Powell, left, and Latortue
In an interview with The Sunday Gleaner, Orna Blum, Public Affairs Officer at the U.S. Embassy in Kingston has defended the postponement of security-related meetings that should have been held between the U.S. and CARICOM Security Ministers, mainly due to disagreements over Haiti.
That interview with Mrs. Blum, conducted by Earl Moxam, covered several issues related to the Haiti and U.S./CARICOM relations.
Excerpts of the interview are published below:
EM: There have been reports about human rights abuses in Haiti under the interim administration. Amnesty Internat-ional recently raised a number of concerns on that matter. There have been reports about the severe beating of a judge who, in 1994, presided over the trial of some of the men who at the time participated in a massacre. It's reported that these very men are among the rebels who helped to topple Jean-Bertrand Aristide and who were involved in the beating of the judge in April. Is the United States concerned about these developments and are they being looked into from an American point of view?
OB: I've not personally read that Amnesty International report. I do know that the United States is very concerned as well as the other countries working in Haiti that there be, first of all, a laying down of all weapons, the disarming of all groups. The priority has been to try to establish an interim Government of technocrats who do not represent any of the parties. We recognise, however, that it is very important that the opposition rebel forces who took over Port-au-Prince leading to Mr. Aristide's departure Secretary (of State) Powell has made it very clear that we did not recognise them as part of the Government. We've made very clear as well that the thugs who were pro-Aristide and who were killing opposition supporters that they would not be recognised and should lay down their weapons as well. During this time the priority is first to establish peace and security, to make sure that humanitarian assistance gets to the people who have been needing food, to open lines of communication. Gerard Latortue (Haiti's interim Prime Minister) has done a very good job in helping to facilitate that process. There's going to have to be a further step; a truth and reconciliation process, if you will. There's been a lot of talk of modelling that process off the South African experience because, in the structure of Haiti and the politics of that country for so long, unless folks come together and acknowledge what has happened in the past and what their involvement has been, it's going to be very difficult to go forward.
EM: Would you anticipate though that persons who were found guilty of atrocities and were imprisoned for these and who later escaped and became part of the rebel movement, that they would benefit from this Truth and Reconciliation forum?
OB: Well, it would be premature for me to comment on who would benefit and who wouldn't. I know that this is something that the international community is going to have to come forward and help Haiti with. The point is that the average Haitian should be able to benefit in having a more secure environment in which to live.
EM: Does the U.S. Government trust Gerard Latortue?
OB: The United States Govern-ment has strongly supported Gerard Latortue. He was a very well-respected member of the international community working through the United Nations and Secretary Powell just recently went to Haiti to meet with him to signal his support of the transition. At this point we want to do everything we can, with the international community's support to make sure that the transition can happen in a peaceful way to help the restructuring and reconciliation process and move forward to elections.
EM: But this (Latortue) is the same person who reportedly sat on the platform with the rebel leaders in Gonaives; the same persons we spoke of earlier, about being involved in atrocities in the past. Does this accord with your view of him as being an honourable man and the right one to lead this transition process?
OB: Every country has its domestic politics and many leaders often make moves that others don't necessarily agree with. I'm not in Haiti but I do know that our diplomats and other international officials have met with Gerard Latortue to talk about that event. They have met with the other sides to say it's time to scale back the rhetoric and it's important to recognise that when you go onto a platform, apart from the audience with whom you are speaking, there's a wider audience of which to be aware.
EM: But wouldn't you concede that, in the very least, it was a major mistake to have done that?
OB: I think that would be for the Haitians to decide for themselves.
EM: How would they decide that?
OB: It is not for me to decide whether that was a mistake.
EM: Aren't you an employee of the State Department?
OB: Yes.
EM: Wouldn't you or your bosses in the State Department have cringed at the sight of Latortue and the rebel leaders together?
OB: Well, I'm not in Washington now.
EM: But here in Jamaica, when you heard of that incident, how did you react?
OB: Well, as a public diplomacy officer I'm very aware of image and I do understand that often, a speaker can be caught up in the moment. My personal observation was that I saw someone who was happy that there were forces that had led to Aristide's departure; that had helped to stop a certain system of Government and certain corrupt leadership. I recognised that there would immediately be reactions within the region and in the international community.
EM: Why are those persons still at large though?
OB: I'm sorry, what persons are you speaking of here?
EM: The specific rebel figures of whom we spoke and who sat with him there. These are persons who, internationally would not be recognised as legitimate figures. Why would they still be at large and in some instances still be armed?
OB: Well, the United States is only one of several countries that are working under UN auspices to try to disarm them. It's a very delicate situation a lot of negotiations are going on, on the ground right now to get them to disarm, but it's a very sensitive situation.
EM: The United States was, to say the least, not happy with Jamaica for allowing Aristide to come here for a short while. He's been here for a while now and has been very quiet. Have your worst fears been allayed?
OB: Well I understand that Mr. Aristide is on his way to another destination for formal permanent residence and asylum and I think it will be a good opportunity to bring some reconciliation to Haiti because Mr. Aristide being so close to the country has inflamed the situation on the ground. So we are looking forward to him moving forward with his life in another country, and we are very appreciative that things have been very calm here in Jamaica.
EM: Are you saying that his presence in Jamaica has inflamed the situation on the ground in Haiti?
OB: I wouldn't be able to comment on that.
EM: I thought that's what you were saying just now.
OB: Yea, I mean I did say that his presence so close to Haiti has inflamed them. For example, Aristide's supporters in Port-au-Prince, when he returned from South Africa, thought that his presence here in Jamaica, thought that their cause was not close to ending. I also understand that there were recent reports that Haitians who had recently arrived in Jamaica said that they wanted to meet with Aristide. I don't know that there was any particular political motivation. But I think that the Government of Jamaica has played an important role in making sure that he's had the opportunity to have a safe place to stay; to join back up with his family; and in trying to identify his ultimate place of residence.
EM: Does the U.S. Government now recognise Prime Minister Patterson's stated motivation as far as this having been a humanitarian gesture towards a man who, only recently, had been sitting beside him in the councils of CARICOM?
OB: We understand that Prime Minister Patterson and the Government of Jamaica presented this opportunity for temporary asylum as a humanitarian gesture.
EM: How is P.J. Patterson regarded in this context? An irritant or a statesman?
OB: Prime Minister Patterson is seen as a leader of a friend of the United States and friends don't always agree. And when that happens we find ways in which we can work together and we move forward.
EM: Is he respected?
OB: I would say so.
