U.S., Canada, France, Spain, Germany and Brazil Disregard Wishes of the Haitian People and Select Ariel Henry—who sold out to the Western powers following the country’s 2004 coup—As Successor to Slain Haitian President Jovenel Moïse
It is déjà vu all over again.
On July 17th, the Core Group (U.S., Canada, France, Spain, Germany, Brazil, UN and OAS) published a note saying Ariel Henry was the prime minister of Haiti.
Within 48 hours the other individual claiming the position fell into line behind Henry, who was a member of the U.S./France/Canada created “Council of the Wise” that appointed the prime minister after President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was ousted in 2004.
The Core Group’s bid to unify the PHTK (right-wing ‘Bald-Headed’ Party) regime was designed to undercut an effort by a broad group of Haitian political actors to form a consensus government. The Commission pour la recherche d’une solution à la crise is seeking to form a government that would remain in place for a year or two in a bid to stabilize the country and revitalize moribund state institutions. Then it would oversee elections.
But the Core Group wants the PHTK regime to oversee quick elections, which will be easy to manipulate, something that has happened numerous times in the recent past.
As a result, many Haitian civil society and political actors have criticized the Core Group’s “selection of Haiti’s leader by statement.”
To understand their concerns, imagine the Jamaican, Congolese, Guatemalan and Filipino ambassadors releasing a collective statement on who should be prime minister of Canada.
The assassination of President Jovenel Moïse reflects the disintegration of Haitian politics after a decade of foreign intervention that empowered the neo-Duvalierist PHTK since an earthquake devastated Port-au-Prince and surrounding regions in January 2010.
Instead of dispatching Heavy Urban Search and Rescue Teams to help with relief and medical support after the quake, Ottawa sent 2,000 troops to join more than 10,000 U.S. troops deployed to Haiti.
As internal Canadian government documents show, they were deployed out of concern over a “popular uprising” amidst the political vacuum and the return of Haiti’s most popular politician, Aristide, from forced exile.
While their massive capacities offered certain logistical benefits, the foreign troops trampled on Haitian sovereignty by seizing control of the airport and port. Simultaneously, the government was sidelined from international reconstruction.
In the months after the quake the U.S. and Canada demanded the Haitian parliament pass an 18-month state of emergency law that effectively gave up government control over the reconstruction.
Not viewing then-President Renée Préval as sufficiently compliant, the U.S. and Canada pushed for elections to take place only months after the horrific earthquake.
With rubble throughout Port-au-Prince and hundreds of thousands living in camps, Canada’s then-Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon demanded Préval hold elections by the end of the year.
In May 2010 Cannon said, “the international community wants to see a commitment, a solid, serious commitment to have an election by the end of this year.” (With far fewer logistical hurdles, it took two years to hold elections after the 2004 U.S./France/Canada coup.).
As a result of various obstacles tied to the earthquake and a devastating cholera outbreak introduced to the country by negligent UN troops in October 2010, hundreds of thousands were unable to vote during the first round of the November 28, 2010, election. Another factor dampening turnout was the exclusion of Aristide’s Fanmi Lavalas from participating.
Following the first round of voting the U.S. and Canada forced the candidate whom Haiti’s electoral council had in second place, Jude Celestin, out of the runoff.
Rather than the candidate of Préval’s social democratic INITE party, U.S. and Canadian officials claimed the extreme right-wing Michel Martelly deserved to be in the second round. A U.S. and Canada-dominated OAS electoral mission concluded Martelly was in second place despite, explains the Center for Economic Policy Research, no “legal, statistical, or other logical basis for its conclusions.”
Nevertheless, Ottawa and Washington pushed the Haitian government to accept the OAS’s recommendations. Cannon said he “strongly urges the Provisional Electoral Council to accept and implement the [OAS] report’s recommendations and to proceed with the next steps of the electoral process accordingly.”
In an interview Canada’s foreign minister warned that “time is running out,” adding that “our ambassador has raised this with the president [Préval] himself.”
As part of their full-court press, Haitian officials had their U.S. visas revoked, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton traveled to Port-au-Prince and there were threats that aid would be cut off if Martelly’s vote total was not increased as per the OAS recommendation.
The pressure worked. But only about 20% of potential voters participated in the second round of elections, which Martelly “won.”
Washington and Ottawa backed Martelly as he failed to hold constitutionally mandated elections and became ever more violent. As president, Martelly surrounded himself with former Duvalierists and death-squad leaders who’d been arrested for rape, murder, kidnapping and drug trafficking.
When brutal dictator Jean-Claude (“Baby Doc”) Duvalier returned to Haiti after 25 years, Martelly told The New York Times no one wanted him prosecuted except for “certain institutions and governments” abroad.
During repeated visits Canadian Foreign Minister John Baird praised Martelly for “going in the right direction” and operating “a really functioning government.”
In 2013 Baird and Minister for the Americas Diane Ablonczy met Martelly and Prime Minister Laurent Lamothe in Port-au-Prince saying, “we share with Haitian leaders the goal of seeing a self-sustaining economy with opportunity for all Haitians and a greater role for private-sector actors, including Canadian companies.”
Ottawa backed Martelly until protests forced him to leave office at the end of his five-year mandate.
They also helped Martelly make the little-known Jovenel Moïse his successor. The U.S. and Canada pushed to move forward with the second round of voting after mass protests broke out over election irregularities.
When the second round was finally canceled Global Affairs Canada put out a statement headlined “Ministers Dion and Bibeau concerned by postponement of Haiti’s presidential elections.” A subsequent audit of the election results found that 92% of polling place tally sheets had significant irregularities and a stunning 900,000 of the 1.5 million votes cast were from ‘accredited poll observers’ who could vote at any voting station.
In a new election a year later barely one in five eligible voters participated. According to official figures, Moïse received fewer than 600,000 votes — just 9.6% of registered voters. Voter suppression was widespread.
Beyond direct efforts to dampen turnout, elections had largely lost their legitimacy. Many Haitians believed then and believe today that no matter who receives the most votes the tallies will be “arranged” to suit the ruling candidate. And if a pro-poor candidate wins, their agenda will be stifled or they will be overthrown.
This belief is based upon experience. In the most credible election in Haitian history, Aristide’s Fanmi Lavalas won more than 70% of the votes for 7,000 positions. In the May 2000 legislative and municipal elections they took an unprecedented 89 of 115 mayoral positions, 72 of 83 seats in the Chamber of Deputies and 18 of 19 Senate seats.
Knowing they had no chance of gaining power via the ballot box in the foreseeable future, the foreign-backed opposition parties cried foul. After initially describing the elections as “a great success for the Haitian population,” the OAS subsequently criticized the counting method in a handful of Senate seats (as had been done in previous elections, the electoral council determined the 50 percent plus one vote required for a first-round victory by calculating the percentages of the top four candidates).
The opposition boycotted the subsequent presidential election, which they had no chance of winning. A USAID poll of 1,002 Haitians conducted on the eve of the November 2000 presidential election showed that Aristide was far and away the most popular politician and Fanmi Lavalas was the preferred party by an incredible 13 to one.
In one of the most impressive feats of 21st-century imperial propaganda, supposed “irregularities” in the May legislative and municipal election became the justification for destabilizing and ultimately overthrowing Aristide. In other words, the 2004 coup against President Aristide began with an effort to discredit elections he neither participated in nor oversaw.
The U.S.- and Canada-sponsored destabilization campaign included an aid embargo, funding for opposition groups, diplomatic isolation and paramilitary attacks. It culminated with U.S., French and Canadian troops invading the country to physically remove the president.
Incredibly this was all planned, in broad outline, in advance in Canada.
In 2003 Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government organized the “Ottawa Initiative on Haiti” where high-level U.S., French and OAS officials discussed ousting Haiti’s elected president, re-creating the dreaded army and putting the country under UN trusteeship.
Thirteen months after the meeting Aristide was forced out and Haiti was under UN occupation. The military was subsequently re-created.
The current Core Group traces its roots to the 2003 Ottawa Initiative on Haiti meeting. Some have labeled it a “fourth branch” of the Haitian government. But the Core Group’s success at rallying the PHTK behind Ariel Henry demonstrates its influence may be greater than that.
The vast majority of Haitians are right to be angry at foreign interference in their country. Look at where it has led.
CovertAction Magazine is made possible by subscriptions, orders and donations from readers like you.
When you donate to CovertAction Magazine, you are supporting investigative journalism. Your contributions go directly to supporting the development, production, editing, and dissemination of the Magazine.
CovertAction Magazine does not receive corporate or government sponsorship. Yet, we hold a steadfast commitment to providing compensation for writers, editorial and technical support. Your support helps facilitate this compensation as well as increase the caliber of this work.
Please make a donation by clicking on the donate logo above and enter the amount and your credit or debit card information.
CovertAction Magazine, CovertAction Quarterly and CovertAction Information Bulletin are projects of CovertAction Institute, Inc., a not-for-profit organization incorporated in the State of New York.
We sincerely thank you for your support.
Disclaimer: The contents of this article are the sole responsibility of the author(s). CovertAction Institute, Inc. (CAI), including its Board of Directors (BD), Editorial Board (EB), Advisory Board (AB), staff, volunteers and its projects (including CovertAction Magazine) are not responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. This article also does not necessarily represent the views the BD, the EB, the AB, staff, volunteers, or any members of its projects.
Differing viewpoints: CAM publishes articles with differing viewpoints in an effort to nurture vibrant debate and thoughtful critical analysis. Feel free to comment on the articles in the comment section and/or send your letters to the Editors, which we will publish in the Letters column.
Copyrighted Material: This web site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. As a not-for-profit charitable organization incorporated in the State of New York, we are making such material available in an effort to advance the understanding of humanity’s problems and hopefully to help find solutions for those problems. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. You can read more about ‘fair use’ and US Copyright Law at the Legal Information Institute of Cornell Law School.
Republishing: CovertAction Magazine (CAM) grants permission to cross-post CAM articles on not-for-profit community internet sites as long as the source is acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original CovertAction Magazine article. Also, kindly let us know at info@CovertActionMagazine.com. For publication of CAM articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: info@CovertActionMagazine.com.
By using this site, you agree to these terms above.
About the Author
Yves Engler is a Montreal-based writer whose 2009 book, The Black Book of Canadian Foreign Policy, was short-listed for the Quebec Writers’ Federation Mavis Gallant Prize for Nonfiction.
Yves can be reached at: email@example.com.