18832: Walton: US Intervention???

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: "Walton, Robert" <robert.walton3@us.army.mil>
----------------------------------------

In 1994 the US dispatched troops to restore democracy in Haiti with the
blessings of both the UN and the vast majority of the Haitian people.  The
current situation is quite different.  President Aristide has not be shown
to
be corrupt in his person but his administration has been provably
ineffective
in providing the leadership necessary to serve the needs of the vast
majority
of his people.  Because of this this, there has risen an insurgency
bordering
on less on civil war than on an anarchy of varied competing political
interests
holding in common only the goal of ridding the country of its once-favored
leader.  Under current circumstances, military intervention in support of
the
Haitian constitution would result in the forced imposition of a leader who
is
neither effective nor necessarily popular.

President Aristide was elected constitutionally.  Based on a properly
elected
legislative body, the best means for his removal would  be to follow the
constitution.   IMHO, The legitimacy of the current legislature is
questionable
and without a legitimate legislature, a legitimate recall
is not possible. Therefore, if there is to be military intervention, let
it be
in the cause of peace enforcement followed by UN-supervised direct
elections
for both a new president and a new legislature.

Peace enforcement is a military proceeding whereby ALL armed parties are
prevented from exercising their will (they may be forceably disarmed) .
Peace
enforcement can be accompanied by martial law.  Under martial
law, constitutional guarantees are held in abeyance.  The military
commander is
the leader of the government, sees to the basic needs of the population
and
generally appoints civil administrators as caretakers of the public
infrastructure.)

Bob Walton