[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 133 (Wednesday, September 21, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 21, 1994]



                PRESIDENT CLINTON'S LEADERSHIP IN HAITI

  Mr. DeCONCINI. Mr. President, I rise to congratulate the President of 
the United States on the tremendous leadership he has demonstrated in 
Haiti. President Clinton's decision to put together a multinational 
force authorized by U.N. Resolution 940 to restore the democratically 
elected Government of Haiti, in conjunction with a final diplomatic 
effort carried out by former President Carter, General Powell, and our 
distinguished colleague, Senator Nunn, was the decisive impetus which 
finally led the military rulers in Haiti to agree to step down and turn 
over power to the legitimately elected officials.
  While I believe the President made a clear and compelling case for 
the use of force, I did not relish the use of military force for an 
invasion, and I was gravely concerned about the potential loss of 
American lives in such an endeavor. No one wants to place our military 
men and women in harm's way, but the diplomatic options had been 
exhausted. I am deeply grateful that the President made one last 
diplomatic step to peacefully restore the elected President of Haiti, 
which will assist the Haitian people to build democratic institutions 
and rebuild their economy.
  Surely, there will be tense moments ahead, and Haiti's future is, 
indeed, uncertain. The military leaders who have agreed to step aside 
have broken many commitments time and time again. The most infamous one 
was the July 1993 Governors Island agreement where they had agreed, and 
then failed to honor their commitment, to restore the democratically 
elected Government of Father Aristide. Surely, this agreement will have 
to be watched and monitored carefully. We do not know if the military 
rulers will honor their commitment they have just made to leave no 
later than October 15.
  I am cautiously optimistic, however, that the transfer of power will 
occur, and I do believe it can occur and will occur. The men and women 
in our Armed Forces also deserve the strongest praise for what has been 
a highly successful operation to date. If President Clinton had not 
balanced power with diplomacy, there would be no end in sight to 
General Cedras' hold on power and the reign of terror they have 
inflicted on the Haitian people. It was the President's leadership 
which allowed U.S. troops to go in not forcefully but peacefully to 
ensure the transition.
  Incredibly, some Republicans continue to take political aim at the 
President even though it is President Clinton who has achieved the 
objective set forth by former President Bush. That objective, shared by 
both Presidents and now on its way toward implementation, is the 
restoration to power of the democratically elected Haitian President 
and the end of a reign of terror close to American shores.
  These gentlemen who are leaving power certainly have records that are 
anything but democratic. They have reigned with brute power and force. 
They have permitted their own thugs and gangs to administer their own 
justice to anyone who has opposed them.
  I think it is important that we understand that President Aristide, 
as many political officeholders, including this one and, I daresay, 
most in this body, often said things that might be misinterpreted or 
actually were said in the manner they were said because of the 
frustration and the anger that builds up sometimes in political office. 
Mr. Aristide did do that when he was President, but such remarks do not 
justify throwing out a constitution and a freely elected President. 
There is a rule of law. There is a rule of order. There is a 
constitution. These should have been respected.
  Mr. Aristide, since he was deposed and recently on a number of 
occasions, has stepped up and said there will be no retaliation, at 
least from him, and he will do all he can with his supporters to see 
that there will not be retaliation. But you can understand why there 
might be retaliation. Imagine if you saw your daughter, your wife, your 
son, or your father raped, murdered, body washed up on the beach and 
you knew who committed that crime. You might have a hard time, even 
under the Judeo-Christian belief, turning the other cheek and not 
taking some retaliatory action. It is difficult for people to do that, 
as we have seen in many other parts of the world.
  So we need leadership now, and Mr. Aristide has demonstrated that he 
is prepared to lead.
  President Clinton demonstrated that he would use force. But he did 
not just take a poll, lick his finger and put it up in the air to see 
which direction the political wind was blowing. He showed great 
leadership by taking action after the years of failed attempts to get 
the military leaders to leave power.
  I watched the debate here prior to the deployment of U.S. troops, and 
it really bothers me to see so much partisanship relating to this issue 
and to the President.
  As they continue to assail the President's policy in Haiti, I would 
urge my Republican colleagues to ponder the following statements made 
to representatives of the Organization of American States:

       The test we face is clear to defend democracy; to stand 
     united as a community of democracies; to make clear that the 
     assault on Haiti's constitutional government has no 
     legitimacy and will not succeed.
       Let the coup plotters in Haiti--and any who dream of 
     copying them know this: This hemisphere is united to defend 
     democracy.

  I am not quoting the U.S. Ambassador to the OAS, Hattie Babbitt. Nor 
am I quoting U.N. Ambassador Albright, nor Secretary Christopher. No, 
the man I am quoting is former Secretary of State James Baker. This 
clever architect of the international coalition arrayed against Iraq 
made these remarks during an October 1991 address to the OAS. If this 
hemisphere was ``united to defend democracy'' in 1991, I would ask my 
colleagues, what has changed in 1994? Nothing, I would argue. Nothing 
but politics.
  It was President Bush who said in September 1991 that the coup 
``constitute[d] an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national 
security, foreign policy and economy of the United States.'' If that 
statement by President Bush was true in 1991, and this Senator believes 
that it was, then the statements made and the recent actions taken by 
President Clinton are a logical and correct extension of those remarks. 
After 3 years of negotiations and other peaceful attempts to get 
General Cedras and the others to step aside, it was time to bring an 
end to the terror and impoverishment which the military thugs were 
perpetuating against the Haitian people.
  Had President Bush been elected in 1992, would we have seen all this 
opposition to this policy? I rather doubt it.
  Those military leaders, led by Gen. Raoul Cedras and Lt. Col. Michel 
Francois, overthrew the popularly elected Government of President 
Aristide, who was supported by almost 70 percent of the population at 
the ballot box, with 12 different candidates monitored by international 
observers who concluded it had been a fair election.
  That election culminated years of struggle by the Haitian people on 
the road to achieving a functioning democracy. It was snuffed out 
overnight by the military coup which showed complete and utter contempt 
for the will of the people. President Clinton's difficult decision to 
use force to oust the military leader came after 3 years of our 
Government's extraordinary attempts, in concert with the OAS and United 
Nations, to achieve a peaceful restoration of the democratically 
elected Government in that nation. Those efforts were met with lies, 
broken promises, and an arrogant disregard by Cedras and his groups for 
the will of the people of Haiti and the diplomatic efforts of the 
international community.
  It was President Clinton's leadership in deciding after all 
diplomatic efforts had failed that the time to take decisive action had 
finally come. The threat of force coupled with our successful 
diplomatic efforts will allow for the peaceful transfer of power to 
Haiti's democratically elected officials. We owe President Clinton as 
well as President Carter, General Powell, and Senator Nunn our deep 
gratitude for their success in getting the military leaders to give up 
their illegitimate hold on power, thereby avoiding the bloodshed that 
surely would have occurred had an invasion force landed and taken over 
that island nation.

  Our military people were prepared, as always. They stepped up and did 
what they were instructed to do. They were prepared to carry out the 
mission, and they are prepared to follow the Commander in Chief.
  Some I am sorry to say, continue to question why we are in Haiti at 
all. Last Thursday night President Clinton clearly outlined United 
States interests in Haiti: They encompass: First, The preservation of 
democracy in the hemisphere; second, the restoration of human rights; 
and third, the end of the Haitian exodus to America's shores. To those 
who say that these are not U.S. vital interests, I argue to the 
contrary. I believe that albeit unpopular, President Clinton has made a 
clear and concerning case for a military presence in the wake of 3 
years of failed negotiations.
  Just think if we did not support democracy in the other countries, in 
Guatemala, Nicaragua, El Salvador, Argentina, Peru, Bolivia, and 
Mexico, where would we be today? We would have a difficult time in this 
hemisphere. There are only two countries that do not have elected 
democratic leaders in the southern hemisphere--Cuba and Haiti.
  During debate in this Chamber last week, my Republican colleagues 
claimed that the President was motivated solely by a desire to bolster 
his sagging opinion poll numbers through a Haitian invasion. If any 
politics are being played in this debate, it is by the Republicans who 
are trying to score cheap political points. The blatant hypocrisy 
displayed in the 180-degree turn made by some Republicans in attempting 
to tie the hands of a Democratic occupant of the White House--after 
they argued that the hands of the last two Republicans occupants should 
remain unfettered--is dizzying. Their clamoring for the President to 
come to Congress for authorization of military action was a mere 
technicality to the fierce defenders of Republican Presidential 
prerogative just a few short years ago. Perhaps they did not recall the 
words of Senator Dole, the Republican leader, on December 20, 1989, 
during the Panama invasion:

       I think my own view is the President of the United States 
     has to make the final decision.

  He also said during that debate,

       * * * the primary thing is not pleasing all Members of 
     Congress, it's protecting the American lives in that area and 
     restoring democracy. You can't please every Member of 
     Congress, whatever you do, though I think in this case it 
     should be almost unanimous.

  Similarly, Senator Dole, when speaking of the failed coup attempt 
against Noriega said,

       A good part of what went wrong * * * did not happen last 
     weekend. It started happening many years ago when Congress 
     first decided to start telling the president how he ought to 
     manage a crisis.

  If that is the case, I would ask my friend from Kansas why he and his 
colleagues continue to be telling the president how to manage the 
situation in Haiti.
  Three years ago, then-Secretary of State Baker decried the military 
coup in Haiti. ``This junta is illegitimate,'' he charged. ``It has no 
standing in the democratic community. Until President Aristide's 
government is restored,'' Baker added, ``this junta will be treated as 
a pariah throughout the hemisphere--without assistance, without 
friends, and without a future.'' President Clinton has begun to achieve 
what was sought by the Bush administration--to assist in the 
restoration of the legitimately elected President of Haiti and the 
building of democratic institutions in that country.
  Mr. President, it is my hope that our military mission will bring 
back a democratically elected government to Haiti, that we will indeed 
insist on the rule of law, that we will indeed insist, if necessary, 
that the military in Haiti be replaced and disarmed, that we will not 
stand by once we have the forces in place to do what is right to ensure 
the transition to democracy, and to help ensure that there is no 
retaliation against any Haitian, including those in the political camp 
of Mr. Cedras, and those in political support of President Aristide or 
any other political party. It is time to do the right thing here and 
not let violence reign, and allow the transition to democracy to occur.
  I thank the Chair. I thank my friend from Iowa.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Senator from Iowa [Mr. 
Grassley] is recognized.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Thank you, Mr. President.

                          ____________________