29855: potemaksonje (news) Can the New Congress Help Uncover the Truth? (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

> From <potemaksonje@yahoo.com>




http://counterpunch.org/concannon01092007.html

Can       the New Congress Help Uncover the Truth?        Resolutions for Haiti 
By BRIAN CONCANNON
        The New Year is a good time for all       kinds of resolutions: 
resolutions (or firm decisions) to do better       next time; the resolution 
(or settling) of conflicts; and passing       resolutions (or expressions of a 
joint opinion). Although any       time of any year is a good time for 
resolutions promoting stability,       prosperity and peace in Haiti, this New 
Year presents a particularly       good opportunity for the U.S. Congress.
        Haiti was the Americas' second       independent country- proclaiming 
its independence on New Year's       Day 1804. But we did not recognize our 
neighbor for fifty-eight       years, because acknowledging the freedom of a 
country run by       former slaves raised too many hard questions about our own 
commitment       to freedom. We were trapped in a conflict between our 
high-sounding       espoused principles- all men are created, endowed by the 
creator       with the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit 
of happiness, etc.- and the brutally low reality of enslaving       millions of 
human beings.
        Abraham Lincoln took a step       towards resolving that conflict on 
June 5, 1862, when he recognized       Haiti during the U.S. Civil War. Three 
and a half months later,       President Lincoln took the next step, resolving 
to soon emancipate       all slaves in areas remaining loyal to the rebel 
Confederacy.       True to his word, on New Year's Day 1863 Lincoln issued the 
Emancipation       Proclamation, instantly turning the abolition of slavery 
into       the principal issue of the U.S. Civil War. The surrenders of 
Confederate Generals in early 1865 and the ratification of the       13th 
Amendment to the Constitution the following December abolished       slavery 
for good throughout the U.S.
        Emancipation was important,       not only because it freed over four 
million Americans from the       bondage of slavery, but also because it freed 
the rest of the       U.S. from the hypocrisy of keeping slaves in a country 
that claimed       to be free. Ending the hypocrisy also raised America's 
international       standing: by the 1860's, most of the powerful countries in 
the       West recognized slavery as the evil it always was. By resolving 
to eliminate the evil, we earned respect, and friends. In particular, 
emancipation forced France and England, whose commercial interests       would 
have benefited from an independent Confederacy, but whose       principles 
opposed slavery, to stay out of the war.
        Two hundred years after its       independence, Haiti challenged the 
U.S. to resolve another conflict       between our espoused principles- this 
time our commitment to       democracy- and our practices. On February 29, 
2004, the country's       33rd coup d'état forced the constitutional President 
Jean-Bertrand       Aristide out of the country on a U.S. plane. He was 
replaced       by a brutal dictatorship, led by a hand-picked Prime Minister 
flown in from Boca Raton Florida. The regime held on until June       2006, 
during which thousands of Haitians were killed in political       violence, and 
Haiti's democratic institutions were gutted.
        President Aristide claimed       that the Bush administration played a 
key role in his overthrow,       by supporting his armed and unarmed opponents, 
weakening the       government through a development assistance embargo, and 
eventually       forcing him onto the plane. Mr. Aristide's claim was echoed by 
members of the U.S. Congress, the 73 countries of the Africa       Union and 
the Caribbean Community, and millions of Mr. Aristide's       supporters in 
Haiti. The claim is also supported by reports from       human rights groups, 
documents filed in lawsuits and by media       investigations, including a New 
York Times investigation published       last February.
        If these charges are true,       the Bush Administration's practices 
conflicted with the fundamental       American commitment to democracy, both 
here and abroad, a principle       that President Bush has espoused widely, 
even justifying the       Iraq War as a democracy promotion exercise. These 
practices would       also have violated international law, and contributed to 
a deadly       reign of terror in Haiti.
        The Bush Administration has       consistently rejected the 
allegations. Officials contend that       the withholding of aid was not an 
embargo, but a legitimate effort       to force the government to correct 
election irregularities; that       U.S. aid to Haiti fought poverty and helped 
build democracy;       and that President Aristide asked the U.S. to fly him 
out of       the country after he had resigned in the face of a rebel takeover 
of much of Haiti.
        The best way to resolve these       conflicting accounts of the U.S. 
role in Haiti's 2004 coup d'état       is an impartial, independent inquiry. If 
the Bush Administration       is correct in its denials, it deserves to have 
the record set       straight. If the Administration did participate in the 
overthrow       of an elected government, that fact should be established. 
Haitians       need to know whether they can trust the U.S. to keep our word 
and respect our principles. They know from repeated hard experience       that 
coup d'état # 34 is already in the planning stages,       which adds urgency to 
exposing the causes and mechanics of #33.
        Establishing the truth about       the U.S. role in Haiti's coup is 
also important for the U.S.       Although the 2004 coup did remove a 
government that our government       disliked in the short term, Haitians 
eventually got a chance       to vote in February 2006, and inevitably elected 
another progressive       by another landslide. The coup's repression generated 
a spike       in refugee flows that placed unwanted pressure on our immigration 
and homeland security systems. U.S. troops, already overextended       in Iraq 
and Afghanistan, were stretched thinner by a three-month       deployment in 
Haiti. The post-coup chaos provided shelter to       smugglers bringing cocaine 
from South American through Haiti       to the U.S.
        Allegations of U.S. involvement       in Haiti's coup also hurt our 
international standing, at a time       when we need friends in the world. They 
particularly undermine       our credibility when we claim that we are trying 
to establish       democracy in Iraq, criticize other governments as 
undemocratic,       or try to stop the Sudan and other countries from condoning 
political       killings.
        The U.S. Congress may be the       only chance for a credible 
investigation of the U.S. role in       Haiti's coup d'état. Although the 
Africa Union and the       Caribbean Community- together almost one-third of 
the United       Nations' members- called for the UN to conduct an independent 
inquiry in March 2004, the UN declined to investigate and instead       sent 
troops to Haiti to support the illegal Interim Government.       That support, 
along with the troops' shootings and illegal arrests       of political 
dissidents makes Haitians distrust the UN's ability       to impartially 
investigate the coup. Haitian victims of the coup       have petitioned the 
OAS' Inter-American Commission on Human Rights       for help. But that body 
refused to hear their complaints, without       explaining why.
        Unlike the UN, Congress has       the ability to require Bush 
Administration officials to appear       at hearings, answer questions under 
oath, and produce relevant       documents. Some members of Congress supported 
the President's       Haiti policies in 2004, while others opposed them, which 
would       help ensure balance in the inquiry.
        Congress already has a vehicle       ready for such an investigation: 
the proposed "Responsibility       to Uncover the Truth about Haiti Act", known 
as the TRUTH       Act. The TRUTH Act was originally filed in 2005 in the U.S. 
House       of Representatives by Rep. Barbara Lee of California, with 21 
co-sponsors. It would appoint a bi-partisan, independent commission 
charged with investigating the February 2004 coup d'état,       and determining 
whether the U.S. contributed to the overthrow       of the Constitutional 
President, directly or by channeling aid       to groups that helped the 
overthrow.
        The TRUTH Act's commission       would resemble the Iraq Study Group 
that released its report       last month. Commission members would be 
appointed by Congress       (half by Republican leaders, half by Democrats), 
and would be       entrusted with reviewing all the evidence, and submitting a 
final,       public report, including findings, conclusions, and 
recommendations       of corrective measures, if needed.
        The TRUTH Act was referred       to the House International Relations 
Committee's Western Hemisphere       Subcommittee, where it languished. But 
last month, following       a visit to Haiti, Rep. Lee promised to reintroduce 
it. With last       week's convening of a new Congress, with a Democratic 
majority       and an unequivocal mandate to question the Administration's 
foreign       policy, the TRUTH Act's time may have come.
        By enacting the TRUTH Act,       Congress could resolve, once and for 
all, the outstanding controversies       about that the U.S. role in the 2004 
overthrow of Haiti's constitutional       government. If the investigation 
determines that the U.S. did       participate in President Aristide's 
overthrow, that knowledge       would allow Congress to take steps to resolve 
the conflict between       such illegal and harmful practices and our professed 
policy of       promoting democracy and respecting human rights. The knowledge 
would also inform the most important resolution of all: a commitment       by 
everyone concerned- Haitians and Americans, government officials, 
candidates and voters- to allocate political power in Haiti with       ballots, 
not bullets, and to promote the stability that Haiti's       peace and 
prosperity requires.
        Brian Concannon Jr. is a human rights lawyer and directs       the 
Institute for Justice & Democracy in Haiti, www.ijdh.org


---------------------------------
Expecting? Get great news right away with email Auto-Check.
Try the Yahoo! Mail Beta.