[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 131 (Monday, September 19, 1994)]
[House]
[Page H]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 19, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
       THE DISREGARD OF THE CONSTITUTION IN THE INVASION OF HAITI

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from California [Mr. Horn] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, this morning American forces landed without 
resistance in Haiti.
  This country owes a collective thank you to former President Jimmy 
Carter, Gen. Colin Powell, and our colleague from the other body, 
Senator Sam Nunn. Their diplomatic work has helped to avert what would 
have been a very misguided invasion of Haiti. President Clinton 
deserves credit for selecting such a distinguished group of Americans. 
I am sure that we all join with the President in his appreciation to 
the men and women of our armed forces who were poised to invade and 
have now intervened into Haiti. As the President stated, ``A 
significant measure of credit goes to the United States military forces 
for their preparation and their readiness.''
  This situation should remind each of us of the importance of 
maintaining the strength of our Nation's armed forces. Had President 
Clinton's planned invasion not been averted, our forces would be in the 
process of invading Haiti at this time. This invasion would have come 
without the authority or support of Congress and the American people.
  In Resolution 940, the United Nations may have authorized its member 
states to take whatever means necessary to remove the military rulers 
from power in Haiti, but such a resolution does not make the President 
of the United States automatically the yes-man chief of the praetorian 
guard for United Nations Secretary-General Boutros Boutros-Ghali. 
Despite the seemingly successful agreement reached with the military 
leadership of Haiti, President Clinton must remember that he is not the 
commander in chief of a United Nations army. He is the constitutional 
Commander in Chief of the United States Army. The United Nations 
Charter does not give an American President the power or authority to 
wage war above and beyond the authority granted in the fundamental 
charter of our Nation, the Constitution of the United States of 
America. In that sacred document, that authority to wage war rests with 
Congress.
  In failing to seek the support of Congress, President Clinton should 
not now forget that events in Haiti will be watched with even closer 
scrutiny. Having intervened in a domestic conflict in Haiti, the United 
States must now hold the soon-to-be-restored government of President 
Aristide to the high standard of compliance with international norms of 
human rights and popular democratic principles which was found wanting 
by the present military government. A superpower such as the United 
States of America should not be on the ground in Haiti. The United 
Nations resolution should be implemented by the smaller Caribbean and 
Latin American nations as well as by those Haitians in exile. As soon 
as possible the latter forces should replace the American forces now on 
the ground in Haiti.

  Three objectives must be met: Maintain order and prevent armed 
opposition; ensure the safe return of parliamentary power and a 
democratically elected President; but basically draw down the size of 
the American presence in favor of the Haitian, Caribbean, and Latin 
American forces.
  Since American forces were at the lead of invasion plans, it is only 
right that American commanders would have control over our own 
soldiers. However, now that the mission in Haiti has changed to what 
amounts to be police functions, it is not necessary to maintain an 
extensive American presence in Haiti. Haiti has never represented a 
vital security interest to the United States. With an overwhelming 
American force assuring a secure situation, we can soon allow policing 
activities to be taken over by our Caribbean and Latin American allies 
and/or by the Haitians themselves who have a much higher stake in 
stability than do the Americans.
  Now that Lieutenant General Cedras and his cohorts appear to be on 
the way out without a fight, we hope, we must turn our attention to 
returning the thousands of Haitians that have fled for the United 
States. I would hope that they would return to their homes and families 
and help rebuild the economy of their native land and to help make 
democracy work.
  Mr. Speaker, I include for the Record the relevant sections of the 
United Nations Charter and the Charter of the Organization of American 
States as they pertain to nonintervention in the domestic affairs of 
other nations, as follows:
  Article 2(7) of the U.N. Charter states:

       (7) Nothing contained in the present Charter shall 
     authorize the United Nations to intervene in matters which 
     are essentially the domestic jurisdiction of any state or 
     shall require the Members to submit such matters to 
     settlement under the present Charter; but this principle 
     shall not prejudice the application of enforcement measures 
     under Chapter VII.

  Article 18 of the OAS Charter states:

       Art. 18. No State or group of States has the right to 
     intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, 
     in the internal or external affairs of any other State. The 
     foregoing principle prohibits not only armed force but also 
     any other form of interference or attempted threat against 
     the personality of the State or against its political, 
     economic, and cultural elements.

     

                          ____________________