Thousands March in Haitian Slums, Praise UN Troops

[struggle4progress]

Friday, March 04, 2005 5:24:37 PM ET

By Joseph Guyler Delva

PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti (Reuters) - Thousands of supporters of exiled former President Jean-Bertrand Aristide marched peacefully on Friday through a Haitian slum, calling for his return and praising U.N. troops who secured the demonstration.

The march in the Bel-Air neighborhood of Port-au-Prince was the second pro-Aristide demonstration in five days. On Monday, Haitian police opened fire on a demonstration and killed at least three Aristide supporters.

On Friday, U.N. officials mounted their first major operation to secure a demonstration, with 300 heavily armed peacekeepers and 50 U.N. vehicles, said Col. Carlos Barcelos, a spokesman for the U.N. peacekeepers.

Brazilian peacekeepers kept the demonstration's route under tight control and denied access to Haitian police who wanted to enter the perimeter of the march. <snip>

http://www.metronews.ca/reuters_international.asp?id=59774

[Ms. Clio]

1. But I thought the U.N. was just a useless debating society? n/t

[burrowowl]

2. Thank heavens

the UN peacekeepers weren't a U$ contingent, the demostrators would have been shot up.

"Brazilian peacekeepers kept the demonstration's route under tight control and denied access to Haitian police who wanted to enter the perimeter of the march."

[chlamor]

3. The Spirit of the Haitian People Cannot be Destroyed

[seemslikeadream]

4. Political Crisis in Haiti House Committee Hearing

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1189042

I'm looking for the transcript of this hearing

[seemslikeadream]

5. PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MAXINE WATERS

PREPARED STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE MAXINE WATERS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

I have been to Haiti three times during the last two months, most recently, about ten days ago. It was clear to me that a coup d'etat was in progress, and I communicated my concerns to Secretary of State Colin Powell on a regular basis. As recently as a week ago, Secretary Powell had repeatedly stated that the United States would not call for the resignation of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the democratically-elected President of Haiti, or support any attempts to remove him from office. Yet, obviously, by this past weekend, the Bush Administration abandoned that position, reversed course, and pressured President Aristide to leave.

What happened? Why would we not commit U.S. forces to stabilize the democratically-elected government of Haiti when we had no reluctance to commit those same forces once President Aristide was removed? Were the Haitian people less worthy of protection from violence and unrest when President Aristide was still in power? Were their circumstances any less dire? It appears that our government was perfectly content to let the Haitian people suffer the burdens of this violence and civil unrest until President Aristide's departure was achieved.



Perhaps this sheds some light on why Ambassador Roger Noriega, the Assistant Secretary for Western Hemisphere Affairs and the former chief of staff for Senator Jesse Helms, was permitted to pursue a policy of undermining President Aristide's government for so many years. Ambassador Noriega has a long history of being aligned with the anti-Aristide business owners in Haiti and undermining the democratically-elected governments of Haiti. Ambassador Noriega has been working closely with the opposition in Haiti. The Ambassador's statements throughout the political crisis that led to President Aristide's removal have been extremely one-sided.

For several years, the United States blocked $145.9 million in development loans to Haiti by the Inter-American Development Bank. These loans were supposed to fund health, basic education, rural road development, potable water and sanitation programs, but the United States government prevented the money from ever going to Haiti until the Congressional Black Caucus intervened last year. Denying Haiti access to basic development assistance undermined the ability of the elected government of Haiti to serve the needs of its people and further impoverished a poor population.

The United States government also helped to organize and train the political opposition in Haiti. The International Republican Institute (IRI) has been providing the opposition training for political party development, communications strategies, public opinion polling, web site development and public outreach. IRI has a blatantly partisan approach. It trains opposition groups but flatly refuses to work with Lavalas party members or other supporters of President Aristide. IRI's Haiti Program is funded by American taxpayers through the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID). IRI is currently operating under a two-year grant from USAID obtained in late 2002.



While I was in Haiti, I met with leaders of the opposition, including Andre Apaid, the leader of the Group of 184. Unfortunately, Andre Apaid is not the democratic leader that the Administration would have us believe. Andre Apaid was a Duvalier-supporter, who allegedly holds an American passport and operates sweatshops in Haiti. Andre Apaid refused to accept the CARICOM proposal as the basis for negotiations to resolve the political crisis. He repeatedly rejected President Aristide's offer to negotiate, and he refused to participate in any negotiations whatsoever.

The opposition has accused President Aristide of drug trafficking and corruption. Yet when asked for documentation, they have not been able to produce anything more than rumors, innuendos and allegations. No one has ever identified any money allegedly stolen by President Aristide.

President Aristide has given the United States special authority to assist with drug interdiction efforts by allowing the United States to interdict drugs in Haitian waters. The government of Haiti does not have the resources needed to wage a tough and consistent war against drugs, and the President of Haiti begged the United States for assistance to eliminate drug trafficking.

Many of the thugs that took over Haiti in the last few weeks are former members of the Haitian military or members of the feared death squad known as the Front for the Advancement and Progress of Haiti (FRAPH). FRAPH members were responsible for numerous human rights violations during the three years following the coup d'etat in 1991. Guy Philippe, who yesterday declared himself the new chief of Haiti's military, is a former police chief and military officer, who was accused of a previous coup attempt in 2002. Louis Jodel Chamblain, was a leader of FRAPH and was convicted in abstentia for his role in a 1994 massacre. He has also been accused of drug trafficking.



When President Aristide disbanded the Haitian military following his return to Haiti in 1994, the former military officers were never disarmed. Many simply went over the border into the Dominican Republic, taking their M–1 and M–14 weapons with them.

I am especially concerned by the possibility that the U.S. government may have armed and trained the former military officers and death squad leaders who carried out last Sunday's coup. In 2002, the United States supplied M–16's to the Dominican Republic, supposedly for use along the Haitian border, and stationed 900 U.S. troops alongside Dominican guards at the border. Many of the thugs that have taken over Haiti are now armed with M–16's. The U.S. government must investigate how these thugs were armed and explain how the M–16's got into their hands.

The United States has also maintained a ban on weapons sales to Haiti. This has left the Haitian police force ill-equipped to maintain law and order in the face of groups of armed thugs, former military officers and death squad members. The people of the city of St. Marc placed boxes, rocks and cars in the roads to protect themselves from the approaching paramilitary groups. The Administration should explain why this ban on weapons sales was maintained against Haiti throughout President Aristide's term in office.

Once the thugs had completely surrounded Port-au-Prince, President Aristide was forced to leave Haiti. President Aristide called me on Monday morning and told me that Luis G. Moreno, the Deputy Chief of Mission at the U.S. Embassy in Port-au-Prince, came to his home in the wee hours of the morning with other diplomats and U.S. Marines. He said he was told to leave, and leave now, or he and many Haitians would be killed. He said he was kidnaped.



This certainly has the appearance of a coup.

I demand that this Administration explain how they allowed a democratically-elected government to be overthrown by a group of heavily-armed thugs.

...


Question:

It seems that all sorts of sordid figures are coming out of the woodwork to rule in Haiti. Guy Phillipe has taken over the armed forces and is insisting on a role in Haiti's future, Baby Doc wants to return, and Danny Toussaint wants to run for President. What is our current plan for Haiti and will these people be allowed to take office?

Response:

We have been very clear with the interim Government of Haiti that there can be no role in government or the police for anybody who espouses political violence or has committed crimes or human rights abuses in the past. We also encourage the Government of Haiti to pursue justice for any criminal acts through the judicial system.

We are working with the international community to assist Haiti in planning for its elections and in standing up its police force and justice system. The Administration expects to play a role, defined in the context of the other donors in the international community, in Haiti's reconstruction over the next several years to help restore the capacity to govern, develop a professional and independent police force, promote economic development, and support free and fair elections.


...

Question:

The International Republican Institute is said to have worked with opposition groups, which have not only vetoed the government's attempts to call elections, but have refused to negotiate under CARICOM proposal, or the recent U.S. proposal. Exactly how much was given to IRI since 2000 to work with opposition groups? Did the IRI give this money to opposition groups? What groups were the recipients? Were any of the groups in the Dominican Republic? Did Stanley Lucas work with these groups in Haiti and/or in the Dominican Republic?

Response:


IRI's current grant from USAID is a two-year program, begun in 2002, with an annual project budget of $600,000 per year. From 2000 to 2002, IRI undertook U.S.-based assessments and planning for future activities in Haiti. This involved a few trips to Miami to discuss prospective activities with Haitian political leaders and members of the Haitian diaspora.

Under its current grant, IRI provides training and education in basic skills of democracy, citizenship, and advocacy. Specifically, IRI training focuses on democratic political party development, and communications strategies (public opinion polling, web site development, public outreach).

IRI does not provide financial assistance or material resources to any Haitian political party or group under this grant program. Participants in IRI training sessions receive no fees or payments; only their direct travel, lodging, and food expenses are covered. Since December 2002, IRI's Haiti program has held 26 training sessions. IRI held these sessions in a large public hotel in Santo Domingo, the capital of the Dominican Republic, with direct oversight from USAID. IRI held sessions in the Dominican Republic based on its assessment that security risks in Port-au-Prince were too high.

To foster a level playing field, IRI has concentrated efforts mostly on working with weaker political parties and disenfranchised constituencies such as women and youth. Under its USAID grant, IRI political party training is open to all parties committed to democratic principles. Political parties, groups, and individuals that support violence are not invited to IRI activities. Nor are individuals associated with the former Haitian military. In recent years, reports of links between elements of Fanmi Lavalas and acts of violence discouraged IRI from providing training for them. IRI has not offered or provided training for any groups based in the Dominican Republic.


Stanley Lucas participated in IRI training session noted above held in the Dominican Republic, as part of the IRI Haiti program team.

Question:

What is the legal status of Emmanuel Toto Constant, former FRAPH leader? How did he come to reside in Queens, NY? Does he have CIA connections? Why isn't he considered a risk to Haitians in NY?

Response:

Emmanuel ''Toto'' Constant arrived in the United States on a B–2 visitor's visa in December 1994, at San Juan, Puerto Rico, with authorization to remain in the United States until June 23, 1995. The Department of State revoked his visa on February 14, 1995. In September 1995, a U.S. immigration judge issued a final order of removal to deport Constant to Haiti. In December 1995, Constant filed a constitutional tort action against the Secretary of State and the Attorney General seeking $50 million in damages. In June 1996, Constant settled his lawsuit. In August 1997, an assessment of the threat to Constant if he were returned to Haiti was prepared. Based on that assessment, reviewed by various government agencies, Constant was not returned to Haiti. There were concerns about Constant's personal safety in Haiti, the inability of Haiti's weak judicial system to guarantee a fair trial, and potential unrest if Constant were returned.

In February 1998, Constant attempted to reopen his case to apply for asylum, but an Immigration Judge denied the motion. In September 2003, the Board of Immigration Appeals upheld the denial. There are at the moment no pending appeals or known legal impediments to Constant's removal. The Departments of State and Homeland Security are evaluating, in light of current country conditions, whether Constant may be removed to Haiti.


We believe that Constant ended up in Queens because of the substantial Haitian community living in New York.

If Constant were considered a threat to Haitians in New York, that would be a law enforcement matter, to be addressed by state authorities and the Department of Homeland Security.

I have no knowledge of alleged connections between Constant and the CIA.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa92343.000/hfa92343_0f.htm

[seemslikeadream]

6. STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. SACHS, DIRECTOR, THE EARTH INSTITUTE AT COLUMBIA U

STATEMENT OF JEFFREY D. SACHS, DIRECTOR, THE EARTH INSTITUTE AT COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY

Mr. SACHS. Thank you very much, Chairman. You asked a few minutes ago why we would stay through such a long hearing. There are two reasons: One is I would go anywhere where Congressman Rangel is and I would follow him around the world because he is the most remarkable person, and I am so honored that he is my representative in the Congress. But there is a second reason, which is that I think I speak for many Americans that are deeply frightened today. We are frightened partly for Haiti, but we are truly frightened for America because we don't know what is happening in this country.

What we hear doesn't add up. It reminds me when I am asked to believe the Administration of Groucho Marx's old line, ''what do you believe me, or your own eyes.'' Doesn't meet the smell test when I hear Mr. Noriega. And what I have heard directly, and I am experienced probably as much as any person on this planet in international development and in countries like Haiti and in Haiti, what I hear about what is happening does not make sense, Mr. Chairman. And so I come here to appeal to you, to Congressman Menendez and to the rest of the panel to exercise Democratic oversight over the Executive Branch with urgency now.

I heard a lot of speeches. A lot of your colleagues seem to know all the answers, but there are a lot of urgent questions you must find answers to. And I don't believe that you are working hard enough in the Congress yet to find out the answers to something that is at a threat to American democracy.



Now I and others have been in touch closely with the people around President Aristide, his wife. We have been in contact repeatedly. I have talked to his attorney. What you have been told and what we have been told is flatly denied by President Aristide and his wife. And I believe that rather than hearing congressmen like Congressman Weller or like others say we believe, I think it would be good to find out rather than just to believe. Where is Mr. Aristide? How safe is he right now? I know as of this morning, they fear for their safety. I know that as of this morning, they do not believe they can communicate freely with the outside world.

Are you sure? I heard Mr. Noriega just say right now the U.S. has no responsibility. This was a most shocking answer to me as an American citizen after airlifting a President out of his country and depositing him in the Central African Republic to be told by the Assistant Secretary of State, it is not our responsibility is simply amazing. What is his current status? We heard so many contradictions today. Mr. Aristide's departure was never a U.S. demand. That was in the testimony but I heard Mr. Noriega flatly contradicted himself. It was a demand. It had political reasons he said, but yes, it was a demand. And I heard it directly as well from Mr. Aristide's attorney that his client was not allowed on the airplane without giving the letter of resignation to Mr. Moreno in the Embassy in Haiti.

Do you just believe it or do you exercise oversight to find out, Mr. Chairman, because we need to know these things. Because in one case, it is a resignation and in another case, it is a coup. We need to understand these facts. What was said to Mr. Aristide about his security? Congressman Cummings said that Secretary Powell assured President Aristide—was assured of and assured Mr. Aristide of his security as of Saturday afternoon. Mr. Aristide's attorney has said that his client was told that the U.S. would not protect his personal security or family security.



Mr. Noriega said early in the testimony, Mr. Chairman, said early in the testimony that yes, we weren't going to protect him. Said later in the testimony that no, he was not at any personal risk, he was very surprised that he decided to leave under those circumstances. What are you going to believe, me or your own eyes? What about the withdrawal of U.S. support for CARICOM. Curious, isn't it? The Caribbean leaders are absolutely aghast of what we have done. One of them had the gumption to say so on the record knowing that we can turn our governments it seems and has a history of doing so. But he said at no time was CARICOM action plan predicated on the unconstitutional removal of President Aristide from office.

The removal of President Aristide in these circumstances sets a dangerous precedent for democratically-elected governments. What about U.S. links to the rebels? Please don't take these denials at face value, Mr. Chairman, because history constantly shows the CIA fingerprints after the fact. Let's find out what Guy Philippe was doing when we talked to him, what Jodel Chamblain is doing there as the head of the rebels. Let's ask not to hear that our Defense Department doesn't know how M–16s from the Dominican Republic got in their hands. Maybe they were ''sold.'' Maybe they were given. Let's find out. It is absolutely alarming.

Then what was the support from congressionally voted funds to the International Republican Institute going to an opposition that blocked the CARICOM agreement? We are supporting the opposition. Is that right? We are giving millions of dollars to the opposition that Mr. Noriega went down to negotiate with them and got a negative answer? Are you curious? I am curious as an American and I am appealing to the Chairman of this Subcommittee to be curious as well. It doesn't make sense. What do you believe, Mr. Noriega or your own eyes? What about all of the love and care for Haiti that we heard today? Now here's an area of some expertise of mine——



Mr. BALLENGER. Could you summarize?

Mr. SACHS. I will summarize. I will summarize of why I am frightened and why millions of Americans are frightened and why we are looking to you for leadership. Now I came back from Haiti in early 2001 and spoke to the leadership of the Inter-American Development Bank, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the Organization for American States. And they all told me that the Bush Administration had put a complete freeze on all multi-lateral assistance. I know something about that business certainly as much as anyone in this room. And I know what it means for the United States to put a freeze on this aid. And then when I hear people concerned about the children of Haiti where nearly 100 children die before their fifth birthday out of every thousand that are born where we froze all aid for 3 years.

Mr. BALLENGER. Is this a summary?

Mr. SACHS. As Dr. Maguire said, we have strangled that country. I would like some answers as an American citizen. I am grateful for the chance to tell you how frightened we are for our own democracy, Mr. Chairman. We do not know what our country is doing and we appeal to you and your Committee to get real answers to these questions. Thank you very much.

Mr. BALLENGER. If I may interrupt for a second in the fact that I wondered myself about the safety of the President. And so the Steele Foundation is an organization that has been providing—taken care of his safety for years that are paid for by the Haitian government. And I called the president of the Steele Foundation and last night he told me for sure that there is no doubt in my mind that they were completely protected by our men. And then he said this morning he called me back and said I just wanted to check it out, and I will tell you now I will swear on a stack of Bibles that we had armed guards there at his request and we did whatever he told us to do.



Mr. SACHS. Mr. Chairman, may I make a suggestion to you and our colleagues. Please call President Aristide in the Central African Republic. Please call President Aristide to find out for yourself whether you are correct in that assessment because they feel at risk of their lives.
http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa92343.000/hfa92343_0f.htm

[seemslikeadream]

7. Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA.

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. First, let me say that I hope you received my letter of apology at our last meeting. I did not mean anything personally to you, but I stand by what I said about this Administration's policy, pertaining to the Haitian people, is racist, and there is no way around it.

In our discussion, there was a lot of discussion about elections, and of course, everybody knows that I take any discussion about elections personally, because I experienced, I guess, the American-style coup d'etat.

I heard you say something about not a traditional coup d'etat in Haiti; well, we had not a traditional coup d'etat in Florida; in my district alone, 227,000 votes were thrown out. And I personally went to Haiti and monitored the election, and I can tell you it was just as fair as the one that we had in Florida.

Now, my concern—and my concern was there about the Haitians that have been turned back, how we have dual policies, we do not let not one Haitian come into this country, we send them back into the middle of this war that is going on, and we turn on the television and we see people being slaughtered. So my concern still is for the Haitian people. We have our military there, and I am grateful that they are there, but they are standing by while people are being slaughtered in the streets.

What are our plans for the Haitian people? In talking to other leaders in the Caribbean countries, they are—they indicated that the United States of America blocked us going in, intervening. We stopped the other members of the international community from going in and helping to stabilize this country.

Page 132 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC

Can you tell me what you know about that to be true, and what are we going to do to help the hard-working Haitian people?

Now, I know it is a difference between them and Iraq, because in Iraq they have oil, and in Haiti they have nothing but a history—and we just left Black History Month—they do have a history of helping the United States.

Now, I want to know, what are we going to do to help those people, my brothers and sisters, those children?

Mr. NORIEGA. Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. I did receive your letter, and I have never for a moment doubted that your concern and engagement and interest and passion about the subject was anything less than sincere and motivated by your interest in the well-being of the Haitian people.

The United States did not block other countries from intervening. There was some allusion that maybe we did this vis-a-vis France. The suggestion was that, somehow, Secretary Powell was being deceptive about that; and of course, that is not true. We did not block them——




Page 133 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Yes, ma'am. Thank you very much. I did receive your letter, and I have never for a moment doubted that your concern and engagement and interest and passion about the subject was anything less than sincere and motivated by your interest in the well-being of the Haitian people.

The United States did not block other countries from intervening. There was some allusion that maybe we did this vis-a-vis France. We did not block them or any other country from intervening on a bilateral basis, but no country chose to intervene before Aristide's resignation. This was for the same reasons I described for the U.S. decision not to intervene. No country wanted to place troops and lives at risk by putting them into the middle of an unresolved, armed conflict. Your question suggests that perhaps we stopped the international community from going in to stabilize Haiti. I think this may be a reference to the UN Security Council Resolution that some Caribbean Community member states applied for on February 26. If so, I would respectfully point out to you that the Security Council voted 15–0 not to involve the UN at that point. In deciding not to intervene, the Security Council gave the same reasons I have stated for not involving the U.S.—it did not want to put a UN stabilization force in between two warring factions.

To answer your question about what we are doing to help the Haitian people, we are doing a lot and will do much more. The U.S. has provided over $3 million in emergency aid since mid-February, on top of the $55 million in regular assistance budgeted for fiscal year 2004. We supported, and of course will continue to support, re-engagement of the International Financial Institutions. Since last July, when the Haitian government cleared its arrears to the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), it has approved loans totaling $398 million. The IDB has distributed $47 million of this amount, all but $30 million of the rest are project loans that will pay out over 5–10 years, thereby making a substantial contribution to Haiti's long-term development. On a bilateral basis, the Administration expects an intensive engagement in Haiti's reconstruction over the next several years to help restore the capacity to govern, develop a professional and independent police force, promote economic development, and support free and fair elections.

Page 134 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. Sir, it was not just France; we talked to several different countries. I fear to call their names, because, you know, if we are not in lockstep with this Administration, they take you out. So I am not going to call anybody's name, any country's name, not me.

Mr. NORIEGA. I understand the discretion that you are showing by not naming particular countries, but I can say that any country that wanted to send police or troops was free to do so. Of course, the United States would not be in a position to prevent any one of the 150 countries in the world from contributing to Haiti.

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. My understanding, after talking to these various leaders, is that the United States of America, under the Bush Administration, blocked the international community from going in and stabilizing this country. I mean, they were in the process of trying to do something.

My understanding on Sunday, and we went in on Saturday night, in the heat of the night, in the middle of the night and took out Aristide.

Mr. NORIEGA. Regarding the reference to blocking assistance, I think I would be aware of any of that, and I do not have any—there is no——

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. Did we tell other countries? Now, be careful. Did we tell other countries that we did not want them to intervene?


Page 135 PREV PAGE TOP OF DOC
Mr. NORIEGA. No, we did not do that. We did not do that. And as far as—one final thing to the personal security thing that I think Congresswoman Jackson——

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. You are going to have to answer her question on her time.

Mr. NORIEGA. I am sorry. I thought——

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. I want to protect Aristide, but I want to know about the Haitian people. They are being shot down as we speak here today. What are we doing?

Mr. NORIEGA. We will gradually build up this presence, bring in other countries that will provide security, get the Haitian National Police stood up again, let them do their work in a professional way, bring some resources in, some technical assistance, get them to start doing that.

We will also have to look at the economic side, look at ways to create jobs and investment.

Ms. CORRINE BROWN OF FLORIDA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa92343.000/hfa92343_0f.htm

[chlamor]

9. Why Haiti?

One thing to consider is where Haiti lies geographically and how the trade winds blow. One needs to refuel small planes carrying precious coca cargo from S. America to western markets, Miami e.g.

I can hear the rhythms of the Caribbean people in the winds.

[seemslikeadream]

8. Ms. JACKSON LEE.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. First of all, let me thank the Chairman and particularly the Ranking Member for the effort they have made to have this hearing, which happens to be particularly timely, but all of the Members who worked so hard that are on this particular Committee that really generated this meeting, all of the standing Members that are there—Congressmen Payne and Meek, Barbara Lee and Ms. Watson and others who are on the Committee—I thank you very much, and I thank you for the courtesies of allowing us to be here.


Mr. Noriega, this is not a personal inquiry, it is not personal against you. I can tell you that there is a great deal of emotion because many of us have taken personally the bleeding in the streets, the mutilating and the murdering that has been occurring. And, of course, we take personally words such as a ''rule by tyranny,'' and we take personally the seemingly unceasing attack on an ex-priest that through a great deal of his life has spent making efforts to the extent of possibly a loss of life to preserve democracy.

To this very distinguished gentleman that is in the room let me, first of all, acknowledge you and offer to you my deepest understanding, because those of us who lived through the era here in the United, States as we still fight against racism and hostilities and discrimination, are reminded of those who marched across the Edmond Pettis Bridge and the dogs and hoses that came about, and the fact that some of those who were marching were unfortunately terribly injured.

If you would, accept our sympathies.

To Mr. Noriega, let me pose this series of questions to you: Have you ever had a sense of fear of your life or the fear of your life and that of your family members? Do you have any history of that or any way that you could understand that by personal experience?

Mr. NORIEGA. Yes, yes, absolutely.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So you have been in fear of your life?

Mr. NORIEGA. Yes.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Might you share with us?

Mr. NORIEGA. No.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. You have been in fear of your life when and where?

Mr. NORIEGA. That is none of your business, ma'am.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Well, let me say this. Since you are going to be hostile, let me say this.

Mr. NORIEGA. No, no. It is a silly question.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. My business is to find out whether the Administration lied and whether or not you kidnapped and coerced Mr. Aristide. So that is my business.

Mr. NORIEGA. Please ask me those questions, and I will answer them.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. I would imagine—excuse me. I am talking, not you. Since you started off being rude, then let me be rude. In any event, let me just say this.


My understanding of Mr. Aristide's position on that eve where he was, if you will, thrown out of his own country, is that he was told by American officials, maybe with the involvement of the CIA, that his life was in jeopardy and that the security would be removed.

My question to you is whether or not you have any firsthand knowledge of that activity.

My second point is—and you don't need to comment on this—I am reminded of the attack on Chairman Karzai's, or President Karzai's life in Afghanistan, reminded of the fact that we did not ask him to leave his country, but we provided the necessary security so that, thank God, his life was spared. He didn't have to make that decision.

Do you have any firsthand knowledge of saying to President Aristide that your security would be immediately removed?

Mr. NORIEGA. It is not true. As a matter of fact, there is an organization that, as a private contractor, has provided security for——



It is not true. As a matter of fact, there is an organization that, as a private contractor, has provided security for Aristide, paid for by the Government of Haiti. This organization provided for Aristide's security throughout all of the events that led to his resignation. A U.S. government security team consulted with his security detail on the prevailing security conditions. We approved of that contact because we were concerned about the security of U.S. citizens, including Mrs. Aristide and the Americans who served in his private security detail. However, I am not aware of the details of these exchanges. After those conversations, Aristide contacted the Embassy, through his private security firm, to ask what the U.S. Ambassador thought would be best for Haiti. Our answer was that he, Aristide, had to make that judgment. Aristide's private security personnel stayed with him after he made the decision to resign, accompanied him to the airport, and boarded the aircraft with him for the trip to the Central African Republic.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Do you have any knowledge of saying to him that his security would be removed at that time.

Mr. NORIEGA. I am trying to answer the question. It is not true.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. If that is not true, then I assume that you would welcome, as I have asked both the leaders of this House for a full congressional investigation that would investigate the Administration as to whether or not that is true. Would you welcome that investigation?

Mr. NORIEGA. The Congress has an obligation to oversee——

Ms. JACKSON LEE. You would welcome that investigation, yes or no.

Mr. NORIEGA. The Congress has an obligation to oversee the Executive Branch.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Is that yes or no? Is that yes or no? Is that yes or no.

Mr. NORIEGA. We would cooperate with any——


Ms. JACKSON LEE. And you would welcome that investigation, yes or no?

Mr. NORIEGA. We will welcome—we will cooperate with any inquiry that the Congress deems appropriate.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much.

Let me proceed with my questions on another important aspect that I am concerned about.

Is the United States a member of the U.N. Security Council?

Mr. NORIEGA. Yes.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. So as I understand it, by way of a report on February 25, 2004, the U.N. News Service, the United Nations Security Council today deplored the Haitian opposition's rejection of proposals from two regional organizations that could form the basis for a peaceful compromise. And so you were—the United States was a part of that offering of a compromise——

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Chairman, regular order.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Let me just conclude, Mr. Chairman, by saying this.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Chairman, regular order.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. CARICOM has been totally disrespected by this Administration.

Mr. WELLER. Regular order, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And you have violated the relationship with the Caribbean——

Mr. WELLER. Regular order, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. And we will never be able to mend it, because there is no way of providing the support that the United States has.

Mr. WELLER. Mr. Chairman, regular order.

Ms. JACKSON LEE. All I can say, Mr. Chairman, is that we have failed to be the kind of friend to Haiti that we should have been.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa92343.000/hfa92343_0f.htm

[seemslikeadream]

11. Mr. MEEKS Ms. LEE.

Mr. MEEKS. I find it incredible. I look at today's news. I understand that the United States is shifting its policy, where Staff Sergeant Timothy Edwards said that at airports, the Marines' mission now is aimed to protect Haitians from reprisal attacks. I mean, it is clear what is going on. We are shifting our policies now. This is just in today's paper. I don't know whether you read it today. But there are problems that we have to shift it because of the reprisals, and they are talking about bodies laying in the street.


I watched CNN the other day. But they have had bodies just recently that they were putting in and taking to the morgue. So people are dying every day. I think that is well documented.

I wonder, is Venezuela next? I wonder, because we tried that once and it didn't work, and maybe we ought to go back again because we believe in democracy. I wonder if Venezuela is next.

Let me ask you, I think that it is clear—and I wonder what is the most important thing here. It is clear to me, and I think it is clear to all, that you and the Administration for whatever the reason, you don't like—didn't like Aristide. Now, I wonder what becomes more important. Is it an individual or an institution of government that is important in the lives of the people, the 8 million people that happen to live in Haiti, the most important thing, the saving of lives of Haitians?

Now if, in fact, you have a policy that is just based upon who you like and dislike in regards to who heads the country, and you make those decisions, then I wonder why we even went through the charade of saying that we agree with, first, the Bishops. When they came together, they had an agreement and they wanted to sit down and get both parties together so we can stop atrocities. Why would we even say we agree with that? Why would we even say that we agreed with the CARICOM agreement, if in fact we weren't serious about trying to get two sides to the table to negotiate an agreement?

We know an agreement cannot be had but one side. You need two sides at the table. And if fact—why would we say we want a diplomatic relationship? Based upon everything I heard here, you are saying that your minds were made up before CARICOM and you were saying you didn't want a diplomatic conclusion to this problem. You just wanted to get rid of Aristide. That was the objective, not to preserve this democracy. The objective seems to me to get rid of a Head of State.

You indicated in your testimony we don't put American lives at risk to save a government. But by now, right now, by not trying to save a government, we are going to put American lives at stake, because we have rebels and criminals and hoods that are controlling the streets. And our own admission when we look at individuals—and I am not a conspiracy theorist at all, but when, in fact, you have these allegations, I think some of them have been fairly well documented, and I will ask you that when you have allegations that the CIA had been connected to the FRAPH, whose leaders went through Aristide originally, and most recently over the weekend, and the FRAPH death squad leader Toto Constant, who not only lives in Queens, lives in my district and is causing heck in my district as we speak, causing people—and we are separating Haitians in the streets of New York and Brooklyn, Queens and Brooklyn from each other, but Constant is there and he is going to come back.

Then you have Guy Philippe, who is a leader of the current movement, was trained by the United States military in Ecuador. We have M–16s that were found and M–60s and rocket-propelled grenade launchers in the hands of the rebels appear to be weapons sent by the United States to the Dominican Republic, and now they end up in Haiti. You have a situation, as I said, where the U.S. did not really back the CARICOM peace plan at all, but they claim they backed it after the Congressional Black Caucus—I would ask—and I can go on and I could bring up allegation after allegation, but I would like to know—and then you also have all sorts of figures who are coming out of the woodwork to rule in Haiti—Guy Philippe and I hear Baby Doc is coming back, Danny Toussaint.

What is our current plan for Haiti and will these people be allowed to take office? There are criminals that have been released. Prisons were broken into. The people that broke laws, people that went to the DR, some people serving a life sentence, all is forgotten about and these people can now come back, and are these going to be the ones that are going to negotiate a peace agreement for a democratic government in Haiti?

Mr. NORIEGA. Thank you, Congressman. Congressman, the Bishops that you referred to, the Bishops' plan that you referred to, was actually withdrawn by the Bishops. We tried to get them to propose another plan, and Secretary Powell encouraged them to propose another plan. But the Bishops' consensus was that Aristide had to leave, and we were told they would not put forward a plan that would leave Aristide in place.

With respect to the question of whether we like the man or not, that isn't the issue. It isn't even the issue of whether we like what he did when he was in office over a 10-year period. But we do have to make some judgments about whether we want to put American lives at risk merely to keep him in power for a little bit longer.

We were not asked and are not expected to put American lives at risk to keep in power good men in Bolivia or in Argentina or in Ecuador. And it is not merely a question of whether we like a person; it is whether we think it is a sustainable, viable investment for American foreign policy. It is a reasonable assessment that we are obligated to make.



Thank you, Congressman. Congressman, the Bishops that you referred to, the Bishops' plan that you referred to, was actually withdrawn by the Bishops. We tried to get them to propose another plan, and Secretary Powell encouraged them to propose another plan. But the Bishops' consensus was that Aristide had to leave, and we were told that they would not put forward a plan that would leave Aristide in place.

With respect to the question of whether we like the man or not, that isn't the issue. It isn't even the issue of whether we like what he did when he was in office over a 10-year period. But we do have to make some judgments about whether we want to put American lives at risk merely to keep him in power a little bit longer. We were not asked and are not expected to put American lives at risk to keep in power good men in Bolivia or in Argentina or in Ecuador. And it is not merely a question of whether we like a person; it is whether we think it is a sustainable, viable investment for American foreign policy. It is a reasonable assessment that we were obligated to make.

It is worth remembering that Haiti's political crisis had festered for more than two years by the time the rebels began armed attacks in the north. Intervening with troops in the middle of an armed insurgency caused by the unresolved political crisis was not, in our judgment, a prudent policy. The armed insurgents opposing Aristide would have viewed the intervention as supporting Aristide, substantially increasing risk for American troops. When President Aristide resigned and left the country, it became possible for troops to conduct stability operations without being in between two armed factions.

Let me address some of the other questions you raise in your statement. You said that we didn't like Aristide, that our minds were made up before the CARICOM plan, that we did not want a diplomatic conclusion to the problem. The facts, I think, show something far different. We were observers at the meetings where CARICOM came up with its plan, and offered our advice and counsel when asked. We knew what the plan involved from the very beginning, and were it favor of it. The Secretary himself publicly endorsed the CARICOM plan on February 13. After Aristide accepted the plan in Kingston, we engaged in intensive diplomacy to convince opposition and civil society leaders to accept the CARICOM plan, including that part of the plan that called for Aristide to serve out the remainder of his term. So we did engage in diplomacy to achieve a political solution, and this settlement included President Aristide remaining in office.

As I said earlier, the U.S. Government has delivered no M–16 rifles, or any of the other weapons you mention, to the Dominican Republic. The last U.S. weapons sale to the Dominican Republic was 1991, when we delivered side arms. I have also testified that Guy Philippe's military training in Ecuador was not funded or sponsored by the U.S., but was part of a bilateral program between Haiti and Ecuador.

On our current plans for Haiti, the U.S. intends to support efforts to rebuild Haiti's governmental institutions, including a professional, independent police force. We will support free and fair elections as soon as the interim Haitian government determines it is practical to hold them. One of the guiding principles of our engagement in Haiti is that political power will not be turned over to persons who have participated in political violence, including irregular armed groups.

Mr. BALLENGER. Again, sorry, Mr. Secretary. Ms. Lee.

Ms. LEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and let me thank you and the Ranking Member for this hearing. It is long overdue, but now I understand why.

It is very clear to me, Mr. Noriega, that, first of all, we have been involved in the process of destabilizing and undermining the government of Haiti over the last 3, 4 years. It is also very clear to me that—and it is this Administration's policy that regime change is a central component of its foreign policy and it manifests itself in a variety of ways. It just so happens in Haiti, it was planned in this way, working with the murderers and the thugs and those paramilitary groups to achieve what you had planned from day one, and that is a coup and overthrow of the government of President Aristide, the duly elected President of a black nation of 8 million people, the poorest in the Western Hemisphere. I think your testimony confirmed that for me.

Let me also indicate that it is very important for me to just ask you about the safety and security of President and Mrs. Aristide, because we have called the State Department just to ask them to put us in touch with them, and it is my understanding there is no United States Embassy in the Central African Republic. Or is there a way to at least know what is transpiring? I want to make sure from your point of view that you are ensuring their safety and their well-being.

Next I would like to know just, really, Mr. Noriega, when did you decide that Mr. Aristide had to go? And what did you do to make sure that that happened? And I ask you that because I wrote to Secretary Powell on February 12 and said in this letter—let me just read one paragraph. I said—and this was February 12:

''I must say, Mr. Secretary, that our failure to support the democratic process and help restore order looks like a covert effort to overthrow a government. There is a violent coup d'etat in the making, and it appears that the United States is aiding and abetting an attempt to violently topple the Aristide government. With all due respect, this looks like regime change.''

There were a series of questions I asked the Secretary of State. He has not responded yet. Maybe you can.

Does the State Department support the democratically-elected government of Haiti, and what tactical steps is our government taking to support the democratic process?

Secondly, is our country supporting and sanctioning an overthrow of the Aristide government by giving a wink and nod to the opposition? And I said to the Secretary, there are reports that we are covertly funding the opposition.

Thirdly, does the United States support the CARICOM proposal and will we work through the OAS to broker a peaceful solution and not an overthrow of the Aristide government?

Finally, I asked, is it true that Haitian opposition parties and leaders have received USAID funding? Mr. Secretary, I think it is very important that these questions be answered truthfully because many would like to believe the Secretary of State.

I know he said recently some of our statements are nonsense. There have been reports that we are buying into conspiracy theories. But I also think it is very important to ask these questions, given the facts that the Secretary of State made and the presentation he made at the United Nations with regard to the weapons of mass destruction, with regard to Iraq. It is important we know the truth. And it is important to answer some of these questions that we have been asking today, because certainly your testimony to date begs the question, just when did we plan this and how did we see this being executed? And I would like to hear from you on that.

Mr. NORIEGA. Well, Congresswoman, on the safety and well-being of President Aristide and his party, he is not the responsibility of the United States Government. We facilitated his safe departure from the country at his request. He is free to leave the Central African Republic at any time.



Well, Congresswoman, on the safety and well-being of President Aristide and his party, he is not the responsibility of the United States Government. We facilitated his safe departure from the country at his request. He is free to leave the Central African Republic at any time.

On your next question, we never decided that Aristide had to resign office—he decided that himself when he realized that continuing in office would mean death and suffering in the conflict between his armed partisans and the insurgents. And as I responded a moment ago to Congressman Meeks, we supported the CARICOM plan, which among other things called for President Aristide to remain in office for the balance of his term.

While Aristide was in office, we acknowledged him as Haiti's elected president and supported the democratic process by working with all parties to achieve a settlement of the political crisis. This included urging Aristide on several occasions to end his undemocratic suppression of legitimate political dissent and free press. We also asked him to do something to create a climate of security for elections, as he promised the OAS he would, but never did. We engaged in an intensive effort to obtain the opposition's agreement to the CARICOM plan, which initially they did not accept because it allowed Aristide to remain in office.

Opposition parties and leaders in Haiti have never received direct funding from USAID. Opposition parties and their leaders have participated in political party training given by USAID grantees, the National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute.

Ms. LEE. Mr. Secretary, let me just say my office was in touch with the State Department throughout this process, and we were told that President Aristide and Mrs. Aristide were going to a destination of their choosing. We heard that President Aristide had no idea where he was going until 20 minutes before they landed.


Mr. NORIEGA. That is accurate. He had chosen a destination which decided it would not be able to accept him. We then had to find a place that would accept him. We did, and the Central African Republic has graciously accepted to do that.

They also now say that he is free to leave any time he wants, and the public statements I have seen, I think that they would welcome his leaving whenever he wants.

Ms. LEE. And wouldn't we get a letter in response to the questions that we asked of the——

Mr. NORIEGA. I think you certainly are owed an answer, Congresswoman.

Ms. LEE. And this was February 12, mind you, before the coup took place.

Mr. BALLENGER. Okay. Could I request, just to assist you all, we have quite a few more people, and let us be honest, I think they are more interested in making a statement than asking questions. But if you could record the questions that we do not have time to answer, it would be greatly appreciated.

Sooner or later, the gentleman with the leg problem is supposed to come up and, at the rate we are going, it may be midnight. So let me ask the people that are going to ask questions, either make your statement and don't ask questions, or ask questions and give them time to answer.

http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/intlrel/hfa92343.000/hfa92343_0f.htm

[scarletlib]

10. Thank you Brazilain Peacekeepers

Thank you my Haitian brothers and sisters for continuing your fight against tyranny. People who have little left have little to lose in fighting against tyranny. The ordinary Haitian is at that place.