27287: Durban (comment): Civil Society Turns Uncivil (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

Lance Durban <lpdurban@yahoo.com> writes:

I have a great deal of respect for Andy Apaid and feel that he has too
often been miss-labeled as a mere symbol of Haiti?s elite.  From what I
have seen, his civil society Group of 184 has consistently been calling
for institution-building, an emphasis on the rule of law, better
accountability on the part of government officials, in short, all those
things Haiti needs if it is ever going to get its act together.  There
was even a moment of regret expressed when one of the group (Charles
Baker) dropped out to run for president.  Regret, I think, that the
Group would then somehow be seen as just another self-interested
political faction rather than an entity working for the greater good of
the entire country.

That said, they have made some serious mistakes along the way.
Breaking the 5 year electoral habit by forcing Aristide out early set
an unfortunate precedent.  And make no mistake, it was the Group of
184?s refusal of all compromises which played a major part in
Aristide?s departure.  But that is water over the dam.  Apaid?s group
is now in a loud spat with the U.N. peacekeepers in Haiti, calling for
a more aggressive stance against the violent crime centered in Cité
Soleil.  Anti-U.N. demonstrations by Haitian 'civil society' is really
quite ironic since, in giving the final push to Aristide, this group is
at least partly responsible for the sorry state of affairs in the first
place.

More importantly, the Group of 184 fails to appreciate that U.N.
peacekeeping is essentially a form of foreign aid, with Haiti as the
beneficiary.  Brazil may have volunteered for this, but many Brazilians
are beginning to question if Haiti isn?t just a small-scale version of
the Americans in Iraq.  "And why do we have to be spending our money in
Haiti?" Brazilians are now beginning to ask.  Does the Group of 184
seriously believe that the situation would be improved by the removal
of foreign peacekeepers?

Indeed, there IS a problem in Cité Soleil, but unfortunately actions by
the Group of 184 are coming across as motivated by self-interest... the
legitimate interest of Haiti?s elite to improve its own security
situation.  However, there are at least two other reasons why the Cité
Soleil 'problem' needs to be tackled:

1.  Humanitarian assistance for the Cité Soleil residents -
    Before the recent troubles, conditions in Cité Soleil
  were already terrible.  My guess is that most NGO?s who
  used to provide some measure of relief have pulled out for
  security reasons.  Remaining residents are being held as
  virtual hostages unless they are willing to slip out without
  their few significant belongings (primarily furniture).
  With no place else to go, that is a difficult choice, yet
  many of them have still made it.  The population of Cité
  Soleil has reportedly dropped considerably.

2.  Economic Stagnation -
     Cité Soleil has put the entire country is on hold, with
  the bad press about this hot-spot scaring away the rest of
  the world.  Longer term, Haitian young people of all classes
  are looking to leave.  No Haitian woman with a visa gives
  birth in Haiti anymore, and this too represents a valuable
  part of the next generation that Haiti can least afford to
  lose.

Vocally blasting U.N. peacekeepers is perfectly in keeping with the
Haitian tradition of blaming someone else for your own shortcomings.
It would be far better to develop an attitude of gratitude, and then do
some productive strategizing on how the problem can be solved with no
further loss of blood.  One would have thought that with 34
presidential candidates in the running, we would have heard some
thoughts on the subject.

The U.N. peacekeepers were not called in to fight a war, but they could
use some creative help in waging peace.  So far, leaders of Haiti, both
in and out of government have not helped much.