NewsWhore
01-27-2010, 05:10 PM
Deputy Pelegrin H. Castillo has republished an article that originally appeared in the Listin Diario on 1 March 2004 in response to the political crisis in Haiti that saw the ousting of then-President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. Castillo believes that the positions taken and points made at the time apply now more than ever.
"Haiti returns to the front pages of the world press with a conflict that could become more dangerous and complex than those in the past. Why has this small and singular island country, located on the west side of the island of Santo Domingo suffered from such prolonged instability? Was it not intervened in 1994 by multinational forces under the US, with the approval of the United Nations and the Organization of American States to "re-establish democracy" that at the time was personified by a strong messianic flavor by Jean Bertrand Aristide?
The case of Haiti illustrates what happens when the international community takes on situations on the wrong premises, or what is worse, with an attitude of cynicism, indifference or hegemonic manipulation.
For decades Haiti has entered into a process of disintegration that has put in question its national viability. Its territory is an ecological disaster, with barely a portion of forestry cover and scant water resources. Human development indexes are among the lowest in the continent, with dramatic incidence of HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, undernourishment and illiteracy. Its government suffers the corroding effects of narco-crime, and barely has 2,000 police agents for the policing of 28 thousand square kilometers and 7 million inhabitants.
In these conditions, to expect political stability and democracy is a true work of drama of the absurd. Despite this, resources have been restricted and it has been penalized for not satisfying the democratic standards that one knows beforehand Haiti is not in condition to meet.
If this reality were accepted with all its consequences, the international community (specially the US, France and Canada) would have to take on a serious national reconstruction effort, which Haiti deserves for historical reasons. And that would also contribute significantly to the security of this region that is considered the third frontier of the US.
But above all, they would have to abandon the dangerous trend of passing on responsibilities to the DR that because of its own institutional weaknesses and its own accumulated problems, is not in any condition to take on the role of pivot state, given its vulnerability and dependence.
Moreso, if a bloody conflict between Dominicans and Haitians is to be prevented, which would add more to regional tensions and conflicts, one cannot continue to postpone the finding of a multilateral solution.
The serious problem of Haitian migration to the DR needs to be approached as a variable dependent on the greater problem that the dissolution of the Haitian state proposes. A stable and restored Haiti is the priority interest for the DR, but historical differences and the potential of conflict that exists, suggest that we only become involved if there is a widespread international community effort of those who can and should.
Haiti has been devastated and defeated, more by the predatory actions of its own leadership than by foreign interests. A formal trust is not contemplated by the United Nations charter, but in these times of redefining international relations, when there have been "humanitarian interventions" and "preventive wars" probably this would be feasible in the framework of a grand international conference, to find a governance formula that is fair and in solidarity with the Haitian people and that brings peace and stability to its neighbors.
If this crisis leads to a mini-Marshall Plan for Haiti, then the continent with the greatest inequity in the world will have a good reason to continue to be known as the Continent of Hope."
See: www.listindiario.com.do/app/article.aspx?id=128963 (http://www.listindiario.com.do/app/article.aspx?id=128963)
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#10)
"Haiti returns to the front pages of the world press with a conflict that could become more dangerous and complex than those in the past. Why has this small and singular island country, located on the west side of the island of Santo Domingo suffered from such prolonged instability? Was it not intervened in 1994 by multinational forces under the US, with the approval of the United Nations and the Organization of American States to "re-establish democracy" that at the time was personified by a strong messianic flavor by Jean Bertrand Aristide?
The case of Haiti illustrates what happens when the international community takes on situations on the wrong premises, or what is worse, with an attitude of cynicism, indifference or hegemonic manipulation.
For decades Haiti has entered into a process of disintegration that has put in question its national viability. Its territory is an ecological disaster, with barely a portion of forestry cover and scant water resources. Human development indexes are among the lowest in the continent, with dramatic incidence of HIV, tuberculosis, malaria, undernourishment and illiteracy. Its government suffers the corroding effects of narco-crime, and barely has 2,000 police agents for the policing of 28 thousand square kilometers and 7 million inhabitants.
In these conditions, to expect political stability and democracy is a true work of drama of the absurd. Despite this, resources have been restricted and it has been penalized for not satisfying the democratic standards that one knows beforehand Haiti is not in condition to meet.
If this reality were accepted with all its consequences, the international community (specially the US, France and Canada) would have to take on a serious national reconstruction effort, which Haiti deserves for historical reasons. And that would also contribute significantly to the security of this region that is considered the third frontier of the US.
But above all, they would have to abandon the dangerous trend of passing on responsibilities to the DR that because of its own institutional weaknesses and its own accumulated problems, is not in any condition to take on the role of pivot state, given its vulnerability and dependence.
Moreso, if a bloody conflict between Dominicans and Haitians is to be prevented, which would add more to regional tensions and conflicts, one cannot continue to postpone the finding of a multilateral solution.
The serious problem of Haitian migration to the DR needs to be approached as a variable dependent on the greater problem that the dissolution of the Haitian state proposes. A stable and restored Haiti is the priority interest for the DR, but historical differences and the potential of conflict that exists, suggest that we only become involved if there is a widespread international community effort of those who can and should.
Haiti has been devastated and defeated, more by the predatory actions of its own leadership than by foreign interests. A formal trust is not contemplated by the United Nations charter, but in these times of redefining international relations, when there have been "humanitarian interventions" and "preventive wars" probably this would be feasible in the framework of a grand international conference, to find a governance formula that is fair and in solidarity with the Haitian people and that brings peace and stability to its neighbors.
If this crisis leads to a mini-Marshall Plan for Haiti, then the continent with the greatest inequity in the world will have a good reason to continue to be known as the Continent of Hope."
See: www.listindiario.com.do/app/article.aspx?id=128963 (http://www.listindiario.com.do/app/article.aspx?id=128963)
More... (http://www.dr1.com/index.html#10)