Why The US Owes Haiti Billions

A CNN crew spotted police stopping the two men Thursday afternoon. The CNN crew heard 4 gunshots while getting out of the car, saw 2 men on ground, shot in back. http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/americas/01/21/haiti.police.shooting/index.html?eref=igoogle_cnn

Why does the US owe Haiti Billions? Colin Powell, former US Secretary of State, stated his foreign policy view as the “Pottery Barn rule.” That is – “if you break it, you own it.”

The US has worked to break Haiti for over 200 years. We owe Haiti. Not charity. We owe Haiti as a matter of justice. Reparations. And not the $100 million promised by President Obama either – that is Powerball money. The US owes Haiti Billions – with a big B.

The US has worked for centuries to break Haiti. The US has used Haiti like a plantation. The US helped bleed the country economically since it freed itself, repeatedly invaded the country militarily, supported dictators who abused the people, used the country as a dumping ground for our own economic advantage, ruined their roads and agriculture, and toppled popularly elected officials. The US has even used Haiti like the old plantation owner and slipped over there repeatedly for sexual recreation.

Here is the briefest history of some of the major US efforts to break Haiti.

In 1804, when Haiti achieved its freedom from France in the world’s first successful slave revolution, the United States refused to recognize the country. The US continued to refuse recognition to Haiti for 60 more years. Why? Because the US continued to enslave millions of its own citizens and feared recognizing Haiti would encourage slave revolution in the US.

After the 1804 revolution, Haiti was the subject of a crippling economic embargo by France and the US. US sanctions lasted until 1863. France ultimately used its military power to force Haiti to pay reparations for the slaves who were freed. The reparations were 150 million francs. (France sold the entire Louisiana territory to the US for 80 million francs!)

Haiti was forced to borrow money from banks in France and the US to pay reparations to France. A major loan from the US to pay off the French was finally paid off in 1947. The current value of the money Haiti was forced to pay to French and US banks? Over $20 Billion – with a big B.

The US occupied and ruled Haiti by force from 1915 to 1934. President Woodrow Wilson sent troops to invade in 1915. Revolts by Haitians were put down by US military – killing over 2000 in one skirmish alone. For the next nineteen years, the US controlled customs in Haiti, collected taxes, and ran many governmental institutions. How many billions were siphoned off by the US during these 19 years?

From 1957 to 1986 Haiti was forced to live under US backed dictators “Papa Doc” and “Baby Doc” Duvlaier. The US supported these dictators economically and militarily because they did what the US wanted and were politically “anti-communist” – now translatable as against human rights for their people. Duvalier stole millions from Haiti and ran up hundreds of millions in debt that Haiti still owes. Ten thousand Haitians lost their lives. Estimates say that Haiti owes $1.3 billion in external debt and that 40% of that debt was run up by the US-backed Duvaliers.

Thirty years ago Haiti imported no rice. Today Haiti imports nearly all its rice. Though Haiti was the sugar growing capital of the Caribbean, it now imports sugar as well. Why? The US and the US dominated world financial institutions – the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank – forced Haiti to open its markets to the world. Then the US dumped millions of tons of US subsidized rice and sugar into Haiti – undercutting their farmers and ruining Haitian agriculture. By ruining Haitian agriculture, the US has forced Haiti into becoming the third largest world market for US rice. Good for US farmers, bad for Haiti.

In 2002, the US stopped hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to Haiti which were to be used for, among other public projects like education, roads. These are the same roads which relief teams are having so much trouble navigating now!

In 2004, the US again destroyed democracy in Haiti when they supported the coup against Haiti’s elected President Aristide.

Haiti is even used for sexual recreation just like the old time plantations. Check the news carefully and you will find numerous stories of abuse of minors by missionaries, soldiers and charity workers. Plus there are the frequent sexual vacations taken to Haiti by people from the US and elsewhere. What is owed for that? What value would you put on it if it was your sisters and brothers?

US based corporations have for years been teaming up with Haitian elite to run sweatshops teeming with tens of thousands of Haitians who earn less than $2 a day.

The Haitian people have resisted the economic and military power of the US and others ever since their independence. Like all of us, Haitians made their own mistakes as well. But US power has forced Haitians to pay great prices – deaths, debt and abuse.

It is time for the people of the US to join with Haitians and reverse the course of US-Haitian relations.

This brief history shows why the US owes Haiti Billions – with a big B. This is not charity. This is justice. This is reparations. The current crisis is an opportunity for people in the US to own up to our country’s history of dominating Haiti and to make a truly just response.

Bill is Legal Director for the Center for Constitutional Rights and a long-time Haiti human rights advocate. For more on the history of exploitation of Haiti by the US see: Paul Farmer, THE USES OF HAITI; Peter Hallward, DAMNING THE FLOOD; and Randall Robinson, AN UNBROKEN AGONY).

5 our of 11 of the people shot between ‘03-’05 were unarmed, so its no surprise the Justice Department has found flaws in the way things are handled in Inglewood!  The Justice Department is now proposing reforms that are intended to minimize police brutality and police shootings.  But although we support these efforts, we at Malcolm-Che do not have a reformist perspective; that is to say that we do not see a package of reforms leading us ultimately to a society that will not contain many egregious police brutality cases.  That is because capitalism itself, the system in American society, is a system where there are those who have and those who have not.  The interests between these classes are irreconcilable, and any force aimed at mediating the tensions between these classes is doomed to failure in their job.

This article is a must read!!!

Justice Department seeks police reform in Inglewood

Protest In Inglewood, CA. 5 out of 11 people shot by Inglewood PD have been unarmed.

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-inglewood11-2010jan11,0,4430016.story?track=rss

The U.S. Department of Justice has found significant flaws in the way Inglewood police oversee use-of-force incidents and investigate complaints against officers and has proposed a host of reforms to help ease fear and distrust among city residents.

As part of a comprehensive review of the department, which is ongoing, Justice Department officials found that Inglewood’s policies on the use of force are poorly written and legally inadequate despite recent reform efforts. In a letter sent to the city’s mayor in December, federal officials called for numerous changes in the way the department trains and investigates its officers.

The Justice Department launched its civil rights probe after a series of officer-involved shootings in 2008 sparked outrage in the city and prompted calls for reform. Federal officials told the city they are continuing with their probe and plan close scrutiny of specific incidents.

A Times investigation, published more than two months before the federal inquiry began, found that Inglewood officers repeatedly resorted to physical or deadly force against unarmed suspects. The Times also raised questions about how the department investigated its officers’ use of force.

In the 33-page letter to the city’s mayor, the Justice Department acknowledged that the department had begun revising its policies but said some of those proposed reforms didn’t go far enough.

Among the Justice Department’s conclusions:

* Inglewood police routinely assigned certain types of excessive force investigations to supervisors who either wrote the initial incident report or approved it, creating “an apparent conflict of interest.”

* The agency’s rules on using deadly force are vague and inconsistent with U.S. Supreme Court guidelines. “The majority of the [department's] policies and procedures are outdated,” federal officials said.

* The department provides its officers with “little direction” on when to use electric Taser weapons. The city should prohibit officers from using Tasers on suspects who are restrained.

* The Police Department should create an early warning system to better track excessive force complaints and other conduct. Such a system would help alert supervisors to problem officers.

Rep. Maxine Waters (D-Los Angeles), who was among several politicians who called for an outside investigation in the wake of the shootings, said after reviewing the Justice Department’s letter that some of Inglewood’s policies were “unacceptable.” Waters said she would urge the Police Department to “quickly comply” with the recommendations and would inquire into a possible federal consent decree to oversee the department.

“The number of deaths at the hands of police officers has been alarming,” she said. “These deaths are the result of the failed policy.”

Geoffrey Alpert, an expert on use of deadly force by police, said the Justice Department’s findings suggest that Inglewood’s problems were systemic rather than a question of individual officers making poor decisions.

“If the rules are wrong, it opens officers up to doing the wrong thing,” said Alpert, a professor at the University of South Carolina who has helped police agencies draft policies.

The department has also come under fire for adopting what some critics consider a bunker mentality in dealing with officer-involved shootings. Some members of the city’s Citizen Police Oversight Commission have complained in the past that they were shut out of investigations into police misconduct. The city also has refused to release a report by an independent consultant hired to evaluate the series of shootings and the department’s use of force.

Police Chief Jacqueline Seabrooks declined Friday to discuss the specifics of the Justice Department’s findings, saying she was still reviewing them.

“We’re evaluating policies,” she said. “We’re doing everything that we need to make sure the community can maintain its trust.”

Inglewood Councilman Daniel Tabor said the city was preparing a response “explaining what’s already been done, correcting some of the interpretations of what we currently do and providing some additional information.”

Justice Department spokesman Alejandro Miyar said the ongoing “pattern and practice” investigation is a civil matter focused on systemic issues but could lead to criminal investigations if violations are found. He said the Inglewood police have been “fully cooperative and responsive.” Federal authorities also have the option to bring lawsuits to pressure local authorities into reforming operations.

The Times’ investigation found that five of the 11 people shot and killed by Inglewood police between 2003 and 2008 were unarmed. Among the dead was Jule Dexter, who had been stopped for drinking in public in June 2005.

Officer Jose Estrada fired four shots into Dexter’s back and head as, witnesses said, he reached to pull up his baggy pants, which were slipping. Estrada later said he feared Dexter was reaching for a weapon, but none was recovered.

After he was suspended for 16 days, Estrada challenged his discipline in court, complaining that the department’s deadly force policy was confusing.

In August 2009, Superior Court Judge David P. Yaffe ruled that there was not enough evidence to support Estrada’s claim that the policy was vague and ambiguous.

But Justice Department officials found that parts of the policy were vague and inconsistent with U.S. constitutional standards.

The city’s general use of force rules fail to provide officers with clear guidance and give them too much discretion in determining what force to employ, officials wrote. Even a revised policy the agency is considering would fail to meet legal standards, according to the Justice Department.

In their letter dated Dec. 28, federal officials also faulted the department for not offering enough direction or training for officers in dealing with suspects who are mentally ill or under the influence of drugs or alcohol. Dexter was both schizophrenic and under the influence of cocaine the day of his death, records show.

The Justice Department also found fault in another area highlighted by The Times, the use of Tasers that deliver high-voltage shocks to suspects.

The newspaper found that officers used Tasers on suspects who posed a questionable threat or who were handcuffed.

Justice Department officials wrote that Inglewood gave its officers little direction in “how and when the Taser should be used.” The Justice Department advised the city to prohibit the use of the weapons on restrained suspects and recommended that it track officers’ use of Tasers.

The Justice Department was also critical of the department’s complaint process, which it said could deter citizens from filing complaints. Officials recommended improvements in community outreach, saying that interviews with residents and others “revealed allegations of distrust and fear” of the police force.