Canada Sponsors Illegal Membership
of Haiti
to Caribbean Development Bank
by Marcella Adey
ZNet, November 22, 2005
On February 29, 2004, Canada played an
integral role in the illegal removal of one of Haiti's first democratically
elected presidents, Jean Bertrand Aristide, effectively assisting
in the propulsion of the U.S.'s neo-liberal restructuring of Haiti.
Following the coup, at which Canada provided armed forces to oversee
security at the airport where Aristide was forcefully pulled from
the country, Haitians have faced grave human rights abuses, as
reported by Amnesty International, Harvard University and other
internationally recognized bodies. In addition to these abuses,
the U.S., Canada and France, have worked to push through the establishment
of an economic policy, created through the Interim Cooperation
Framework, which would lock Haiti into a restructuring program,
reported to be virtually irreversible by any future government.
As the puppet interim regime installed
by the U.S. and Canadian governments illegally signs on to various
international trade agreements that concretize and increase Haiti's
odious debt, essentially placing the stamp on Haitians debt toll,
the people are not reaping the benefits our government speaks
of so proudly. Canada, since the coup, promised over $180 million,
of which over $20 million has been issued by paying RCMP officers
to "keep the peace", which, as exposed in a report issued
by Harvard University following a delegation visit to Haiti, has
produced nothing more than thousands of dead poor Haitians. While
the Government of Canada promises better essential services to
Haitians, the people continue to live without electricity, clean
water, adequate food supplies and proper education.
In the mix of all the turmoil facing the
country, Canadian officials have claimed that elections tentatively
slated, following several postponements, for December 2005 will
be fair and democratic, not to mention overseen by our own Jean-Pierre
Kinglsey, Chief Electoral Officer, Elections Canada . However,
sources have now revealed that Haiti is far from being ready for
elections, political prisoners, such as presidential candidate
Father Jean Juste, rot in jail without charge, members of non-American
supported parties are being repressed and even killed. With the
level of injustices and discrepancies surrounding these elections,
"democratic" seems the furthest descriptor of upcoming
Haitian elections from the truth.
Yet, with all of this boring down on the
Haitian poor majority, the Interim Cooperation Framework (ICF),
sponsored by the U.S., Canada and France, continues to enforce
a neo-liberal economic policy centered around privatization and
export-promotion on the already devastated country. And while
Canada has boasted its support of this agenda, a key piece to
the ICF has remained in the shadows, Canada's recent announcement
that it will sponsor Haiti to join the Caribbean Development Bank,
on which Canada's own Foreign Affairs Minister, Pierre Pettigrew,
sits a Vice-President of the Board of Governors, the highest decision-making
body of the private bank.
Canada, also a major investor in the Bank,
will be paying Haiti's registration fee to join the Bank. In an
interview with Denis Marcheterre, a senior Multilatral Financial
Institutions speciliast with CIDA, he confirmed that this announcement
was in fact made in order to fast track the signing on to the
Bank by the non-elected interim government to ensure that Haiti
becomes a member prior to upcoming elections. This move will effectively
lock Haiti in to long-term debt, not decided on by the people
of Haiti, but rather by the people who sit in Washington and Ottawa.
Canada's ménage-à-trois
with Haiti and the CDB neither begins nor ends with Mr. Pettigrew,
as Canada was the first country to pressure Haiti into joining
the Bank in 1998. By 1999, Haiti officially submitted their application,
coincidentally the same time period when aid flows from Canada
and the U.S. to Haiti began dropping. For the following four years,
the CDB contested accepting Haiti for the reasons that it met
neither the financial requirements nor did Haiti's government
follow practices of "good governance", so determined
by the Bank. It was not until May 2003, the same month as the
now famous Ottawa Initiative meeting where top Canadian officials
and others decided that Aristide must leave Haiti, that Haiti
was deemed to meet the conditions of "good governance".
And it was not until After Aristide's removal, seven years after
pressuring Haiti to join the CDB, that Canada agreed to pay their
registration fee. With both of those conditions now met, nevermind
the fact that Haiti was being run by an unelected interim government,
the country was deemed ready to receive the loans.
The ICF, which has made key recommendations
to the CDB on programs to be coordinated and financed by the bank,
was initially developed at that same Ottawa Initiative Meeting
held in May 2003, comprised of top officials from Canada, including
Pierre Pettigrew, the U.S. and other nations, yet conveniently
excluding any Haitians - bears resemblance to slave-era control
by "civilized society" over the black majority. Only
now, the shackles that bind are low-wages in sweatshops, export-development
of Haiti's precious resources and enforced privatization on still
popular publicly funded essential services and utilities, the
last point highlighted in the CDB's records of ICF major recommendations,
which includes "private sector development".
The whips are slated to be held firmly
in the hands of Canadian corporations, as confirmed by Mr. Marcheterre
in a statement that Canada's involvement in the Bank is in large
part in order to ensure that Canadian corporations have the opportunity
to win contracts in borrowing countries, such as Haiti, rather
than promoting local employment and business development. The
requirements imposed by the CDB for winning contracting bids,
effectively the programs financed by the laons, have been established
with little, if any, consideration for the climate facing Haiti's
poor majority, such as determinants as to what a "well-established"
company is or the ability for a violently devastated local Haitian
company to compete against multinational Canadian corporations.
According to the CDB's own statements
on competitive contracting and regulations for winning contracts,
Haitian companies are from onslaught at a great disadvantage as
they will be unable to meet the competitive bidding process against
well-established Canadian corporations outlined by the CDB, which,
for example, requires companies to have been well-established
within the region for more than five years. This requirement alone
excludes any up-and-coming Haitian companies or any companies
that have been ravaged by the current post-coup forces from being
able to obtain work through the CDB. This type of contracting,
rather than promote Haitian companies to participate in the rebuilding
of this devastated country, suggests not only that existing rich
Canadian corporations will enter Haiti for rebuilding purposes
and then leave, but also that CDB, a bank promoted by Canada seemingly
a far cry from the sustainable development models so widely promoted
by Canada elsewhere.
With Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs
palying a key role in the establishment of policies for one of
the region's main private lending institutions, and Haiti's unique
history as a recipient of Canadian development assistance, we
can better understand the importance attached to the CDB and the
urgency with which Canada is rushing through the finalization
of Haiti's CDB membership prior to any democratic elections that
might produce a less enthusiastic or pliant government. With the
government of Canada slashing its aid to Haiti in the years leading
up to the 2004 coup, and the possibility of a new Canadian-dominated
conduit for Canada's lending to Haiti in the CDB, there emerges
a significant risk that this little-noticed institution will in
fact prove to be of "developmental" benefit only to
Canadian corporations and private lenders. Such an outcome, marketed
as a component of Canada's "overseas development assistance"
to Haiti, would only serve to further lock-in Haiti's underdevelopment
and continue its history of victimization at the hands of the
powerful.
Haiti page
Home
Page