[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 10 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H311]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                        HAITI: BELOW THE SURFACE

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Hobson). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Goss] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, today is day 122 of the American occupation of 
Haiti, a friendly country just south of our borders. The United States 
command in Haiti has determined that a secure environment has been 
established. The United Nations is expected to rule on this question in 
the coming weeks and the process of transition to a United Nations 
mission will be online, hopefully for an end of March completion. What 
will this transition mean? Today, our forces in Haiti have the 
authority to arrest and detain troublemakers and to respond with force. 
And in fact they have been doing that.
  The U.N. mission in Haiti, which will include approximately 2,500 
United States troops, will be a chapter 6 mission--strictly one of 
providing presence and monitoring. Under current mission parameters, 
American soldiers provide the security in Haiti, to the degree that 
that security is real. They are the folks who are enforcing the 
security there, to the degree that there is any real security.
  Today, our soldiers are involved at the local level in the day-to-day 
running of villages throughout the Haitian countryside. Our soldiers 
are serving as mayors and judges; they are serving as the electric 
company and waste disposal management company. In any given day, they 
might be called upon to deal with a charge that perhaps the local 
magistrate is engaged in extortion; they will probably buy the food for 
the prisoners in the local jail and make certain it is delivered; they 
will probably give out a few speeding tickets and might even confiscate 
a few guns. As we always expect of them, our troops are doing an 
outstanding job. Whether or not it is an appropriate or safe job for 
them to be doing and what sort of track record they are building in the 
eyes of the Haitian people are questions still open for debate. We have 
lost one soldier tragically in action in Haiti--he was trying to force 
someone to pay a toll to an individual who apparently had no official 
authority to collect it. We are deeply troubled by this death and renew 
our call for a thorough review of United States policy in Haiti.
  Knowing the degree of American financial and personnel involvement in 
Haiti, Americans were no doubt surprised to read in the national press 
yesterday that their men and women in uniform are not accepted with 
open arms by all Haitians. Despite the fact all we are doing for 
Haitians, apparently there are some problems. This is in sharp contrast 
to the pictures they remember of jubilant Haitians in Port-Au-Prince 
welcoming Americans to their shores. But there is more to Haiti than 
Port-Au-Prince.
  It is true that in many Haitian villages, American soldiers are 
cheered as they drive through the streets, and that gladdens the heart 
of all Americans. But the feeling that American troops do not belong in 
Haiti also is real in many areas of the country.
  It is a little bit of going back to the old days of the occupation 
that some remember, the gringoism that we have suffered for so many 
years in our hemisphere and tried to get away from through the good 
works we have done in so many countries in our hemisphere.
  Haitians from the provinces will tell us that the soldiers have made 
little difference in their lives. They are disappointed. The farmers 
will tell us that they still have no one to go to when someone steals 
their crops or their livestock, or that if they do complain, nothing 
happens. People will tell us that the American soldiers have let 
themselves be used in some instances by thugs and vagabonds. Some will 
also tell us that they would prefer that no foreign soldiers be in 
their country. I guess we can understand that.
  In other places, like Jeremie, they are crying foul because they 
believe the U.S. troops are too close to the military leaders who once 
terrorized that population. It is a very thin, delicate line our troops 
have to walk.
  As we make the transition to a U.N. mission, any feelings of 
insecurity and resentment will continue to grow. We know that. That is 
not uncommon in a transition. But we have to add into the equation the 
fact that the Haitian Government is not up to the administrative and 
financial challenge of providing for its own security right now or for 
getting government up and running, even with the present monitoring of 
our United Nations mission. They are not going to be able to do that.
  Haitian police forces do not have the respect of the public, and they 
do not have the weapons or the vehicles to provide for law and order.
  The conclusion I reach is that below the surface of the so-called 
secure environment there remain very serious problems that could become 
deadly in an instant once the transition is made.
  Mr. Speaker, the U.N. mission in Haiti is not the end of the risk for 
our troops. In fact, it may even up the stakes. I hope the Clinton 
White House is looking below the surface to ensure the safety of our 
men and women in uniform.
  And while they are thinking about Haiti, the Clinton administration 
might start thinking about the American taxpayers who are footing the 
bill for the hundreds of millions committed to bail out the Aristide 
ship of state, which many observers feel is a boat that will not float 
no matter how hard you bail.

                          ____________________