252

U.S. Military Planes Are in Haiti. Haitians Don’t Know Why. (foreignpolicy.com)

submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by DolphinMath@slrpnk.net to c/world@lemmy.world

61 comments fedilink hide all child comments

In the past several weeks, I have watched dozens of sleek U.S. military planes descend over Toussaint Louverture International Airport in Port-au-Prince, Haiti, where I live. They were the first flights to land since gangs blockaded and halted commercial air traffic in March. U.S. news reports suggest that the aircraft contained civilian contractors and supplies to pave the way for the deployment of a Kenyan-led security mission to Haiti, which is expected to begin any day now.

But no one has informed Haitians who or what was on board. Even the members of Haiti’s new transitional government told me that they did not know precisely what the United States was flying into the country. Although the Haitian members of the presidential council have met with Kenyan and Haitian officials to discuss the force, they said they have not provided input to U.S. officials. Aides to newly installed Prime Minister Garry Conille confirmed that he has had no say on decisions related to the mission. It remains unclear what the force’s specific goals are or how it can contribute to rebuilding the Haitian state.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 84 points 2 months ago

Looks like they're getting ready for whatever play they intend to make against the gangs and are trying to keep exacts on the hush hush to avoid the gangs being able to make preparations.

They're called gangs in print but it's worth remembering that these organizations have military training and equipment at their disposal far exceeding what you'd picture when someone says the word "gang", at this point it'd be more accurate to consider them warlord bands.

[-] SilentStorms@lemmy.dbzer0.com 70 points 2 months ago

There's something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.

I feel like if they were in another part of the world they'd be calling them paramilitaries or militant groups.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 37 points 2 months ago

It's because they want to remove the political goals some of these groups have from their public narrative.

Which, you can debate how underhanded doing something like that is, or how good or bad based on what those narratives are.

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 16 points 2 months ago

You have any information about their political goals? I went looking not too long ago and I wasn’t really able to find much.

[-] PhlubbaDubba@lemm.ee 21 points 2 months ago

I don't have sources but I've heard tell the biggest gang right now is led by a guy who guys by BBQ, and his stated goals are basically a combination of Liberation rhetoric and demanding the government submit to his authority as the legitimate transitional executive.

[-] chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world 19 points 2 months ago

Yes. Jimmy “Barbecue” Chérizier. Former cop. Alleged to have perpetrated massacres against the public killing dozens of people and burning down hundreds of homes. As a leader of G9 he publicly threatened genocide unless the prime minister of Haiti stepped down.

This is all information I got from Wikipedia. I don’t know the veracity of any of it. I don’t live in Haiti and don’t really follow the situation there. Whoever Jimmy is, he doesn’t have very good PR. That’s all I can say for sure about him!

[-] NOT_RICK@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

Sounds like his political goals are “I want all the power”

[-] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Fairly standard political goals then

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 13 points 2 months ago

According the the Haitian guy who comes in from time to time where I work his family had to leave due to the gangs. Its what he calls them so I think that is what I should call them.

[-] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world 7 points 2 months ago

There's something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.

It's about fixing the narrative in the public mind. They do similar shit in almost every foreign news story, especially places, we are not supposed to like

[-] tal@lemmy.today 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

There’s something off to me about the media exclusively referring to them as gangs.

I think that "strongmen" or maybe "warlords" is normally reserved for people who control a lot more territory than this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gang_war_in_Haiti.svg

Each group here controls tiny patches of territory.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gang_war_in_Haiti

By 2022, researchers estimated that about 200 gangs operated across Haiti. Of these, half were located in Port-au-Prince. The more influential gangs control large swathes of territory, including entire municipalities and communes.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

If we call them that then we have to call their migrants refugees and give them asylum.

[-] NoMoreLurkingToo@startrek.website 5 points 2 months ago

Ah, there it is.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 48 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I am very concerned about the situation in Haiti and the global public seems to have a very poor understanding of the situation. Media coverage of the crisis there has been very biased and superficial. This concerns me because the powers that be may not have Haitians’ best interests at heart and without public oversight these military solutions could end up creating further problems.

If anyone here lives in Haiti I would be very interested to hear any knowledge they could share of what is really happening and how they think it can be solved.

[-] Talaraine@fedia.io 39 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

A couple of years ago I had a conversation with a Haitian native on this very topic. While I deleted my reddit account and no longer have access to that conversation, the gist was...

Americans don't seem to understand that every time they swoop in to 'save' Haiti, what they are really doing is enforcing the same colonial ideals that landed Haiti in the mess to start with.

There's no politician in play down there that isn't on the take. His opinion was just to leave it alone and let the gangs sort it out. Either they'll pull together a government or the last gang standing will.

His statement had a lot more anger and quite a few expletives.. They're just sick of all of us, y'all.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Americans don’t seem to understand that every time they swoop in to ‘save’ Haiti, what they are really doing is enforcing the same colonial ideals that landed Haiti in the mess to start with.

You might find the article reassures you on this point if you decide to read it!

The truth is that the United States outsourced the Haiti mission to Kenya. U.S. President Joe Biden has admitted as much: “We concluded that for the United States to deploy forces in the hemisphere just raises all kinds of questions that can be easily misrepresented about what we’re trying to do,” Biden said in May during a news conference with Kenyan President William Ruto, adding, “So, we set out to find a partner or partners who would lead the effort that we would participate in.”

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 months ago

Is there reason to think this is anything more than a fig leaf? The US is obviously heavily involved in directing this effort, even if Kenya is doing the dirty work.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 months ago

What would convince you?

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago

I mean you read the article right? It’s all about how the US has created this multinational coalition but that it’s really calling the shots. It almost seems like your excerpt was deliberately chosen to omit all of the other information that supports what I’m saying.

So, I guess there would have to be a large accumulation of information that the US was not directing these efforts, despite members of congress and others having already confirmed that fact.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 2 points 2 months ago

Kenya as far as I know has no experience in operations of this type — do you think it's reasonable to expect them to do this alone? It makes sense that the US are helping to get this up and running. I expect a fuller handoff when whatever they're doing is in place.

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 months ago

I'm not making a statement about Kenya, I'm saying I don't trust the US's intentions in this case based on their historical actions in Haiti. But no, I don't think it would be good for Kenya to be involved unilaterally either. I would prefer to see a non-military solution.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 4 points 2 months ago

I would prefer to see a non-military solution.

Me too, but that would only really work if Haiti had a functional government to maintain order. Unfortunately that ship has sailed.

load more comments (2 replies)

[-] DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social 2 points 2 months ago

Can you make 2+2=5?

[-] GBU_28@lemm.ee 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Not saying it isn't a fig leaf, but does.kenya really have the ability to project peacekeeping and humanitarian efforts on another continent? It stands to reason they'd need a partner with the infra and equipment to actually make the mission happen. The US is literally best in the business on this topic, and is nearby.

That can be true, before and exclusive of US political meddling. (Which is for sure possible, I'm not discounting that, I'm just not addressing it here)

load more comments (6 replies)

[-] DolphinMath@slrpnk.net 12 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Media coverage of the crisis there has been very biased and superficial.

Can you be more specific? Is there any particular coverage that you find biased and superficial?

I will admit that some outlets undoubtably cover this better than others, but that is the case in all conflicts.

[-] FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Is there any particular coverage that you find biased and superficial?

Very hard to find one that is NOT biased. Canibal savage gangs? Sure

https://youtu.be/wBYLkoED5i4

[-] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

The whole framing of this conflict as a “gang” issue is very problematic in my view, since these warring factions are more of competing political actors seeking to control the country. While they may or may not be engaged in traditional criminal activity, their primary goals are political, not merely economic as with typical organized crime. Yet there has been essentially no attempt to explain who the various factions are and what their goals are. They are just described as gangs that are going on killing sprees for no reason (with an unspoken implication that Haitians are just violent savages). From my limited research on the topic, this is highly inaccurate.

That said, I really am not too knowledgeable about the situation there which is why I was hoping someone from outside of the US media ecosystem could share some real knowledge.

[-] doodledup@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

You mean Afghanistan 2.0?

[-] FreudianCafe@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 months ago

Heres someone from Haiti talking about it

https://youtu.be/wBYLkoED5i4?si=P9MD7rqmvabKZFkq

[-] ormr@feddit.de 6 points 2 months ago

Lol, sounds totally unbiased to me...

After all, why wouldn't you believe in unbiased reports from a channel named "neutrality studies"?

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

Sounds fair and balanced to me.

[-] ormr@feddit.de 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

A lot of it is truthful information for sure. But sentences along the lines of "the west has never forgiven Haiti" are quite obviously biased and tell of a rather black-and-white view of the world. The west is not monolithic. Haiti is so far away from those countries that most of the west probably couldn't care less about what's happening in Haiti. Just like most South American countries couldn't care less about what's happening in Ukraine.

With the former colonial powers of Haiti, especially France, that's of course a different case and they contributed a lot to the sad state of affairs in Haiti.

Or "if I were president of Haiti, first thing I would do is remove Haiti from Caracom". Yeah... Okay why? Whatever the history was, why would someone think that less regional cooperation would improve anything for Haiti? Also what kind of undemocratic mindset is that? You could at least say "I would do a referendum." Alright, she was probably joking... But she's definitely far from unbiased or objective.

In any case I think if you asked the average Haitian what they would like to see in their country it's probably the same thing people need and crave everywhere: Peace, and a good economical perspective to improve their livelihood. And for that it doesn't matter if you're part of an empire or not. You can very much be free and be part of an empire.

Ultimately you need stability to achieve peace and prosperity and the chances for that are often even higher when you're part of an empire. Most people on earth would always prefer peace and stability over revolution if there's any alternative to the latter.

[-] Maggoty@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago

Fair and Balanced was Fox News' slogan for 20 years. They finally retired it because even they didn't want to pretend it was true anymore. I was just making a joke to go with your opinion.

load more comments (1 replies)

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 23 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

a Kenyan-led security mission to Haiti

This is very odd, but also very intriguing. The President met with Biden a month ago, so this tracks. I kinda hope this happens just to see how it plays out.

Edit: this will also be a great test of who reads past the headline. There are going to be a lot of knee-jerk "Murica Bad" comments.

[-] Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

The President met with Biden a month ago

But....the president IS Biden......

OHHH!!! You mean the president of Haiti. Ok. Didn't realize they had a president. That whole sentence threw me for a loop.

I'm going to blame this heatwave frying my brain. I'm not stupid, I'm just.....stupid.

.......wait.

[-] cygnus@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 months ago

Ha, sorry about that — the President of Kenya, actually. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/05/23/fact-sheet-kenya-state-visit-to-the-united-states/

[-] MehBlah@lemmy.world 14 points 2 months ago

I'm just glad for once the US is letting some other country take the lead. Let the Haitians hate Kenya for trying to stabilize their country. I'm sure the US will be seen and the puppeteer pulling the strings though.

[-] gmtom@lemmy.world 9 points 2 months ago

Idk why but I'm getting big deja vu from this story.

[-] OopsAllTwix@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 2 months ago

Russian warships in Cuba causes deja vu too.

[-] CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.org 6 points 2 months ago

There's no way the US is going to surprise invade, if that's the hidden question-headline here.

[-] DolphinMath@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

Foreign Policy – Bias and Credibility

Bias Rating: Least Biased

Factual Reporting: High

Country: USA

Press Freedom Rank: Mostly Free

Media Type: Magazine

Traffic/popularity: High Traffic

MBFC Credibility Rating: High Credibility

MediaBiasFactCheck.com: About + Methodology

Ad Fontes Media Rating: Middle / Reliable

By: Pierre Espérance

Archive Link: 21 Jun 2024 22:32:15 UTC

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments

this post was submitted on 21 Jun 2024

252 points (97.4% liked)

World News

38554 readers

3386 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.