18215: Esser: New Haitian exodus? Same old US treatment of refugees (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: D. Esser torx@joimail.com

Christian Science Monitor
from the February 03, 2004 edition


New Haitian exodus? Same old US treatment of refugees
By Kathie Klarreich

MIAMI - Almost daily, pro- and antigovernment demonstrators flood the
streets of Haiti's capital, Port-au-Prince, disrupting business and
forcing schools to close. Those calling for the departure of
President Jean-Bertrand Aristide show no sign of backing down: Since
September, more than 50 people have died and scores more have been
wounded.

In decades past, political conflict like this has sent waves of
Haitian boat people onto the high seas seeking refuge. In the 1980s,
bodies of Haitians escaping the Duvalier dictatorship in rickety
boats washed up on south Florida's shores. In 1991, a military coup
forced President Aristide into exile, and the US Coast Guard plucked
nearly 70,000 refugees from small vessels in the ensuing three years.
The majority then were taken to the US military base on Guantánamo
Bay, Cuba, and eventually returned to Haiti.

Guantánamo may soon be seeing more action. Under what it
characterizes as part of an ongoing contingency plan, the State
Department has, in the past month, contacted a dozen nongovernmental
agencies (NGOs) about running a refugee camp with as many as 50,000
beds. That's a startling estimate given that in all of 2003 fewer
than 1,500 Haitians were interdicted.

While Bush officials say this is just routine preparation for mass
migration and natural disasters in the Caribbean, it looks
suspiciously like a new twist on an old US tactic: Making sure that
Haiti's problems stay in Haiti and asylum-seekers never make it to US
shores.

As Caribbean diplomats labor to broker a peace between Aristide and
his opponents, the US is cynically battening the hatches against a
possible refugee crisis landing on Florida's coast. America is the
world leader in defending human rights, and it's shameful that US
policy is geared more to keeping Haitians out than offering them the
haven provided for refugees from most other countries.

NGO directors confirm that in late December, the State Department
began polling them about their resources, capabilities, and staff in
the Caribbean to run a large camp as early as this month. And these
directors are nervous about their agencies' participation in a plan
so obviously geared to barring Haitians from US shores, effectively
denying them full legal rights as refugees.

The US has long had a double standard when it comes to Haitian
refugees. And with the war on terror as an excuse, the Bush
administration has raised the bar for Haitians looking for refuge in
the US. When two large boatloads of Haitians arrived in south Florida
in December 2001 and October 2002, the US implemented new measures
aimed at deterring Haitians from ever attempting to flee their
homeland. These measures drastically reduced the time refugees had to
make their case and limited the ways they could exercise their rights
to plead asylum. These changes, coupled with the "shout test" - which
requires a migrant picked up at sea to literally cry out for help
once aboard a US vessel even to have a shot at political asylum -
have proved an effective deterrent.

Of the 1,490 Haitians interdicted last year, just one received
refugee status. But that Haitian remains - along with four other
compatriots who received refugee status in 2002 - at Guantánamo
awaiting resettlement in a third country.

Last April, Attorney General John Ashcroft declared that Haitians
posed a security risk to the US because Haiti was believed to be a
jumping-off point for terrorists from places like Pakistan and
Palestine. A Freedom of Information request by legal aid agencies
turned up no supporting documentation for this claim. The US upped
the ante again when, on Dec. 29, just days after the State Department
contacted the NGOs about its contingency plan, it released a fact
sheet that said Haitian migrants were a threat to US national
security. Again, no explanation has been offered as the basis for
this declaration.

It's morally wrong - if not xenophobic - to deny Haitian refugees
their rights through tenuous association with terrorists who might
use the Caribbean nation as a backdoor to the US. And it may be even
harder now to defend the label of economic refugee because much of
the violence in Haiti seems to be politically motivated, linked to
demands for Aristide's ouster. While the majority of Haitians are
desperately poor, the entire population is vulnerable to the chaos
created by unruly mobs, a politicized police force, and a resounding
lack of leadership.

There is also a legal component. Interdicting refugees fleeing
political violence and refusing them entry to the US breaks
international law.

"With the Haitians there has been some tendency by the US to use
detention or deportation as a deterrent," says Joung-ah Ghedini of
the UN High Commission for Refugees. "That, as a policy, is not
acceptable according to the [UN] Convention of Refugees."

While the international community works to find a diplomatic solution
to further bloodshed and a mass migration, it's understandable that
the US is discussing a contingency plan.

A plan of action is welcome, says Wendy Young of the Women's
Commission for Refugee Women and Children. But she'd be more
supportive "if the plan was designed not to keep Haitians out, but
rather offer them protection."

The US should continue to pursue a diplomatic solution that respects
international law. But until then, Haitians should receive the same
treatment granted asylum seekers from other countries, including
admittance to the US to pursue asylum claims. The final plan should
provide full and meaningful protection for Haitians seeking relief,
rather than one that sequesters them and denies them due process.

Kathie Klarreich is a freelance writer who lived in Haiti for 10 years.

Copyright © 2004 The Christian Science Monitor. All rights reserved.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0203/p09s02-cogn.html