[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 135 (Friday, September 23, 1994)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: September 23, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
   COMMENDING THE PRESIDENT AND THE SPECIAL DELEGATION TO HAITI, AND 
           SUPPORTING THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES IN HAITI

                                 ______


                               speech of

                          HON. GARY A. FRANKS

                             of connecticut

                    in the house of representatives

                       Monday, September 19, 1994

  Mr. FRANKS of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my 
discontent with President Clinton's policy on Haiti. I want to first 
state that I commend Gen. Colin Powell, former President Jimmy Carter, 
and Senator Sam Nunn for the compromise agreement they were able to 
secure with General Cedras of Haiti. This agreement avoided a hostile 
invasion of the Caribbean island, which would have certainly cost 
American lives.
  Several reasons stand out in my mind why we should not be in Haiti. 
First of all, who is going to assume the cost of this mission? I know 
the United Nations approved this occupation, but I don't see our allies 
opening up their checkbooks for support. I'll tell you who is going to 
pay for this debacle, the American taxpayer is. The Department of 
Defense has already stated it does not have enough money to cover the 
$250 million initial cost of the operation. Estimates of the cost of 
the occupation are now being made as high as $3 billion. So once again 
the taxpayer is going to get stuck with the bill for an occupation that 
the majority of Americans oppose.
  My second concern with the United States occupation of Haiti is that 
President Clinton blatantly ignored the will of the American people and 
the Congress. Instead he turned to the United Nations for validation, 
rather than the elected officials of his own country. In my opinion it 
is reprehensible that Clinton places the approval of the United Nations 
ahead of the American people.
  You may recall that this is not the first time American troops have 
been in Haiti. From 1915 to 1934 U.S. forces occupied this Caribbean 
nation without achieving any durable political reform. In its history, 
Haiti has never had a sustainable democracy.
  Finally, I am concerned about the lack of any plan to get United 
States troops out of Haiti. What is the plan? What is our mission? When 
can we expect our troops home? These are legitimate questions that the 
American people have a right to know. Is it going to take another 
disaster to bring our soldiers home? I agree with former Secretary of 
Defense Caspar Weinberger that there are four principles that should be 
adhered to before committing U.S. troops on foreign soil: the operation 
should have the support of the American people and the Congress; the 
mission should be specifically defined; the operation should be in the 
strategic interest of the United States; and finally, there should be a 
clear exit plan for our troops. Unfortunately, the Haiti occupation 
does not satisfy any of these four criteria.
  A majority of the Congressional Black Caucus wanted the United States 
to invade Haiti and President Clinton caved in. So what's next? Cuba? 
This is the fundamental problem of allowing caucuses and special 
interests to have a disproportionate influence on U.S. foreign policy. 
The administration's foreign policy has been a series of failures, I 
hope we can avoid another one in Haiti.

                          ____________________