“Trust is not a gasoline-soaked blanket that succumbs to the matches of betrayal, never able to be used for its warmth again; it’s a tapestry that wears thin in places, but can be patched over if you have the right materials, circumstances, and patience to repair it. If you don’t, you’re always the one who feels the coldest when winter comes.” ― A.J. Darkholme, Rise of the Morningstar
Haiti is burning while its citizens are squabbling
Haiti is in a state of siege and sinking deeper into the abyss of despair. Gangs have taken control of large portions of its capital, Port-au-Prince. They continue to expand their capacity to other cities. And, like a boa constrictor, they are tightening and squeezing their prey's life. The population is running out of water, food, fuel, and medicine. The schools have not been able to open and businesses are closing their doors.
Despite this dire situation, Haitians seem to be unable to agree on much of anything about what to do. Haitians living abroad, the diaspora, are just as confused, lost, and divided.
On October 7, 2022, Haiti’s de facto regime wrote to the UN Secretary-General asking for help to stem the gang violence. As a result, this created another chasm as Haitians debate the potential for international intervention.
Those who support an intervention argue that the Haitian National Police (PNH) and The Armed Forces of Haiti (FADH) are incapable of securing and protecting the nation. They also recognize that Haiti's political leaders have essentially resigned from their posts and absconded their responsibilities.
Those who oppose an intervention also recognize the incapacity of Haiti’s armed forces. However, they argue that past interventions have failed. Worst, they maintain that said interventions are, in fact, at the roots of the current crisis. They claim that Haiti’s destruction was always the international community’s (IC) goal. The purpose, they explain, is to (1) punish Haiti for the temerity of the 1804 revolution, and (2) to take control of Haiti’s resources.
There is broad agreement that the PNH and FADH cannot protect the nation and its citizens.
Nonetheless, even those who opposed international intervention agree that the IC should and must act.
On October 19, 2022, HDPAC, an organization in the US diaspora, released a statement about the crisis. They claim to be “emphatically and unequivocally against any foreign armed intervention in Haiti under the command of the United Nations.” The organization went on to ask the “G7 Countries to provide a contingent of police experts, a force of between 800 - 1,200 who will provide reinforcement, equipment, training, and logistical support.”
The August 30, 2021 accord known as the Montana Accord also supports the provision of “technical and logistical assistance to the Haitian State for the strengthening of the forces of the National Police.” However, they are against “a new military and police intervention in Haiti!” For the Transitional National Council (KNT), the IC can help by “blocking the arms trade, arresting businessmen who provide money and weapons to terrorize the population, to prevent it from demonstrating peacefully to claim the right to live as people.”
As local and diaspora organizations call for the PNH’s reinforcement, a report by the human right organization, Sant Karl Lévêque (SKL), claims that “between 40 to 60% of police officers have links with armed groups.” In essence, they are asserting that the very PNH, for which everyone is asking technical support, is in cahoots with the gangs. Nonetheless, SKL also “opposes the intervention of a foreign armed force in the country.”
Since the de facto regime's request to the United Nations, many voices within Haiti's civil society have been in synch in their steadfast opposition. As the UN security debated the request, those voices were unequivocal that they oppose such a request because it was unconstitutional. More importantly, they oppose it because the request came from a regime that they deem illegal and illegitimate. They argue that only an eventual transitional government could have sufficient legitimacy to make such a request on Haiti's behalf.
On October 21, 2022, the UN passed a unanimous resolution (2653) to sanction individuals and entities that will be designated by a yet-to-be-established Committee. The sanctions will apply to those people who are found to be “responsible for or complicit in, or having engaged in, directly or indirectly, actions that threaten the peace, security or stability of Haiti.” The resolution imposes a “travel ban” and “asset freeze.” Lastly, in its annex, the resolution specifically named one person: “Jimmy Cherizier (AKA “Barbeque”). It notes that Mr. Cherizier has “engaged in acts that threaten the peace, security, and stability of Haiti and has planned, directed, or committed acts that constitute serious human rights abuses.”
Given the opposition against any intervention by the UN, this resolution should have been considered an achievement for those who had opposed it. Yet, those same voices were disappointed by the resolution's limited nature. They argue that it should have gone further and identified those individuals who are financing Mr. Cherizier.
Haiti and the International Community are caught in the famous theory of the prisoner’s dilemma (PD). It is a paradox in decision analysis in which two individuals acting in their self-interests do not produce the optimal outcome.
In the Haitian context, we need to reconcile our paradoxes about the international community. We rightly believe in our sovereignty. Those who are opposed to any type of intervention center their arguments on national sovereignty – a powerful concept that infers inalienable rights. Indeed, few could argue against a people’s right to control their fate without subordination to outside authorities.
Yet, despite centering our argument on our sovereignty, we write to ask the international community to support the most mundane tasks that are the responsibility of a functioning state. We expect the IC to protect our coastlines, fight against gangs, arrest those who commit crimes on our territory, arm and train our police, pay for our roads, and fund social projects. Asking for help does not have to be in contradiction with our sovereignty. We must, however, come to terms with these two concepts and approach them from a place of agency and urgency.
In contrast, if Haitians believe that the US is Haiti's archenemy, then we must be willing to make the sacrifices required to gain our freedom and protect our sovereignty. To quote one of the greatest black labor leaders, Philip Randolph: Freedom is never granted: It is won. Justice is never given: It is exacted.
We are not living up to the legacy bequeathed to us
Most Haitians are quick to talk about our ancestors’ achievements in the early 19th century. Our enslaved ancestors' ability to reclaim their humanity against all odds was indeed historical. This act deserves its place in the history books as one of the most transformative events in the world since the Israelites were delivered from Egyptian bondage nearly 3,500 years ago.
As Haitians, we are proud of our ancestors' achievements. Yet, our unwillingness to sacrifice for the public good is disheartening.
In a recent interview on Radio/Tele Metropole, Dr. Jean Fils-Aimé, a well-known personality in the Canadian diaspora, made a compelling and forceful argument in support of the lockdown and protests as one method of legitimate defense. He was asked about former presidential candidate Moise Jean Charles' incitement to burn down the banks. In response, Mr. Fils-Aimé expounded on the violence the banks and oligarchy have exacted on the population. Under these circumstances, he said, the people have the right to defend themselves by any means necessary. Mr. Fils-Aimé made the same case against the International Community and the US. Given the asymmetry of forces, it is logical to conclude from Mr. Fils-Aimé's comments that Haitians should consider themselves at war. He certainly made the case for a just war (Jus ad Bellum).
Dr. Fils-Aimé’s comments stoked the pride of many Haitians who feel the fire of nationalism burn with the heat of a thousand suns. Yet, as the gangs' stranglehold over the country tightens, those proud Haitians twist themselves into knots to avoid any responsibility. We are suddenly stricken by the Haitian illness of "se pa fòt mwen" (it's not my fault). Worst, even as the nationalists argue for war, few are willing to make any sacrifice – however, small – for the public good.
Over the past two centuries, our history is littered with leaders who have used their power to rob the country of its wealth. The Petrocaribe fund is a prime contemporary example. When Haitian leaders are not appropriating the national resources for themselves in their families and friends, they are willingly giving those resources to our adversaries. Most of us either don’t know or selectively erase the memory of the Haitians who were “contracted” (sold) by our government to cut sugar cane in the Dominican Republic.
1804 was historic but we are unable to agree on anything today because we have never agreed on anything since that time. We killed Dessalines, the nation’s founder. Still, 218 years later, not one government nor civil society group, has chosen to give him the proper resting place and respect he deserved. We laud him while (literally) pissing on his grave. The people see these acts as signals of how we treat those we call heroes. While our motto says “l'union fait la force” (there is strength in unity). In reality, we live by another proverb: “chak koukouy klere pou je yo” (each person looks out for his interest). As citizens, we protect our small privileges at all costs and are blind to the suffering around us. The internalization and normalization of this concept in Haitian culture are central and make the current challenges difficult to resolve.
If the International Community and the US have always been Haiti's enemies then 218 years later it is time to take responsibility for our destiny.
This fact does not absolve the international community's role and responsibilities. Their overt and covert influence over Haitian affairs since its founding is well-documented and beyond any doubt. If we know this as fact and accept the argument that the IC and particularly the US have always been Haiti's enemies, then 218 years later it can no longer be discussed as if it is news. We can no longer be surprised that said IC supports Haitian leaders who are self-interested and willing to sell out the nation they are charged to protect. 218 years later, we should no longer be asking that same IC for help. 218 years later, we should know better! Therefore, the only questions that remain in the struggle are the following: do we believe we have any agency over our destiny, and can we act to take our fate into our own hands?
The diaspora must find common ground and collaborate
As I wrote in 2021, Diaspora Unity is the only way - Pa gen Wout pa Bwa. Still, the diaspora faces the same dilemma as Haitians in the country. There are dozens of organizations in the US diaspora as there are hundreds of groups and political parties in Haiti. Each has the plan to save Haiti but none of them are willing to sit together to put up a common front. In sum, the diaspora suffers from the same social, political, and economic divisions that ail Haitians back home.
The trust gap that is at the root of our divisions was carried over to our adopted countries. Like those back home, the diaspora is unable to define a shared vision for itself. We do not know what role we could or should play to support our motherland.
I believe that achieving unity is the singular most vital goal for my generation.
Haitians living abroad – and those in the country –will comment online and have radical opinions about what should be done. Yet, few are willing to sacrifice even one iota of their privileges. They won't help finance the revolution they seek. They will not march in protest of the policies they opposed nor in solidarity with the people they claim to support.
At some point, we must decide to take our destiny into our own hands and be willing to sacrifice for the realization of a united community. One of those sacrifices will be to come to terms with reality. Haiti is a small country in the shadows of a superpower in a unipolar world. Whether we like it or not, the United States will play a role in resolving the crisis. If Haiti is to come out of this crisis, Haitians must learn the lessons of the past. The most important lesson is that it is not up to the international community to build Haiti – it never was and never will be. But for Haiti to survive, its leaders must learn to suss out the interests of the United States and navigate the rough geopolitical waters.
Our beautiful national tapestry which was always frayed is now torn to pieces. Haiti needs its diaspora. But our work is not to save Haiti – a task for which we are unqualified. Our work is to bring new threads to help weave a new tapestry. It is to show that it is possible to bridge our long-standing social and economic divides. Our work is to show up because it is imperative to do so now. Unfortunately, we have been failing at this task but we can change course, and present a new leadership based on humility and with a sense of urgency. Indeed, we must change course for otherwise, history will judge us harshly.
It is in the spirit that indeed "all things are possible to him who believes" that I call for the diaspora to come together in solidarity. I am once again asking the Haitian-American leaders need to step up but also step in.
No comments:
Post a Comment