The Tribune

By MALCOLM STRACHAN

IS Haiti finally seeing some progress? The news that Prime Minister Ariel Henry has agreed to hold general elections is either a positive sign – or a concession to pressure at both home and abroad.

A quick reminder – Ariel Henry is a prime minister without a mandate. He was not elected, he has not presented a platform to the people, and there is not a single elected official still in office in the country.

The country has been torn apart by gangs – and continues to see gangs control vast areas of the country, both in territory and major road routes, while the only official organisation standing between them and completely overrunning the country is a police force that is short in numbers and facing daily danger just to do their jobs.

In that sense, a move towards general elections is essential – though it is an open question how soon such a goal would be achievable.

Mr Henry has given himself time – both practically and politically. The election date is to be some time in 2025, giving a full year at least to try to make it possible. Putting the election tentatively on the calendar stops some of the pressure Mr Henry is facing as a result of the repeated calls to carry out a vote, and restore democratically elected representatives to Haiti to restore the processes of society.

All of this comes if it can be made to happen. And that if is a big one.

The news of the election promise came at a CARICOM gathering, at which our own Prime Minister, Philip “Brave” Davis, summed up the situation in Haiti as “truly terrible”, adding: “Haiti is haemorrhaging … we are deeply concerned about the continued deterioration of the security situation.”

The next step will be a meeting in Jamaica of Haitian stakeholders – but barriers remain to actually carry out efforts to move to an election.

There has long been talk of a multinational force – including Bahamian troops – to go to Haiti to help quash the gang violence in the country.

That talk has seemed to focus little on what our troops would actually do, while some might argue that if The Bahamas is struggling to stop its own gang violence, what will our troops be able to do over there on unfamiliar territory.

The multinational force is facing its own difficulties too – it was due to be led by Kenya, which agreed to send police officers to Haiti only to run into a constitutional challenge over whether it is legal or not for the country to deploy police outside of its own borders.

On Thursday of last week, Mr Henry flew to Kenya to try to salvage that plan – which would see 1,000 Kenyan police officers deployed.

Simply flying to Kenya isn’t going to solve anything on its own. Mr Henry was apparently there at the invitation of Kenyan President William Ruto to finalise agreements for the deployment – but Mr Henry’s presence frankly should not make an impact on the decision of the courts. They ought to be deciding whether the matter is or is not constitutional – the visit of a foreign leader should not change that.

There is substantial opposition to the Kenyan deployment, with an opposition leader there arguing that the prime minister lacks the legitimacy to sign such a deal, and the police officers are needed at home anyway to deal with extremists linked to al Qaida and high crime rates.

For many of us on the outside, it also seems as if some of the big players are taking something of a back seat.

Why is Kenya the one at the front, especially if it has constitutional difficulties following through?

Should those thousand officers be the ones leading the way, or should nations such as the US, the UK, France or Canada be taking point?

Haiti has a measure of distrust to overcome when it comes to foreign intervention too – a United Nations mission has been blamed for a cholera outbreak in the 2010s that led to nearly 800,000 being infected and more than 9,000 dying.

A United Nations team along with others from the US and Canada will be created to help Haiti prepare for those hoped-for elections.

CARICOM meanwhile has issued a statement, saying: “CARICOM heads expressed their deep concern over the continued deterioration of the security, humanitarian and political situation and the continued delay in overcoming the political stalemate, which have blocked the possibility of free and fair elections.

“CARICOM heads underlined the critical and immediate need for a clear political path forward which should be participatory and inclusive.”

There are a few simple things to say. Haiti needs intervention of some sort. It is clearly struggling to find its own path unaided. At present, its democracy is, at best, suspended. Further delays could see it tilt towards dictatorship with whoever seizes control long term.

The Haitian people deserve better than that. The Haitian people deserve to have a chance to choose their leaders.

CARICOM has its own self-interest in this situation too. Anarchy in Haiti will only contribute to greater numbers of migrants, and an open sore of crime and smuggling of guns, drugs and people to affect the region.

The promise of new elections is only welcome if they can be achieved. If it is nothing more than putting down a marker to give the current prime minister more time without reaching the stated goal, it will leave Haiti no better.

Haiti needs deliverance from the chaos that has long affected its society. But how we get there is still unknown.