6443: Re: 6430: Poincy replies to Ruckle on parallel government (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: caineve@idt.net

Point well taken! However, their strategy based on Peru's case confirms
their political inaptitude as they failed to see that the circumstance
was different. As you pointed out, legitimacy of one or another before
the people remains the question. The legitimacy that Aristide is
enjoying Fujimori was no longer enjoying it. Fujimori has served his
terms over and over; as a result, there were actions on which the people
could judge him in deciding to support him or not. Aristide did not
serve his term as he was suppose to (we all know why); for there was
nothing the people could use against him to become faithless. Another
point is that Aristide's opponents have done much to lose their
credibility before the people whereas in Fujimori's ones have gained
ground. Considering this fact, it is understandable that the
non-participation of Fujimori's opponents would be successful.  

The opposition does not think ahead. What would be better for them to
let Aristide go so he will be judged later by his actions. Considering
that Ayiti is a democratic State, Aristide can't be forever in power.
All they have to do during Aristide's presidency is to reflect on their
past political strategies and bring about means to correct their wrong
doings to gain credibility.  Their insistence on being the one to run
the country shows that they are out there for their own interest and
will do worst than what they accusing the Lavalass government of. Not
having the common sense to let go now to win greater later is the most
irrational behavior that one may have in seeking for a well-being;
indeed that's is self-destructive.


Ayiti has lived, lives and will live
Mozeb