Haiti or MINUSTAH: Which Threatens the US?
One week before Michel Joseph Martelly's official visit to Washington D.C., the U.S. Senate placed Haiti on the list of countries that are in conflict or have had a civil war for a number of years. This document, prepared by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, mentions Haiti's fragility as a result of its extreme poverty, violence provoked during elections and parliamentary opposition to President Martelly. These fanciful considerations do not allude either to potential problems or to organized crime that could affect the country, and contradict the last report from the U.S. Department of Defense that had withdrawn Haiti's red zone [status] on Jan. 3.
What then could have been the U.S. Senate's motivation? Since the Sept. 30, 1991 coup, Haiti has been placed in the "fragile state" category. American intervention on Sept. 19, 1994, the dismantling of Haitian army forces, and the agreement signed between the U.S. and Haiti under President René Préval in 1997 allowed Americans to control the territorial waters of our country, weakening Dessalines' nation. Since Feb. 29, 2004, the U.S. and, later, the U.N. Mission for Stabilization in Haiti (MINUSTAH) had control of the country on land, at sea and even in the air. How could a country without an army, without defense, possibly be a threat to the internal security of a superpower country that controls its territorial waters?
Has the U.S. Senate, in the space of several weeks, become the U.S. Department of Defense or the Department of State? Does it receive, in advance and regularly, all the reports from American diplomatic missions abroad regarding security?
This report from the U.S. Senate could be an attempt to weaken President Michel Martelly in the eyes of Barack Obama. Do the Americans need this kind of action to obtain what they want from the Haitian president, as was the case for Aristide after the coup in 1991 and for René Préval during his two terms? The privileged relations between the Haitian government and Cuba and Venezuela — are they special? From René Préval to Michel Martelly, the relationships between Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela have remained unchanged. Aid from Hugo Chavez, sent to Haiti in the form of grants and loans, has exposed [the fact that] traditional American aid is often returned to the United States by foreign experts put in place by Western donor countries.
It is difficult to determine the hidden motive behind Martelly's visit to the White House. However, the U.S. Senate's position, naturally, is to believe [the visit will revolve around] an important request by Barack Obama of Martelly. It is not typical in the United States for two enormous arms of the government to contradict each other to this extent. Meanwhile, from Jan. 3 to 29, 2014, the situation in Haiti has become calmer and more secure.
What new, imaginary data could have been provided by the American Embassy in Haiti to the U.S. Senate, without passing through the Department of State or the Department of Defense, that is considered a threat to the internal security of the U.S.?
What then could have been the U.S. Senate's motivation? Since the Sept. 30, 1991 coup, Haiti has been placed in the "fragile state" category. American intervention on Sept. 19, 1994, the dismantling of Haitian army forces, and the agreement signed between the U.S. and Haiti under President René Préval in 1997 allowed Americans to control the territorial waters of our country, weakening Dessalines' nation. Since Feb. 29, 2004, the U.S. and, later, the U.N. Mission for Stabilization in Haiti (MINUSTAH) had control of the country on land, at sea and even in the air. How could a country without an army, without defense, possibly be a threat to the internal security of a superpower country that controls its territorial waters?
Has the U.S. Senate, in the space of several weeks, become the U.S. Department of Defense or the Department of State? Does it receive, in advance and regularly, all the reports from American diplomatic missions abroad regarding security?
This report from the U.S. Senate could be an attempt to weaken President Michel Martelly in the eyes of Barack Obama. Do the Americans need this kind of action to obtain what they want from the Haitian president, as was the case for Aristide after the coup in 1991 and for René Préval during his two terms? The privileged relations between the Haitian government and Cuba and Venezuela — are they special? From René Préval to Michel Martelly, the relationships between Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela have remained unchanged. Aid from Hugo Chavez, sent to Haiti in the form of grants and loans, has exposed [the fact that] traditional American aid is often returned to the United States by foreign experts put in place by Western donor countries.
It is difficult to determine the hidden motive behind Martelly's visit to the White House. However, the U.S. Senate's position, naturally, is to believe [the visit will revolve around] an important request by Barack Obama of Martelly. It is not typical in the United States for two enormous arms of the government to contradict each other to this extent. Meanwhile, from Jan. 3 to 29, 2014, the situation in Haiti has become calmer and more secure.
What new, imaginary data could have been provided by the American Embassy in Haiti to the U.S. Senate, without passing through the Department of State or the Department of Defense, that is considered a threat to the internal security of the U.S.?
Previous article![]( "Why John Kerry Is Israel’s Black Sheep")
