In the words of Shakespeare, “When sorrows come, they come not as single spies but in battalions.” The unfathomable loss of life in poverty-stricken Haiti transcends any of the words and notions of suffering with which we might try and encapsulate it. Even so, we mustn’t let the historical context laid by colonialism and imperious subjugation escape our attempts to understand this eminently avoidable tragedy and our efforts to help our besieged fellows.
How, in the 21st century, could an earthquake kill nearly the equivalent of Madison’s population so abruptly? Undoubtedly, immense poverty and an anemic civil infrastructure were the immediate causes, but how did things get so bad in the first place? While the answer is by no means a simple one, the question itself has fallen mute under the cacophony of cookie-cutter humanitarianism and duplicitous “assistance” so apt at obscuring the deeper truth.
One might start in the years following the revolution, when France forced Haiti to finance massive “reparations” for profits lost when their slaves revolted. By the turn of the 20th century, nearly 80 percent of Haiti’s annual budget was spent servicing this debt. Not until 1947 was this loathsome indemnity even 60 percent paid off. Hounded by a fading power, Haiti could not hope for any relief from the rising empire in its backyard.
In 2003, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the former president, liberation theologian and populist, insisted the French pay restitution to Haiti for this insult to justice. Several months later, his government was overthrown after purportedly being threatened with armed conflict by the U.S. By this time Washington bullets had long been familiar with Haiti’s shores.
U.S. armed forces occupied the country for nearly 20 years beginning in 1915, again from 1994-95, and briefly in 2004, and there are indications that a fourth occupation may be occurring at this very moment.
While the 1915 incursion ostensibly sought to stave off German influence in the region and secure the payment of debt to allied powers, the invasions of 1994 and 2004 had more malevolent objectives. Fulfilling its role as the vanguard of neo-liberalism, the U.S. military, in its recent Haitian armed ventures, aimed to supplant democratic populism with privatization and structural adjustments. After all, why allow Haitians to feed themselves when the invisible hand could just as well, and at a profit to American industry?
At last, in the past decade the United States has managed to curtail Haitian populism and replace it with a regime more amenable to neo-liberal dogma. Now in what many are calling the “Haitian shock doctrine” the IMF, in conjunction with U.S. military forces, is attempting to capitalize on Haiti’s catastrophe by exploiting the desperation of a benighted people.
U.S. military forces have taken control of Port-au-Prince’s main airport and Haitian airspace. What was briefly touted as a humanitarian mission almost immediately took on a military character as cargo planes carrying supplies for Doctors Without Borders, as well as professional search and rescue and emergency teams from many nations, were repeatedly turned away.
In efforts to obscure the almost uniformly peaceful conditions on the ground, security “experts” and U.S. military officials are artfully portraying the situation as chaotic, marred by looting and violence, a disorder so dire that only uniformed men with guns might make it right.
U.S. mercenary organizations in the Blackwater mold have already begun to seek contracts providing “security” to U.S. firms interested in Haitian projects. As is all too often the case in situations like these, unscrupulous actors circle like profiteering vultures over the wreckage.
Our military and private militias might have a purpose in the country if such a security problem truly existed. But it does not, and the illusion that such a situation exists is costing hundreds of lives on a daily basis as help is sequestered to predominantly wealthy areas dense with foreign blood. To prioritize .securitys over medical and humanitarian relief suggests ulterior motives. As noted by Cin? Institute Director David Belle: “I have been told that much U.S. media coverage [represents] Haiti as a tinderbox ready to explode… [that] could be nothing further from the truth. I have traveled the entire city daily since my arrival. The extent of the damage is absolutely staggering, [but]… not once have we witnessed a single act of aggression or violence.”
In a country seeing a rate of amputation not seen since the Crimean War, any diversion of medical aid is unconscionable. The use of U.S. military forces for purposes other than humanitarian relief has brought many to question the true intent of U.S. policy makers. Maintaining a “friendly state,” accessible to U.S. corporate interests and amenable to IMF debt servitude and “austerity measures” is no doubt a top priority.
As the IMF attempts to saddle Haiti, in its desperation, with another $100 million of debt, including mandates to raise the price of electricity and freeze public sector wage increases, it will be absolutely critical in the months ahead to campaign for complete debt forgiveness from Haiti’s creditors. This, combined with an abstention from interfering with Haiti’s sovereignty, the will of its people and its chosen economic course, will be essential if Haiti is to halt the flight of sorrows that have shrouded its future for far too long.
Sam Stevenson ([email protected]) is a graduate student in public health.
