Another terrible news story out of haiti…two people murdered by gangs…bodies tossed into the street. Could Haiti ever become a modern prosperous country? Something like Aruba? Granted, the Haitians have done an excellent job of screwing up their environment (they cut down all of the trees, so the country floods when it rains). Also, they seem to do their best to sabotage any efforts a reforming their governemnt.
Suppose, just suppose order could be restored…is there any hope that some significant foreign investment would take place? Could Hait actually become something better than the dirt poor dump it is today?
Or is the whole thing just hopeless? 
Not entirely hopeless. What would you do to make things better?
Part of the solution is in identifying what the problems actually are. Once the problems have been identified, then it’s much easier to formulate solutions. However, even if you have identifid the problem and have formulated solutons, implimenting those solutions may be extremely difficult.
For example, one of the reasons that Haiti has been virtualy deforested has to do with the economic/political framework within which most Haitians have had to deal with. Wood is an all purpose resource - for building materials and especially for fuel. If it’s a choice between personal survival and the environment, then it will be the environment that suffers.
But one can’t simply have the government ban the use of wood for fuel or prevent people in large numbers in using it unless there’s an alternative. And you can’t simply start planting a bunch of trees and expect Haitians NOT to use the wood for fuel or other purposes (I know, most of Haiti is devoid of trees; but it’s not a matter of simply planting more trees. What needs to be addressed is the underlying reason for why for Haitians need to use trees rather than some other resource).
Restoring political stability is important - but what kind of stability are we talking about? The most stable periods in Haiti’s history are those in which dictators have had power. Which has encouraged those in power to hold onto power (and the spoils that come with it). Thus continuing the cycle of misery and poverty for the vast majority of Haitians.
In short, Haiti is not hopeless - but the solutions to the problems facing Haiti are not one-dimensional; they are multi-dimensional and will take lots of money, work, and time to see results. And the majority of Haitians need to agree that the solutions are the proper ones and are willing to see them through.
Would it help any if Aristide came back to power (again)? 
We should adopt them. For one hundreth of the cost of our failed attempts to bring our way of life where it isn’t wanted, we could bring decency and hope to thousands upon thousands. If our global generosity can extend to invasions on behalf of the oppressed, there is no legal reason we can’t be unilaterally assertive and bring food, medicince and order to those who live in darkness. We could apply to the UN for some special protectorate status, at least no one will say we are trying to steal their natural resources, the only thing they have an abundance of is misery.
In light of the current political situation, we can’t beneficially “adopt” the Haitians without occupying them. If the current rulers are left in power they will just divert all foreign aid into their bank accounts in the Caymans. We could remove the bastards from power by force . . . but, as we learned after Clinton restored Aristide, the corrupt right-wing kleptocratic forces would just go underground, and await their chance to rise up again as soon as our troops leave. Would it really be worth the trouble, do you think?
I think I started at least another thread in the past about Haiti and possible solutions to their problems. From that (and, mostly, other life experiences) I arrived to the following conclusions:
Few people know.
Few people care.
I am looking forward to see how this thread goes. Haiti is the Great Forgotten in America.
We have a lot of Haitian immigrants in Florida, especially the Miami area. (I once went into a bank in a downtown neighborhood in Miami. The signs were in English and some sort-of-French-but-not-French language – after a minute I figured out it was Haitian Creole!) Sooner or later, some of them will become citizens, and all of them who are allowed to stay will raise children who are born citizens. Eventually, they might have some political clout, just like the Miami Cubans.
But not this year.
Nope. But simply because military power is seldom utilized humanely by rational people, doesn’t mean its not possible. These are the people who would, in fact, strew garlands at our feet.
Now, I dont think we need send a taskforce, clearly we don’t have as immediate and urgent a threat as that posed by Grenada. We might start by suggesting a “protectorate” to the General Assembly and the OAS, while proceeding with humanitarian assistance. We offer to take responsibility for Haiti’s security, and request assistance in providing internal security, especially from francophone nations.
We offer protection and security, and humanitarian assistance, at least to the level that conditions of life in Haiti are no longer repugnant to a civilzed conscience. In return, we get nothing.
I expect this would be a tough sell.
I post in this thread from the position of someone who has spent some time working in Haiti for an international relief and development agency on several occasions (including right now) since 1996. I do not consider myself an expert by any stretch of the imagination but I am in the rare position of having the opportunity to see the situation there for myself.
Haiti could become a lot better than it is, but it would be over-optimistic to think it could become anything close to a modern prosperous country. There is so much that has to change both externally and internally.
What little there was of Haiti’s domestic agricultural production has been decimated by cheap imports (mainly rice, but also beans, another Haitian staple) from the US. Haitian farmers simply stopped producing rice and joined the flood of migrants to the cities, the Dominican Republic, the Bahamas and the US. To stop this trend people need to have something that guarantees them a stable income within their own country. Fairer trade rules would do a lot to reverse the damage done over the last decade or so.
The environmental degradation of the landscape is well-documented and the causes have already been discussed on this thread. Although some of this is irreversible there are pockets of land where coffee cultivation has led to a slight increase in prosperity and improved environmental awareness, resulting in some successful reforestation.
The tiny but extremely wealthy Haitian elite is almost entirely self-serving and cares little for the vast majority of the population which simply exists on the edge of survival in giant shanty towns. Colleagues of mine who have worked in Africa and Asia describe these slums as on a par with the worst they have ever seen. Most Haitians survive by engaging in petty trade. If it weren’t for remittances from their relatives outside Haiti, the entire place would grind to a halt.
Solutions range from some that have been mentioned above, but anything resembling a ‘protectorate’ would probably not go down too well with most Haitians, who are proud of their identity and independence, despite the clear failures of their nation.
Some speak of a ‘Marshall Plan’ type solution, but there are many other countries outside the Americas worse off than Haiti so why should Haiti be singled out? Its proximity to the US, perhaps? The US has some interest in keeping the region stable and that is why it has intervened in the past, but to the extent of baling out an entire impoverished nation of 8 million? Not likely.
Investors in Haiti are attracted by the dirt-cheap labour (garment assembly factories have attracted some controversy in the past) but are put off by the instability so there is not enough to make much of a difference to the economy as a whole.
The positive changes I have seen in Haiti have been very small-scale, on individual and community level, where people have been helped to find new markets for their products and thus bring modest but meaningful changes to their own lives. By this I mean being able to afford to keep their children in school, making improvements to their houses and to community infrastructure such as paving roads and improving drainage, and the simple fact that if you are more or less assured of a regular income you can live your life normally rather than constantly struggling for survival.
Struggling for survival is what life is like for most Haitians, and this is made even more arduous when the little you have is destroyed by the forces of nature - as we have seen a couple of times this year alone. Much of the effort of the international agencies has to concentrate on relieving those urgent needs, and the crucial longer-term work that helps people build up a sustainable income falls into neglect.
I am aware that this might not be very coherent as I am too close to the problem at the moment and have not had a chance to step back and reflect too much. I also realise that I may be doing Haiti an injustice by not listing all the positives, like the richness of its culture and the resilience of its people, but that is straying too far off the OT.
If I were to draw any conclusion it would be to say that Haiti needs what most countries in the so-called Third World need, but much more so and much more urgently. It needs better government than it has had in living memory. Its people need a source of a sustainable income. If these very difficult challenges could be achieved, stability would follow and in turn investors and possibly tourists would start coming in. Environmental damage would halt and start to be reversed. But I can’t see Haiti recovering to the point where it could compare itself to other countries in the region which although much more ‘modern’ are not ‘prosperous’ by global standards.
I don’t think you are doing the people of Haiti any injustice. Just pointing out the difficulties that face Haiti is critical. There are very few people in the US and elsewhere that really know what it’s like there. I know Dopers are an informed lot, but any insight/information is helpful. You obviously care about the people (or else you wouldn’t be spending so much of your time trying to help), and that’s important.
I once read an interesting fact about haiti. The country was occupied by the US from 1919-1934(not sure of the dates). During this occupation (by the US marines), the US built schools, hospitals, and raods . We also trained the Haitian Army, and trained school teachers. Now, the only decent roads in the whole country are those built by the US in the 1920’s! My question: do the Haitians DO anything for themselves? Granted, the island is not rich in natural resources…but if you compare it to other carribean islands, it is like night and day! As I said, Aruba is pretty clean, with modern roads, and has a reasonable standard of living…and they don’t kill each other in the way that the haitians do. What is it about haiti that has made it such an awful disaster?
I think comparisons with Aruba of all places are unfair. Aruba is under the direct rule of an affluent European country (the Netherlands) IIANM. Haiti, although unique in many ways, is better compared with other countries with similar histories and circumstances, most notably the Dominican Republic. Michele Wucker’s book ‘Why the Cocks Fight’ is a brave attempt at analysing Haiti in this context.
I think I listed many of the elements that make Haiti ‘such an awful disaster’ in my first post. Added to these is a brutal tradition that dates back even before Duvalier’s notorious Tonton Macoutes. Their practices are now being continued by Aristide’s ‘Chimeres’, criminal gangs and some elements of the former army (the rebels that overthrew Aristide). There are a lot of weapons available, few employment opportunities, and grinding poverty, so crime is an easy option for many.
It is true that much of the infrastructure in Haiti looks as if it hasn’t been updated since the US invasion. We certainly found that to be the case when identifying water sources for potable water distribution in the northern city of Cap Haitien earlier this year. The wells we looked at had been installed by the Americans in the 1920s. A Haitian colleague admitted that this is often the case. The reason being that almost without exception all the governments since the US occupation have been concerned with increasing their personal fortunes. I am not familiar with the south of the country but I was told by Haitian friends that Aristide made some improvements to the road system in this part of the country because that was his place of origin. The usual way of doing things (and not just in Haiti) is to throw just enough favours to keep your supporter base happy, and save the bulk of the resources for your own Swiss bank account.
My personal opinion is that Aristide was no better than any of the other disastrous Presidents that preceded him. If anything his betrayal was two-fold having presented himself as a saviour. But people forget that Duvalier senior (Papa Doc) also started off as a populist. Many of the Haitians I know are former Aristide supporters, in fact some were very close to him indeed. Some claim that they ‘saw the signs’ of his bullying tactics and megalomania way back when he was still a parish priest in the slums of Port-au-Prince.
On the question of ‘do Haitians DO anything for themselves?’ the answer is YES, if I can give examples of small scale efforts on community and individual level that I have seen as part of development and emergency work. One of the projects I visited was a disaster preparedness programme, aimed at preventing floods (llike the recent tragedy in Gonaives) and creating early warning systems. I attended a training day for community leaders from low-lying slum areas in Cap Haitien that are vulnerable to flooding. One man in particular told me how he and some friends ran a school for children whose parents were too poor to send them to normal schools. They received some charity funds but worked for very little material reward. All the community leaders in attendance were people with next to nothing who were prepared to devote their time and effort to making some improvements in their community.
The potential is there, but a great amount has to change before it is realised on a larger scale.
A friend of mine had a son who was part of the US Army mission yo Haiti, a few years ago. Along with patrolling the roads, part of their job was confiscating guns…they would often search a horribly poor slum dwelling, and find an AK-47 or two, and several hundred rounds of ammunition. This in a country with a per capita income of around $300/year! I guess these people would rather fight than eat.
Suppose we had a “Marshall Plan” for Haiti-we moved in. built highways, drilled wells, replanted forests, build housing, etc. How long would it be before the housing was wrecked, the forests cut dowmn, and the roads washed away? :eek:
I’m also thinking … tiny island nation … 8 million people … could be a lot of their problems are self-created … maybe a little cultural change would go a long way.
The root here is - again - corrupt leadership. All past presidents have armed their supporters to act as paramilitary enforcers for the regime. For every Haitian who would ‘rather fight than eat’ there are hundreds who are struggling to survive by honest means. One or two guns in a slum does not mean every single inhabitant would ‘rather fight than eat’. If you are young in this environment, with no legitimate education or job opportunities and someone gives you a gun, it gives you power and importance. In most cases, when people have viable alternatives they will gladly give up their guns. One of the programmes being implemented by the current peacekeeping force is confiscating weapons in conjunction with providing training and small business opportunities for former gang members. If it is successful, it should prove my point.
For a modern-day ‘Marshall Plan’ to work it has to include creating the conditions for sustainable means in which people to survive economically. All the infrastructure and facilities money can buy is not enough to get a country on its feet if there is no economic base and international trading conditions for the country to sustain itself economically. In the short term a country like Haiti would have to have massive international assistance, but there has to be consultation with the people on the receiving end, rather than donors deciding for themselves what is best for the country.
A Haitian colleague of mine said this week: 'you can throw all the money in the world at the problem but without consultation and participation nothing will change. (I paraphrase, but that was the gist of it).
Just as importantly, if governments continue to pocket the bulk of the national budget there will be no money to maintain new infrastructure. If people have no income they will continue to cut down trees for charcoal, and the landscape will remain vulnerable to flooding and landslides. This, I believe is the most insurmountable problem in this situation. International assistance can be tied to good governance, but more often than not corrupt governments get away with everything and if penalties are imposed, it is the poor people that suffer, not the crooks in power.
To dismiss Haiti and its people as a lost cause is a huge discredit to all the people there working to improve things in small ways.
Yes, some of the problems of Haiti are self-created. But it’s not just a matter of making small changes in the culture. For one thing, you can’t “change” a culture in the same way that you can, for example, change the channel on a television or even change laws or governments. Changes in culture take time. But if you live in a country where your first concern is survival, changing the way things are done drops to the bottom of priorities. Unless everyone changes (or at least enough to make a difference).
Martha has illustrated nicely that the problems of Haiti are multi-dimensional. If the problems of Haiti are to be addresses properly, then almost EVERYTHING needs fixed at the same time - infrastructure, government, economy, environment, culture, and the like. One shouldn’t expect to just throw money at the problems - it’s not that simple.
It is a set of circumstances rather than the Haitian people themselves (as some here appear to have decided) that is to blame for the situation the country is in. You can’t define an entire nation, or culture, as responsible for a country’s ills, Haiti or elsewhere. Certainly there are internal practices that have to change, but this will not have much impact unless combined with change in external factors like trading rules.
No one would deny that something that has to change is the culture of corruption at government level - which is not exclusive to Haiti but Haiti’s rulers have excelled at this, there is no doubt. Same goes for the culture of violence at community level. In the latter case there is more hope for change, but only when young people are provided with realistic alternatives.
There are also elements of Haitian culture which will serve the nation well given the right circumstances. A culture of resilience, humour in adversity, resourcefulness (is that a word?), creativity and hard work also exists there but that is rarely depicted by the media.
You left out the part where we politely ask all members of the existing government to step down and leave the country. And the part where they refuse to do so and we have to shoot them.
I too flirted briefly with the idea of declaring Haiti a protectorate under the auspices of the UN or OAS but discarded the idea as the quick-fix solution that will take us (or rather them) nowhere. Like Martha I have a stake (only much smaller) in this race, as I am their neighbor, so mine could be a severely skewed opinion.
First, Haitians are fiercely independent, they likely won’t accept the idea of becoming ‘a colony’ again, and for all intents and purposes that’s exactly what they will become if declared a protectorate or any other such thing. Second, doing that is not much different than putting a junkie in jail to cure them (no offense intended in what is probably the worse, but only, analogy I can come up with), it can be well-intended but negates that some problems require long-term solutions.
At this point I am out of ideas. Throwing money at Haiti hasn’t worked, and won’t work. It will quiet down our conscience but Haiti requires that we get down and dirty and commit to help in the long term. I just can’t conceive what to do to help them get good leaders. And if I knew that I would surely try it out on us first.