24413: Kondrat (Reply to Morse: Re:) Esser's post on Lavalas achievements (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

--- Peter Kondrat <petekondrat@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> It's very surprising to me, a non-Haitian, that
> someone as smart as Robert Morse would suggest that
> Aristide was not the legal head of state of Haiti,
> that he had somehow to be "legitimized" by Esser.
>
> From what I observe on this list, the Lavalas
> bashers
> refuse to acknowledge that Arisitide was the
> constitutional leader of Haiti before February 29
> '04,
> and that in fact he remains so. I don't see how
> anyone
> can argue this; it seems very obvious to me that
> Aristide, though he may have become corrupted by
> power
> (what?! Power corrupts? quelle surprise!), he was
> the
> head of government and that he had a legal right to
> remain so ... just as his opponents had legal
> channels
> to seek his removal.
>
> I see clear parallels with the Clinton bashers who
> paralyzed the government and attempted to
> deligitimize
> Clinton's government in the late 90s. You can say
> that
> he was venial, and corrupt, and arrogant, and
> hypocritical, and sold out his ideals ... you can
> say
> all that, but it is a huge and dangerous leap to
> then
> say that  these qualities justify extralegal
> measures
> to remove him from office. That is the legalistic
> argument, but I think that a practical argument is
> just as valid: did the removal of your duly elected
> president change Haiti for the better?  It's clear
> to
> me that Haiti and Haitians have suffered a huge
> setback in just about every realm, and that it will
> take years if not decades to put the country back on
> track toward the rule of law and a culture of
> democratic pluralism.
>
> I would be very happy to see some of the Lavalas
> bashers begin to acknowledge publicly that it was at
> least a strategic error to advocate his removal by
> non-constitutional means.
>
> Peter Kondrat
>