The Real Reason the US is Invading Haiti

The US is moving forward with its plans to invade Haiti by way of a UN-backed police force led by Kenya. The intervention was postponed after Haiti’s unelected prime minister Ariel Henry resigned in March but CARICOM's recent appointment of a 'transitional council' has revived the plans. Dr. Jemima Pierre, Professor of Global Race in the Institute of Race, Gender, Sexuality and Social Justice (GRSJ) at the University of British Columbia and a member of Black Alliance for Peace, discusses Haiti’s newest puppet leaders and why foreign intervention is not the solution to the deepening crisis in the country.

By Jemima Pierre, Eugene Puryear , Rania Khalek 

May 12, 2024

Source: Break Through News

Plastic, Plastic Everywhere — Even at the UN’s “Plastic Free” Conference

At a conference meant to address the plastic crisis, pro-plastic messaging was inescapable. Meanwhile, industry insiders — some positioned as government delegates — were given access to vital negotiations.

By Lisa Song

May 11, 2024
Source: ProPublica

Pro-plastic ads near the Ottawa, Ontario, convention center where the United Nations plastics treaty negotiations took place Credit:James Park for ProPublica


When I registered to attend last month’s United Nations conference in Canada, organizers insisted it would be a “plastic free meeting.” I wouldn’t even get a see-through sleeve for my name tag, they warned; I’d have to reuse an old lanyard.

After all, representatives from roughly 170 countries were gathering to tackle a crisis: The world churns out 400 million metric tons of plastic a year. It clogs landfills and oceans; its chemical trail seeps into our bodies. Delegates have been meeting since 2022 as part of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution in hopes of ending this year with a treaty that addresses “the full life cycle of plastic, including its production, design and disposal.”

The challenge before delegates seemed daunting: How do you get hundreds of negotiators to agree on anything via live, group editing? Especially when representatives from fossil fuel and chemical companies would be vigorously working to shift the conversation away from what scientists say is the only solution to the crisis: curbing plastic production.

But when I got to the meeting, I discovered those industry reps were not the sideshow; they were welcomed into the main event.

They could watch closed-door sessions off limits to reporters. Some got high-level badges indistinguishable from those worn by country representatives negotiating the treaty. These badges allowed them access to exclusive discussions not open to some of the world’s leading health scientists.

In a setting that was supposed to level the inequalities among those present, I watched how country delegates and conference organizers did little to minimize them, making what was already going to be a challenging process needlessly opaque and avoidably contentious.

With such high stakes, I asked the INC Secretariat — the staff at the UN Environment Programme who facilitated the negotiations process — why they hadn’t set rules on conflict of interest or transparency. They told me that wasn’t their job, that it was up to countries to take the lead. But in some cases, countries pointed me right back to the UN.

Over five days, I would come to understand just how hard it will be to get meaningful action on plastics.A pro-plastic ad Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Day 1: Represent the Public? Stay Out.

From the moment I landed in Ottawa, the counter-argument of the plastics industry was inescapable, from wall-sized ads at the airport to billboards on trucks that cruised around the downtown convention center.

Their message: Curtailing plastic production would spell literal doom. (I could almost see the marketing pitch: Think of the children!)

These plastics deliver water, read one, depicting a girl drinking from a bottle in what was implied to be a disaster zone.

I headed to the media registration desk and got my green-striped badge, which placed me at the lowest rung of the pecking order.

At the top were people on official delegations. Their red-striped badges opened the door to every meeting, from the large “plenaries” where rows of country representatives spoke into microphones, to smaller working groups where negotiators hashed out specifics like whether to ban certain chemicals used in plastic.

The majority of the attendees wore orange badges. This hodgepodge of so-called observers included scientists, environmentalists, Indigenous peoples and some industry reps, though the color code made no distinction among them.

Observers were allowed into certain working groups at the discretion of government delegates.

Reporters could attend only plenaries.

These huge, open sessions were like the UN equivalent of Senate floor speeches: declarations and repetition to get ideas into the public record.

Veteran observers tracked the real action in the margins, standing in the back of the ballroom to watch who was talking to whom. It was an art, they said: You want to stroll close enough to read the small print on name tags, but you have to be chill about it.

I was not chill about the lack of access, which prevented sources from talking about what happened behind closed-door proceedings. They were governed by rules that prohibited those present from recording the meetings or revealing who had said what.

Reporters trying to inform the public and hold governments accountable were completely shut out. Yet somehow the rules allowed the industry whose survival depends on more plastic production to dispatch reps to watch negotiators at work.

The rules follow the “norms when it comes to fundamentals of negotiating, multilateralism, and diplomacy amongst UN Member States,” said a statement from the INC Secretariat. These meetings are managed by the countries negotiating the treaty, the statement said; the countries set the rules.

But when I asked the U.S. State Department, which led the U.S. delegation in Ottawa, whether journalists should have more access, a spokesperson directed me back to the UN.An environmental health advocacy group near the Ottawa convention center Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Day 2: “The Human Right to Science”

I heard about an exhibit at the nearby Westin hosted by the Alliance to End Plastic Waste. It sounded like an environmental group, but an online search showed it was founded by corporations including Dow and ExxonMobil. Dow didn’t respond to a request for comment. ExxonMobil said it attended the conference “to be a resource, bring solutions to the table and listen to a broad range of views by all stakeholders.”

As I wandered through the ballroom stocked with refreshments, shiny videos and diagrams promoted the potential of “circularity,” a marketing term that’s often focused on recycling. Independent research shows pollution will skyrocket if companies don’t curb production, but the industry has, for decades, shifted attention from that with false promises about waste management.

“The work we do is not the whole solution,” the alliance later told me in an email.

But I could easily see someone leaving the exhibit with that impression.

The finer points of plastic science, from its toxic manufacturing process to the limits of recycling, are highly technical and complex.

While countries like the United States could afford to fly in multiple experts to inform government delegates, other countries could not.

Later that day, I met Bethanie Carney Almroth, an ecotoxicologist from Sweden’s University of Gothenburg, who was among 60 independent, volunteer researchers who had traveled to Canada in hopes of bridging that gap in access to expertise.

As part of the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, they shared fact sheets and peer-reviewed studies and made themselves available for questions. Carney Almroth said ensuring the integrity of the group was vital. Members must have a proven track record of researching plastic pollution and follow a conflict-of-interest policy to prevent bias.

“The human right to science,” she said, “includes the right to transparency.”Bethanie Carney Almroth, a professor of ecotoxicology at the University of Gothenburg in Sweden, is on the steering committee of the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty. Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Day 3: “No Such Thing as Conflict of Interest”

For the first two of these conferences, the INC Secretariat didn’t include the participants’ affiliations when they released the list of people who had registered for the event, making it hard to tell who worked for the industry. That has since changed, making it easier for advocacy groups to scour lists for fossil fuel and chemical company affiliations.

After the UN released the roster of the 4,000 people who had registered for Ottawa this year, the Center for International Environmental Law released its analysis of industry attendees. It found about 200 people with observer-level badges.

What’s more, the group said, 16 industry representatives had received the red badges usually reserved for government delegates. They were invited onto official delegations by China, the Dominican Republic, Iran, Kazakhstan, Kuwait, Malaysia, Thailand, Turkey and Uganda. I later learned an Indonesian delegate was listed as part of its Ministry of Industry; LinkedIn revealed him to be a director at a petrochemical firm.

I reached out to officials from all 10 countries. Most did not respond.

(The United States wasn’t on the list. “As a matter of policy, the United States does not include any industry or civil society representatives in our official delegation,” said a spokesperson from the State Department.)

There is “no such thing as conflict of interest in International negotiations,” the executive director of the Uganda National Environment Management Authority, Barirega Akankwasah, told me in a WhatsApp message. It’s “a matter of country positions and not individual positions,” he said, adding that the conference was “open and transparent” and stakeholders were “all welcome to participate.”

An official from the Dominican Republic, Claudia Taboada, told me that environmental groups and academic scientists had been consulted before the Ottawa conference and that the two industry reps on the country’s eight-member delegation had restricted privileges. They were barred from internal meetings where observers weren’t allowed, she said, and they couldn’t negotiate on behalf of the government.Claudia Taboada was part of the official delegation from the Dominican Republic. She is director for science technology and environment at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Those industry reps weren’t trying to influence the government’s position, added Taboada, who is director for science, technology and environment at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

I found that hard to believe. Who would sit through days of bureaucratic meetings just to observe?

A red-striped badge provides tangible benefits, multiple attendees told me, like access to email lists and WhatsApp chats that are closed to observers. A university scientist who’s part of Fiji’s official delegation, Rufino Varea, said it’s easier to talk to official delegates from other countries when you have that badge. It shows only a person’s name and country, making it impossible to tell at a glance whether someone works for the government or for private interests.

A press release issued that day showed a counter-analysis of the entire list of attendees from the International Council of Chemical Associations, which said that industry observers were vastly outnumbered by more than 2,000 members from nongovernmental organizations like environmental advocacy groups.

Many of these groups are “incredibly well funded” and supported by billionaires, said a subsequent email from the American Chemistry Council, the country’s largest plastics lobby. It noted that at least eight countries had NGO representatives on their official delegations.Rufino Varea is in his final semester as a doctoral student in ecotoxicology at the University of the South Pacific. Varea said Fiji’s delegation supports a strong treaty that limits plastic production. Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Day 4: Fighting for Attention

For every NGO with millions in the bank, there were others whose members couldn’t afford the trip to Ottawa. Many had to compete for limited travel funds from sources like the UN or larger advocacy groups.

I sat down with John Chweya, a friendly man in a leather jacket who makes a living as a waste picker in Kenya. A single salad at the conference cost more than a day’s pay.

As president of the Waste Pickers Association of Kenya, he wanted delegates to understand how plastic impacts the millions around the world who collect garbage and sort the recyclables they can sell in places without formal waste disposal. Toxic fumes from plastic burning in landfills make his fellow workers sick, he told me. They wake up with swollen necks, joints that don’t work and mysterious tumors. Chweya wants the world to make less plastic; he came to Ottawa to fight for protective gear and health care.

The specificity of his story brought home how the experiences of front-line communities could inform the understanding of the plastics crisis.John Chweya traveled to Ottawa to advocate for waste pickers in Kenya. Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Others like Chweya tried to give voice to huge portions of the world’s populations that are suffering from every step in the plastic life cycle: residents of Indigenous communities and Louisiana’s “Cancer Alley” breathing dangerous plant emissions; Pacific Islanders seeing their coral reefs entangled in abandoned fishing nets; activists from lower-income countries that are swimming in Americans’ discarded plastic.

I watched them trying to grab the attention of government officials with handwritten posters, events in cramped rooms and limited speaking slots during the plenary.

None of it matched the flash of the billboards I could not seem to avoid, which heralded their own impending health emergency.

These plastics save lives, one decreed, featuring a girl in a hospital bed, wearing an oxygen mask.

Negotiators couldn’t even agree on setting voluntary reductions for plastic production, I thought. Nobody was proposing to eliminate enough plastic to cause hospital shortages.

Chweya called the prevalent ads “traitorous.”

Day 5: The UN Isn’t Powerless

UN officials had warned against the inequities playing out in Ottawa.

In November 2022, the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights issued a statement during the first conference to negotiate the treaty, held in Uruguay.

Even though they weren’t hosting it, human rights officials had advice on how to proceed. “The plastic industry has disproportionate power and influence over policy relative to the general public,” they wrote. “Clear boundaries on conflict of interest should be established … drawing from existing good practices under international law.”

They recommended policies similar to those adopted by the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, a separate UN treaty. Government representatives meet every two years to evaluate results. Recognizing that the tobacco industry’s presence was fundamentally incompatible with protecting public health, the countries agreed to virtually ban Big Tobacco from those meetings.

“It is irresponsible and inaccurate to liken plastics to tobacco,” the American Chemistry Council said in a statement in response to my questions about this comparison. “Unlike the tobacco industry, the plastics industry is playing a vital role in helping meet the UN’s sustainability goals by contributing to food safety, healthcare, renewable energy, telecommunications, clean drinking water, and much more. …

“Keeping plastic producers out means a less informed treaty,” the council said. “We are essential and constructive stakeholders in the global effort to prevent plastic pollution.”

Short of barring the plastics industry, many have wondered why the UN can’t start with smaller steps, like giving industry observers a different kind of badge.

The fossil fuel companies “that are manufacturing plastics” are “not coming to these negotiations with solutions,” Baskut Tuncak, a former UN special rapporteur for human rights and toxics, told me. They’re here “to throw a wrench in the process, or two, or three.”

When I asked if it intended to introduce conflict-of-interest controls, the INC Secretariat said it couldn’t impose rules unilaterally. Governments would have to decide for themselves.

Some U.S. and European politicians have requested such reforms. Negotiators should consider measures “to protect against undue influence of corporate actors with proven vested interests that contradict the goals of the global plastics treaty,” said a letter last month sent to President Joe Biden and the secretary-general of the United Nations.

It was signed by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., who’s often criticized the fossil fuel industry’s influence on public policy, along with 11 other members of Congress and a member of the European Parliament. Industry reps should be required to disclose lobbying records and campaign contributions, the letter suggested.

The UN isn’t powerless, said Tuncak and Ana Paula Souza, a UN human rights officer I met on my last day in Ottawa. There’s more the institution could do to raise the profile of the issue, they said. Souza said the UN could also increase funding to allow more of those most affected by plastic pollution to attend these meetings.An art installation outside the Ottawa convention center Credit: James Park for ProPublica

Looking Ahead

The Ottawa conference ended with limited progress. Negotiators have a long way to go to reach a final draft at the last scheduled conference this November in Busan, South Korea. Smaller groups of delegates will meet before then; it’s unclear how many observers will be able to attend.

It’s tempting to feel pessimistic. This could easily end up like the UN climate treaty — anemic, voluntary and dragging on forever.

And it’s not like a conflict-of-interest policy would magically solve everything. Countries with powerful plastics lobbies, including the United States, can still advocate for corporate interests.

But it’s worth stepping back to recognize the magnitude of what’s happening.

Nearly every government on Earth signed up for days of painstaking sessions on plastic as a global threat — even places confronting existential crises, like Haiti, Palestine, Sudan and Ukraine. The world recognizes the importance of figuring this out. And despite all the industry influence, capping plastic production remains a possibility.

‘I am starting to panic about my child’s future’: climate scientists wary of starting families


A fifth of female climate scientists who responded to Guardian survey said they had opted to have no or fewer children

Damian Carrington
Fri 10 May 2024 
THE GUARDIAN 

“Ihad the hormonal urges,” said Prof Camille Parmesan, a leading climate scientist based in France. “Oh my gosh, it was very strong. But it was: ‘Do I really want to bring a child into this world that we’re creating?’ Even 30 years ago, it was very clear the world was going to hell in a handbasket. I’m 62 now and I’m actually really glad I did not have children.”

Parmesan is not alone. An exclusive Guardian survey has found that almost a fifth of the female climate experts who responded have chosen to have no children, or fewer children, due to the environmental crises afflicting the world.


Such decisions were extremely difficult, they said. Dr Shobha Maharaj, an expert on the effects of the climate crisis from Trinidad and Tobago, has chosen to have only one child, a son who is now six years old. “Choosing to have a child was and continues to be a struggle,” she said.

Maharaj said fear of what her child’s future would hold, as well as adding another human to the planet, were part of the struggle: “When you grow up on a small island, it becomes part of you. Small islands are already being very adversely impacted, so there is this constant sense of impending loss and I just didn’t want to have to transfer that to my child.”

“However, my husband is the most family-oriented person I know,” Maharaj said. “So this was a compromise: one child, no more. Who knows, maybe my son will grow up to be someone who can help find a solution?”

The Guardian approached every contactable lead author or review editor of all reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change since 2018. The IPCC’s reports are the gold standard of climate knowledge. Of the 843 contacted, 360 replied to the question on life decisions, a high response rate.

View image in fullscreen

“When I was making my choice, it was very clear in the ecological community that human population growth was a problem” Camille Parmesan, who is based in France, said she was happy with the decision she made not to have children. Photograph: Lloyd Russell / University of Plymouth

Ninety-seven female scientists responded, with 17, including women from Brazil, Chile, Germany, India and Kenya, saying they had chosen to have fewer children. All but 1% of the scientists surveyed were over 40 years old and two-thirds were over 50, reflecting the senior positions they had reached in their professions. A quarter of the respondents were women, the same proportion as the overall authorship of the IPCC reports.


The findings were in response to a question about major personal decisions taken in response to the climate crisis by scientists who know the most about it, and who expect global temperatures to soar past international targets in coming years. 7% of the male scientists who responded said they had had either no children or fewer than they would otherwise have had.

Most of the female scientists interviewed had made their decisions about children in past decades, when they were younger and the grave danger of global heating was less apparent. They said they had not wanted to add to the global human population that is exacting a heavy environmental toll on the planet, and some also expressed fears about the climate chaos through which a child might now have to live.


‘Hopeless and broken’: why the world’s top climate scientists are in despair

The role of rising global population in the destruction of nature and the climate crisis has been a divisive topic for decades. The publication of The Population Bomb by Prof Paul Ehrlich in 1968, mentioned by several of the scientists in their survey responses, was a particular flashpoint. The debate prompted past allegations of racism, as nations with fast-rising populations are largely those in Africa and Asia. Compulsory population control is not part of today’s population-environment debate, with better educational opportunities for girls and access to contraception for women who want it seen as effective and humane policies.


Parmesan, at the CNRS ecology centre in France, said: “When I was making my choice, it was very clear in the ecological community that human population growth was a problem: preserving biodiversity was absolutely dependent on stabilising population.”

Prof Regina Rodrigues, an oceanographer at the Federal University of Santa Catarina in Brazil, who also chose not to have children, was influenced by the environmental destruction she saw in the fast-expanding coastal town near São Paulo where she grew up.

“The fact of the limitation of resources was really clear to me from a young age,” she said. “Then I learned about climate change and it was even more clear to me. I’m totally satisfied in teaching and passing what I know to people – it doesn’t need to be my blood. [My husband and I] don’t regret a moment. We both work on climate and we are fighting.”

View image in fullscreen

“It is honestly only now that I am starting to panic about my child’s future” Prof. Dr. Lisa Schipper Photograph: Friederike Pauk / GIUB

Prof Lisa Schipper, an expert on climate vulnerability at the University of Bonn in Germany, chose to have one child. She said that coming from the global north, where each person’s carbon footprint is much bigger than those living in the global south, there is a responsibility to think carefully about this choice.


“It is honestly only now that I am starting to panic about my child’s future,” she said. “When she was born in 2013, I felt more optimistic about the possibility of reducing emissions. Now I feel guilty about leaving her in this world without my protection, and guilty about having played a part in the changing climate. So it’s bleak.”

An Indian scientist who chose to be anonymous decided to adopt rather than have children of her own. “There are too many children in India who do not get a fair chance and we can offer that to someone who is already born,” she said. “We are not so special that our genes need to be transmitted: values matter more.”

She said rich people who choose to have large families were “self-centred and irresponsible in current times”, citing low infant mortality and the huge gap between the emissions of the rich and the poor.

The links between environmental concerns and fertility choices are complex and research to date has found little consistency across age groups and nationalities. According to a recent review, choosing to have fewer or no children for environmental reasons could be the result of fears about the future, population levels or not having the resources needed to raise the children.

A study of Americans aged 27 to 45 – younger than the IPCC scientists surveyed – found concern about the wellbeing of children in a climate-changed world was a much bigger factor than worries over the carbon footprint of their offspring. However, a focus group study in Sweden across all ages found few had changed or would change their plans for children owing to climate fears.

There has been almost no research in the global south. Many researchers noted that some women do not have the freedom or ability to choose if they have children, or how many.

On the debate on the role of population growth in environmental crises, Schipper said: “How many people we have is irrelevant if only a small percentage are doing most of the damage.” Parmesan disagreed, saying the total impact is the combination of people’s level of consumption and the total number of people: “Don’t cherrypick half of the equation and ignore the other half.”

 

Vodou grows powerful as Haitians seek 

solace from unrelenting gang violence

Canadian Press Videos

Thu, May 9, 2024 

  

Shunned publicly by politicians and intellectuals for centuries, Vodou is transforming into a more powerful and accepted religion across Haiti, where its believers were once persecuted. Vodou believers are seeking solace and protection from violent gangs that have killed, raped and kidnapped thousands in recent years. Amid the spiraling chaos, a growing number of Haitians are praying more or visiting Vodou priests known as “oungans” for urgent requests ranging from locating loved ones who were kidnapped to finding critical medication needed to keep someone alive. (AP video by Pierre Luxama)

Haiti: Transitional Presidential Council Is Sworn in, a President Is Selected, But Disagreements Ensue

BY JAKE JOHNSTON – CHRIS FRANÇOIS

 MAY 10, 2024
Facebook

TwitterRedditEmail

After weeks of waiting, the transitional presidential council (TPC) was sworn in on April 25 at the National Palace. De facto prime minister Ariel Henry’s official resignation letter, signed from Los Angeles, California, was made public immediately after. Former minister of finance Michel Patrick Boisvert, who had been serving as head of government in Henry’s absence for the last two months, was named interim prime minister pending the council’s formation of a new government. For more details on the parties represented on the transitional council and its members, see this explainer by Le Nouvelliste and this previous CEPR post.

As a first step toward forming a new government, the group selected one of its seven voting members as TPC president last week. On paper, the role of president is supposed to be like a coordinator, with no additional powers than the rest of the council. Nonetheless, there were four candidates for the post and days of intense backroom negotiations ahead of the selection. On April 30, it was announced that Edgard Leblanc Fils had secured the support of four voting members and been named the TPC’s president. Controversially, however, in his initial remarks, Fils announced that the same four TPC members had also chosen a prime minister: a former minister of youth and sports, Fritz Bélizaire, who is close to Moïse Jean Charles.

Representatives Smith Augustin, Louis Gerard Gilles, and Leblanc — of coalitions from the, Moïse, Henry, and Martelly administrations respectively — joined with the Pitit Dessalines party to form an “Indissoluble Majority Bloc” within the council. According to a document signed by the four council members, they agreed to reach consensus positions within their bloc “or failing that, by a majority of three out of four.” In effect, the group formed a council within the council that would appear to permanently remove the three minority representatives from participating in the decision-making process.

Though most TPC members seem to have accepted the appointment of Leblanc as president, the three minority representatives rejected the choice of prime minister, with Leslie Voltaire from Fanmi Lavalas arguing that Bélizaire’s nomination violated the council members’ April 3 agreement outlining the selection process for the prime minister. Lavalas also criticized the decision in a press release: “Unfortunately, the farce that took place on April 30, 2024 within the presidential council is a conspiracy aiming to secure power for the PHTK party and their allies during the transition period, as well as to perpetuate the tradition of corruption.”

The Monitoring Office of the Montana Accord echoed Fanmi Lavalas’s sentiments, denouncing a “conspiracy” by “mafia forces” to “take control of the presidential council and the government so that they can continue to control the state.”

Notably, the international community, which had energetically cheered on the TPC’s installation the week prior, remained silent. Luis Almagro, secretary general of the OAS, noted Leblanc’s appointment but added, “the transparent and rule-compliant appointment of a Prime Minister, as well as the rapid formation of a new government, are vital for the stability of the country.”

On May 1, the majority bloc released a statement reversing its prime ministerial appointment and pledging to follow the agreed-upon procedures, the Miami Herald reported. However, the paper added, “there is no indication that his nomination would eventually be dropped by the controlling majority.” On May 2, CARICOM leaders met with the TPC for the first time. Lavalas, Montana, and the private sector did not participate in the meeting.

The crisis within the council, in the first week of its formal existence, threatens to undermine what little credibility it had to begin with. Critics, who have referred to the TPC as a “seven (or nine) headed serpent,” alleged it would quickly degenerate into politics as usual as the same forces that have governed the country for the last 15 years work to again divvy up the spoils of the state. In a May 3 interview with Radio Magik 9, Gilles, one of the majority bloc members, revealed that his group had already distributed ministries among its political coalitions.

On May 7, however, the council members reportedly reached an agreement to resolve the conflict, raising the voting threshold from a simple majority to a qualified majority of five out of seven. They also agreed that the head of the council would rotate among four different representatives, with each serving in the position for five months. Leblanc will serve first, followed by Fritz Jean from the Montana Accord, Voltaire, and then Gilles.

Without any real constitutional or popular legitimacy, the only hope council members have is convincing an overwhelmingly skeptical population that they can put their differences aside and govern effectively.

New Date Expected for Arrival of the Multinational Security Support Mission

After putting deployment hold pending installation of a new government, the United States and Kenya “plan to have the first troops in Haiti by the time President Ruto arrives in Washington, DC for his May 23 state visit,” according to CEPR Senior Research Associate Jake Johnston. POLITICO confirmed the information, noting that the US-constructed base for the MSS had yet to be completed.

That is not the only barrier, however. The mission is expected to cost between $250 and $600 million, but thus far the UN-managed fund for the mission has received just $18 million, including $8.7 million from Canada, $6 million from the United States, and $3.2 million from France. On May 4, POLITICO reported that the Biden administration was providing up to $60 million in equipment for countries contributing to the MSS and to the Haitian police. “The package, the second the U.S. has approved for the Haiti crisis this year, includes mostly small arms but also some armored vehicles. The notification lists at least 80 Humvees, 35 MaxxPro infantry carriers, sniper rifles, riot control gear, firearms, ammunition and surveillance drones,” POLITICO reported.

Recruitment for the mission is progressing, as the UN Spokesperson’s Office recently announced that the Bahamas, Bangladesh, Barbados, Benin, Chad, Jamaica, and Kenya had officially notified Secretary-General António Guterres that they intend to provide personnel. According to the spokesperson, other countries are interested but have not yet made their commitment official. Recently the Canadian Armed Forces wrapped up training for soldiers from the Bahamas, Belize, and Jamaica. Bahamian foreign minister Keith Mitchell told a local news outlet that Kenya would begin deploying troops on May 26.

“I don’t think personnel is going to be our problem. I think resources, financial resources are going to be our problem,” Todd Robinson, director of the State Department’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, told the Miami Herald. Robinson said the deployment “will happen sometime around” Ruto’s visit, and noted that civilian contractors had arrived in Port-au-Prince to work on the base construction.

“We don’t want to send them into a situation where they’re not securely housed and have a place to sleep, plan and do all of that,” he told the paper.

A key first step will be opening the international airport in Port-au-Prince, which has been closed since early March. In recent weeks, at least seven US military planes were able to land, bringing humanitarian relief supplies, equipment for the local police, and contractors working on the MSS. The pace of such flights has been increasing, with three landing on May 7 alone. The Miami Herald previously reported that American Airlines had expected to resume service on May 9, but has now pushed that date back a week. JetBlue, which also flies to Port-au-Prince, said it tentatively plans to resume service on May 15. One condition for resuming flights, the destruction of some homes surrounding the airport, was recently met, with over 180 homes destroyed.

Though many officers welcome international support, some have raised concerns about the resources available to foreign police. “It’s quite frustrating to hear that they are going to spend hundreds of millions of dollars on a multinational mission, while the Haitian police officer receives a few hundred dollars,” an officer told Ayibopost.

The outgoing government has also made changes to police officers’ benefits and has created new ones for members of the military in an attempt to bolster morale in the beleaguered security forces. In a special decree published in Le Moniteur, the government’s official publication, 36 months of salary will be granted as severance to police officers after they retire, and military service members who suffer a major accident or die during the course of their duties will receive various allowances, determined by rank.

The members of the TPC agreed to support the MSS as a precondition of their participation in the new governing structure. On May 7, the council wrote to Kenyan president Ruto, noting that they had “taken charge of the file” relating to the MSS. Still, some have questioned the international community’s strategy. “We don’t need the Kenyans, we need support for our police, like equipment, additional training,” council member Leslie Voltaire told the Wall Street Journal. “We can handle it, provided we get the aid from the international community to back us up.”

The police have had a number of successes in recent weeks, belying the impression that they lack capacity. The TPC was able to be sworn in at the National Palace, despite the intense fighting there in recent weeks. Police were also able to secure the airport perimeter, and last week successfully reopened the Varreux fuel terminal after a two-week closure.

In an Al Jazeera op-ed, Doudou Pierre Festile and Micherline Islanda Aduel, two Haitian peasant leaders associated with La Via Campesina, argue against another foreign intervention and raise concerns with the TPC, noting: “civil society, rural communities and grassroots political movements find themselves sidelined in the current transition plan, with just one seat in the presidential council” posing “a serious threat to the credibility of the interim administration.”

“The plight of the Haitian people cannot be ignored or trivialised. It necessitates immediate and concerted action, but the answer is not another foreign intervention. Western powers ought to honour Haitian sovereignty and endorse local solutions instead of imposing their own preferences. The will of the people who are bearing the brunt of this catastrophe must be upheld,” Festile and Islanda Aduel conclude.

Armed Group Leaders Push for Negotiations, Amnesty as Attacks Continue

When disparate armed groups announced they were forming the Viv Ansanm coalition in late February, their leaders pledged to cease kidnappings, urged displaced residents to return to their homes, and apologized for past abuses. With the suspension of territorial fights, residents of certain neighborhoods even experienced a slight reprieve from years of violence. “We want the civilian population to know that we are not in a fight against them,” Jimmy “Barbecue” Cherizier, a former police officer and self-described spokesperson for Viv Ansanm, said in early March.

But a little more than two months later, violent attacks have increased and the leaders’ rhetoric has again shifted, suggesting the population has been unconvinced by the talk of “revolution.” Neighborhoods in lower Delmas, for example, which are under Cherizier’s control, have again experienced repeated incursions by armed groups over the last month following years of relative security.

In early April, Cherizier accused residents of Delmas 3 and Delmas 5 of collaborating with the police to have four of his men killed. In leaked audio from April 21, Cherizier allegedly can be heard telling an associate, “I don’t care whose house it is, burn all of the homes, set them on fire!”

In another recording, from April 27, published on Facebook, Barbecue says: “I want the Haitian people to know that everything that is being done is in the name of peace. All the bullets you see being shot are for peace. Even the people who are dying, are dying for peace. Even the homes that are burning, are burning for peace. The reason? When you want peace, you go to war.”

Though much of the media coverage has depicted the armed groups as attempting to take control of the state, there is little indication this is the case — if it ever was their goal. Rather, Cherizier has repeatedly stated his desire to participate in negotiations with the government. “It’s either we’re all at the table, it’s either we’re ALL at the table, or none of us are there,” he said in late April.

Christ Roy Chery, aka “Krisla,” who has held sway in the Ti Bwa neighborhood for many years, launched a series of attacks in the Carrefour neighborhood, where schools and businesses had largely remained open. In a recording posted on April 18, Krisla said, “The same way everyone else can’t go to school, we must paralyze Carrefour so they can’t go to school either.” Seven people were killed in the assaults and multiple police stations were emptied of prisoners and supplies.

“Today, if the population knew what it was doing, it would stand with us,” Krisla said, an implicit acknowledgement that citizens have largely rejected the “revolution” led by Viv Ansanm.

In an interview with CNN, Vitel’homme Innocent, who remains on the FBI’s Most Wanted list, was explicit that armed groups like his were seeking amnesty, while describing the violence as “collateral damage.” Innocent, however, claimed that the coalition was working to “get rid of the oligarchs who prevent the country from progressing.”

“How can they say they are fighting for the poor, when they are using their guns to kick us out of our homes?” a resident of lower Delmas, whose house was burned, asked a journalist from Ayibopost. The local news outlet has done extensive reporting on the Viv Ansanm coalition and the contradiction between its rhetoric and its actions.

While few seem to trust the armed groups’ motivations, the question of negotiations remains.

In March, staff from the Kenyan first lady’s office traveled to the United States to meet with policymakers, security officials, business leaders, and religious organizations. Serge Musasilwa, a member of the delegation, told the press that they had also participated in a Zoom meeting with Cherizier. The delegation, Musasilwa said, is offering recommendations to the Kenyan government for the MSS’s operations.

“Among the recommendations in his report, for instance, will be that Kenya help Haiti facilitate a peace and reconciliation conference to bring as many Haitians as possible into conversations about its future—including gangs,” Christianity Today reported. The TPC has not directly addressed the issue, but in the political accord signed by all members, it called for the formation of a Truth, Justice, and Reparations commission.

In the CNN interview, Innocent said that, while wanting amnesty, “we are ready too to answer the justice system of our country, so that we can see where the worst evil was hidden.” Innocent’s testimony, as well as that of other armed group members, could be instrumental in holding accountable members of the political and economic elite who have facilitated and funded the violence.

Innocent has called in to local radio stations on multiple occasions to name prominent government officials and politicians he claims have worked with him. A former political activist and businessman, he has hosted political meetings at one of his properties in the Tabarre neighborhood. Local human rights groups have denounced his long-standing relationship with current police chief Frantz Elbe. Innocent told CNN his one regret was getting involved in politics.

Without naming names, Innocent accused politicians of directing kidnappings and facilitating the trafficking of weapons. “If you choose to block them, they’ll call us and say: ‘I have such and such a job … Fix it for us.’ And then you hear so-and-so has been kidnapped. Or so-and-so has been taken hostage,” he said.

“Let’s take a clear example. We aren’t able to travel. We aren’t able to import. We aren’t able to export. Yet there are always weapons coming in. There are always bullets. And we don’t have any representatives at the border. We don’t have any representatives at customs. Yet all these materials go through exactly these channels. How do they get to us?” he said.

Armed group leaders have also repeatedly raised the issue of police violence in their public comments, claiming that civilians in areas under the control of armed groups have been indiscriminately shot at and killed. “If you’re from Village de Dieu, you’re a dead man walking,” Cherizier said in late April. “Because if the police catches you, they will shoot you, they’ll say you’re part of Izo 5 Segond’s gang.” On May 6, residents in the Delmas 6 neighborhood took to the streets to protest against police violence, with some holding signs calling for negotiations with Viv Ansanm. The next day, an armored police vehicle opened fire on a bus transporting civilians, according to a transport union leader.

Colombian President Says Missing Equipment and Ammunition Could Have Been Smuggled to Haiti

At a May Day rally, Colombian president Gustavo Petro suggested that weapons and ammunition stolen from military stockpiles may have made their way to Haiti, noting the country is just seven hours by speedboat from the Colombian coast.

Petro has taken an increasing interest in Haiti. On April 18, in a joint press conference with President Lula of Brazil, Petro acknowledged that Colombia’s illicit economies had caused significant damage to Haiti and that he and Lula had discussed “a peaceful solution” to Haiti’s crises.

Haitian and International Civil Society Groups Call on France to Pay Reparations to Haiti

During the third session of the UN Permanent Forum on People of African Descent, a group of Haitian civil society representatives called on France to pay reparations to Haiti for the billions in “double debt” that France forced Haiti to pay in exchange for recognition of its independence. Volker Türk, the UN human rights chief, echoed the calls during his closing speech. The topic has gained greater awareness in the 20 years since former president Jean-Bertrand Aristide was ousted in a US- and France-backed coup motivated in part by Aristide’s call for restitution. In 2022, for example, the New York Times published a series examining how Haitians had been forced to pay reparations to their former enslavers.

The France-based Foundation for the Memory of Slavery also called on French authorities to make 2025, the 200th anniversary of King Charles X’s ordinance calling on Haiti to pay the indemnity, an opportunity to take action. “As for reparations, it is time today to open this question, as urged by a global movement in which other European democracies have already engaged, such as Germany and the Netherlands,” the Foundation said in a press release on its website.

This first appeared on CEPR.

Jake Johnston is a Senior Research Associate at the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, D.C. Chris François is an intern in the Center for Economic and Policy Research’s international program.