The problems in Haiti are President Clinton’s fault. In 1993, Clinton invaded the island nation and reinstalled dictator Jean Bertrand Aristide as Haiti’s president. He did this under the auspices of “restoring democracy to Haiti.” Since then, Aristide has ruled with a bloody fist.
He murdered political opponents, embezzled much of Haiti’s $2.6 billion foreign aid money, staged phony elections in 2000 and advocated the “necklacing” of opponents.
Necklacing involves setting a gasoline-filled tire around a victim’s neck and setting it afire. The flaming rubber of the tire melts, searing the victim’s flesh as the person burns to death.
Three weeks ago, members of the “Cannibal Army,” formerly Aristide supporters, revolted after their leader was assassinated. Since then, roughly 100 Haitians have died.
Aristide fled Haiti Sunday, after receiving pressure from the Bush administration. U.S. Marines, backed by the United Nations, began arriving shortly thereafter, the first of a multilateral peacekeeping force. The head of Haiti’s Supreme Court assumed the presidency in accord with Haiti’s constitution. Bush’s handling of the crisis has proven effective. Bush applied diplomatic pressure, deposed Aristide, worked with the U.N. and sent in U.S. Marines to restore order.
Since then, Democrats like Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters and the Congressional Black Caucus have complained that Bush deposed a “democratically elected government.” Apparently, Democrats believe that a thug who was installed by foreign soldiers, who voids elections and murders opponents is fit to run a country “democratically.” This must be why they believed Saddam Hussein should run Iraq.
This turn of events reveals the fundamental differences between Bush and the Democrats. Bush believes in deposing dictators-such as Aristide, Hussein and the Taliban. Democrats believe in installing and supporting them. The differences are stark and undeniable.
Liberals have used the occasion of Haiti’s four-week-old bloody rebellion to try and tar the Bush administration as hapless and hypocritical. Let me first express my disgust with those who see in the death and destruction another chance to advance their partisan political agenda. Once again, the left plays politics with tragedy, caring more about attacking Bush than helping Haiti.
The left claims that Bush moved in a leisurely manner in Haiti, while breathlessly rushing into Iraq. So, according to leftists, a 12 year-long odyssey of no-fly zones and bombing campaigns, coupled with 17 U.N. resolutions and a year-long buildup to war-in which Hussein was given chance after chance to comply-qualifies as “rushing.” On the other hand, three-and-a-half weeks of diplomatic pressure in Haiti is somehow supposed to equal a lackadaisical saunter toward helping the island nation. Twelve years is “rushing,” three weeks is “too long.”
Moreover, liberals sneer at the humanitarian reason for liberating Iraq. For them, 400,000 murdered civilians buried in mass graves are insufficient reason to depose Iraq’s terrorist-supporting regime. However, they then claim that the 100 deaths from the current revolt create a clear and compulsory call to invade and colonize Haiti. To them, 400,000 Iraqi deaths are unimportant, while 100 Haitian deaths constitute a grave humanitarian crisis.
The evidence proves that it is liberals who are “remarkably inconsistent” and hypocritical.
The Democrats’ primary foreign policy tenet is to leave terrorist nations alone, free to arm, train and support terror. At the same time, they are demanding that the U.S. military establish yet more indefinite-duration peacekeeping missions. Liberals mandate invasions in nations that pose no threat to the United States. Yet they opposed the invasion of Afghanistan, whose Taliban regime was responsible for 3,000 U.S. citizens’ deaths.
There is nothing Bush could have done to avoid Democrats’ opprobrium. The left opposes nearly everything Bush does, heedless of the consequences. The left would rather regain power than fight the War on Terror. Their anger over Haiti is just an excuse to engage in another round of Bush-bashing.