U.S. Aid to Haiti Could Help to Corrupt

Haiti’s rumor mill has been spinning wildly since a coup attempt in early April. The U.S. Marines were reported just off shore on several occasions and there are still suspicions that 150 black U.S. troops were flown in quietly to help put down the army rebellion.

Haitians have had little but rumors to go by in recent days. Soldiers forced radio stations off the air during the putsch and officials in the administration of Lt. Gen. Prosper Avril have been virtually silent.

It turns out, though, that there may be something to the spirit of the speculations about U.S. policy. The State Department and key members of Congress appear ready to offer the first direct aid since U.S. assistance was suspended after an election massacre in November, 1987. Both military and economic assistance have been mentioned because, according to officials, Avril is “on the road to democracy.”

Unfortunately, the facts suggest no such direction; Avril’s democratic rhetoric has repeatedly rung hollow. And the coup attempt has provided an excuse for further government violations of Haitians’ basic political rights.

While he restored the popularly ratified 1987 constitution in March, for example, Avril suspended dozens of articles protecting the public from military abuses of power. They are on hold “until such time as there is an elected government”--an event, Avril said later, that Haiti is not ready for.

One of the suspended articles provided for the trial of soldiers in civilian courts for crimes against civilians, offering Haitians badly needed legal recourse. Without such guarantees, say human-rights groups, complaints don’t have a chance.

Another of the State Department’s arguments for supporting Avril now is the general’s story about the origins of the coup attempt. He claims his U.S.-backed moves against the military on alleged drug traffickers and “Duvalierists”--supporters of the deposed dictator, Jean-Claude (Baby Doc) Duvalier--provoked a backlash.

Yet there is little evidence that the group of officers dismissed before the rebellion were any more involved in the drug trade--or any more corrupt--than many of Avril’s cronies. It is quite clear, on the other hand, that they were rivals. And it is also clear that Duvalierists still retain senior positions in the Avril government; there are at least three in his Cabinet.

Supporters of the Avril government should also take a closer look at its record on press freedom. While the media have flourished since 1986 in ways that would have been unthinkable under the Duvalier dictatorship, both the Avril government and individual soldiers have demonstrated little respect for such liberties.

Police and soldiers have physically assaulted at least half a dozen local reporters during Avril’s term, and members of the presidential guard are widely blamed for crippling attacks on four radio transmitters during the night of April 6.

Although it is not clear whether the soldiers were acting under orders from Avril, the attacks came the day after the stations had chosen to defy a strict censorship order. Once the four transmitters had been sabotaged at a total cost to the stations of about $200,000, several other stations chose not to broadcast news at all.

The result was a complete information gap. For several days, Haitians--80% of whom are illiterate--had no access to news about the coup-related street fighting between army factions. The government released so little--and such contradictory--information that estimates of the death toll still range from six to 50, and there are no figures at all for arrests since then.

U.S. officials and members of Congress, on the other hand, have a better idea of what’s going on in Haiti than the average Haitian. They know that there have been no concrete steps toward investigating military abuses or disarming paramilitary groups. The constitution has been crippled and there is a distinct lack of respect for existing law.

Instead of desperately throwing U.S. aid money at the situation in vague hopes that it will improve, a more appropriate reaction to the turbulent events of April would be to pose difficult questions and look for concrete responses.

How does Avril intend to resolve his contradictory statements about elections? He says now is not the right time, yet he continues to support the country’s new electoral council. Will the military--which has benefited enormously from the drug trade--allow the government’s new anti-narcotics program to function?

The radio news blackout in early April brought back memories of Haiti under the Duvaliers. Avril’s true intentions are still not evident, and Washington’s hesitation about financing Haiti’s leaders since the disaster of November, 1987, has shown a diplomatic wisdom and leverage that it would be a shame to lose now.