Amerikans: What democracy?
Bush flip-flops, overthrows elected Haitian government
*See also, "Why do you oppose democracy?"
Haiti is another perfect case of the lie in all
Amerikan "foreign policy" which is really a
system, not a policy. In April 2001, President
Bush spoke of all of the Western Hemisphere except
for Cuba as "free" and "democratic." Proving that
"freedom" and "democracy" are just covers that he
uses, Bush overthrew the democratically-elected
Haitian government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide on February
29th.
The key facts are not in dispute by the U.S.
Government. As late as January 6th, 2004, the U.S.
Government was not disputing that Haiti had a
democratically-elected government. A press release
harking back to a pivotal FTAA (Free Trade
Agreement of the Americas) meeting read as
follows: "In April of 2001, the democratically
elected leaders of the Hemisphere gathered in
Quebec City for the Third Summit of the Americas.
At that meeting, the leaders committed themselves
and their countries to pursuing an agenda for all
the people of the Americas."(1) Bush said the only
exception in the Western Hemisphere was Cuba.
Hence, Bush himself counted Haiti as having
a democratically elected government and his February
smokescreen for overthrowing Aristide was that
Aristide resigned. The State Department put it
this way: "At President Aristide's request, the
United States facilitated his safe departure from
Haiti."(2) Yet, Aristide called it kidnapping:
"Maxine Waters, a Democratic congresswoman from
Los Angeles, said Mr. Aristide 'told me he had
been kidnapped in a coup d'état.'"(3) The clue is
the State Department's opinion that Aristide's
departure: "resolves the political impasse that is
the root of the violent unrest in Haiti in recent
weeks."(2) That's just the u.$. agenda speaking
loud and clear.
While Bush claims not to have had a part in the
2004 violence that overthrew Aristide and that is
a deception, the remaining facts are proof enough
that "democracy" is not the guiding light of u.$.
"foreign policy." It's quite in the open that the
united $tates had a role in picking the next prime
minister and the new president. The fact that the
united $tates chose also to back replacing the
prime minister of Haiti Yvon Neptune proves
Aristide's contention that he did not resign but
the united $tates forced him out.(4) The CIA said
Neptune was still in power as March 4th but sought
to cast doubt on all his departments while
supporting the new interim president.(5)
A few days later, Gerard Latortue from Boca Raton, Florida arrived
to take power as prime minister.(6) He had left
Haiti in 1988, thanks to pressure from another
u.$.-backed regime. U.S. Government documents and
interviews with the BBC show that Latortue was the
choice of the united $tates, not elections in
Haiti. In case the Haitian people do not get the
message, the united $tates landed 1600 troops.
Official government documents read as follows: "A
U-S backed advisory panel has chosen a new prime
minister for Haiti. V-O-A's [Voice of America's--
mim ed.] Jim Teeple reports the move comes as
multi-national troops in Haiti say they will soon
begin disarmament operations in Haiti.
"Gerard Latortue, a former political refugee and
foreign minister in Haiti is his country's new
prime minister. Mr. Latortue, was chosen after
five days of deliberations by the so called
council of wise individuals, a panel selected to
choose a new prime minister after the departure of
President Jean Bertrand Aristide."(7)
The only indications from the u.$. officials of
their true motivations mention some sense of
entitlement because of u.$. aid to Haiti including
the aid of u.$. troops. These criticisms of Haiti
only show what a low priority Uncle $am places on
elections. Pretty much anything justifies overturning them
in their minds despite rhetoric to the contrary.
In another manifestation of deeper fissures in the
ruling class breaking up their usual bipartisan
unity, Senator Kerry, the presumed Democratic
Party nominee for president in November 2004
elections said that the united $tates should have
sent troops to back Aristide. Of course, at
meetings of leaders of Latin America and
the Caribbean in particular, the imperialists and
Caribbean leaders agreed to support each other's
"democracies" in the event of instability. In
response Secretary of State Colin Powell said:
"'We found that his performance was so bad and so
wanting that it was going to be impossible to find
a political solution between the two parties under
the circumstances that existed,' Powell added.
"'And so we were not prepared, nor was Canada,
France or anyone else prepared to send in a
military force, as (Democratic presidential
hopeful and) Senator (John) Kerry suggests, to
prop up a leader who was seriously failing.'"(8)
So let's see: Powell is saying elections are valid,
unless of course the elected leader faces problems.
By the way, it was France that arranged the country
for Aristide to go to in his kidnapping. France also
sent troops. Haitians are familiar with French language.
MIM is not a fan of Aristide's. Nonetheless,
we fully appreciate the thousands of demonstrators who
want their president back. These protestors are
protesting in the face of u.$. troops and getting killed for it.
"Aristide has to come back; we don't want Bush as president" read
some protest signs.(9) That's learning the hard way that imperialist-style democracy is phony.
Already two people are dead directly thanks to "peacekeepers"
from France and the united $tates.(10)
We also laugh at Kanada
for arresting Aristide's security chief, Oriel Jean.
The Kanadians are investigating him for "war crimes,"(11) while
letting Amerikkkans off the hook in Iraq etc. It's a bad joke.
Kanada is also sending 450 troops to Haiti.(12) We support
Aristide's lawyer who says the U.S. Government officials involved
should be arrested. That would be Bush and Powell.
The Kanadians and French should also be arrested.
Of other notable hypocrisy--the Bush administration position
opposes gun control; yet the first thing they are doing in
Haiti is carrying out a policy to disarm everyone. The
National Rifle Association (NRA) should be screaming about this.
If the united $tates is backing "democracy" in Haiti, then there is
no need to be carrying out radical "gun control" in Haiti.
MIM is not in favor of "democracy" in the sense of
majority rule at this time. There are much better
ways to channel popular input than pulling a lever
in a voting booth every couple years and we do not
believe majorities of the united $tates should
have the "right" to tell gays if they can marry or
if Iraqis can import medical devices from abroad.
However, even though we do not support "democracy"
in the sense used by the united $tates, we point
out the facts about Haiti to uncover the hypocrisy
of u.$. leaders claiming to uphold elections.
There are some advantages to the political system
of voting that Bush is constantly touting and
claiming, especially relative to our communist
ideas. Yet those advantages are on paper only,
because in practice the imperialists do not
respect their own bourgeois-style elections, as in
Haiti's case.
There is an important lesson in political
realism to learn in all this and once we learn it,
we move a major step closer to the communist road:
democracy is not possible under capitalism. Capitalism
develops to a stage of monopoly capitalism where business
interests direct political leaders to take a global view
of control.
When there was a Soviet Union, the U.S. Government
used to justify its actions overthrowing
democratically elected governments by pointing to
competition with the Soviet Union. That did not
address why the united $tates did the same thing
before there was a Soviet Union in 1917. Now that
there is no Soviet Union, we can see that the
motivations for the united $tates to overthrow
elected governments are not what the imperialists
say.
Even being a democratically elected lackey of the united
$tates does not create stability and protect the people.
Our disagreement with Aristide is that he thought it would
be possible to co-exist with u.$. imperialism. Now even
the Kanadians admit that in Haiti there are "morgues full and government offices closed,
bodies were piling up, littering streets."(12) U.$. imperialism
does not respect anything but its own selfish and militarist interests.
If Haitians want control of their own destiny, they have no
choice but to join with the international proletariat in conquering u.$.
imperialism.
Notes:
1. http://www.state.gov/p/wha/rls/rm/27975.htm
2. http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2004/29990.htm
3. http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20
040302.wxhaitibush0302/BNStory/Front/
4. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3545229.stm
5. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3545229.stm
6. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/haiti/8156653.htm
7. http://ibb7.ibb.gov/newswire/27e8094d.html
8. http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1495741,00.html
9. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2004/03/12/379177.html
10. http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/world/americas/8148729.htm
11. http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/CalgarySun/News/2004/03/12/379266.html
12. "US in Haiti gun hunt,"
http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2004/03/12/379179.html
|