[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 132 (Tuesday, September 20, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 20, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
                         THE SITUATION IN HAITI

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, I am sure, like almost all Americans, over 
the last few days, I have had a mixture of emotions concerning what 
happened in the neighboring country of Haiti. I know I share with all 
my fellow citizens a great sense of relief that there was not an 
invasion in which there would have been, possibly, a great loss of 
life. I share a great sense of relief that our troops are landing there 
safely and that a process is now underway that, hopefully, will lead to 
the peaceful transition back to democracy in that very troubled country 
of Haiti.
  On the other hand, I remain concerned, as I am sure many Americans 
do, about just what we are about in Haiti and just what our troops are 
going to be doing there, and what the next sequence of events might 
bring. The President has very forthrightly said that we are still not 
out of danger and that there is still a risk.
  So I want to, first of all, commend our President, President Clinton, 
for being steadfast since he first took office in carrying out the 
stated policy of not letting the coup stand in Haiti and returning 
President Aristide and democracy to that country. That policy was first 
enunciated by President Bush when the coup happened in September of 
1991, when he said that the coup represented an unusual and 
extraordinary threat to the vital interests of the United States. Then 
Secretary of State James Baker said that the coup cannot and will not 
stand.
  President Clinton continued to carry forth that bipartisan, and I 
hope to say nonpartisan, approach to foreign affairs during the ensuing 
years after he was inaugurated. The policy was to try to go the extra 
mile, and President Clinton did go the extra mile in trying to seek a 
peaceful resolution. Thus, we had the Governors Island accord, in which 
both sides, the duly elected President Aristide and Raoul Cedras, the 
general who was the leader of the coup that overthrew President 
Aristide, signed the Governors Island accord saying they would step 
down and President Aristide would return last fall.
  But as we all know now, the military leaders, led by Raoul Cedras, 
reneged on that and President Aristide was not able to return, and thus 
we had the ensuing crisis. President Clinton has maintained 
steadfastness in that we would return Aristide and democracy to Haiti. 
He imposed a complete embargo on Haiti. The people of Haiti have been 
suffering over the last few months. But they have suffered for many 
years under cruel dictators and tyrants and under the cruel military 
leadership there.
  The President, last Thursday a week ago, went before the Nation and, 
I think, very forcefully and clearly outlined our national security 
interests, the vital interests of this country, and what was at stake. 
I thought, very forcefully, as the President and Commander in Chief, he 
said that the coup would not stand and their time was up and they had 
to go. A force was ready to carry that out.
  Again, to repeat, Mr. President, I think I can sum up the vital 
interests of the United States in Haiti in three ways. First of all, we 
have 16,000 Haitians now in Guantanamo Bay--refugees from their own 
country--because they were supporters of President Aristide, and they 
cannot under the present circumstances return to Haiti or they risk 
losing their lives. Where are they to go? They cannot stay in 
Guantanamo Bay. Will we open our doors here?
  Will we then keep the generals in charge in Haiti and watch as 
100,000 to 300,000, perhaps more, Haitians get in their boats and come 
to the United States, or the Bahamas, or other Caribbean islands where 
they cannot take and handle such refugees?
  So I think that is our first vital national interest.
  The second vital national interest is that we have a lot of fragile 
democracies in this hemisphere, many of whom have just overthrown 
dictators and military dictatorships. They are now sort of getting 
their sea legs in democracy. But in the wings are waiting their 
military ready to take over.
  (Mr. BRYAN assumed the chair.)
  Mr. HARKIN. If we were to allow the coup to continue and to allow 
Cedras and the military to continue their dictatorship in Haiti, that 
would have sent, I think, shock waves throughout not only the Caribbean 
but all of Latin America, destabilizing governments, bringing back 
military dictators, and that would not be in our vital national 
interest.
  The third reason that is in our vital national interest is because of 
the gross violations of human rights in Haiti.
  President Clinton was right last Thursday when he deemed it a reign 
of terror. We have not seen anything like this before in our 
hemisphere. We have seen things like this in Cambodia, we have seen it 
in Rwanda, but never in this hemisphere.
  While I do not think and do not believe that the United States should 
be the policemen of the world, we cannot be that, at least when it 
happens in our own backyard in a country in which we have vital 
interest and a country in which we have seen the heavy hand of the 
United States disrupting that country before, then I think we have an 
obligation to act and an obligation to ensure that these gross 
violations of human rights, these murders, tortures, the killing of 
orphans, the rapes, are not continued by this military dictatorship.
  President Clinton spelled that out quite clearly last Thursday. Now 
over the weekend we had former President Carter, former Chairman of the 
Joint Chiefs of Staff Colin Powell, and of course our colleague, 
Senator Nunn, as we know engage in discussions with the military in 
Haiti to reach an agreement for their departure and for the return of 
democracy.
  Now, Mr. President, while I applaud and I commend those who went and 
who hammered out this agreement, I must at this time raise some serious 
questions as to what now will take place and what this agreement really 
means and what our troops are in Haiti for.
  I guess I have been pretty disturbed to hear people talk about the 
military in Haiti as our friends, as patriots, honorable people acting 
in the best interest of their country. Mr. President, they are not our 
friends, and they are not patriots.
  Keep in mind this is the military in Haiti responsible over the last 
3 years for somewhere between 3,000 and 4,000 murders, disappearances, 
countless tortures and rapes. This is the military in charge down there 
under which now orphans are being killed, the orphans of people who 
were Aristide's supporters. A daily occurrence is for Aristide's 
supporters to be summarily executed. No, they are not patriots and they 
are not our friends.
  I recognize that we have to deal with them. They have the guns, and 
they are in power, and we have to deal with them. So I am not going to 
take those to task who tried to hammer out this agreement. I think we 
had to do that.
  I guess the other problem I have is when I keep hearing former 
President Carter refer to ``President Jonassaint of Haiti.'' I saw it a 
couple times on television today, former President Carter referring to 
President Jonassaint.
  Mr. Jonassaint is not the President of Haiti. Haiti only has one 
President, and it is President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, who was elected 
with over two-thirds of the vote in an open and free election. Mr. 
Jonassaint was simply put there by the dictators, by the junta, by 
General Cedras and his compatriots. He was put there as a puppet by the 
very military that initiated the coup.
  So I hope that we will quit referring to Mr. Jonassaint as the 
President of Haiti. He may be something but he is not the President. He 
may be a friend of the military. He may be their puppet, but he is not 
the President of Haiti. I certainly wish that Mr. Carter would quit 
referring to him as that.
  So why are the troops there? Last night we saw the first instances of 
violations, and another instance today. As I understand the news 
reports, what happened last night is that some of President Aristide's 
supporters came down to the dock to welcome the American troops in a 
demonstration. They were not hurting people. They were not damaging 
anything. But the police forces came in there and broke them up, beat 
some with batons, and dispersed them. And we saw the things happen 
today.
  Our troops are standing idly by. I understand that our troops are not 
to engage in policing activities in Haiti. I understand that. But does 
that not then give the appearance to the Haitian people that now our 
military is there on the side of their military and their police who 
have been repressing them? That sends all the wrong signals.
  Initially we were going in there as friends of the Haitian people and 
on behalf of the Haitian people. Now the appearance is that we have 
gone in there on behalf of the Haitian military and the Haitian police 
forces.
  I believe that is a formula for disaster. The Haitian people had 
their hopes raised by President Clinton and by the actions we took, by 
the strong policies we have had and enunciated for over 3 years that we 
were going to return democracy and return President Aristide.
  Now, somehow if they see or if they feel, if they perceive that we 
are there on behalf of the military and that we are only dealing with 
the military, then I think reactions are going to occur, and I think 
that could spell big trouble for our troops and for us in Haiti.
  So, what do we do about it? We cannot act as policemen. I understand 
that, and I would not ask our troops to act as policemen. We should not 
do that. We cannot do that.
  So then what is the solution to this? I believe there is only one, 
Mr. President. First of all, we have to start dealing not just with the 
military. I understand we have to deal with them. But as soon as our 
troops are in place by this weekend, as soon as they have secured 
whatever they are going to secure, the ports, the airport, the roads, 
and things like that, then I believe that we have to immediately begin 
dealing with the duly elected and constituted Government of Haiti. That 
means, first and foremost, we have to start negotiating and deal with--
not negotiating but deal with--and talking with and involving President 
Aristide, not Mr. Jonassaint--he is not the President--but President 
Aristide.
  Second, I believe that we should begin dealing as soon as possible 
with President Aristide's Minister of Defense, not the generals, but 
President Aristide's Minister of Defense, not the rump Parliament that 
is there now, but the Parliament that was elected in that free election 
in 1990, and we must start dealing with President Aristide's Cabinet 
and President Aristide's nominated interim Prime Minister.
  We have to start doing that very soon because if we do not, then we 
will go down that road of dealing more and more only with the military, 
only with Mr. Jonassaint, who, as I pointed out, is not the President 
of Haiti. This will send all the wrong signals and images to the 
Haitian people.
  So I am hopeful that as soon as possible we will begin the process of 
dealing with the duly elected Government in sending those signals to 
the Haitian people that we recognize President Aristide as their duly 
elected President, that we do not recognize this rump Parliament that 
was elected in January of this year in what no one believes was any 
kind of open and free election but that we will deal with the duly 
elected Parliament of 1990. In order to effectively do that, then our 
troops must ensure the safety of President Aristide, of his Cabinet, of 
his Ministers, of his Prime Minister, of his Minister of Defense.
  I thought that is what our troops were going there for and I hope 
that is what they are there for. Those are clear orders, a clear 
delineation of responsibility.
  So I hope, beginning early next week, that we would see that our 
orders to our troops from our commander in chief would be that they are 
there and they should protect, 24 hours a day, in their jobs and in 
their homes and on their way to and from work and their families, those 
who constitute the duly elected Government of Haiti. That sends a 
signal to the Haitian people about whose side we are on.
  And this cannot wait too long. If this waits 2 more weeks or 3 more 
weeks and all we deal with is the military, I am afraid of a reaction 
that might happen.
  There is a risk, as the President said, still to Haiti. We can reduce 
that risk. We cannot get rid of it completely, but we can reduce that 
risk if we start dealing with the Minister of Defense, for example, 
that was appointed by President Aristide.
  Again, I am not saying that we cannot deal with Mr. Cedras and his 
military. I understand that. I understand that we have to deal with 
him. But we should not be dealing with him exclusively as now appears.
  So I am hopeful that, as soon as possible, we will provide that 
protection.
  And I would further suggest, Mr. President, that we make it clear to 
the Haitian people that we are going to return President Aristide to 
Haiti at the earliest possible moment-- and I hope that would be as 
soon as next week--with the commitment of our thousands of troops who 
are there, that we will give him the protection he needs and the 
protection his government needs so that they can operate, so that 
Parliament can indeed meet and pass an amnesty law. I know that amnesty 
is a big issue, and I understand that. And the agreement that was 
signed by Mr. Jonassaint and former President Carter speaks to that 
issue of amnesty.
  But what parliament is going to pass it? Is it the rump Parliament 
that does not represent the Haitian people? Or will it be the real 
Parliament, the one that was elected in 1990? I would suggest for it to 
have any force and effect, it has to be the latter, it has to be the 
real Parliament.
  Well, 40 members of the Haitian House who were elected in 1990, who 
are President Aristide's supporters, are now living in exile in Miami, 
afraid to go back, afraid for their lives. Many others are in hiding in 
Haiti. So we are going to have to enable these 40 to go back. But we 
are going to have to make sure we provide them the protection that is 
necessary for them to get back the reins of government and to start 
functioning again. Then, the police forces will be under the civilian 
government. Then the military in Haiti will be under the civilian 
government, as it ought to be.
  So I hope we are not putting the cart before the horse here, in 
trying to restructure a military and deal with Mr. Cedras and his 
coconspirator who engineered the coup.
  But I hope we will do everything to expedite the return of President 
Aristide. And I think this should happen as early as next week. And 
with the return of a duly elected Parliament, then they can go about 
the business of passing an amnesty law.
  Mr. President, the military thugs in Haiti are not our friends. Some 
have even tried to make General Cedras as something like a democrat or 
something. In today's Washington Post, it is reported that former 
President Carter said that those who referred to General Cedras as a 
dictator were dead wrong.
  Tell that to the 4,000 murdered and brutalized Haitians who were 
murdered and brutalized under Cedras' regime. Tell that to the 
estimated 300,000 Aristide supporters who are in hiding and in fear for 
their lives. Tell that to the women raped by Cedras' military, many 
times in front of their own husbands and children. Tell that to the 
orphans who have been killed and orphanages that have been ravaged by 
the military. Tell that to the countless thousands of refugees who 
risked their lives to flee the repression, often at risk, great risk, 
to themselves and their families.
  Mr. Cedras may be many things, but he is not our friend and he is 
certainly not a democrat with a small ``d.'' It is time, as President 
Clinton said, for him to go.
  There is another story circulating around that was in the Washington 
Post today that, according to former President Carter, it was General 
Cedras who saved President Aristide's life. This is a myth. I do not 
know what sources former President Carter has for this statement, but 
President Aristide categorically denies that Cedras saved his life. And 
there is other evidence that exists to refute that claim and that it 
was other military people who, in fact, saved Aristide's life, while 
those coup plotters, including Mr. Cedras and Mr. Biamby and Mr. Michel 
Francois and others, were debating whether or not to kill him.
  So, Mr. President, I wanted to take this time to again commend and 
compliment, first of all, President Clinton, for being steadfast and 
strong and ensuring that a coup like this would not stand and we will 
return democracy and President Aristide to Haiti.
  I commend those who went to Haiti this weekend at great trouble to 
themselves and I think at great risk, great risk, to themselves to 
hammer out this agreement.
  I think now we must look ahead and we must, as expeditiously as 
possible, get our troops in--I understand they will be there by this 
weekend--and then we must right now begin dealing with the duly elected 
civilian Government of Haiti. We must return President Aristide to 
Haiti as soon as possible, with the protection that we can afford him 
with our military there, so that he can once again get the reins of 
government with his Cabinet, so that the duly elected Parliament 
elected in 1990 can come back into existence; so that we can look 
forward to December of this year of having some more truly free 
elections in Haiti.
  I fear that if this does not happen, we can expect more violence in 
Haiti, more occurrences of what happened yesterday and today.
  Having served for a great number of years in the military--5 years 
active and 3 years in the Reserves--I have a great deal of respect for 
those who serve in our military. I think we ought to be cautious 
whenever we commit our young men and women to risk their lives in any 
kind of military endeavor. I believe that when we do that, we ought to 
back them up with every possible resource that we can give them. And I 
believe that the orders that we give them ought to be clear and concise 
and unambiguous.
  And I guess that is what I fear about this operation in Haiti right 
now. And that is why I believe if they had the orders to protect the 
key civilian components of the Haitian Government, those would be 
clear, unambiguous, recognizable and enforceable orders, and orders 
that could be carried out. They would not be offensive in nature. We 
would not be seeking to harm anyone, but only to protect the civilian 
elected government of Haiti.
  That, I believe, should be the role for our military for the next 
several weeks, maybe for the next couple of months. And then turn over 
the peacekeeping operations to the multinational force so that we can 
set up structures where by December we can have another round of free 
elections in Haiti.
  So, Mr. President, again I hope that the ensuing few days will not 
see an outbreak of violence. I hope that our young men and women who 
are in Haiti will have all of the full resources of this country behind 
them.
  And I am hopeful that, as soon as possible, our Government and our 
President reaches out to President Aristide to set up the structures so 
that he, his Cabinet, his Ministers, and the Parliament elected in 1990 
can, within the next 2 or 3 weeks, start assuming command and control 
of their country once again and get the reins of government. The faster 
we do that, I believe, the more peaceful will be the transition to 
democracy in Haiti. The more we prolong that, I believe the more 
violent it will become.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. Feingold].

                          ____________________