Haiti needs 18 months to elections - U.N. envoy

[seemslikeadream]

UNITED NATIONS, Mar 31 (Reuters) Haiti will need 18 months to organize elections following last month's armed rebellion and the departure of President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, a U.N. adviser on the impoverished Caribbean nation said.

Envoy Reginald Dumas, who just returned from a 10-day visit to Haiti and a meeting of Caribbean nations, also yesterday said the U.N. Security Council accepted that countries needed ''to get away from a stop-start cycle'' on aid to Haiti and give it sustained, long-term assistance.

''Some people feel that elections should be held not later than the end of the year,'' Dumas told reporters after briefing the 15-member council. ''The consensus that I have detected is a transition period of about 18 months to the holding of elections, but less if possible.'' U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan appointed Dumas on Feb. 26 to the new post of special adviser. He has been working with a U.N.

http://www.deepikaglobal.com/latestnews.asp?ncode=14433

[MrSoundAndVision]

1. Which is BS

I'd think that in the land of the birth of democracy there would be more people publicly condemning the actions of the Bush administration-enacted illegal coup. I think it's time to remind people what this country is founded on: the will of the people, all of the time. Jefferson asserted that democracy is 'natural', and indeed it is. Coups are unnatural. Delaying the voice of the people 18 months is unnatural.

So the UN has said that the thugs who are currently killing the supporters of Haiti's democratically elected government (who presumably make up the majority) should stay in power for 18 months. Why? So that the lower class will be permanently terrorized out of voicing their opinion? Or are they just doing what the bully says?

[sam sarrha]

2. it doesn't take 18 months for us to rig an electin...send in some Diebold

machines .. we can rig it in a week.

[seemslikeadream]

3. Back on the Back Burner

Wednesday, March 31, 2004; Page A24


REMEMBER HAITI? One month ago, shortly after President Jean-Bertrand Aristide was flown out of the country on a U.S. military aircraft, U.S. Marines began landing in the capital of Port-au-Prince as part of a multinational intervention to stop the spread of anarchy. It was a mission the Bush administration did its best to avoid, following years of neglecting Haiti and months of trying to hand off management of its mounting crisis to others. Thirty days later, the Marines are still there -- 1,900 of them -- but the country and its dire problems have once again vanished from the agendas of administration policymakers. And once again, the Haitian situation is starting to deteriorate.


So far, the Bush administration's response to this forthright challenge looks a lot like another dodge. Today the most senior U.S. official to visit Haiti since before Mr. Aristide's departure is to arrive in Port-au-Prince -- a deputy assistant secretary of state. His boss, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, recently told a congressional committee that the administration will not ask for any supplemental appropriations for Haiti this year. The current budget is $44 million -- about 2 percent of what the United States is spending on reconstruction in Afghanistan.

Some midlevel American officials agree that U.S. engagement with Haiti is essential; they are studying how the United States might participate in such areas as training police and building up democratic institutions, provided funds could be diverted from other programs. But they are mired in debate with administration policymakers who oppose further aid. It's true, as the opponents say, that the Clinton administration spent billions trying to save Haiti, and failed. But this is about the poorest nation in the Western Hemisphere, a haven for drug traffickers and a perpetual source of refugees 600 miles from Florida. It's time for the Bush administration to develop a better policy than ignoring the country

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37604-2004Mar30.html