#4937: CIP: The Appetite of Fanmi Lavalas (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Max Blanchet <MaxBlanchet@worldnet.att.net>

The appetite of Fanmi Lavalas: a story that forever repeats itself . . .

By Jean-Claude Bajeux

Director, Ecumenical Center for Human Rights

August 5, 2000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Blessed by the gods, here and abroad, the Lavalas movement had generated 
an interest, a curiosity, an enthusiasm among many, here and abroad. Was 
it the end of the historic Haitian "curse?" Had the nation finally found 
its way?
The person in charge of a German organization wrote to me recently and 
reminded me that there was the feeling at the time that a popular
revolution drawing its inspiration from the Bible was taking place in
Haiti. The coup d'état was to reinforce international support for the 
movement and the mobilization within the country. The 165 nations of the 
UN voted unanimously to condemn the coup and asked for the return of the 
legitimate president which took place with the landing of 22,000
soldiers. The message had relevance for the whole world: democracy
against dictatorship. In July 1995, a colloquium on Democratic
Transitions placed the country in the context of the general march of
poor countries towards development linked necessarily with an ethics of 
respect for the rights of each and every one. The dismantling of the
army led one to believe that the country would become more and more
integrated in regional, continental and transcontinental groupings,
thereby breaking with the de facto isolation that had prevailed
throughout its history.

But, it seems that Lafanmi took an abrupt 180-degree turn which put it 
at odds with the position that Lavalas had taken to date, thereby
placing it in confrontation on all fronts with its interlocutors abroad 
as with the bulk of the democratic movement in Haiti. The continued
failure of the Lavalas government to organize credible elections
culminates on May 21 in a procedural and logistical disaster which puts 
the country in a painful situation vis-à-vis the international
community, not to mention the deep frustration of citizens. After three 
years of institutional vacuum, without a parliament and with a cabinet 
which was not ratified by the chambers, three years without a budget and 
with all development projects practically blocked, Fanmi Lavalas
intensifies the internal crisis and puts the country in conflict with
the international community on the issue of procedure, which should have 
never been a problem on the face of it. For it is clear that both the
Constitution and the Electoral Law require that the senators and
deputies obtain an absolute majority to be elected in the first round. 
It is on this issue that the OAS, the United Nations' Secretary General, 
the White House, the Congress, the American Senate, the European
Community, the governments of France, Canada, CARICOM, etc. intervene to 
stress that one could not invent a new method for calculating an
absolute majority. Thus, the procedure invented by the mathematicians of 
the CEP being in violation of the constitution, more than a dozen
senators allegedly elected would have had to go into a second round. One 
might recall that the same kind of problem provoked the break between
the president and the then-prime minister. Then, it was about the blank 
ballots. It is worth noting that the conflict with the international
community is carefully limited to constitutional procedure, thus to a
matter of principle. All the rest, that is all the fraud and abuse
surrounding the counting of the votes were left out of the debate
although we know the extent of the disaster. The conflict was
circumscribed to a matter of principle, as was done with the issue of
the return of the elected president but, in this case, it would have
been easier to resolve the matter if only there was a will to do so.

Why then place the country in this predicament which will poison its
relations with the outside world for years to come and render the
internal crisis even more acute? Why antagonize support essential to the 
development of the country? Why this obstinacy in a behavior which
appears to be at the very least suicidal? Why the violence of a claim
for a total victory which eliminates all the other parties and gives to 
Lafanmi all existing elective positions? More time is needed to answer 
these questions. Without indulging in metaphysical theories ("Jupiter
makes mad those he intends to destroy") one can at least for the time
being come up with three explanations.

First of all, the decision to overlook the absolute majority required by 
the Constitution while arguing that the decision to have all the
candidates elected in the first round "is an expression of the people's 
will" puts us in front of a fait accompli. From now on, it is up to the 
party -- as the party of the people -- to determine when and how the
Constitution comes into play. Secondly, there can be representation of 
the Haitian people only through Lafanmi. There can only exist a minute 
minority that cannot ask for anything because it does not represent the 
people and is therefore guilty of all the ills of Israel. Thirdly, no
senator from a third party can be allowed to win so as not to endanger 
the impunity of the members of Lafanmi... And the CEP was forced to
accept these three guiding principles with a knife under its throat.

This is where we are in this year of grace 2000. Already, we can assess 
the impact of Lafanmi's about-face on daily life. Already, the discourse 
that we hear is singularly similar to the discourse of another age, the 
discourse of the "time before." It appears that the 20 years of
democratic discourse never existed and we hear the same sloganeering,
so-called nationalist, so-called patriotic that was shouted by Figaro
and his ilk in the 60s, not to mention the grimaces of the military and 
FRAPH during the coup years. "Aristide or death," it is our death that 
is announced as in Duvalier's time, it is the "macoute" language
buttressed by AK47s. "We took it and we took it forever!", what a
strange slogan in the mouth of the President of the Republic! No to
mention the threats to burn and loot hurled by the hired commandos. And, 
surreptitiously, a shameful fear already controls attitudes, demarches 
and speeches.

We could make fun of formulas such as "endogenous paths to development" 
if only we did not recall the case of Sékou Touré's Guinea: peoples pay
dearly for the intoxication of their leaders. "Love it or leave it" -- 
such was the slogan of a famous putschists. This world in which they
want to lock us up we know well: it is the world of the tramp. Three
hours of electricity daily, construction projects that are never
completed, the destruction of the environment, water once a week,
impassable roads to Cap Haïtien, Hinche and Jérémie; no need to draw it
for us, we know the march in reverse. The children of poverty lock
themselves in poverty. Already, Le Monde of August 4, 2000, had
published an article by Raoul Peck entitled: "Haiti: the return of
fear."