[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
6743: Pina comments: [6704: Bombs Explode in Port-au-Prince (fwd)] (fwd (fwd)
From: Martine Jean <firstname.lastname@example.org>
"Evans Paul has certainly come a long way since he was Mayor of Port au
and I saw him beat into a coma on October 7, 1991 by the Haitian military.
Then he was standing on the principle of democracy and the need for the
military to negotiate for the return of President Aristide. Having
him several times, the only explanation I can offer for his change in
direction is a variant of the Stockholm syndrome whereby the abused takes on
attributes of the abuser."
Another explanation I can find for the behavior of Evans Paul is that most
likely he was never truly on the side of Democracy. I think what happened in
Haiti since 1986 is a continuous polarization of the country into two groups
(not totally monolithic; and don't necessarily identify them as pro or
against lavalas): those who were always fighting for themselves and those
who were fighting for the establishment of democracy in Haiti. After
Duvalier's fall in 1986, a bunch of people exiled by the Duvaliers came back
to Haiti. The haitian people immediately identified them as "friends" or
"pro-people and pro-democratic" because they were anti-Duvalier. I'm not
sure Evans Paul was in exile but he was probably anti-Duvalier even though
living in Haiti. He was thus immediately identified as Pro-people. However,
with Aristide's popularity in the political arena (for better or worse) we
are witnessing a near total polarization of the Haitian political scene
(Again for better or worse; I personally think for the better)where some
people are finally revealing their true colors in their desperation to grab
power. THat's how one may explain Evans Paul "change" of behavior.
"My concern is with the position of my own government towards these events.
is time for the US government and international human right organizations to
condemn this latest round of violence and send a clear statement to the
Convergence that these acts of terrorism against an unarmed population will
not be tolerated. It is the moral thing to do."
I hate to be right when it comes to the US government and the international
human right organizations policies toward Haiti. But, even though condemning
the opposition in Haiti would be the "moral thing to do," I am quasi sure
that it's not what's gonna happen especially with Bush in power and the
Republican in the congress.
The jugdment is already made and the verdict pronounced.
That reminds me of a quote by Lafontaine: "selon que vous soyez puissant ou
miserable, les jugements de cour vous rendrons blanc ou noir" (Depending on
whether you are powerful or weak, the court will condemn you as white or
P.S. I don't know if the translation is well done. But I think I got the
idea of the quote.
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com