[Militant International Review, No. 59, October-November 1994, p. 2-6]
With Aristide’s return the problems facing the US invasion force have only just begun. Dave Cotterill writes.
The joyous popular welcome to the US forces who landed in Haiti turned sour in less than a fortnight. When US marines stood by while the police and armed thugs attacked pro-Aristide demonstrators, the mood turned to fury. There was outrage on the third anniversary of the coup which overthrew Aristide, when thugs working for the regime and militiamen linked to the grotesquely misnamed ‚Front for the Progress and Advancement of Haiti‘ tossed a grenade into the crowd, killing at least five and injuring several dozen. „I hate you Americans“, chanted one demonstrator: „You lie to us, you cheat us“.
While the junta’s assassins roamed the slum areas, the US forces were concentrated in the hillside suburb of Petionville, protecting the homes of the wealthy elite from a feared attack by the hungry, furious masses. As it was, the impoverished workers and slum-dwellers concentrated on seizing food from several big food warehouses owned by two or three of the wealthy families (including one owned by the hated police-chief, Lt-Col Michel Francois) who dominate Haiti’s chaotic economy.
Despite the murders and repression on the streets, Clinton was quick to claim the US mission was ‚going well‘. But many GIs, as was clear from TV reports, were angry that they were ordered to stand back while people were beaten or shot in front of them. The US embassy spokesman, Stanley Schranger, blamed the violence on the reactionary para-military forces linked to the military and the failure of the police to keep order. „We cannot permit such loss of life to continue“, he said, „but what we are going to do about it is under discussion“,
Such inaction is hardly surprising given Clinton’s contradictory aims. The Carter deal with the illegal junta provides for the return of Aristide on 15 October, but at the same time granted an amnesty to the military leaders and made no concrete provision for their removal and exile. The junta reneged on a similar deal last year, and once again responded by unleashing ferocious repression against Aristide’s supporters. This was predictable. But Clinton wants a ‚humanitarian‘ intervention to restore democracy, while he is terrified of the political consequences in the US of casualties.
„We want to be able to deal with whatever we might be confronted with.“
When they first landed, the main aim of the 15,000 US forces appeared to be to protect themselves and avoid casualties. Such a policy will clearly not resolve the crisis, In congress, the Republicans are already demanding that the troops should be home by Christmas. But the US military commanders are talking of the danger of ‚mission creep‘ – of getting sucked in deeper and deeper. Faced with bloody defiance from the junta’s forces, the US has already been forced to take some steps to curb their repressive power. But US strategists are still very uncertain about Aristide, who is deeply feared by Haiti’s small, very wealthy ruling elite. The reconvened parliament has already rejected an amnesty for the junta. Aristide’s supporters are demanding revenge for the bloody terror they have endured, and food and jobs to lift them out of the squalid misery of the slums. Already, in the countryside, beyond the reach of the military, the masses are beginning to settle accounts with the hated section chiefs, the Tonton Macoutes they used to control, and the voodoo priests who acted as lackeys and informers.
Commenting on the continued military build-up, a Pentagon spokesman said: „We want to make sure we have all the assets necessary in Haiti to be able to deal with whatever we might be confronted with“. What they are facing is not a rapid, in-and-out mission but a colonial-style occupation in which the US will have to grapple with the explosive legacy of its past interventions, the blood that has flowed between US-backed dictators and the masses, the unimaginable gulf between the elite and the toilers, and the stored up fury of the workers and peasants. Neither Clinton nor any of his disorganised gang of advisers, appears to have any real understanding of what they have got into, let alone a strategy to find a way out. The longer they stay, the more the US forces will be seen to openly side with elements of the ruling class, including the military, and the more they will collide with the mass of the people. If under pressure at home, Clinton – or his successor – pulls out precipitately, US imperialism would only have added another destructive intervention to the sufferings of the Haitian people.
* *
*
In 1990 Father Jean-Bertrand Aristide was elected as Haiti’s president with 67% of the popular vote. This followed the heroic struggle of the masses which led to the overthrow of the hated ‚Baby Doc‘ Duvalier dictatorship and the seeming rout of his death squads, the Tonton Macoutes. Regarded as the messiah of the masses, Aristide was viewed with suspicion by the Haitian right-wing military and the US establishment. Overthrown by a military coup in September 1991, he fled to the US for sanctuary.
The return of military dictatorship, however, brought new problems for successive US administrations. Up to 100,000 refugees were expected to flee from Haiti to Florida. Fearing the consequences of this for the Democratic Party’s electoral prospects, Clinton did a dramatic U-turn in January 1993, reneging on his election promise and continuing the Republican policy of sending the refugees back – during the election campaign he had savagely criticised this in order to win the black vote.
Faced with domestic pressure Clinton then attempted to broker an agreement between Aristide and the military. Under the Governor’s Island Agreement, signed in New York last year, the military agreed to Aristide’s return in August 1993 and an amnesty for the coup leaders, who would then resign their military posts. Such was the expectation of a negotiated settlement the US lifted sanctions and set sail with a task force to prepare the way for Aristide’s return. The military leaders, however, immediately reneged on the agreement. Determined to cling to power, they unleashed an even more savage terror against Aristide’s supporters, using death squads closely linked to the army and the police. Arriving in Haiti the US naval force found itself confronted on shore by threatening government organised mobs – and sailed away. Conscious of what had happened to the US forces in Somalia through the TV, the protesters had shouted ‚we’re going to make a second Somalia here‘.
With a split in the state department, and with domestic opposition developing against intervention, Clinton and his advisers decided not to involve US forces in another debacle, and returned to the policy of sanctions. Such actions mainly affected the destitute masses while the Haitian rich got even richer by using their resources to trade in the underground market. As for US business, trade actually increased by 50% despite the sanctions.
Emboldened by this, General Cédras, head of the military, and Colonel François, head of the police, encouraged and directed the death squads to systematically terrorise the Haitian workers and peasants – attempting to destroy Aristide’s network of support. Since the coup, supporters of Aristide and other opponents of the military dictatorship have been brutally tortured, mutilated and murdered in order to terrorise the whole population. In the shanty town areas where the greatest opposition exists, the death squads, the Macoutes, operated with impunity, raping women and murdering anyone suspected of being an opponent. TV coverage showed the effect of the terror. No one would openly speak out about politics and everything had been driven underground. The only way that workers could meet without arousing suspicion was around the TV when football was being televised.
The murder squads are deeply entwined with the state forces, but in turn these state forces have been trained by the CIA and supported by US imperialism for decades. Now that they have clashed with US interests, the intelligence agencies have blown the whistle and revealed that the heads of the military and the police are linked to the drug trade – something which, of course, until recently they turned a blind eye to as they did with Noriega in Panama.
In reality, Clinton did not want a conflict with the Haitian military regime. Instead his policy was to create the conditions for a reconciliation between the military and Aristide, with each acting as a check on the other. The priest is not regarded as being trustworthy. The US fears that under pressure from the masses he may try to carry out Measures against US interests.
Moreover, the military is acutely aware that it is sitting on a social pressure cooker, Haiti is the poorest country in the Western hemisphere and the divide between rich and poor could not be greater. The hatred between rich and poor is also added to by a race hatred. Ninety per cent of Haiti’s six million population are black, while the powerful, rich elite are mulattoes, of mixed black and white descent. Traditionally, the mulattoes were an exclusive caste which formed Haiti’s ruling class. Through his fascistic para-military political apparatus drawn largely from among blacks, ‚Papa Doc‘ Duvalier clipped the political wings of the mulatto elite, but it remains extremely powerful. Additionally, the masses have endured decades of vicious military rule and terror, and the fear of revenge haunts Haiti’s rulers.
In 1986 Baby Doc’s regime was overthrown and hundreds of Tonton Macoutes were dispatched to their rightful place. Baby Doc himself was forced to flee into exile by a mass movement and general strikes and it seemed that the power of the Macoutes had been smashed. However, no powerful working class leadership emerged to fill the vacuum which was filled instead by the only other viable force in society, the state forces, trained over decades by US imperialism.
* *
*
Continuing atrocities and the open defiance of US imperialisms‘ wishes forced Clinton to up the ante and threaten an invasion. Domestically he was coming under pressure from the Black Caucus of Democratic senators and congressmen. Electorally Clinton’s Democratic Party has the support of 83% of black voters so, with congressional elections coming up in November, it was impossible for him to ignore the accusations of indecision, especially after he had agreed to 20,000 Cubans receiving entry visas.
In the past US foreign policy used to be driven by security issues, the threat of revolutions or countries moving into the so-called Soviet bloc, For instance Papa Doc Duvalier at one time flirted with the Eastern bloc. With Castro in power in Cuba this represented a real threat to US interests so they moved to back his vicious dictatorship. Nowadays, because of the collapse of Stalinism, US foreign policy is partly driven by issues which impact on domestic policies such as drugs, refugees and immigrants.
Yet Clinton hesitated over the use of military force because at home a majority were opposed to intervention but more importantly because of the fear of US troops being drawn into a much wider conflict.
Throughout the recent history of the island of Hispaniola (with Haiti on the west and the Dominican Republic on the east) the US has resorted to outright military occupation. In 1915 troops went into Haiti and stayed for 19 years. In 1965 US troops were sent to the Dominican Republic in a quick in-and-out operation. Elections in 1962 had seen the victory of a liberal reformist, Juan Bosch, whose programme included full employment and land reform. In April 1965 US president Lyndon Johnson sent in 22,000 troops because he feared another Cuba and wanted to ‚restore democracy‘ – which has a familiar ring. US troops stood by while Dominican troops massacred 3,000 activists in the slums.
Understanding that the US is motivated by its own economic and political interests, the neighbouring countries of the Caribbean and Latin America have been lukewarm to the idea of armed intervention in Haiti, This partly explains why Clinton has held off for so long before finally threatening an actual invasion. Diplomatically time had to be spent to secure the appearance of international backing and UN support. However, only 1,700 non-US troops have been scrapped together from 17 nations including Israel, whilst the Caribbean allies will send the magnificent total of 266. To gain backing within the United Nations the US had to do a deal which allowed Russia to take action in Georgia, supposedly on behalf of the United Nations. As The Financial Times pointed out, „each country is willing to act only where it conceives its national interest or prestige to be at stake and then looks… for a UN rubber stamp“ (August 8, 1994).
This, then, is the ’new world order‘
This, then, is the ’new world order‘ conceived under the Republican, Bush, and put into practise by the Democrats who operate ‚gunboat liberalism‘ and serve notice not to threaten US interests.
Haiti is not a humanitarian UN operation but the naked aggression of US imperialism against a weak and small nation and it serves notice to all the neighbouring countries in the area.
Since the time of Reagan US imperialism has pursued a policy of promoting ‚democracy‘ and free trade. Realising that military dictatorships would only result in revolutionary upheavals, they have attempted to promote democratic transformations in a number of Latin America countries – the exceptions being Haiti and Cuba. At the same time, under the auspices of free trade, US big business has promoted – firstly with the NAFTA agreement covering Canada, the USA and Mexico, but intended eventually to cover the whole of Latin America and the Caribbean – a trading zone stretching from Alaska to Tierra del Fuego which US imperialism would dominate. The days when the US could openly back military dictatorships (allegedly against the threat of ‚communism‘) are over.
But as Clinton is well aware, the foundations for building democracy in Haiti are very weak, given the poverty, the polarisation of wealth, and the brutality of the state forces. It was relatively easy to send 15,000 troops in, but that was only the beginning of the problems.
* *
*
Initially, the US troops were welcomed by the masses because of the hatred towards the military rulers. But the more politically advanced sections are acutely aware of the intended role of US troops. Bazelias Jean Baptiste of the Papaye Peasant Movement (MPP) explained: „the ultimate goal of any intervention would be to reinforce the status quo – and that is what the Haitian people are fighting to change“.
Fr Aristide’s return is likely to raise the expectations of the masses and revenge for the terror will be high on the agenda. But Aristide will be unable to deliver any major reforms. The US government is mistrustful of his intentions and have bound him in an economic and political strait- jacket. Though taped conversations by the CIA reveal that he vowed not to let Washington push him around, his actions are already bound by US-imposed economic policies. In return for an $800m aid package Haiti will have to accept the privatisation of state industry and abandonment of import quotas. Politically he has been forced to accept new elections for the government in December and for his position as president in 1995. And if this is not enough to make him a safe representative, then there is always the military and the militias to fall back on.
Dominated by US imperialism and dependent on imported food and US manufacturing, working for 14 cents an hour in US factories and now lorded over by US forces, it may not take much before conflict breaks out and then a Somalian situation develops.
This nightmare scenario haunts the Clinton administration and explains why they have attempted to involve other nations. But enormous problems will now confront them. The military, the police death squads and the rich remain totally opposed to Aristide and yet the US will attempt to get the two sides to co-operate with each other.
In the short-term run up to the November congressional elections Clinton is unlikely to derive much electoral benefit for the Democrats as views are focused on domestic issues and the actual implementation of the agreement. But US workers will not have missed the usual hypocrisy of their politicians. Under the Republican president Bush the Democrats argued that the president should not have the prerogative to authorise intervention in Kuwait or Panama but should submit to congress. Now under a Democratic president, Clinton has ignored the congress and used his presidential powers.
Clinton is now likely to increase the pressure on Cuba to introduce parliamentary democracy and market reforms. At the same time his poll rating could be boosted by his apparent ‚toughness‘ with Japan in trade talks.
US imperialism will regret its decision to police its own backyard.
All of this is in the short term, however, whilst in the medium to long-term US imperialism will regret its decision to police its own backyard.
A former Democrat assistant secretary of state for the Americas, Bernard Arnson, warned recently that the free market miracle was not working „even where it seems to be working. In Chile, for example, it is not reaching 40% of the population. We saw the dark side of the so-called Mexican miracle with the Chiapas uprising – by the time Clinton holds his Miami summit in December we will be seeing the economic crisis spreading throughout Latin America, where the gap between rich and poor has never yawned wider, with political repercussions that could remind us the age of political revolutions may not be over“. But as Haitian troops continue to brutalise and murder under the watchful eye of US troops then the reverberations may be felt first in the US.
Schreibe einen Kommentar