Last Friday or was it Thursday/ It matters not unless you're stuck under a concrete slab hoping to get rescued, the Guardian posted a great article , a sort of definitive history of Haiti. Those who wish to read it in full will find it right here.
Titled Haiti: a long descent to hell the guardian which is rather pro tony bliar's new labour rarely does the exposes of colonialism it used to do, particularly not negative assessments of amerikan imperialism, but since in this instance the other blackguard imperialist is france, I suppose for the guardian's editors the old angle francophobia trumped the new angle amerikaphilia.
Dangerous stuff they loosed a confirmed anti-imperialist onto the case whose examination of Haiti's treatment is bound to stir up issues about the similarity of Haiti's demise and englander PM brown's treatment of Iceland. Although he doesn't move out of the unwhitefella point of view terribly much preferring parallels with Somalia.
It could just as easily be New Zealand. The chief reason NZ had to privatise it's national assets and sell them to foreign corporations in the 1980's was that NZ was being held accountable for loans from english banks made during WW1 and WW2 when the brits borrowed money from themselves in our name to finance NZ's involvement in european wars. Crazy isn't it? even the NZ's at the time thought that was taking the spirit of dedication to what they used to call 'the mother country' a little too far.
Helen Clark's tedious rule was just that tedious but she did manage to ensure that NZers didn't owe anyone a brass razoo. Less than 12 months of the tory mob in power and our national debt acquired by slashing taxes for the rich, has already reached over $2000 US per capita.
With debt comes a loss of independence, of course. So now kiwis are gonna play war games with the septic tanks once again. See this puff piece from our local fishwrap written before Haiti's disaster stopped the Clinton meet and greet.
But NZ's problems are not the issue here. I'll just give readers a taste of the guardian article so they can see for themselves how Haiti became Haiti:
Quote: But what has really left Haiti in such a state today, what makes the country a constant and heart-rending site of recurring catastrophe, is its history. In Haiti, the last five centuries have combined to produce a people so poor, an infrastructure so nonexistent and a state so hopelessly ineffectual that whatever natural disaster chooses to strike next, its impact on the population will be magnified many, many times over. Every single factor that international experts look for when trying to measure a nation's vulnerability to natural disasters is, in Haiti, at the very top of the scale. Countries, when it comes to dealing with disaster, do not get worse.
"Haiti has had slavery, revolution, debt, deforestation, corruption, exploitation and violence," says Alex von Tunzelmann, a historian and writer currently working on a book about the country and its near neighbours, the Dominican Republic and Cuba. "Now it has poverty, illiteracy, overcrowding, no infrastructure, environmental disaster and large areas without the rule of law. And that was before the earthquake. . .
. . .In the 18th century, under French rule, Haiti – then called Saint-Domingue – was the Pearl of the Antilles, one of the richest islands in France's empire (though 800,000-odd African slaves who produced that wealth saw precious little of it). In the 1780s, Haiti exported 60% of all the coffee and 40% of all the sugar consumed in Europe: more than all of Britain's West Indian colonies combined. It subsequently became the first independent nation in Latin America, and remains the world's oldest black republic and the second-oldest republic in the western hemisphere after the United States. . .
. . .The French West India Company gradually assumed control of the colony, and by 1665 France had formally claimed it as Saint-Domingue. A treaty with Spain 30 years later saw Madrid cede the western third of the island to Paris.
Economically, French occupation was a runaway success. But Haiti's riches could only be exploited by importing up to 40,000 slaves a year. For nearly a decade in the late 18th century, Haiti accounted for more than one-third of the entire Atlantic slave trade. Conditions for these men and women were atrocious; the average life expectancy for a slave on Haiti was 21 years. . .
. . .Not surprisingly, the French Revolution in 1789 raised the tricky question of how exactly the Declaration of the Rights of Man might be said to apply both to Haiti's then sizeable population of free gens de couleur (generally the offspring of a white plantation owner and a black concubine) – and ultimately to the slaves themselves. . .
. . .As France became increasingly distracted by war with Britain, the French commander, the Vicomte de Rochambeau, was finally defeated in November 1803 (though not before he had hanged, drowned or burned and buried alive thousands of rebels). Haiti declared independence on 1 January 1804.
As Stephen Keppel of the Economist Intelligence Unit puts it, Haiti's revolution may have brought it independence but it also "ended up destroying the country's infrastructure and most of its plantations. It wasn't the best of starts for a fledgling republic." Moreover, in exchange for diplomatic recognition from France, the new republic was forced to pay enormous reparations: some 150m francs, in gold. It was an immense sum, and even reduced by more than half in 1830, far more than Haiti could afford.
"The long and the short of it is that Haiti was paying reparations to France from 1825 until 1947," says Von Tunzelmann. "To come up with the money, it took out huge loans from American, German and French banks, at exorbitant rates of interest. By 1900, Haiti was spending about 80% of its national budget on loan repayments. It completely wrecked their economy. By the time the original reparations and interest were paid off, the place was basically destitute and trapped in a spiral of debt. . .
. . .in 1911 came another revolution, followed almost immediately by nearly 20 years of occupation by a US terrified that Haiti was about to default on its massive debts. The Great Depression devastated the country's exports. There were revolts and coups and dictatorships, and then, in 1957, came François "Papa Doc" Duvalier. . .
The rest which is equally horrific should be familiar to most of us who have followed the horror show which is the colonisation of Latin America by amerika.
This sentence has been ringing in my head since I firdst read the article:
"The long and the short of it is that Haiti was paying reparations to France from 1825 until 1947"
Take a close look at any 'failed state' and you'll find something similar.
I don't reckon Oblam has any plans to make Haiti a keeper. Why would he? Making extortionate loans disguised as 'foreign aid' has worked so well up until now. If amerika actually took over Haiti, they would have to actually spend some money there on stuff other than bribes to Haiti's traitors.
I couldn't help but notice that Haitian expat Wyclef Jean is copping it in spades from the mainstream "charities" at the moment. (sorry bout the bad pun put it down to watching Spike Lee's movie of 'Passing Strange' last nite)
I don't know the original source of this article[ which has appeared in many local fishwrap (in this case the HongKong Standard) as well as my own but the time is as Jean points out "interesting".
I have no idea how straight up Jean is but this is quite a thing to be casting independent Haitian charities into disrepute right at the time alla the collecting is going on.
After all maybe Jean planned on giving Haitians stuff with no strings attached. maybe he isn't pushing it through the channels amerika has control over.
I dunno but I do know that Haiti has zero chance of getting its problems sorted until all of the banks and other usurers are made to get off Haiti's case. |