OAS Balks at Leveling Sanctions 
Against Haiti... for Now
Despite an all-out campaign by the U.S. to use Haiti as a test case for the coercive and interventionist provisions of the newly ratified "Inter-American Democratic Charter," the Organization of American States (OAS) settled Tuesday for a "compromise" resolution which simply renews OAS Secretary General Cesar Gaviria's mandate to meddle in Haiti.

The Jan. 15 resolution calls for the launching of a new open-ended "OAS Mission" in Haiti which would be empowered "to undertake an investigation, to evaluate the situation, and to help the Government and the people of Haiti to strengthen their system and their democratic institutions" (translated from the French version of the final resolution). 

The "Inter-American Democratic Charter" is a U.S.-championed accord, approved in Lima, Peru last Sep. 11, which seeks to allow the OAS the power to convene the Permanent Council and take action "when situations arise in a member state that may affect the development of its democratic political institutional process or the legitimate exercise of power." Under the new charter, a country may have actions taken against it -- such as being suspended from the OAS, enduring trade sanctions, or perhaps a military action -- when there is "an unconstitutional interruption of the democratic order or an unconstitutional alteration of the constitutional regime that seriously impairs the democratic order in a member state." Of course, in the case of the OAS, Washington is the supreme judge of what is "democratic order."

The final resolution of the Special Session of the OAS Permanent Council, which was adopted around 8 p.m. after a long day of intense diplomatic wrangling, calls on the Haitian government to implement "a deep and independent investigation of the events linked to Dec. 17 and the following days." On that date, an armed band of about 30 men took over the National Palace for several hours in an attempt to assassinate President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, sparking a mass uprising which resulted in the burning of the headquarters and homes of several opposition politicians (see Haïti Progrès, Vol. 19, No. 40 Dec. 19, 2002). The resolution also calls on the government to carry out "the prosecution of any person and the dismissal, if necessary, of any individual whose complicity is proven in the acts of violence perpetrated" and "a thorough investigation of all politically motivated crimes" and "reparations to organizations and individuals who experienced damages as a direct result of the violent acts of Dec. 17th." The OAS did not offer to provide reparations to the Haitian government for two Haitian policemen killed in the attack or for the extensive damage inflicted on the National Palace. The resolution also invited the OAS's Inter-American Commission for Human Rights to visit to Haiti.

Of course there was the inevitable call for the government also "to renew with urgency the negotiations under the auspices of the OAS."

The essence of the final document, however, was to force Haiti to "reaffirm the mandate of the Secretary General... and, in the framework of the Inter-American Democratic Charter, to ask him to pursue, in consultation with CARICOM et the Group of Friends of Haiti, his efforts aimed at contributing more to resolve the present political crisis in Haiti."

In his remarks at the final session, Haitian Ambassador to the OAS Raymond Valcin said that "despite its imperfections [on which he did not elaborate], this resolution constitutes a definitely balanced legal instrument." And in a telephone interview with Haïti Progrès immediately following the OAS meeting, Valcin expressed even greater satisfaction with the outcome. "It is a victory," he said. "Of course, the struggle is not over. We cannot sit on our laurels. Any war has its different stages. But this represents a reprieve."

But one wonders how much of a reprieve from Washington's relentless low-intensity war it really is. In reality, nothing has been gained since the Haitian government still accepts the principle of the OAS to meddling in its affairs. And one wonders if Ambassador Valcin wasn't being sarcastic when he said in his closing remarks to the Permanent Council "The [Haitian] delegation very certainly is encouraged to see the important steps taken to arrive at redefining the modalities for the intervention of the OAS in our country... the continuation and even the strengthening of the OAS presence."

He went on to salute "the spirit of flexibility, comprehension, and goodwill shown by the United States delegation, and [U.S.] ambassador [to the OAS Roger] Noriega," and sent "special greetings to the two members of the Haitian opposition" who were present. These were Victor Benoit de Konakom and Luc Mesadieu of MOCHRENA, both members of the U.S.-backed Democratic Convergence opposition front. Micha Gaillard of Konakom was also present at the OAS previously during the day.

Clearly, U.S. Ambassador Noriega was not too happy with the outcome. He appeared to be apologizing to the Convergence members present in the room when he said that the compromise resolution was "not perfect by any means... falls short of our initial expectations... it was the best we could produce under the current circumstances..." He admitted that Washington was behind the push to invoke the Lima accord. "My government has explored in recent weeks the advisability of applying the Inter-American Democratic Charter in the circumstances that we find Haiti in today," Noriega said, but then he tried to recast Washington's punitive crusade in a "helpful" light. "However, invoking that Charter, in varied circumstances, does not always imply, by any means, the imposition of sanctions on any country. In fact, it can be an important tool to help a country through a crisis."

Noriega also made it clear that he would continue to push for invoking the Democratic Charter against Haiti. "We have consulted and concluded that a consensus doesn't exist to do that today," he said. "But this resolution does not represent the final word on this subject and it does not represent the final chapter in terms of our implementation of the Inter-American Democratic Charter," he concluded, just a little too unilaterally. He expressed satisfaction nonetheless that the OAS resolution "provides the Secretary General with the mandate he needs to redouble his efforts to field and deploy a permanent presence... of a mission in Haiti to continue to monitor events in that country."

Of course, Gaviria's mission will just help to deepen the crisis in Haiti. As the Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) pointed out in a typically feisty analysis released Jan. 15: "Another problem with OAS intervention is that it will weaken the country's democratic fabric and will most likely further alienate the Haitian electorate. Most Haitians are already deeply embittered that the U.S. favors the Convergence coalition, and its ending of direct aid, as well as and by imposing a 'semi-blockade' on the country which further impoverishes its impoverished population." The COHA press also notes that "interestingly, the international community seems to be more concerned with the protests following the coup attempt than the coup itself," and that "after the Dec. 17 failed coup attempt, many Haitians living in Miami carried signs declaring, 'Aristide is the people's choice-not President Bush.' If the OAS is allowed to intervene in this domestic situation on entirely spurious grounds, it could set a dangerous precedent for other member states."