by Kim Ives
Feb.
7, 2013 promises to be a hot day in Haiti. Thousands of Haitians
plan to march through
Port-au-Prince to protest President Michel Martelly’s patent
corruption and drift toward a repressive neo-Duvalierist
dictatorship.
At the same time, former
President-for-Life Jean-Claude “Baby Doc” Duvalier will be
personally appearing in the capital’s Appeals Court to answer a
challenge by his regime’s victims.
One year ago, Investigating
Judge Carves Jean ruled that Duvalier should not be prosecuted
for the many crimes against humanity committed under his 15-year
rule from 1971 to 1986, including extrajudicial executions and jailings. Human rights groups like Amnesty International and its
Haitian counterparts cried foul, as did over a dozen of people
who had filed human rights complaints against Duvalier following
his return to Haiti in January 2011. They appealed the decision. Ironically,
Judge Jean Joseph Lebrun, the head of the Appeals Court, set the
hearing for final arguments against Judge Carves Jean’s ruling
for the 27th anniversary of the Duvalier regime’s
fall.
Feb. 7, 1986 was the day when,
after a three-month nationwide uprising against his regime, the
playboy dictator and his haughty bourgeois wife, Michelle, drove
their Mercedes-Benz through a cordon of journalists at the
airport to board a U.S.-provided C-130 cargo jet that flew them, with her
furs and his cars, into a golden exile in France.
The Duvaliers divorced but
lived the good life off the some $800 million (according to best
estimates) that they and their cronies embezzled from the
Haitian treasury. In fact, Judge Carves Jean did charge Duvalier for
his “economic crimes,” but the maximum sentence if he were ever
found guilty (an unlikely event under Martelly’s regime) would
be only five years.
Duvalier returned to Haiti on
Jan. 16, 2011 thanks to a Haitian diplomatic passport furnished
to him five years earlier by one of his former Haitian Army
generals, Hérard Abraham. The former general, whom President Jean-Bertrand Aristide
fired in 1991, had been resurrected
13 years later as the Foreign Affairs Minister under the de facto
regime of Prime Minister Gérard Latortue, installed by
Washington following the Feb. 29, 2004 coup d’état against
Aristide.
U.S. State Department cables
provided to Haïti Liberté by the media organization
WikiLeaks in 2011 reveal that the U.S. Embassy was very
“concerned” about Duvalier’s return to Haiti in early 2006, when
the de facto regime was about to hold presidential elections on
Feb. 7, 2006.
In Santiago, Chile, for
example, U.S. Ambassador Craig Kelly “expressed [U.S.] concerns
about the Interim Government of Haiti's (IGOH) decision to
approve the issuance of a diplomatic passport for former
president and dictator Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier,” Kelly
wrote in a Jan. 11, 2006
Confidential cable. He
asked the Chilean government “to approach the IGOH to make clear
that Duvalier's return would undermine efforts to assist Haiti
in its transition to a stable, democratic society.”
The U.S. also talked to France,
which “understood and shared our ‘political’ concern that Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’
Duvalier might use a diplomatic passport to return to Haiti,”
reported a
Jan. 12, 2006 cable from
Paris.
In a meeting with then
Dominican President Leonel Fernandez, the U.S. Ambassador “urged
Fernandez not to allow Duvalier to obtain a visa for the
Dominican Republic so as to pass through en route to Haiti,” a
Jan. 17, 2006 cable marked
“Secret” reports.
Meanwhile, the cables detail
several meetings that U.S. Embassy officials held with Latortue
and his officials about Duvalier. What becomes clear in the
diplomatic record is that the U.S. Embassy was primarily
concerned about appearances, and the bad press Duvalier’s return
would generate. “The visuals are bad,” argued U.S. Chargé d’Affaires Timothy Carney in a
Jan. 17, 2006 cable from
Port-au-Prince, and “Baby Doc is a risky, potentially divisive,
presence.” Carney was reporting on a meeting he’d had the day
before with Abraham, who “concluded by refusing to revoke the
passport already issued to Duvalier, but confirming that he
would do everything in his power to transmit the message to
Duvalier that he should not to return to Haiti at this time.”
The most telling bit of the
cable is where Carney quotes Abraham as saying that Duvalier
"lacks appropriate guarantees, security and otherwise, to secure
his reentry into the country."
Fast forward exactly five years
to Jan. 16, 2011. When
Duvalier arrived in Haiti
on that day, the U.S. acted as surprised as everybody else and
divulged nothing about its opposition to the diplomatic passport
provided to Duvalier five years earlier by the very coup regime
it had installed in power.
The Haiti cables that WikiLeaks
obtained only covered a period from April 2003 to February 2010,
so we don’t know what the Embassy was saying in the days just
before Duvalier’s “surprise” return, which it surely knew was in
the offing. But, judging from the 2006 cables, one can
reasonably assume that Duvalier would only have returned to
Haiti if he’d received the "appropriate guarantees, security and
otherwise, to secure his reentry into the country."
Those “guarantees” could only
have come from Washington. Then President René Préval, a former
anti-Duvalierist militant, surely didn’t give them. He launched
a “serious effort to put together a case against Duvalier”
during the four months that he remained in office, according to
human rights lawyer Mario Joseph, whose International Lawyers’
Bureau (BAI) helped build the prosecution’s dossier. But Préval
was replaced on May 14, 2011 by Martelly, and at that point the
prosecution against Duvalier “ground to a halt,” Joseph said.
The new neo-Duvalierist
president was installed through an illegal election in which the
U.S. brazenly intervened to bump out the candidate of Préval’s
party, Jude Celestin, who came in second-place in the first
round, and replace him with Martelly, who came in third.
Did the U.S. (and France) feel
that the time was right for Duvalier to come back to Haiti, as
they were engineering the election of Martelly? Did they offer
Duvalier “guarantees” ?
One thing is for sure: the U.S.
and its allies did not fight to block Duvalier’s return from
France in 2011 the way they fought like hell to block Aristide’s
return from South Africa two months later, as Haïti Liberté
revealed when dissecting
WikiLeaked cables in 2011.
“The cables show how Washington
actively colluded with the United Nations leadership, France,
and Canada to discourage or physically prevent Aristide's return
to Haiti,” we wrote in our Jul. 28, 2011 edition. “The Vatican
was a reliable partner, blessing the coup and assisting in
prolonging Aristide’s exile.”
The history of the U.S. Embassy showing Duvalier the door in
1986 and then likely opening it for him in 2011 makes one wonder
what the U.S. will be doing behind the scenes on Feb. 7, 2013.
Whatever it is, the Embassy will be trying to avoid one outcome:
that “the visuals are bad.”
|