The one certainty about the November 28th upcoming legislative and presidential elections in Haiti is that they will be declared “free and fair” by the international community, despite the illegal machinations of Provisional Electoral Council (CEP). In contrast, the November 7th election in Myanmar (formerly Burma) was, for all purposes and intents, declared unfair and undemocratic by the international community, even before the first votes were cast. Two elections with similar dynamic; Haiti and Myanmar’s two largest political parties are excluded in both instances and their leaders, Jean Bertrand Aristide and Aung San Suu Kyi, in exile and under house arrest, respectively. Apparently, free and fair elections, the bedrock of democracy, far from being a universal concept are actually subjective. Based on that reality, wouldn’t it be fair for Haitians to be asked whether they want to be part of this charade?
It is by now an historical fact that voting for the wrong candidate can have terrible consequences for Haiti and its people, the electorate should therefore refrain itself from engaging in an exercise that is being used to suppress its aspirations. Unless the people’s choice, no matter misguided it may be, can be validated and respected, what is the point in participating in a protracted process that is expensive and, most importantly, lacking credibility. Obviously, we are going back to the days when a king, having converted to a new faith, orders his subjects to embrace it, regardless of their aversion to it, or face the harshest of punishments. The analogy being: unless the Haitian people conform to this tyrannical, perverted and discriminatory form of democracy, they will be ostracized from the family of nations and made to suffer the consequences.
It should be noted that the Haitian people are receptive to the notion of electing their own leaders, which is a core democratic principle, as opposed to sticking with their country’s storied history of imposed rule. They have done so on several occasions but their choice was scornfully and violently rejected by the international community. There are apparently no discernible differences between the two political systems, which are inherently narcissistic and based on unaccountability, subjugation, exploitation and exclusion. Hence, voting on November 28th is tantamount to the Haitian people willingly endorsing the tyrannical rule of their tormentors, as it will be all but impossible to get rid of the tyrants except through the ballot box which, in itself, is stacked against their aspirations. Try imagining an armed rebellion against a Gerard Latortue-type tyrant, not sanctioned by the international community. Unlike Guy Philippe, the wannabe generalissimo, who spearheaded the 2004 armed insurrection against the country’s democratically elected government, any would-be liberator will be sitting on the dock at The Hague answering for a plethora of crimes before the International Criminal Court.
Though it may be naïve to expect a modicum of decency from the selected crop of candidates in the upcoming November 28th presidential election, this great little nation deserves better nonetheless. Exceedingly ambitious and correspondingly short on ethical and leadership qualities, this slate of politicians is the embodiment of self-preservation and political expediency and rightfully deserves the labels collaborators” and “puppets.” No one among them can stand up against the politic of organized chaos created by outsiders with the help of the mulatto elite, which allows the international community to present itself as “the savior” rather than the instigator of the cycle of destruction and misery.
Though it has been established that the strain of cholera creating havoc in Haiti is South Asian, U.S medical experts are now concerned about its possible spread to the U.S and other countries, which implies that Haiti may be considered ground zero for the epidemic. Yet, Michel Chancy, the Haitian minister in charge of coordinating a response to the epidemic concluded: “Haitians will always complain; it is part of the culture. They blame everyone and anything from colonialism to international aid agencies.” Basically, the man is saying there is nothing to complain about, and no one asks for his resignation. It shows that despite a succession of calamities befallen Haiti since February 29th, 2004, many of which the doings of the occupiers, Haitian politicians remain active participants in the enslavement of their fellow countrymen.
A perfunctory look at the problems facing Haiti and the slate of candidates clearly show that the elections will not solve anything. Consider the two frontrunners, Myrlande Manigat and Jude Celestin, as examples. Ms. Manigat is an over-emotional woman who angrily refused to participate in a run-off for a senate seat she was slated to win. This, after René Préval was declared the winner in the UN-organized, fraud-marred, 2006 presidential and legislative elections in which her husband, Leslie Manigat, received a little over 13 percent of the vote and denied a run-off. Even the most dedicated feminist should have second thoughts about voting for such an impulsive leader. As for Célestin, how can he convince the Diaspora and foreign investors to come and invest in Haiti when he, himself, saw fit to invest in real estate ventures in the U.S rather than injecting the money into the Haitian economy and helping create jobs?
As per the selective process, one of these two politicians will be president of Haiti on February 7th 2011, and the cycle of apathy, misery and condescension will endure. Aptly, the electorate should desist from participating in this charade until the present situation is reversed.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *