Apparently Canada over threw the Hatian Guvernment before the Quake...

I'd like to believe this isn't how things went down in 2004, and my first reaction was 'it couldn't be'. but the more I dig, the more I'm concerned about what I'm finding. President Aristide was in fact democratically elected and had huge popular support in Haiti. Even since his forced removal from power and exile, he remains hugely popular among Haitians six years later, as evidenced in the article linked below:

November Election in Haiti: The Silent Coup

I find it hard to understand why the Canadian government would involve itself in the politics of this country, citing the 'Responsibility to Protect' legislation as the reason, only to remove a democratically elected leader with 90% support among the people of the country. More startling is the fact that the subsequent government (put in power after the coup and funded in large part through Canadian tax dollars) had an abysmal record of human rights abuses in the following years. This begins to look a lot less like the 'humanitarian mission' presented in the media at the time, and much more like a 'regime change' to protect business interests.

Canada has a stake in Gold and Copper mining in Haiti. Haitians are employed in three Canadian clothing factories in the country, operated by Gildan (who provide most of the t-shirts for the North American market, and who are most surely exploiting local labour.)

Most research suggests that Aristide's election marked the beginning of a populist uprising against the long-standing corruption and exploitation of the poorest in Haiti, by the richest. This freaked out Haiti's elite, and they sought foreign intervention. Canada's participation in 2004 could have been very darkly motivated indeed, and if these allegations prove true, I for one, am ashamed.

I will be pursuing this story further, and would encourage other conscientious canucks to do the same. Contact media, demand answers, and investigation. S & F.

I don't understand how any of you missed this in 2004. Where were you?

Canada was part of a group of countries that were involved in this, though Canada seemed to take point.

While I would LOVE to give you a good reason....I can't. Most of the reasons why our military was involved in this were murky at best. And I was paying attention.

Haiti has got to be one of the worst locations for instability there could possibly be. Geologically, Politically, Racially, Religiously, Culturally. I wonder at how bad someone's corruption - problem making would have to be for anyone to step into the spot.

The whole affair was quite short. Aristide yelled about it from afar....and that was it.

Most of the theories so far on this thread aren't the best. But I'll keep looking. Maybe somebody can actually put their finger on what exactly was the point of the exercise.

reply to post by loagun


Wow my country finally sounds cool lol ehehe just kiding, and where are all these weapons made, what company, got any proof, it could be possible but highly unthinkable, i have never heard of canada behing a mass exporter of weapons, and to who do we sell these the us, kinda odd but maybe its true

reply to post by Trillium


Me thinks that the motivation for this article becomes clear when you read the conclusion. The author advocates a plan based out of Cuba and Venezuela. Socialist much? If it had not been for the earthquake most of the planned new facilities would be near completed and the elections would have pointed to a more clearly defined results.

Canada need no other reason for being present in Haiti than it's responsibility as a peacemaker and friend to the Haitians. Otherwise it would have been on the beaches of both Barbados and Trinidad & Tobago when their governments asked to be part of Canada in the nineties.

Originally posted by Aeons
I don't understand how any of you missed this in 2004. Where were you?

Canada was part of a group of countries that were involved in this, though Canada seemed to take point.

While I would LOVE to give you a good reason....I can't. Most of the reasons why our military was involved in this were murky at best. And I was paying attention.

Haiti has got to be one of the worst locations for instability there could possibly be. Geologically, Politically, Racially, Religiously, Culturally. I wonder at how bad someone's corruption - problem making would have to be for anyone to step into the spot.

Good points.

Personally, I have some Haitian, ex-pat acquaintances (friends of friends) who I get to discuss with once a year... coming up soon actually. All are of the very upper class in Haiti (which becomes pretty middle class here) and one was a highly placed politician which makes for very interesting and enlightening discussion.

I was very interested in the 2004 "coup" as well, but was unaware (and will definitely be discussing it with the Haitian ex-pats) of the "Ottawa Initiative" of 2003 (brought up in the OP) which would appear to have planned it.

It is, as you say, a very complex culture... the upper class (and there is a HUGE class distinction) that I talk to can easily justify the quasi-slaves that they have, and get quite upset and flustered when I point out that this is part of the roots of the problem.

That being said, their consensus of the "coup" and the following "occupation" stem from three main points:

1- Socialist reforms had to be stopped... the status quo "elite" (many of whom reside in Canada),and foreign corporations do not like to "share the wealth" as it were. This may seem like a simple answer, but is the root cause of many, if not most "coups" in modern history.

2- National self-interest... we much rather social instability when it is far away from home. Being that Canada, France and the U.S.A. have the largest ex-pat populations, they would be the most affected by a mass exodus.
(To this point I'll add a small note... though ethically questionable, if we consider that governments are supposed to look after their own interests, this is logical reasoning.)

3- Geopolitical interest... this one mostly concerns American interests (unless, of course, official policy is different than "behind closed doors" positions of other nations). Smack dab between Cuba and Venezuela, and a stones through away from the lower 48, it is an ideal location to police the Caribbean.

The actual reasoning for the "coup" can surely not be simplified to one or two talking points... we cannot discount the apparent fossil fuel resources that have been discussed, nor its importance as a drug dealing hub between South and North America. Those who follow politics closely know that illicit drugs are the main funder of covert intelligence operations and are, therefor, of great importance to them.

Let's keep this discussion going... it has great potential!

the Billmeister

reply to post by loagun


Here's more info.

Canada Ltd. Murdering Haiti. Murdering Canadian Democracy
www.vivelecanada.ca...

And this sounds suspiciously like a trade off, payoff, or the like. Something just doesn't sit right with this:

Canada Gets Haitian Governor General
Tuesday, September 27, 2005
www.foxnews.com...

reply to post by loagun


Eeeuuwww. Hate to think Canada did that. But the facts seem quite clear.

It's also true that Canada is a country born from corporate-government partnerships. And apparently, there's something in Haiti that North American corporations really, really want. Maybe a key/strategic port?

I don't remember the details, but there was some ATS discussion about it back when. Apparently, US development plans date back a couple of decades or more, and they're in the public domain, released under the FOI...