[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 60 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4980-S4981]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                           SITUATION IN HAITI

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, President Clinton is in Haiti today as part 
of the transition from American control to U.N. control. All Americans 
are proud of the performance of the men and women of our Armed Forces 
in Haiti. As always they have served where ordered with skill and 
courage. And all Americans are pleased that the occupation of Haiti has 
gone as smoothly as it has.
  We all support democracy in Haiti. That does not mean, however, that 
we should have occupied Haiti in the first place. And the transition to 
U.N. command serves as a reminder that all concerns about the Haiti 
operation are not over.
  First, we would do well to remember that the problems in Somalia did 
not occur under United States command--they occurred after the 
operation was transferred to U.N. control. We learned the hard way that 
the agenda of Boutros Boutros-Ghali and the United Nations is not the 
American agenda. It is true the U.N. commander is an American--Gen. 
Joseph Kinzer--but the U.N. bureaucrats will be in the loop. The 
problem of Mission Creep has already been raised--in requests to disarm 
the Haitian population, for example. In my view, U.N. command of 
American soldiers should be avoided.
  Second, the costs of Haiti are mounting daily; $1\1/2\ billion have 
already been spent on the occupation and nation-building in Haiti. The 
tab is only going to go up--up to $2 billion or more. In a time of 
severe budget cuts, and in a time when foreign aid is being reduced, we 
must ask whether we can afford $2 billion for Haiti.
  Third, Haiti still has a long way to go. Elections called for in the 
Haitian Constitution have been
 postponed. Political assassination appears to be on the rise. Serious 
reports of involvement by the Aristide government in this week's murder 
have been made, and they deserve full examination. Little effort to 
reach out to parliamentary opponents has occurred. There are disturbing 
indications that President Aristide or his supporters are subverting 
the democratic process. Despite the ceremony today, we realize there 
are real problems in Haiti--and there will continue to be problems, no 
matter how long the United States or the United Nations stays in Haiti.

  We all support genuine efforts at reconciliation and democracy in 
Haiti. We hope the long-delayed elections move forward in Haiti--that 
they are free and fair, that the results are respected by all Haitians, 
and that President Aristide keeps his promise to step down. As a recent 
article by President Clinton's former envoy to Haiti points out, the 
hard work of restoring democracy in Haiti was not returning President 
Aristide from exile--it is in building truly democratic institutions in 
a country that has never known them.
  I ask consent that this article be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

               [From the Washington Post, Mar. 22, 1995]

                        A Voice for All Haitians

       Operation Restore Democracy landed more than 20,000 U.S. 
     soldiers in Haiti and secured the return of President Jean-
     Bertrand Aristide on Oct. 15, 1994. ``We have helped to give 
     the people of Haiti a chance to remake the democracy they 
     earned, they deserve and they plainly wish for,'' said 
     President Clinton on the eve of Aristide's return. Today that 
     goal, which appears to have been eclipsed by the Clinton 
     administration's need to portray Haiti as a foreign policy 
     victory, is in danger of being subverted by some of 
     Aristide's most ardent supporters.
       The issue before Aristide is the election of some 2,000 
     local officials, 18 of the 27 senators and all 83 deputies, 
     scheduled to be held June 4. There's little doubt among 
     political observers that Aristide's Lavalas movement will win 
     big. In fact, in some districts four and even five candidates 
     are competing for the honor of representing their movement. 
     But legitimate opposition parties charge that the Aristide 
     government is stacking the Provisional Electoral Council with 
     Lavalas loyalists and making arbitrary decisions that 
     prejudice fair and open elections.
       When former President Jimmy Carter traveled to Haiti 
     recently to raise these concerns, he was greeted with obscene 
     graffiti painted by Aristide supporters. The mildest epithets 
     called our ex-president ``a false democrat,'' ``a thug'' and 
     a ``danger to democracy.'' While Aristide praised Carter to 
     his face, his close advisers characterized the ex-president 
     as ``tricky and sneaky'' behind his back. Carter offered to 
     perform the same role he did in 1990, when he and a group of 
     international monitors ensured Aristide's free election in a 
     political atmosphere that was even more problematic than it 
     is now. It's a role he's played in Nicaragua, Panama and 
     Guyana. This time Carter's services were turned down.
       Why? Whether Aristide is leading the move to consolidate 
     power at the expense of political opponents or permitting the 
     more radical elements in his Lavalas movement a free hand is 
     not clear. One former member of the coalition that supported 
     Aristide's presidential candidacy in 1990 predicted to us 
     that paramilitary groups would emerge if the political right 
     is not given an opportunity to participate fully in the 
     political process. Political violence and even civil war are 
     possible in this highly polarized society, he says. And 
     legitimate democrats are fearful and frustrated. They see the 
     heavy-handedness of the Aristide camp as a portent of the 
     authoritarianism that has plagued the political history of 
     their country.
       The fairness of the June elections raises the larger issue 
     of political reconciliation in Haiti, which has been 
     championed by Haitian politicians on all levels of the 
     political spectrum as the key to the future of democracy in
      their country. Unfortunately, this goal was abandoned by the 
     Clinton administration almost a year ago, when Aristide 
     lobbied hard for U.S. military intervention to restore him 
     to power. He got his way. Since then he has dismantled the 
     Haitian military. Remnants of the old police force now 
     operate under international supervision. And the new 
     police force that is being trained poses no threat to him. 
     Interestingly, the only attempt to politicize the police 
     force--which the U.S. Embassy, to its credit, put an end 
     to--came from the Aristide camp.
       When Aristide's political rivals extended the olive branch 
     in July 1993 during the New York Pact and again in the spring 
     of last year, they were accused of advocating ``power 
     sharing'' and pushed away. This came after first U.N. 
     Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali and then Vice 
     President Gore assured Aristide in person that neither the 
     United Nations nor the United States would accept any 
     agreement that would threaten his constitutional power. It's 
     important to remember that the Haitian 
     [[Page S4981]] constitution of 1987 provides for a 
     parliamentary system of government with executive authority 
     divided between a president and a prime minister. Political 
     reconciliation is necessary before the larger task of nation-
     building can begin.
       Aristide has the opportunity to initiate a new, 
     constructive phase in Haitian history. But first he must take 
     the lead in creating a participatory political culture in 
     which all Haitians have a voice. The coming elections are an 
     excellent place to start. If he can bring himself to play a 
     historically creative role, he may be able to convince 
     Haitians steeped in cynicism that political comity is 
     achievable. And once the promise of political stability is 
     buttressed by visible signs of political reconciliation, he 
     may find it easier to attract the private investment that his 
     country desperately needs.
       Rather than resting on laurels that can quickly turn to 
     ashes, the Clinton administration should view the Carter 
     visit as a wake-up call. It should take the lead in getting 
     more international observers to monitor the June elections. 
     And, more important, it should be urging Aristide to act as a 
     true democrat and president of all the people of Haiti at 
     this critical time.
       Lawrence Pezzullo is former special adviser on Haiti to the 
     Clinton administration. He and his son Ralph Pezzullo, an 
     author and playwright, are writing a book on Haiti.

  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________