findings based on extensive research of these institutions: “The economic policies imposed on debtors…caused untold human suffering and widespread environmental suffering while simultaneously emptying debtor countries of their resources.” [13]

George notes how the consequences of this “debt boomerang” which sees rich nations actually profiting from the enormous debt service rendered on the poor, as affecting all of us. While the people in the South “are far more grievously affected by debt than those in the North, in both cases, a tiny minority benefits while the overwhelming majority pays.” [14]

The US administration, the World Bank-IMF couplet, and Haitian elites who stand to benefit from a neoliberal agenda, are all aware that Aristide favours genuine democracy over neoliberal reform. Aristide still stands behind the beliefs that swept him to power as the first democratically elected Haitian leader in 1991. As Kevin Pina told me yesterday, the popular [impoverished] masses who revered Aristide in 1991 “are still willing to fight for him. They are willing to die if it means Aristide can complete his term.”

In Monterrey last month at the Special Summit of the Americas, a Third Border Initiative was committed to by the Caribbean Community and the United States. One of the primary aims of the initiative is to “make sure the benefits of globalization are felt in even the smallest economies,” while coordinating ties that discourage terrorist activities and increase security for the area. [15]

We will only know for certain how this applies to the case of Haiti as things progress – or deteriorate. In closing our conversation yesterday, Kevin Pina asserted the following:

“Haiti desperately needs to establish democratic traditions. How is the pattern of instability supposed to be broken? What’s to stop the next democratically elected President from being asked to step down? If people are falling for these distortions and lies they are doing a disservice to Haiti.”

Citizens of Canada, the United States, and Europe all have a stake in this, to the extent that the fomenting of Haitian instability and continued Haitian misery is being carried out and financed in our names. By falling for the delusional picture of Haiti that is drawn by our corporate media, we are actively violating fundamental human rights along with Haiti’s right to self-determination. Anything that can be done to expose this circulation of lies should be done so with an immediacy that above all appreciates the right of all Haitians to determine their own future.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notes
[1] Globe and Mail, February 10, 2004, “Haitian Insurrection Spreads to several more towns.” A16.

[2] Globe and Mail, February 11, 2004 “Haiti’s ‘peaceful people’ erupt in Violence ”, A16.

[3] National Post, February 13, 2004.

[4] “Unfair and Indecent Diplomacy: Washington’s Vendetta against Haiti’s President Aristide,” January 15, 2004.

[5] Transcript obtained from Haiti’s Foreign Press Liason, Michelle Karshan, February 11, 2004.

[6] From the office of Congresswoman Barbara Lee. Contact: 202-225-2398

[7] Alex Dupuy, “Haiti in the New World Order: The Limits of Democratic Revolution,” p. 7.

[8] See Chomsky’s “The Tragedy of Haiti” in his “Year 501: The Conquest Continues” pp. 197-219.

[9] Susan George’s “A Short History of Neoliberalism” speech, March 1999:
http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/econ/histneol.htm

[10] See The Guardian’s “Haiti: proof of hypocrisy”, April 11, 2002:

[11] Excerpts from Aristide’s book at:

[12] Quoting the Brookings Institution’s “U.S. Relations with the World Bank: 1945-1992”: “More than any other country, the United States has shaped and directed the institutional evolution, policies, and activities of the World Bank,” p. 88. The Brookings Institution, incidentally, is a known affiliate of the Haiti Democracy Project, which is friendly with Andre Apaid Jr., and G-184.

[13] See George’s “The Debt Boomerang,” 1992.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Bush II quote, U.S. Department of State website:

Invisible Violence: Ignoring Murder In Post-coup Haiti


by Jeb Sprague

Global Research, August 31, 2006
FAIR


Email this article to a friend
Print this article


In an eight-minute report (6/5/05) in which she rode in a U.N. armored personnel carrier and extolled the bravery of U.N. soldiers, NPR correspondent Lourdes Garcia-Navarro cited “human rights organizations” as saying that “things have improved since the Aristide days.” The NPR report interviewed two members of the U.N. force, one U.S. police trainer, one Haitian police official and Gérard Latortue, the head of Haiti’s unelected interim government. It neglected to quote any victims of the violence perpetrated by the Latortue regime or any human rights organizations critical of the governmental-sponsored violence—perhaps because they might have pointed out that such violence actually increased dramatically during Latortue’s time in power.

After Haiti’s democratically elected leader, President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, was ousted in February 2004, the United States, Canada and France put into place an interim government made up of members of the opposition. Latortue, a wealthy Haitian-American, was installed as the head of this government.


On April 30, 2004, the United Nations, under U.N. Resolution 1542, established the U.N. Stabilization Mission to Haiti, known as MINUSTAH, grouping more than 9,000 military and police personnel from more than 40 countries under the leadership of Brazil and Canada. For more than 26 months, the interim government used former members of Haiti’s disbanded military, along with U.N.-trained paramilitary police, to crack down on the slum-dwelling supporters of the ousted government and of Fanmi Lavalas, the political party which had voted Aristide into office. During this period, the mainstream U.S. press observed a virtual blackout on the state-sponsored violence perpetrated by the U.S.-backed interim Haitian government.


Aristide under fire


For more than two-and-a-half years prior to the 2004 coup, paramilitary rebels led by former Haitian police chief Guy Philippe had attacked Haiti from bases in the Dominican Republic. They killed civilians and government officials, targeted police stations, Haiti’s largest dam and even the presidential palace, all sparking further violence. Government aid embargoes by both the Clinton and Bush administrations further stripped bare the foreign aid–dependent Haitian state.


Opposition-aligned political parties and anti-government “civil society” organizations, however, received tens of millions of dollars in training and support funds during that time from U.S., Canadian and European aid agencies, such as the U.S. Agency for International Development, the National Endowment for Democracy and the Canadian International Development Agency. With the Haitian currency, the gourde, plunging in value, poverty-stricken Haitians struggled under mounting prices and political destabilization.


Even under these conditions, the Aristide government continued to invest in education, medical training and a program to fight human trafficking, albeit with a yearly budget of approximately $300 million for a population of about 8 million. Daring to resist IMF calls to privatize its public industries while raising the minimum wage for Haitian garment industry workers and bringing suit against France for $21 billion in colonial reparations, the Aristide government accumulated powerful enemies.


Further political polarization resulted in violence, doggedly covered by the mainstream U.S. press throughout Aristide’s second administration (2/01–2/04). One of Aristide’s most widely publicized North American critics counted approximately 212 politically motivated deaths during Aristide’s second government, attributing 50 of those killings to the opposition (Michael Deibert, Notes From the Last Testament).


Murderous operations


By contrast, a National Lawyers Guild investigation documented that “800 bodies” had been “dumped and buried” by the morgue in Port-au-Prince in just the first week following the coup; the usual number under Aristide was less than 100 a month (3/29–4/5/04). The University of Miami Human Rights Investigation, a 10-day survey (11/11–21/04) during the interim government, discovered piles of corpses in Haiti’s capital of Port-au-Prince—victims of state security and paramilitary forces (Boston Globe, 4/19/05). World Bank official Carolyn Antsey told this reporter that “thousands died” as a result of the February 2004 events.


Alternative press agencies, human rights organizations and independent investigations, including Amnesty International, the New York University School of Law, L’Agence Haïtienne de Presse (AHP) and Dr. Paul Farmer’s Partners in Health, reported a concerted wave of interim government violence and persecution, while much of the U.S. mainstream press remained virtually silent.


Throughout 2004 and 2005, reports from the non-profit alternative news service Haiti Information Project (HIP) uncovered killings of Lavalas supporters carried out by members of the interim government’s Haitian National Police (HNP). HIP (7/05) also documented murderous operations, with victims often shot in the head, committed by the Brazilian and Jordanian contingents of MINUSTAH. The University of Miami Human Rights Investigation, conducted by Boston immigration lawyer Thomas Griffin in mid-November 2004, documented mass murder by the HNP, mass graves, cramped prisons, no-medicine hospitals, corpse-strewn streets and maggot-infested morgues—the interim regime’s means of dealing with the supporters of the ousted Aristide government. Nine months after Aristide was removed, Griffin wrote,




U.S. officials blame the crisis on armed gangs in the poor neighborhoods, not the official abuses and atrocities, nor the unconstitutional ouster of the elected president. Their support for the interim government is not surprising, as top officials, including the minister of justice, worked for U.S. government projects that undermined their elected predecessors. . . . U.N. police and soldiers, unable to speak the language of most Haitians. . . resort to heavy-handed incursions into the poorest neighborhoods that force intermittent peace at the expense of innocent residents. The injured prefer to die at home untreated rather than risk arrest at the hospital. Those who do reach the hospital soak in puddles of their own blood, ignored by doctors.


A few mainstream outlets occasionally reported on individual incidents of violence perpetrated by the interim government. The Miami Herald (3/1/05) reported: “Haitian police opened fire on peaceful protesters Monday, killing two, wounding others and scattering an estimated 2,000 people marching through the capital [on February 28] to mark the first anniversary of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide’s ouster. . . . Peacekeepers, whose orders are to support the police, stood by as the attack occurred. The police quickly disappeared, leaving the bodies on the street.”


On March 24, 2005, the Associated Press wrote: “Police opened fire Thursday during a street march in Haiti’s capital to demand the return of ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Witnesses said at least one person was killed. . . . Associated Press reporters saw police firing into the air and toward protesters.” Another AP dispatch (4/27/05) reported, “Police fired on protesters demanding the release of detainees loyal to Haiti’s ousted president Wednesday, killing at least five demonstrators.” On June 5, 2005, Reuters wrote, “As many as 25 people were killed in police raids on Friday and Saturday in the slums of Haiti’s capital.”


In one of the most graphic accounts to find its way into the mainstream press, the Miami Herald wrote (9/1/05):




"The police carried assault rifles and wore black masks. The gang they accompanied had brand-new machetes. According to witnesses and U.N. investigators, they stormed into a soccer match during halftime, ordered everyone to lie on the ground and began shooting and hacking people to death in broad daylight as several thousand spectators fled for their lives. . . . Some were handcuffed and shot in the head by police, witnesses said. Others were hacked to death."


Missing the story


But such forthright reporting was exceptional, particularly in the most prominent news outlets. Studying the last two years of coverage by three leading mainstream U.S. newspapers—the New York Times, Los Angeles Times and USA Today—along with National Public Radio, Extra! found that 98.6 percent of the pieces related to Haiti ignored the role of state-sponsored violence and persecution. The few that did mention them provided a few isolated examples, usually working to discredit the documented incidents as partisan political allegations. The human rights reports citing a high number of political prisoners and killings by the interim government’s HNP were rarely cited by the mainstream press.


Following the 2004 coup, press accounts based on interviews with interim government, MINUSTAH and U.S. government officials ensured that an official version of events prevailed. These media outlets demonized Lavalas supporters as “gangs” and “supporters of violence,” and justified the foreign-backed destabilization and overthrow of the constitutional government.


The New York Times published 642 pieces that mentioned Haiti between March 1, 2004 and May 1, 2006—close to one a day. But only four dealt with the violence against and persecution of members and supporters of the former government. While the New York Times reported (10/26/04) on the imprisonment of Father Gerard Jean-Juste, a pro-Aristide priest imprisoned for political reasons, it failed to investigate the nearly 1,000 other political prisoners, many underfed and living in dilapidated jails for more than two years without being charged.


Meanwhile, the Los Angeles Times had 244 pieces mentioning Haiti from March 1, 2004 to May 1, 2006, but only five discussed—briefly—the violent persecution of Lavalas supporters. At the same time, the paper managed to cover every single death of a MINUSTAH soldier.


Well over half of all the quotes in L.A. Times articles dealing entirely with Haiti came from official sources. One L.A. Times article covered the imprisonment of former Prime Minister Yvon Neptune (7/5/05), but failed to mention the evidentiary weakness of the charges leveled against him by a U.S.-funded NGO (Baltimore Sun, 5/29/05), or that there were nearly a thousand other political prisoners languishing in the jails of the interim government.


With a smaller international section, USA Today had 13 articles specifically on Haiti between March 1, 2004 and May 1, 2006. Two (1/4/05, 9/27/05) were critical of the Latortue government, citing its involvement in human rights violations. One of these was followed by a rebuttal from Roger Noriega (1/12/05), then assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs and a primary architect of the 2004 coup. USA Today’s pieces also showed an extreme source bias toward U.S. government and U.S.-installed interim government officials. In its articles, seven U.S. government officials, one U.N. official and 16 Haitian government officials were quoted, compared with only one human rights official and one member of Lavalas.


NPR, according to its website, had approximately 79 stories covering Haiti between March 1, 2004 and May 1, 2006. Only three mentioned violence against Lavalas supporters (10/4/04, 10/7/04, 1/25/06), all of these placing the majority of the blame on pro-Aristide “political and gang” violence, failing to interview victims of state-sponsored or U.N. violence. The role of MINUSTAH and the HNP was almost completely ignored.


The introductions of sources in articles covering Haiti illustrates the reliance on official sources: “diplomats say,” “an anonymous diplomat says,” “a source involved in the palace brainstorming,” “a U.S. diplomat in Port-au-Prince said,” “U.N. officials say,” “Haitian police say,” “USAID workers explain,” “a member of Haiti’s electoral council said,” “the new commander of the U.N. peacekeeping force assured,” “council members said,” “interim officials say,” “State Department officials say,” etc. Rarely, if ever, do we read what the wounded, imprisoned and exiled say—the testimonies that don’t sustain the official story.

Global Research Articles by Jeb Sprague

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Please support Global Research
Global Research relies on the financial support of its readers

Pourquoi Aristide doit-il partir ?



<BLOCKQUOTE>[size=18]


<BLOCKQUOTE>mardi 17 février 2004</BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>

PS :

Haiti as Target Practice


How the US Press Missed the Story


By HEATHER WILLIAMS
<BLOCKQUOTE>
"The fact that the group in charge of Haiti policy today in the State Department has been literally gunning for Aristide since before his initial election as a champion of democracy in 1990 has been left all but unmentioned by the US press."</BLOCKQUOTE>
Now that bodies are littering the streets of Cap Haitien and Port Au Prince, major print news outlets have seen well enough to send a handful of cameramen and correpondents to send back news of the crisis. Even so, the campaign of violence that has finally ousted Haitian President Aristide has been investigated and reported to the American public with appalling indolence. The official reasoning appears to be that if Haiti is the hemisphere's eternal basket case-a dismal repository of poverty where there is no future-- how on earth could its past possibly matter?
But those who view Haiti's current violence as merely one of an eternal humanitarian crisis in temporary overdrive miss the story. It is no simple tale of a corrupt regime collapsing under the weight of popular anger and bad management. A cursory glance at events of the last fourteen years suggests that the fall of the Aristide regime was a foregone conclusion at the entrance of President George W. Bush and the installation of a cabal of appointees with a grim record of utilizing official and covert channels to destabilize uncooperative governments in the Western Hemisphere. What is immediately ominous about the current crisis in Haiti is the likely prospect that leaders of armed groups making a final assault on the capital will play important roles in a post-Aristide order. Such armed groups include the Tontons Macoutes, the gunmen who viciously supervised repression under both father and son Duvaliers' dictatorships until 1986. They also include members of the disbanded Haitian army that held power for three years following the coup against President Aristide in 1991, and the FRAPH death squads that mowed down the ranks of democratic civil society during that period, leaving over 3,000 dead and thousands more in exile. What is also now worrisome about this crisis is what it likely indicates about the intentions of the U.S. State Department and security apparatus elsewhere in the Caribbean.
Now that Aristide's government, protected by a flimsy police force and a smattering of civilian gangs, has collapsed, quiet references in news stories and opinion pieces suggest that editors are wishing that perhaps they had a few more questions along the way about what indeed was going on in Haiti. Notably, until mid-February of this year The New York Times instructed its readers, for weeks on end, with no evidence whatsoever, that the armed groups referred to generically and occasionally quite sympathetically as "rebels" represent a home-grown anti-Aristide opposition. For weeks the New York Tinmes used AP and Reuters dispatches to present the Haitian crisis as one simply of domestic protest and unrest. It wasn't until February 15 that the NYT's own reporter, Lydia Polgreen bothered to mention that the group marching on Gonaïves known a the Cannibal Army was led by "sinister figures from [Haiti's] past," including the infamous Louis-Jodel Chamblain, a soldier who led death squads in the 1980s through the mid-1990s and was convicted in absentia for his involvement in the murder of Antoine Izméry, a well-known pro-democracy activist. Also unexplored by the same reporters were reports that the groups terrorizing Gonaïves had come from across the border, from the Dominican Republic. Given this knowledge, it is curious that no reporter then bothered to inquire how these groups obtained ample caches of brand-new M-16s, M-60s, armor piercing weapons, all-terrain vehicles, and rocket-propelled grenade launchers-equipment far beyond the reach of the Haiti's own impecunious security forces.
Was the story too dangerous to investigate? Was the situation indecipherable? Was the prospect of a weak regime giving way to another in the hemisphere's poorest country just not a story worth the time and effort? The tragedy of this episode is that much of it was abundantly transparent. Running a sixty-second web search on any of the principals involved leads one to a fetid two-decade history of CIA and U.S. ultra-right subterfuge in Haiti. The fact that the group in charge of Haiti policy today in the State Department has been literally gunning for Aristide since before his initial election as a champion of democracy in 1990 has been left all but unmentioned by the press. Also forgotten is the fact that members of the armed groups burning their way through Haiti's cities today include groups that, (according to myriad sources including sworn testimony before Congress by U.S. officials, reporters, and reports of Haitian recipients of covert aid,) were funneling drugs to the U.S. while in the pay of U.S. intelligence agents.
The point is not that the public has been lied to by the government. Governments lie, particularly this administration. The point is that even those on the left who are indignant about systematic misinformation elsewhere have not bothered to jog their memories on Haiti to smell the sulfur emanating from this episode,. The press apparatus reporting on the Caribbean is either too broken or too racist to remember that Haiti's anguish is connected to forces quite beyond poor judgment or even bad will by President Aristide. The ease with which armed thugs have upended a civilian regime, eliciting only murmurs of disquiet from onlookers abroad who ought to know better is cause for worry. Surely zealots in charge of U.S. foreign policy have taken note. If it's this easy to destabilize Haiti , Cuba will unquestionably appear a more viable target for direct intervention in the not-so-distant future.
At least four lines of inquiry were left nearly untouched in the last four weeks of reporting of Haiti.
First, no one bothered to ask who the rebels were and why they were advancing on major cities. If in fact they represented a broad opposition, as reporters readily implied or stated openly, why were the rebels unable to furnish the barest credible details of their demands, their civilian bases of support, and their connections to leaders of civil society groups? Despite literally weeks of lead time, no Haitians in positions of authority, no public figures, and no Haitian intellectuals living here or on the island emerged in press stories as sources of reliable information. Haitians who were quoted in news stories tended to be taxi drivers presumably shuttling skittish reporters from hotel to dinner, or randomly-chosen opponents of Aristide on the street. Predictably, such individuals expressed generic discontent with the government. Thus, even though a number of more respectable political opponents of President Aristide were claiming that armed groups outside the capital were not acting on their behalf, the story by default became a spurious tale of an embattled people challenging a repressive and incompetent government. Stories closer to the truth supported by evidence were likely never taken up because such messiness would necessitate a greater number of column inches than editors were going to allot to Haiti.
The second instance of media negligence was the near-universal acceptance of the idea in the English-language press that Aristide's government had lost all popular legitimacy due to reported irregularities in the 2000 parliamentary elections. This is an extraordinary leap given the monkey business plaguing U.S. elections of the same year. According to Tom Reeves, the admittedly poorly-attended elections were not the stuff of grand vote larceny. "All sides," he wrote in a very fine article last fall in Dollars and Sense, "concede that Aristide won the presidential ballot with 92 percent of the voteThe sole disagreement is over run-off elections for seven senators from Aristide's part who obtained pluralities but not majorities in the first round. The seven senators eventually resigned, making way for new elections." Nonetheless, these electoral "abuses" were grounds for the Bush administration and pliant international partners in Europe to suspend hundreds of millions of dollars in credit lines and aid to Haiti. Allegations of fraud were used to permanently block the release of $400 million in already-approved loans from the Interamerican Development Bank. The IMF, World Bank, and European Union were also pressed to cut off crucial lines of credit. Meanwhile, Haiti was brutally taken to task for its external financial obligations, emptying its coffers in July 2003 to pay $32 million in debt service arrears. As a final blow, Haiti's ability to conserve any remaining foreign reserves was foreclosed by agreements signed with the U.S. government under President Clinton in 1996. These obliged Haiti to abolish tariffs on U.S. imports in the name of what was curiously called "free trade" but was in fact commodity dumping by U.S. exporters. Under threat of huge fines, Haiti was obliged to accept the import of foodstuffs priced far below the cost of production. (Direct subsidies to U.S. farmers since the mid-1990s have averaged over $30 billion a year.) In a nation where the majority of the population works in agriculture, this all but shut down production in the rice-producing northwest of Haiti, as well as among livestock producers throughout the country. Under these conditions, it stands to reason that no government could dodge the discontent of the population.
The third line of neglected inquiry was the question of who the injured "opposition" was in Haiti, on whose behalf this official bloodletting took place. According to Stan Goff, whose thorough article appeared in on this Counterpunch site on February 9 of this year, the fifteen-party anti-Aristide coalition known as "Convergence" includes "every faction of the Haitian dominant class, factions who are generally at war with one another." Despite anemic support from the voting public (never approaching even 20 percent in opinion polls conducted even by the U.S.) what apparently they were able to converge on was three million dollars a year in funding in from the International Republican Institute, a Republican-party backed arm of the National Endowment for Democracy.
Finally, no one has asked questions about the wildly partisan officials in U.S. State Department now running U.S. policy in the Caribbean and Latin America. These include such Blast-from-the-Past supporters of Reagan era highjinks in Central America as Otto Reich, John Negroponte, Elliot Abrams, and (before his ignominious departure last summer) John Poindexter. The most visible in recent weeks on Haiti has been Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs Roger Noriega, a man who has had Aristide in his gunsights for over a decade. As senior staff member for the Committee on Foreign Relations of the U.S. Senate, and advisor to Senator Jesse Helms and John Burton, he was party to a three-year campaign to prevent to defame Aristide and prevent his return to power; all the while CIA-backed thugs left carnage in the streets daily in Port Au Prince. In his capacity in the State Department since 2003, and for two years before that as the U.S. Permanent Representative to the OAS, he has aggressively advertised his intention to oust Aristide a second time. For example, in April of last year, speaking at the Council of the Americas conference in Washington, he linked U.S. policies in Haiti to those in Venezuela and Cuba. He congratulated the OAS for overcoming "irrelevance in the past years" by adopting the Inter-American Democratic Charter. Article 20, he said, lays out a series of actions to be takenin the event that a member state should fail to uphold the essential elements of democratic life. He added the "President Chavez and President Aristide havecontributed willfully to a polarized and confrontational environment. It is my fervent hope," he added ominously, "that the good people of Cuba are studying the Democratic Charter."
Given the inability of Haitians at present to question the direction of whatever succession takes place in the coming weeks, the question of how fully Noriega and his fanatical friends will control U.S. foreign policy in the Americas is crucial. Secretary of State Colin Powell has been cravenly circumspect in his statements on Haiti, straddling the line between encouraging Aristide to step down and discouraging those who would involve the U.S. extensively in any transition effort or state-building mission. What Powell's late entrance into the situation suggests strongly is that Latin America and the Caribbean are considered so insignificant that Noriega and his half-cocked cronies are generally left to play with matches until the fire alarm goes off. In this case, Florida voters were that alarm. Undoubtedly higher-ups in the White House were a bit uneasy at the prospect of thousands of Haitians fleeing chaos being thrown back into the sea by the US Coast Guard in an election year. But the modus operandi of Noriega and company is unmistakeable: fund an opposition, report every clash as repression against the population, arm pliable thugs and mercenaries in exile, embargo the government, precipitate acute crisis, play up the discontent of a hungry population, and then happily leave it to internationalist liberals to lead the charge for military intervention on humanitarian grounds. So with President Aristide neutralized now, it's time to look elsewhere, maybe west across the sea to Cuba.
Heather Williams is assistant professor of politics at Pomona College. She can be reached hwilliams@pomona.edu

Media Lies and Disinformation
Jean Bertrand Aristide: Humanist Or Despot?


by Lynn Duff



Pacific News Service, 1 March 2004

www.globalresearch.ca 4 March 2004


<BLOCKQUOTE>


PNS Editor's Note: When PNS contributor, Lyn Duff, went to Haiti in 1995 at 19 to help start a radio program for street kids, Jean Bertrand Aristide, Haiti's now ousted president, befriended her. What she knew of Aristide, a compassionate, caring humanist, conflicts with the current public image of a dictator.




The Jean Bertrand Aristide I know is markedly different from the one that is being portrayed in the media.

In 1995 when, I was 19 years old, I traveled to Haiti to help set up Radyo Timoun, a radio station run by street children in the capital, Port-au-Prince. Over three and a half years I worked and often lived with the children of Lafanmi Selavi, a shelter for some of the nation's quarter of a million homeless children.

It was there that I came to know Jean Bertrand Aristide, not just as the president of the poorest country in the western hemisphere, but also as a father, teacher, a friend, and a surrogate dad for hundreds of parentless street kids.

In his private life Aristide was very simple and, in many ways, unaffected by the power and prestige that went with being president. He lived in a beautiful but rather small house near the airport where he seemed to be oblivious to the deafening sound of airplanes taking off at all hours. He took piano lessons, played with his children, read books in a myriad of languages, and spent hours in meetings. After his first daughter was born, I often saw children from the neighborhood playing with the toddler under the mango tree while his wife Mildred watched.

The only time I saw their small swimming pool used was when groups of children - usually street children, or kids from our radio station, or children attending literacy classes at the nearby Aristide Foundation for Democracy - came over for a swim. One time, on the way home I asked the boys what they'd discussed with Titid after lunch, and one of them volunteered, "We talked about dating girls and how you should be respectful, and about how to be a good man."

Our conversations were not frequent but when we did chat he always treated me with respect and love in a very real way. Whether I struggled with algebra or with the Bible he always took time to talk about equations or his own faith.

When I faced life after college with trepidation he listened attentively to my fears and concerns before asking if I wanted advice. When I said yes, he helped me sort through my options. During a speaking tour in the south of Haiti, I accompanied him. To the impatience of his staff, he insisted that we drive slowly over the rocky and rutted roads. "It's not worth it to go fast if someone gets hurt," he said.

How then to reconcile Titid the humanist with what the media calls a despot of Haiti?

I don't know, and frankly, I've been struggling with that question. When I spoke with Haitians working for a few pennies an hour sewing clothes for American companies, I was frustrated that Aristide insisted on following a democratic process to raise the minimum wage knowing that the process would be slower and result in a lower minimum than if he just unilaterally raised it himself.

Aristide said, "Change takes time, Lyn. Some people have spent years paying Haitians very little. When I wanted to raise the minimum wage in 1991, they had a coup and you know what happened." He reminded me that he had gone to parliament to raise the minimum wage in 1994, though it was still very low. "Of course people should be paid more, but in a democracy we have to share power and this is what was [voted on.]" he said.

When a major American daily paper published an article that portrayed Aristide as a despot, I was aghast. "Don't you care that they're saying this about you?" I asked him. As much as I disagreed with some of his politics, I was hurt when I saw him so maligned.

Aristide always had an answer: "What is important is not journalists, it's to make democracy real. How can we say we love our brother but we let him starve? How can we say we want democracy but we do nothing when people have no home? How can people have peace in their hearts when they have no peace in their stomach?"

There are, he added, "Larger forces at work here than you or me, forces that have a big stake in our small country."

Knowing President Aristide, I would guess that his staff was much more concerned with how the international media portrayed him than he was personally. Perhaps in the end that was one of his bigger mistakes, failing to focus on winning over the world's opinion.

My opinion about Titid hasn't changed, however. I will always know Titid as a humanist over the failed politician. And during this chaotic time I remember him and his family and wish them peace.


</BLOCKQUOTE>

Documents >

Évitons les amalgames dans la crise haïtienne

<BLOCKQUOTE>
mercredi 25 février 2004


</BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>

Media Disinformation on Haiti


by Anthony Fenton



25 October 2004[/size]
<BLOCKQUOTE>

---

<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>
<BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>

---

</BLOCKQUOTE>

Haïti dans la tourmente



François L’ÉCUYER – 6 juin 2005 Port-au-Prince - Depuis le début de « l’Opération Bagdad », lancée en septembre 2004 par les partisans d’Aristide contre la Police nationale, la Mission des Nations unies pour la stabilisation d’Haïti et la population de Port-au-Prince en général, la situation s’est significativement détériorée en Haïti, tant au niveau économique, politique que sécuritaire. Mais au-delà de cette opération criminelle ayant coûté la vie à plus de 600 personnes, plusieurs secteurs de la société haïtienne et de la communauté internationale chercheraient également à faire déraper l’actuelle transition démocratique.


Malgré la présence de 5 800 soldats de la Mission des Nations Unies pour la stabilisation en Haïti (MINUSTAH) et de 1 620 policiers internationaux, l’insécurité ne cesse de gagner du terrain à Port-au-Prince. Kidnappings et assassinats se multiplient, touchant tant la bourgeoisie que les classes populaires. Les étrangers n’avaient pas, jusqu’à récemment, été touchés par cette vague de peur. Mais depuis, un Canadien et un Russe ont été enlevés, et le consul honoraire de France a également été assassiné cette semaine.

Le pire de la situation touche, bien entendu, les populations des quartiers populaires : Bel Air, situé en plein centre-ville, entourant la Cathédrale et les principaux marchés de Port-au-Prince ; puis Cité-Soleil, énorme bidonville où vivent plus d’un million de personnes, réputé pour abriter les infâmes « Chimères », ces gangs criminels armés par Aristide depuis son retour d’exil en 1994. Bel-Air, Cité-Soleil ainsi que les quartiers environnants sont devenus des No Go Zones où personne n’ose se risquer - pas même la Police nationale haïtienne (PNH).

Aujourd’hui, les populations de ces deux quartiers sont littéralement prises en otage. Pour sortir ou entrer dans Cité-Soleil, un droit de passage est exigé par les gangs armés. Certains, qui désirent quitter l’endroit pour trouver quelque havre de paix, doivent tout abandonner : maisons, meubles et autres biens, qui sont généralement brûlés quelques jours suivant leur départ.

Mardi cette semaine (31 mai), des bandits ont assailli le Marché Tèt Bèf, en plein centre-ville. Après avoir tiré en tout sens à l’arme automatique, ils ont mis le feu à l’édifice ainsi qu’au Sous-Commissariat St-Joseph adjacent. Les pompiers n’ayant pas réussi à contrôler l’incendie, c’est plus de 2500 marchandes qui se retrouvent à la rue, perdant tous leurs stocks. Huit personnes ont également perdu la vie. La crise économique ainsi provoquée touchera lourdement la population de Port-au-Prince. Quand on sait qu’environ 20 personnes dépendent d’une seule commerçante pour assurer leur survie, c’est près de 50 000 personnes, principalement des quartiers pauvres, qui n’auront accès à aucun revenu au cours des mois à venir.

Il serait toutefois naïf de croire que seules la mouvance Lavalas - le parti de l’ex-Président Jean-Bertrand Aristide - et les Chimères armées qui lui sont affiliées sont responsables de la violence extrême qui sévit. Plusieurs autres gangs armés, reliés à différents secteurs, ont profité du climat général d’insécurité. C’est le cas de nombreux gangs reliés au trafic de drogue (environ 15% de la cocaïne arrivant aux Etats-Unis transite par Haïti), des gangs liés à d’autres partis politiques et d’une partie du secteur privé qui bénéficie de la situation actuelle, ainsi qu’à la croissante et lucrative industrie du rapt et de ses rançons.

En effet, plusieurs groupes ont ainsi avantage à entretenir ce chaos et voir ainsi échouer l’actuel processus de transition. D’un côté, plusieurs commerçants profitent excessivement de l’énorme inflation des prix et du laxisme des contrôles sur l’import-export. Certains partis politiques, incluant Lavalas, qui ne prévoient pas remporter les élections prévues entre octobre et décembre 2005, préfèrent également pouvoir œuvrer en toute impunité plutôt que de voir s’instaurer un gouvernement légitime qui signifiera la fin de leurs activités.

Bien sûr, l’ancien président Aristide, n’ayant toujours pas digéré son expulsion du pays, continue de contrôler plusieurs gangs armés et défie tout individu qui, au sein de Lavalas, pourrait vouloir briguer les élections. En ce sens, l’éditorialiste du quotidien haïtien Le Matin, Claude Moïse, écrivait ce matin : « Pour chimérique que soit le vœu d’Aristide, il ne renonce pas à revenir sur la scène nationale en qualité d’acteur majeur. Sa stratégie ? Rendre impossible la normalisation politique sans lui, donc faire dérailler le processus électoral et rendre le pays ingouvernable [...] Entretemps, ses groupes armés font le maximum pour terroriser la population et éloigner des urnes le plus d’électeurs possibles. (sic) »

Une démocratisation souveraine ?

Quant à eux, les mouvements populaires haïtiens critiquent de plus en plus une situation où diverses forces internationales se disputent l’hégémonie de la reconstruction du pays. Nous ne pouvons passer sous silence le fait que, malgré la violence perpétrée par Aristide en fin de régime, plusieurs organisations populaires ayant contribué à son départ n’ont toujours pas digéré l’intervention militaire de février 2004. En effet, il faut se rappeler qu’en novembre et décembre 2003, alors que la mobilisation populaire contre Aristide battait son plein, plusieurs mouvements armés au nord du pays ont surgi, principalement grâce à l’approvisionnement en armes par les Américains à partir de la République dominicaine voisine. Les leaders de ces mouvements armés - dont les Guy Philippe et Jodel Chamblain, ayant autrefois respectivement appartenu aux Forces armées d’Haïti et aux paramilitaires (FRAPH) ayant servi lors du coup d’État de Raoul Cédras (1991-1994) - ont tôt fait de s’identifier au mouvement démocratique exigeant la démission d’Aristide. Le chaos ainsi instauré a largement contribué à la décision des Nations unies d’envoyer une force militaire internationale. Du coup, c’est à l’ensemble du mouvement populaire non-armé à qui on avait coupé l’herbe sous les pieds - tout en militarisant considérablement le pays.

Depuis le départ des Marines en mai 2004 et leur remplacement par une MINUSTAH dirigée par le Brésil, les Américains craignent un éventuel succès militaire et politique des Brésiliens en Haïti. Les conséquences géopolitiques dans l’ensemble des Amériques seraient très dommageables pour l’administration Bush. Alors par diverses façons, les Américains mettent des bâtons dans les roues de l’actuelle transition. Par l’armement de gangs armés et des anciens militaires disent certains, en retenant des fonds promis pour la reconstruction et la transition, ou encore par le blocage administratif des instances de l’Organisation des États américains (OEA). Le rappel du personnel américain non-essentiel, ayant eu lieu à la fin du mois de mai, envoie un signe très clair quant à l’échec, selon Washington, de la force militaire internationale dirigée par le Brésil - et pourrait servir très prochainement afin de justifier, auprès du Conseil de sécurité des Nations unies, un renvoi des Marines en Haïti pour faire la guerre aux gangs armés et aux narcotrafiquants.

Plusieurs mouvements populaires haïtiens critiquent ouvertement le manque flagrant de souveraineté du pays quant à l’organisation des prochaines élections. D’un côté, les responsables de l’OEA - en grande partie manipulée par le gouvernement Américain - affirment ne jouer qu’un rôle « d’appui technique » dans l’organisation des élections. Dans les faits, la situation est tout autre : c’est l’OEA qui sélectionne la location des bureaux d’inscription et de vote à travers tout le pays, qui engage les employés de ces bureaux, qui accorde les contrats de sous-traitance reliés à ces activités, etc. Chaque dépense encourue par les activités du Conseil électoral provisoire (CEP), organe haïtien « en charge » des prochaines élections, doit être approuvée par les bureaucrates du PNUD, organisation responsable de rassembler les fonds nécessaires à la tenue des élections. Et, en bout de ligne, Washington qui retient les cordons de la bourse.

Certes, on reproche au CEP son incapacité à mettre en branle le processus électoral. Mais force est d’admettre que le manque de coordination et de cohérence entre le CEP, l’OEA et le PNUD y joue pour beaucoup. Le processus d’inscription sur la liste électorale comporte des enjeux beaucoup plus grands que le seul processus électoral de 2005. En effet, on évalue à 40% la population haïtienne n’ayant aucune forme d’identité civile. La carte électorale émise cette année servira donc de papier d’identité officiel pour les dix prochaines années. Le hic, c’est que l’inscription se termine à la fin du mois de juin. Et jusqu’à aujourd’hui, seuls 55 000 personnes se sont inscrites, sur une population d’électeurs éligibles évaluée à 4,5 millions de personnes. C’est tout dire.

On craint aussi que, pour des raisons d’incapacité à garantir la sécurité des bureaux de vote, l’OEA restreigne le nombre de ces bureaux en « concentrant » les lieux d’inscription et de vote. À Port-au-Prince, un seul bureau d’inscriptions est présentement en fonction. Et on chuchote actuellement que l’OEA aurait fait une croix sur Bel-Air et Cité-Soleil, évaluant que d’aucune façon le vote ne pourra se tenir dans les conditions actuelles d’insécurité. En plus de renier les droits citoyens à plus d’un million d’électeurs, c’est une bonne partie de la base électorale du parti Lavalas qu’on tiendrait ainsi à l’écart des prochaines élections. Force est d’admettre que dans de telles conditions, les partisans d’Aristide ne reconnaîtront nullement le prochain gouvernement.

Des élections à tout prix...

L’actuel gouvernement de transition est aussi de plus en plus critiqué pour son incapacité à faire face à la crise et son incompétence globale. Parmi les critiques se sont récemment jointes la voix du secteur privé, pourtant largement hostile au régime Aristide, et celle du Groupe des 184, une large coalition d’organismes de la société civile, du secteur privé et des partis d’opposition, en partie derrière le soulèvement populaire ayant contribué au départ d’Aristide. Les reproches au gouvernement intérimaire sont fort simples. Celui-ci, dirigé par le Premier ministre Latortue, n’a pas réussi à remplir un seul des mandats dont il est responsable. Dialogue national, relance économique, sécurité et processus électoral, l’échec du gouvernement Latortue se situe à tous les niveaux.

Le principal mandat de la MINUSTAH étant de permettre la tenue d’élections d’ici la fin de 2005, il n’est pas surprenant de constater qu’en dépit de la situation actuelle, tout sera mis en œuvre pour que les élections aient bel et bien lieu. La communauté internationale semble faire le pari que mieux vaut avoir des élections tenues dans un climat de violence et boycottées par plusieurs, que de prolonger un gouvernement intérimaire dont la légitimité et la crédibilité sont de plus en plus remises en question.

On murmure de plus en plus à Port-au-Prince que René Préval, président du pays entre 1996 et 2001, songerait à poser sa candidature pour les élections présidentielles. L’homme serait l’un des seuls à pouvoir rallier une partie de l’électorat Lavalas, tout en pouvant tenir tête à Aristide en exil. Cette donne rallierait une partie de la communauté internationale, pour qui seules des élections reconnues par le parti de l’ex-Président Aristide seront garantes de la stabilité du prochain gouvernement.

Cette ténacité de la communauté internationale à vouloir rallier le parti Lavalas en vue des prochaines élections indigne nombre d’organisations de défense des droits de la personne en Haïti. Pour celles-ci, l’ancien gouvernement est responsable de nombreux crimes odieux envers la population haïtienne. Ces crimes devront être jugées, affirment-elles, et elles entendent en ce sens interpeller la Cour pénale internationale (CPI). Réintégrer Fanmi Lavalas en vue des prochaines élections rajoute l’insulte à l’injure, condamnent-elles.


samedi 4 juin 2005

L’auteur est chargé de projets pour l’Afrique et Haïti à Alternatives. Il a effectué une mission à Haïti fin mai- début juin 2005.