Things seemed to be going in favor of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide only one month ago, at least diplomatically. On Jul.26, Roger Noriega, the U.S. ambassador to the Organization of the American States (OAS) and current chair of that body’s Permanent Council, addressed a letter to the Democratic Convergence, Haiti’s tiny Republican-backed opposition front, to scold it for "not demonstrating the flexibility that is needed now to reach an initial Accord" with Aristide’s government after a bitter two-year electoral dispute. It was the first time that the U.S. and OAS had blamed the opposition, rather than the Aristide’s government and his Fanmi Lavalas party (FL), for obstructing the negotiations.
But around the same time, Haiti’s fourth largest city, Gonaïves, began erupting in demonstrations calling for Aristide’s ouster (see Haïti Progrès, Vol. 20, No. 21, 8/7/02). Perhaps the "hidden hand" of the CIA had a role in the uprising (as some Haitian officials insinuated but never dared say) or perhaps Washington simply wanted to take advantage of the situation to further destabilize Aristide. Maybe the U.S. delegation just wants to tighten the language of any accord to reduce the Houdini-like Aristide’s wiggle room.
Whatever the case, the U.S. delegation to the OAS made an abrupt about-face early this month. On Aug. 6, Washington’s deputy permanent representative to the OAS, Peter De Shazo, wrote OAS Secretary General César Gaviria demanding "clarification" of "several points." He wanted to know if the Haitian government was agreeing to sign its own "Counterproposal by Fanmi Lavalas to the Initial Draft Accord, Rev. 9 of June 12, 2002" or the OAS Draft Initial Accord. Furthermore, De Shazo asked Gaviria to clarify "a) what steps have been taken in compliance by the Government of Haiti, the OAS and other parties; and , b) those steps that still need to be taken to fully comply with Resolution 806," issued in January, which specified multiple hoops through which the FL had to jump.
In an Aug. 7 letter to his boss Noriega as acting OAS Permanent Council chairman, De Shazo explained how Washington had effectively vetoed the passing of a pivotal OAS resolution which might have facilitated releasing about $500 million in blocked international aid for which the Aristide government is desperate. "Little progress was made on Aug. 2 because the other delegations did not wish to adopt an interim resolution and the United States delegation did not wish to follow the precipitous path of adopting a far-reaching resolution," the letter said.
In an Aug. 27 press conference, Ben Dupuy, secretary general of the National Popular Party (PPN), explained in detail the intricacies of the diplomatic wrangling at the OAS. He noted that there was an amendment in the FL’s "Counterproposal" to the OAS’s draft accord which would explain Washington’s change of heart.
The amendment stipulated that thousands of local FL officials elected in 2001 would remain in place until new elections, except for those implicated in acts of violence. The amendment would allow Aristide not to alienate thousands of his partisans. And for another reason, "this amendment is key," Dupuy explained, "because we know that if there is going to be an election, the FL needs all the mayors and councilmen to stay in office so they can carry out the election where a zero might become an eight, and an eight a six." He was referring to the poll-figure tampering which has marred past elections.
Dupuy also noted that the U.S. delegation is continuing to pressure the Haitian government to round up the leaders of slum-based popular organizations, historically Aristide’s principal base of support. The OAS gave Haitian authorities a 60 day period, until Sep. 9, to arrest popular organization leaders implicated in the violence of Dec. 17, when Convergence leaders’ homes and headquarters were sacked by angry crowds following an apparent assassination attempt against Aristide.
Several popular organization leaders have already been arrested, and Dupuy warned others that they risk being "sacrificed" by Aristide to satisfy the OAS and US. "You better be careful if [the FL] sends you out to sow violence that your name doesn’t wind up in an OAS commission report tomorrow," he said, using a Creole proverb. "Remember, the club which beats the black dog can beat the white one too."
What Haiti is experiencing today is "merely a rivalry between the Fanmi Lavalas and the Convergence, between which there is no great difference," Dupuy said, noting that the Haitian government has cracked down on Haitian unionists, sold off national territory for free trade zones, integrated the partisans and functionaries of former dictatorships, engaged in massive corruption schemes, and embraced neoliberal reforms. "It is just a problem of dividing up the cake."
Finally, Dupuy warned that an Aug. 18 Miami Herald article entitled "Haitians' growing discontent with Aristide may force U.S. to act" might augur U.S. military action. "We know that the United States, especially with the Bush administration, thinks it is the world’s policeman," Dupuy said. "If they think that the OAS can’t do the job, they may act unilaterally, as they always do, and invade."
