CARICOM Delegate Speaks Out Against Bullying of Haiti

Dame Eugenia Charles is no anti-imperialist firebrand. On the contrary, as Prime Minister of Dominica from 1980 to 1995, she was one of Washington's staunchest allies in the Caribbean. She is best remembered for "requesting," on behalf of the five-member Organization of Eastern Caribbean States, that President Ronald Reagan send thousands of U.S. troops to invade Grenada on Oct. 23, 1983 "to protect the lives of U.S. citizens" -- about 900 medical students -- following the overthrow and assassination of progressive leader Maurice Bishop.
        After retiring from politics in 1995, Charles was named the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Representative to the Organization of American States/Caricom Mission which visited Haiti from May 29 - 31, 2001 to facilitate negotiations between the Haitian government and the Democratic Convergence, a popularly reviled opposition front of 15 long-discredited parties, which survives only thanks to Washington's generous backing.
        Last summer, Wall Street Journal writer Mary Anastasia O'Grady wrote a piece quoting Eugenia Charles as saying that she "found the Haitians are only interested in what financial help they can get from the international world. I don't know if they are interested in having the matter solved." (WSJ 7/6/01)
        Betraying her own transparent bias, O'Grady concluded that "it's not surprising that [Eugenia Charles] recognizes Mr. Aristide's modus operandi." Unfortunately for Ms. O'Grady, the following interview makes it clear that Charles was not referring to President Jean-Bertrand Aristide but rather to the author's darling, the Convergence opposition.
        Throughout the interview, Dame Eugenia, now 83 years old, emphasizes her opposition to the strong-arm tactics employed by the OAS/CARICOM delegation of which she was a part. "I do not think that we [should] give aid to people because we like them or because they're obedient to our wishes," she says. "We [should] give aid because the people of the country require it... We kept saying, ...If you do things right, we will give you aid. If you don't, we won't.' That was not a good approach. I do not agree with that approach."
        This interview gains relevance in light of the Bush administration's snub of CARICOM's strong recommendation earlier this month that the U.S. lift its aid embargo on Haiti. The interview, which has been edited down from the original by Haïti Progrès, was conducted by Hazel Ross-Robinson, who does public relations for the Haitian government in Washington, DC.

Hazel Ross-Robinson: How would you assess the prospects for a workable solution being found to the political crisis in Haiti?

Dame Eugenia: We met with government officials, members of civil society and Convergence. After listening to the members of Convergence, I had to ask them why they called themselves "Convergence." They were not converging on anything. They were not agreeing on anything. They cannot get together to form a plan. No one in Convergence was talking about what the Haitian people themselves want. That bothered me. No one is asking "What do the Haitian people want?"

HRR: Please expand on Convergence's inability to unify around a common goal.

DE: Well, there were about 50 Convergence people there, but no two people could agree on any point. There was no sense that there was a need to work things out, to find a solution. I was very concerned that no one was concerned about the Haitian people deciding what is good for the country.

HRR: What was Convergence's response to your concerns about each individual member having their own views and objectives, and the lack of any unifying objective?

DE: They shrugged their shoulders. Nobody is thinking "How can we work together to find something in common between us all?" I did not see that happening. I was concerned about that.

But they were prepared to listen and talk to me. They were glad that we had come to talk with them. There was no doubt about that. But they were not putting anything forward that could be a solution. (...)

I must say that I was very pleased with the government's point of view. They were anxious to get this matter settled. They weren't trying to say, "We are the government so we are right." There was no feeling like that at all. Their position was: "How can we get this thing solved?" And they did in fact do things that showed that they were interested in getting things settled.

The civil society meeting was very good. They all had good ideas, but again I didn't see anyone in Convergence saying "If we do this, then they'll do that, and therefore we can get together." I didn't see that type of argument going on, so I don't know how it's going to work out.

The government was very anxious to listen to what we had to say. To me it was obvious that the government is anxious to get something settled. In fact, they did give their word, and they did what they said. They recognized that it was necessary to work together. They agreed to new elections, and to establish a new commission to oversee the elections.

When we were there, President Aristide was very eager to work things out. People were saying that he's quick to make promises, but then he doesn't do it. But he moved to make clear that these things were done. He was clearly anxious to get this settled.

I did not and do not think that the criticism of Aristide was right. I think that he was very anxious to get the Haitian people to settle their affairs and feel comfortable with the settlement.

We also met with all the Ambassadors of all the countries represented to Haiti. I thought that there was too much pressure on the Haitians to "settle or else they would not get any help from the countries outside." I did not see this in the Haitians themselves, but I did see it in those of us who were there trying to solve the matter. I did not think that was correct.

HRR: Did you get the impression that the people of Haiti were standing with Convergence, or standing with the government?

DE: No. That's the thing that bothered me. I don't see how after an election that was supposed to be flawed, that we're there trying to correct, the people themselves were not shouting for this or that to be done. The Haitian people do not realize that this is their business. They're too accepting of people coming in and fixing their affairs for them. (...)

DE: As I've said, I was very concerned that when we met the Convergence there were no two people there agreed on anything. Every political opinion was expressed. There is no consensus with Convergence.

It seemed that there was too much emphasis on telling the Haitians that they would not get any international help unless they came to a settlement. I was concerned about that. I do not think that this is the way to solve things. I do not think that we were getting the people themselves to consider that they have a right to think for themselves regarding what they want to do. To me, democracy, true democracy, is not apparent in the move we are making. It seems that we are saying to the Haitians "You need financial help. If we give it to you, you must do what we say." I do not believe that that is the way to run a country. I may be wrong in that, but that's the way I feel. (...)

HRR: The OAS passed a resolution - unanimously - in Costa Rica, outlining in great detail the conditions that had to be met by Haiti in order for the financial embargo to be lifted. Convergence has since pushed for the conditions to be expanded beyond those specified at the OAS Summit. Comment?

DE: Nothing will happen at that rate. And they will try to blame the President again. I thought that he was very willing to listen to what was being said and to make sure that Haiti took care of its business, which is what I think needs to be done.

HRR: As you know Haiti is the poorest nation in this hemisphere -

DE: That doesn't mean that they have no voice, that they have no say. They are the ones that have to decide if they want to do what is being pushed on them. They are the ones that have to decide what they will do to help them grow out of it. And they must be the ones to make the decisions that are good for Haiti.(...)

DE: We've been telling the Haitians that unless Haiti can get something solved they won't get any help from the international community. That is the wrong way to handle it! What is required to make the people of Haiti better off? What's required to give the people of Haiti a better life? Those are the important questions. And let's face it - Haiti did not go out and get the AIDS virus, you know. They did not go and import it. People came to Haiti and left the AIDS with the Haitians. People are not thinking about this, and it worries me.

HRR: Haiti is the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere but it has a strong track record on loan repayments. The Government of Haiti has therefore said to the international community "If you do not want to give us aid, that is your prerogative. We do ask, however, that you not block our access to the international loans which our people need and for which you will be repaid!" Yet the international community has stopped all loans to Haiti - for education, for health, for agriculture.

DE: Stopping loans for health?! Nothing else can happen in country if you don't have health in the country.

HRR: Your insights will be very helpful in helping the people of the Caribbean get a better understanding of what is going on in Haiti.

DE: What I did not like was the way we kept saying , "If you do these things, we'll give you aid. If you don't, aid will stop." That is what was being said, and I did not like that. I do not think that we [should] give aid to people because we like them or because they're obedient to our wishes. We [should] give aid because the people of the country require it. 

When I came back to Dominica, I did not feel that we had achieved very much. We kept saying, "If you do things right, we will give you aid. If you don't, we won't." That was not a good approach. I do not agree with that approach.
 
 

Mardi Gras in Haiti 
by Katia Ulysse

Tom was once renowned for his ability to draw big game out of the deep sea. Fish seemed to jump aboard his boat; his voice alone made terrific bait. Seven years ago he cast his net aside and moved to Haiti with his wife, a former schoolteacher. They abandoned their house in New England, taking only a few books and their passion to turn a corner of the world into one big Thanksgiving holiday.

Every year on Fat Tuesday, Tom spends the morning fishing for kribish to liven up his famous bouillabaisse. By sunset a legion of hungry children and their families gather in the couple's fenced backyard -- ready to pose for pictures with their hosts and eat until they burst. For the children's amusement, Tom and his wife don masks of peacock feathers and sequins. Then they take turns snapping pictures, which they later mail to family and friends. 

Tom adores the children. Sometimes he spends hours watching them play. They remind him of the bear cubs he'd seen on TV. "They're so cute," he tells his wife. The children call to her mind the wild natives she had read about in John Winthrop's writings, but she does not share this with her husband. 

Behind the 8-foot wall topped with barbed wire, steam rises out of the aromatic bouillabaisse. The children form a line. One by one they approach Tom, who ladles happily into the dried hollowed gourds in their outstretched hands. "Thank you, M'sye Tom," each child says. "Mèsi anpil." 

Ti Pitit is last in line. He lowers his eyes in gratitude for the couple's generosity. The small boy extends his hands, licking his lips, already tasting the bouillabaisse. As he stands before Tom, Ti Pitit's spindly arms begin to quiver in time to the bamboo flute and manman tanbou beckoning from afar. "Hold still," Tom's voice is stern. "Wi," Ti Pitit replies anxiously, but his legs and arms continue tremble to the vibrations of the rara band simmering in the distance. 

"You're this year's winner!" Tom announces. His wife tosses her hair and flashes Ti Pitit a sympathetic smile. 

Every year without fail, a child leaves Tom's bouillabaisse feast as famished as he had arrived. This time, everyone but Ti Pitit had been able to ignore the pulsating beat filling the atmosphere. "You must learn to stop dancing to this terrible music," Tom says contemptuously. 

"No bouillabaisse for Ti Pitit," his wife agrees, shaking her head. Ti Pitit's eyes swivel with shame, wishing he could have separated the hunger in his belly from an irrepressible urge to dance. The other children make faces at him as they empty their bowls. 

On the way back from Tom's house, the children tease Ti Pitit. As they disperse toward their own homes, they add their own melody to the rara drum now beating stronger, moving closer: "Manje devan, danse dèyè!" They dance as they sang, "Always eat first, and dance later." 

Pitit Tig la se tig li ye tou