|
|
Notes for an Intervention by the Special Representative of the Secretary
General and Head of the Special Mission
at the Permanent Council April 14, 2004
14 April 2004
Mr. Chairman,
Thank you for this opportunity to speak to the Council. What more natural
than that the Council should invite the Head of its Special Mission to
report to it on developments in Haiti over recent weeks. I also bring
greetings from Ambassador Denneth Modeste, Director of the OAS Office in
Haiti and Deputy Head of the Special Mission. I note that you already have
before you the Report of the Secretary General on developments since last
November, and the intervention by the Assistant Secretary General one week
ago.
I will speak to the situation as it evolved from the first few weeks of the
year. But it is important to remember that while an acute crisis exploded in
late February and March, that situation had been developing for some time.
Without going back to the elections of 2000 and to the continuous successive
efforts of the OAS and of CARICOM to mediate a political settlement on a
consensual basis in Haiti, it does need to be recalled that there had been a
marked worsening of conditions on the ground during 2003. Taking stock of
the situation in December 2003, this body through its Chairman expressed its
concern about the developments. At the same time it noted on the basis of a
Report of the SG that the Special Mission had put itself in a position to
carry out its mandates, provided that the necessary political decisions were
taken in Haiti and the resource contributions were made by donors. The
Mission had at that time made a number of suggestions for ways ahead and was
working to elaborate them.
To underscore our respect for Haiti, a founding member state, the ASG and I
both attended the Bicentennial of the Declaration of Independence, despite
the urgings of some to stay away.
Unfortunately conditions worsened in the first weeks of 2004. Polarization
deepened. Violence grew. Armed personnel infiltrated through the Central
Plateau, moved North and joined up with the armed opposition controlling
Gonaives, which for some time had largely escaped government control. By
early February there was an atmosphere of severe tension, not to say fear,
in the country, widely reported by the international press, which had
arrived in droves. At the same time, however, the local press was reducing
its presence; a number of radio stations went off the air or limited their
news broadcasts. This meant that reliable local news and attitudes were more
difficult to obtain.
Government presence in the north and center of the country also largely
disappeared. By the third week of February, major embassies and
international organizations were moving their people out. The Special
Mission also reduced its personnel on the ground by just under half on
February 27, though they were back within eight days. Management was there
throughout.
Since early January, however, a major effort to kick-start political
negotiations was underway, thanks to the initiative of CARICOM, supported by
the OAS and a number of other international players from this Hemisphere and
abroad. I need not go into the specifics of these proposals as they are well
known to this body. But I should emphasize that, beginning in January, the
OAS was deeply involved in pushing these efforts forward. On the ground, the
meetings of the local ambassadors, including the Ambassador of the Bahamas,
were held in the OAS offices under my chairmanship. They were instrumental
in preparing the ground for the negotiations on February 20 with President
Aristide and his Government on the one hand and the members of the
Plateforme Démocratique on the other, all part of the preparation for the
visit of the High-level Delegation on February 21. These efforts continued
on the ground on February 23 and following days; and remained the stance of
the OAS as the security situation declined radically throughout that week,
leading among other things to adoption by this Council of Resolution CP/862
on February 26. By February 28 there were reports that armed groups could
arrive in the capital at any point. The Mission was in constant
communication with the Secretariat and the Secretary General expressed his
concern in a release on February 28.
Turning to the weekend of February 28-29, it has been asked what did the OAS
Special Mission have to do with the events of the Saturday and Sunday
morning leading to the early morning departure of President Aristide from
Haiti. The answer is, Nothing. We were not involved in any way at any point.
We in the Special Mission, and I personally, knew nothing of what happened
that night until we awoke in the morning and were told the President had
during the evening decided to go because of the deteriorating situation, had
written a letter of resignation and departed by plane for an as yet
undetermined destination.
This news spread extremely rapidly. The results were an effective completion
of the disappearance of governmental authority in Port au Prince,
paralleling what had already happened elsewhere. And the appearance of
groups who exercised street authority on their own—and in too many cases
attacked individuals or groups of various persuasions, and stole or
destroyed property. There were an appalling number of deaths—reportedly 300
during all these events-- and widespread looting and damage in this already
desperately poor country. Security was most uncertain and tenuous. It was
difficult to communicate by phone and dangerous to move around by vehicle (we
told our Mission personnel to stay within their homes). Government figures
departed quickly, with few exceptions. One important exception was the Prime
Minister who, despite his home being burned and the violent threats to his
life, remained at his post in the Primature to attempt to provide some form
of continuity through this very difficult period.
In these circumstances, there were three key concerns of almost equal
urgency: governance, security, and humanitarian assistance. The initial step
was taken when the President of the Cour de Cassation, the appropriate
person under the Constitution, was sworn in as provisional President on
February 29. The same day he wrote to the UN Secretary General seeking
support and, following adoption of the Security Council Resolution the same
day, the initial elements of the MIF began to arrive.
During the next days, the Mission kept its remaining people at their homes,
with the exception of a short coordination meeting of our key officials on
most days. We also invited ambassadors involved in the political
negotiations mentioned already to meet at the OAS offices to reflect
together on next steps so as to try to avoid a deterioration of the
extremely fragile and volatile situation with even more blood being spilled.
The conclusion was that in order to facilitate governance, several of the
elements of the previous negotiations might be borrowed with a view to
encouraging formation of an interim government. Security would be promoted
through gradual increase in the MIF and by encouraging a strengthening of
the Haiti National Police leadership, at least on an interim basis. Note
that the HNP was badly harmed during these weeks: it was effectively reduced
to an estimated 2000 persons; there was a loss of many commissariats and
much of their equipment; and a heavy hit was taken to morale and reputation.
Humanitarian steps would have to await the beginnings of progress on the
other fronts, especially as the international community had greatly reduced
its presence in Haiti and getting around the country was very chancy. It was
acknowledged that the coming days would be risky.
In last week’s meeting the Assistant Secretary General explained what
happened next. That explanation was circulated as CP/doc 3867 at the request
of the Council Chair. So you are aware that we applied several key elements
from the previous negotiations, with a view to paralleling those efforts to
reflect the Haitian constitution in letter or spirit to the extent feasible
under the decidedly unusual circumstances. We persuaded Prime Minister
Neptune and the Democratic Platform to name individuals to a Tripartite
Council, along with the Resident Coordinator from the UNDP for the
international community. This ensured inclusivity in the trying
circumstances of the time. That body, meeting with our technical help at the
OAS offices, put together a seven person Eminent Persons Council drawn once
again on an inclusive basis from a variety of social strata and political
viewpoints, but not chosen to represent their organizations as such. This
body, again with OAS financial and technical assistance, chose a nominee to
put to the provisional President as Prime Minister. When the provisional
President agreed, the Prime Minister selected his Cabinet in consultation
with the Eminent Persons Council and in agreement with the provisional
President. The Cabinet members are not to serve in the Cabinet to be formed
after the elections to be held at dates to be chosen by an electoral council.
Since then the various bodies concerned have been proceeding about their
work, although I must say that the Special Mission has been impatient to see
faster progress in several areas. Security, including the crucial
disarmament, has lagged for a number of reasons. Government has yet to
reappear in most parts of the countryside, with implications for
humanitarian assistance, for justice and human rights, and for electoral
preparations.
It was for these reasons that we welcomed the invitation of the interim
prime minister to accompany him to Gonaives, which had been a symbol of the
difficulties for so long, in order to support a return to respect for human
rights and democratic governance. As usual in Haiti, we had not been given a
programme beforehand (I was later told there was none as such). Events on
the day were confused. It was clear that the crowds were large and
enthusiastic. But from our location within the security bubble it was not
evident who was present. Nor could we hear what was being said on the podium
at the large public meeting in the main square. The various speakers did not
have prepared texts and were in the presence of an exuberant crowd. The OAS,
and I personally, certainly did not “approve” (as a press article claimed
yesterday) of what was reported in the press to have been said and done on
that occasion. I left immediately thereafter for meetings here in
Washington. But when I returned to Port au Prince I raised our concerns in
very clear terms with the Prime Minister who underlined to me that he
greatly regretted the damage done which he had not intended.
The SM continues to believe that it is vital over the next period that
government be as neutral and independent as feasible, that it reach out
inclusively for reconciliation and dialogue including to supporters of the
former government, that in particular there be no witch hunts but that human
rights concerns be addressed wherever they arise.
Other issues on which the SM has been putting emphasis are laid out in the
SG’s Report and in the ASG’s statements of last week and today. These
include assisting with the transition and working to prepare for the arrival
of the UN Mission in coming weeks, as well as consulting with the donor
community about how to re-engage with Haiti over the coming period. I would
however in closing wish to emphasize three points.
The first is that we have an opportunity in Haiti to work our way through
what I have called the political mortgages and, in the interest of the
longsuffering Haitian people, actually bring about democratic political,
economic and social change. It has to be done with the Haitians. And we must
be conscious both of the need for a long-term commitment and to be ready to
bear the risks that accompany such a process. There should be an overall
vision that animates this work, into which the activities of the Haitians
and the various international players are fitted on a unified, not just
coordinated, basis.
Second, elections are a necessary gateway for success. They are where the
problems from 2000 started and they are an essential, if insufficient, part
of the solution. I hope that to this end the electoral council will be able
to commence work very soon. Elections must be complemented by humanitarian
and developmental assistance. In all of this the international community has
an unavoidable responsibility to assume, in full collaboration with the
Haitians both governmental and non-governmental.
Finally, the OAS has gained very valuable experience with many different
Haitian groups over a number of years, on security including disarmament, on
human rights, on justice, on governance, on elections. We should ensure that
it is not lost, but rather that the lessons from this experience are learned
and put to best use as the new arrangements for international involvement
with Haiti are worked out with multilateral and bilateral actors in coming
weeks.
Thank you for your attention. I would be happy to take questions.
Port-au-Prince, 14 April 2004
|