[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
#3424: Pierre-Pierre responds to anonymous and Pina (fwd)
I have read quite a few comments here on the list, and in other places
regarding the current situation in Haiti. The general consensus is, that the
pre-election violence in Haiti is untenable. This is true. Something has to
be done in order to curb this present trend, and all potential such trend in
I think that we must however, refrain from letting our emotion overwhelm our
judgement. Politics is not a game of emotion. It is rather, the constant use
of logic and rational thinking based on fact and vision, in order to achieve
a sustainable goal.
All that said, I would suggest that we consider certain other factors before
pressuring one way or the other, a particular leader to act a certain way.
- Despite the fact that the Lavalas party is the one in power, it is
nevertheless also true, that there are a multitude of other actors performing
on Haiti's political ground. There are for instance, more than sixty
political parties in Haiti, some more powerful and influential than others.
-Many of those leaders have at one point or another, used language that may
have incited their partisan to violence.
-Reflecting on that reality, we have to consider the repudiation of the
ongoing violence in Haiti, as not just a single leader's concern (in this
case Aristide), but that of all of them, together.
Rejecting violence as a political tool should not just be, Aristide's
prerogative. It should be the concern of all our politicians, since that
recurring violence seems to be, "selectively random". People keep falling
from all sides of the political spectrum.
In that logic, adding to Aristide's extraordinary popularity would be the
voice of all (or most) of our leaders.
This show of unity against violence, however those leaders would frame it,
would be in my perception, a powerful tool against the killers and their
sponsors. It might also be a much-needed boost and encouragement for the
whole population, that was so willing until recently to cast their vote in
the still upcoming elections.
We must remember that after all, Aristide is, a politician. His calling alone,
for an end to the violence may be like using a knife with double-edge. He
has no guarantee that such violence would stop, or that it won't be
reoccuring at a later time, only to enable his enemies to taint him as they
wish. If he were to do so alone, I think he would have to be very careful in
his choice of words and format. Even if it would work, that could perhaps
even polarize the country further than it already is.
If by the way, our leaders could together (or even separately according to
their own logic) repudiate the violence, this would be a wonderful show of a
possible new spirit in our politics. It would show that on certain issues, we
are at least learning how to use the spirit of consensus, rather than our
tendency to being so overtly and destructively confrontational.