Bookmark Jamaica-Gleaner.com
Go-Jamaica Gleaner Classifieds Discover Jamaica Youth Link Jamaica
Business Directory Go Shopping inns of jamaica Local Communities

Home
Lead Stories
News
Business
Sport
Commentary
Letters
Entertainment
Profiles in Medicine
The Star
E-Financial Gleaner
Overseas News
Communities
Search This Site
powered by FreeFind
Services
Archives
Find a Jamaican
Library
Weather
Subscriptions
News by E-mail
Newsletter
Print Subscriptions
Interactive
Chat
Dating & Love
Free Email
Guestbook
ScreenSavers
Submit a Letter
WebCam
Weekly Poll
About Us
Advertising
Gleaner Company
Search the Web!

'The implications of Aristide's removal'
published: Wednesday | March 24, 2004

THE EDITOR, Sir:

THE ARTICLE by Phyllis Thomas, 'The Implications of Aristide's Stay', in Sunday's Gleaner, leads me to reflect on another set of implications ­ the implications of Aristide's removal.

Jean-Bertrand Aristide's government disappointed many, and the last ten years have been frustrating times for Haitians. But the blame is not entirely Aristide's: a consistent stream of support and funding for Aristide's opponents, many of them with extremely unsavoury pasts, has flowed from conservative U.S. institutions with no liking for the erstwhile slum priest. Haitians in their great majority have disapproved of the obstructionist or violent tactics of this externally-funded opposition and supported Aristide, for example, by returning him to the presidency in the 2000 elections, the legitimacy of which is not in doubt. The present government in Haiti is the outcome of 15 years of expensive agitation directed against one man, Aristide.

Ms. Thomas says that Jamaica must not "be used to further [Aristide's] political ambitions." It would have been splendid if Florida, New York, and the Dominican Republic had not been used to further the political ambitions of the small band of wealthy people and exiles who have suddenly appointed themselves the voice of 'civil society'.

Anticipating the CARICOM meeting where Haiti is sure to be discussed, Ms. Thomas continues: "even a vote not to give recognition to the U.S.-backed Government now in Haiti could further ruffle the feathers of the U.S. who has been showing signs of agitation and who, with apology to no one, punishes those it perceives to be against it."

That's exactly the problem, isn't it? The U.S. apologises to no one for punishing those it perceives to be against it ­ and threatens to continue doing so, though international law and democratic rule may crumble. Acquiescing in a new international order which protects the strong and not the weak is surely not in anyone's interest, least of all, in the long run, that of my own country.

I am etc.,

Dr. HAUN SAUSSY

saussy@stanford.edu

Department of Comparative

Literature

Stanford University

California

Via Go-Jamaica

More Letters | | Print this Page
















©Copyright2003 Gleaner Company Ltd. | Disclaimer | Letters to the Editor | Suggestions

Home - Jamaica Gleaner