Haiti Invasion Averted

* Bill Clinton was lucky (Sept. 19). We were lucky. But he has no reason to celebrate. The Haiti policy was a disaster and we should never have gotten to the point where the reputation of the United States depended upon us doing something we should never, ever do.

Just because we achieved something at the point of a gun does not mean it is right, moral or OK. There is a vast difference between using diplomatic pressure and military force. The failure of diplomatic pressure does not justify military force.

Clinton and his advisers evidently do not understand this. I hope Congress starts an immediate inquiry into Clinton’s Haiti policy. Heads should roll.

WILLIAM N. HOKE

Manhattan Beach

* Now that the invasion of Haiti has been averted, but the intervention has begun, it is time to consider what principles ought to guide our foreign policy in similar cases in the future.

To judge by the volume of criticism aimed at the President, it would seem that the only legitimate use of our armed forces is where we have a vital national interest at stake. But have we honestly thought through what that means?

On the West Bank of the Jordan, Norwegian troops put their lives at risk in the cause of peace between Palestinians and Israelis. Pakistani soldiers served and died alongside Americans in Somalia. Bangladesh--Bangladesh!--is contributing what forces it can to Haiti. Those countries have no conceivable interest, let alone a vital national interest, in any of these places.

The term national interest is diplomatic language for “What is in it for me?” Is it to be American policy that while we will fight and sacrifice where we have something to lose or to gain, we will leave it to countries like Norway, Pakistan and Bangladesh to bear the burden where “mere principles” like peace and freedom and human rights hang in the balance?

STUART ROSENBERG

Los Angeles

* What a spectacle! The worst President in U.S. history sends the second worst (or is it the other way around?) to negotiate for him in Haiti, with the objective of restoring a leftist psycho to power.

The generals must have had a tough time keeping a straight face during the proceedings, but they’ve got to be grinning now. They get to stay, honor intact, while the U.S. gets to pay Haiti’s bills.

ARTHUR HANSL

Santa Monica

* Jimmy Carter, Colin Powell and Sam Nunn--congratulations! The whole world loves you! Jimmy Carter, you deserve the Nobel peace prize!

JEAN MICHENER NICHOLSON

Altadena

* Defying waters roiled by right-wing rhetoric and left-wing doubt, the thrice victorious humble Georgian carpenter returns again, triumphant, deflecting unseemly posturing and bloodshed.

LOUIS ST. MARTIN

Pomona

* Re “Miami’s Haitians Speaking of Bewilderment, Betrayal,” Sept. 20:

To the ungrateful Haitians--where is it written that the U.S. taxpayers are obligated to hand you paradise on a silver platter? If you are so smart, go back and save your own country and quit whining that the U.S. is deceiving you.

DOROTHY MELVILLE

San Juan Capistrano

* Anne-christine d’Adesky in her article “The Nightmare That Is Haiti: Gunshots in the Quiet of the Night” (Opinion, Sept. 18) is correct in describing the fear that the “elite” of Haiti are feeling, but wrong as to its source. Dead wrong. The elite are not, with some exceptions, supporters of Jean-Bertrand Aristide and the poor masses of Haiti; they are in bed with Raoul Cedras as they were with Jean-Claude Duvalier before him, and will be with anyone in power who will keep their businesses prosperous.

When revenge is in the air, the elite are not afraid of the ruling military killing those in prison, as d’Adesky implies, but fear the masses attacking the wealthy elite who have oppressed them for years.

I know about gunshots in the night. My father, Paul J. Alexander MD, in the wee hours of the morning of May 23, 1986, was shot to death as he lay asleep in Port-au-Prince. His crime, as part of a rural health project funded by the Agency for International Development, was working to have a semiautonomous government entity stock only inexpensive, useful pharmaceuticals like penicillin and digoxin, and not high-priced, high mark-up drugs. The elite families (and I use the term with disdain) didn’t like this policy and as surely as the thugs who entered my parents’ house that night, they pulled the trigger.

Now it is their turn; the poor my father dedicated his life to helping will have power, and the elite can now live in fear.

DAVID N. ALEXANDER

Los Angeles

* Re “Soldiers’ Blood, to Fill a Vacuum” by Tom Clancy (Commentary, Sept. 15): Once again we are treated to amateur soldier Clancy and his fictional account of U.S. military policy. This time he is attacking President Clinton, with whom he shares the distinction of never having been in the real U.S. military.

Clancy’s criticism of Clinton’s plan to invade Haiti would be more believable if his memory were not so faulty regarding the Reagan/Bush Caribbean gunboat diplomacy he holds up as justifiable.

Republican gunboat diplomacy can be just as stupid as that of the Democrats. Clearly, we have two amateurs--Clinton and Clancy--vying for air time.

JOHN KING

Irvine