Leading by the Center: A Democratic Imperative in Haiti
Inter-American Dialogue meeting, Thursday July 20, 2006
By Hyppolite Pierre
Introduction
For all the turmoil Haiti has gone through the past two decades, the basic premise for at least temporary respite until the political system is restructured requires governing from the political center. Although this sounds simple, there is a basic need for Haitian politicians to not only understand the concept of "center" in politics but also strive to, and actually reach it.
Haiti has been on the wrong path for quite a while now. Different kinds of explanations have been given for that failure. Yet, the root causes of that failure seem to escape the Haitian political establishment.
Governing from periphery: the Haitian tragedy
Haiti has mostly been governed throughout its 200-year history from either end of the political spectrum. It is a zero-sum mentality that had caused and continues to cause the country not just political headaches but also and mostly, economic downturns, social disharmony and dislocation, and disrespect of the nation from even its closest neighbor. Granted, the very history of the nation is rooted in eccentricity. Nevertheless it is time to take a new look at the malady and its root causes so the patient (an entire people) can stand on its feet for good.
The last 20 years should have augured better days for the nation. Instead, they have mostly been a catastrophe. Although in 1986, Haitians rightfully talked about democracy as the major engine for stability, economic prosperity, social harmony, and upward mobility for the disinherited, none of these goals have been accomplished. There are two basic causes for this vertiginous decent into chaos: the tendency by the whole political establishment to either argue or govern from the raw edges (left and right); and the natural incompatibility between genuine democracy and Haiti's very political institutions. In other words, if you want democracy, you have to build that new system on new foundational pillars.
Although many continue to argue that once the economy begins to improve, Haiti will not only become stable and thriving but also structurally more democratic, the post-Duvalier period has proven otherwise. Without getting deeper into this argument, it is clear that despite billions of dollars dumped into Haiti by foreign governments and banking institutions as loans or grants the past couple of decades; despite the contributions of so many NGO's in Haiti shanty towns and even middle class communities; despite the limited yet important contribution of the Haitian Diaspora in the economy (either through remittances or direct investment), Haiti keeps getting worse.
The logic for societal improvement therefore needs to be changed. Something is obviously amiss. What is this something?
Building confidence: an essential prerequisite
Nothing is as important as confidence in a political system, or in everyday life. Yet, Haiti is a country that has very little if any confidence in itself.
Confidence is not however a self-defined principle that just emanates from the sky. It is an incremental measure of comfort between and among individuals and groups in society that is achieved through concrete actions of the political leadership. Meanwhile, all necessary steps ought to honestly and transparently be debated between and among different parties, so they can gain confidence in their role as part of the overall political, social, and economic leadership of the nation. The translation of their confidence will most certainly be found not just on the political landscape, but all throughout civil society, and among the general population. Confidence has to first be built in this newly emerging and democratic political system.
Haiti is a country where one hears lots of political noise, a sort of perpetual cacophony from which no one ever truly succeeds. There are so many different parties chanting so many different songs that one can rightly believe that Haiti is an ideological laboratory. Ironically, it is the kind of laboratory that has consistently produced the same kinds of defective products: intolerance, insecurity, impunity, corruption, and mismanagement. This may seem weird, considering that every politician seems to not only know what the problems are, but also presumably have their own solutions. The same goes for not only regular Haitian citizens, from the wealthiest to the poorest, but also for many willing hands and minds in the international community.
Party politics and measure of confidence
The most basic resolution approach however has not been yet discussed. Among the first and necessary steps, the idea of political structure leads a high and important role. Once that structure takes hold, clarity of the voices and their message will resonate better and help society rid itself of the current political cacophony. It is a kind of "cacophony" that starts with so many different parties, oftentimes of the same basic right or left-wing tendencies, but separated not so much by ideological points of view but rather by personality clash. Perhaps it would be best for Haitians to compare their disorganized and cumbersome multiparty system with that of some of the more stable democracies in the Caribbean region.
Haiti is member of the very important regional organization CARICOM. Also true is the fact that not only does Haiti lead that organization in population (8 million), but it also leads in numbers of political parties. To date, by official count, Haiti has more than 70 political parties. Meanwhile, out of the 15 CARICOM member states, the wealthier ones have either a two-party political system (Bahamas), or a two-plus political party system (Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados). The interesting question, for academics at least, would be whether there is a correlation between the crowdedness of the political field (i.e. the number of political parties), and the economic, social, and stability indexes in those countries. If such a correlation exists, it would help better explain the lethargic state of Haiti, as opposed to the stable and dynamic state of Caribbean nations like Trinidad and Tobago, the Bahamas, Barbados, and even Jamaica.
However one looks at it, the empirical data suggests that a multiparty democracy may not be the best appropriate form to help Haiti gain confidence in itself, and a viable place in the regional and even perhaps, world economy.
In truth, Haiti's multiparty system is not ideologically based. It is instead clan-like and personality based. A party chief is like a lord in his fiefdom, always strategizing for the sole purpose of eventual control and power over the entire landscape to his own benefits and that of his closest cronies. Haiti therefore does not benefit from it. If anything, the country suffers a great deal because this causes a kind of unnecessary confusion. As a result there is no breeding, or grooming, or training at the party level of future political leaders and politicians who will vie for electoral gain at the local, municipal, and national levels. For a country that carries the historical load of systemic autocracy, this is a treacherous road to stay on.
This sort of thing does not bode well for confidence building, if strictly from the point of view that anyone who comes to power with his own clan-like base can at least try to reinvent the wheel of not only the executive power but also, the power of all other branches of government. That is a great source of instability. Democracy, to be viable, first necessitates structure. If the politicians themselves are not evolving in a structured environment at the party level, how then can anyone expect from them at least the attempt of reifying their ideas through a transparent and structured environment?
Stability through a political center
In Haitian politics the rough edges of the left and right are systemically, historically, and culturally so entrenched in extremism that the "political center" is considered by most as "being wobbly" ("woule m de bó", as we say in Haitian), and therefore dishonest. However, the best way to achieve political stability is by governing from the center rather than from the edges.
The left and right political edges have given Haiti during its history mostly infamous figures with the worst kinds having been Jean-Pierre Boyer (1818—1843), and François Duvalier (1957—1971). The negative consequences of their policies are felt in one way or the other to this day. Nonetheless, whether one talks about Christophe, Pétion, and any or all other combination therefrom, it is clear that governing from the edges, even when one has the best of intentions, is not beneficial to the country in the long term. At the same time, those who had tried historically to include different sides of the political equation while pursuing a policy firmly implanted in a core ideology have had much more success and have brought greater stability to the country in one way or the other.
As this relates mostly to party politics in Haiti, it is interesting to denote how historically, the two most centrist political parties (the Liberal party and the National party) are the most discussed, the best known, and also the most criticized for their "centrism". Yet, they are by far the most successful and had been the most conducive of and for progress in the long term. Michel Rolph Trouillot for instance, the modern guru of Haitian History, and other authors and historians like David Nicholls both criticize these parties for having been two sides of the same coin. Yet, when one looks at their ideological perspective, their orientation and deeds, there is a slight yet very distinct point of view on each side that did and still satisfies the basic political, sociological, cultural, and economic Haitian reality.
In fact, many successful politicians from the late 19th through the first couple of decades of the 20th century had at least some connection with either the National party or the Liberal party. This goes from President Salomon himself (National party), to parliamentarian Jean-Pierre Boyer Bazelais (Liberal party), to others like Demesvar Delorme, François Manigat, and most certainly the great Anténor Firmin (Liberal party). Unfortunately because of the ingrained cultural aversion towards respect for, and of the very idea of process, by Haiti's politicians, politicians from both parties caused their own demise over time by their stubborn recurrence to violence as a tool to achieve political goals.
More likely than not, had those two parties been able to evolve democratically, Haiti today would have been a far different society. Yet, they were rightfully considered "centrist" as in "difficult to clearly differentiate one from the other". In other words, for those who are used to Haitian political jargon, these two parties did not take political positions that are closer to the edge. That is exactly what Haiti sorely needs today: a political center where either the right or the left can gravitate. For those who agree with this logic, the true challenge therefore becomes in which way or by what means one can recreate a "center of gravity" in Haitian politics that can still be identified through two lenses: left and right.
Establishing the political center
It is not as much a matter of establishing the political center, as it is to give much needed recognition to that center. Over the past two decades, the center of Haitian politics has been slowly but surely taking hold without much realization of the entire political class. The rise once more of the current Haitian president and the difficulty nowadays of the left and right political extremes are somehow intertwined. Unless one is speaking in bad faith, it is difficult to place Preval in the category of flashy and angry left wingers whose only purpose is to attack the Haitian elite, traditional or modern. He took over power under difficult circumstances, managed to build a coalition in Parliament that opens up to his ideas and has thus far succeeded.
Incidentally, the 48th Haitian legislature has thus far overwhelmingly approved most if not all his choices. Granted, Preval has allies among elements of the Lavalas party as well. Although he is considered as a much less strident and risky political figure, he still enjoys the trust of the ideological, faith-based left while maintaining solid credentials among the moderates. It is therefore fair to claim that, whether brandished as LESPWA (Hope) or as "Lavalas" or as anything else from the left, those who in their heart of hearts agree with the basic premise of the current Preval presidency agree as well with the basic ideological tenet of the late 19th century National party motto: the greater good to the greater number.
Whether or not Preval succeed in the long term, it is still quite clear that his success thus far is the result of his refusal to not only refute extreme political rhetoric, but also his apparent focus on getting society to once more move forward in an inclusive manner.
There are also many elements from the right which can be viewed as decent and centrist, and who have the potential of great political leadership to even become head of state. This will only happen however, if those elements are not only identified but also allowed to develop a clear and influential voice in the political system. Unfortunately for the center right, the voices mostly heard thus far from the are from the political fringes whose arguments have constantly and consistently been rejected by the Haitian majority. They oftentimes, seem ready to recur to violence to accomplish political goals, seem unable to establish direct contact with the majority of the population and, are also overly concerned with their own safety rather than societal progress at all levels. Nevertheless, in private conversation with many individuals from the right, it is clear that there is an equally valuable, dedicated, and brilliant center-right that is just waiting to prove their full worth to the nation and to the democratic process in Haiti, in the tradition of Boyer-Bazelais and Antenor Firmin of the Liberal party.
In that context, Haitians and friends of Haiti in the international community have to work assiduously to not only help better identify those two poles at the center, but also help them express their political and ideological points of view in a much more structured environment. A center-right party and a center-left party in Haitian politics are two essentials for political stability. Once this goal will have been attained, it will then become much easier to reach others such as economic development. Otherwise, if foreign governments and institutions keep on pouring money into Haiti either in the form of aid or anything else, they will keep on realizing that they are just throwing money into a dark hole, never achieving their intended purpose. The first and most important thing for Haiti, at this juncture, is to structure the political system in a much more reasonable and even predictable fashion. This is how Haiti will more or less begin to finally accomplish the goal of a much more balanced society.
What is, actually the political center?
At least in the context of Haiti, reaching the political center is very much like standing somewhere in the middle of a line, either closer to the right or closer to the left. Those who are closer to the right are more apt at pulling together the resources from that side, while those who are closer to the left are equally more apt at attracting the resources from the far left. Politicians on the far end of either side will never be completely satisfied with the center. Nevertheless, like any people, most Haitians are closer to the center than they are to the far left or far right. Unfortunately still, the voices that are usually heard in Haitian society are either closer to the far right or closer to the far left. This is due in large measure to the polarization of society because both sides are afraid of the new context in which they are evolving.
Many things have changed in Haitian society since the departure of Duvalier. Consequently, largely the result of greater democratic opening, the center itself has shifted. It is crucially important to admit that Haitian society has been for the most part, quite imbalanced. Nevertheless, as a result of that shift, which may be equally considered as left and right-leaning, those who were already closer to the left had become more convinced of the righteousness of their political ideology, dismissing the entire right as an assembly of buffoons. The left had therefore gotten to the extreme, consistently making major faux-pas. However, although the right itself had benefited from these mistakes of the left, their gain on the landscape had also consistently been short-lived. One can refer to the two years of Latortue in power (March 2004— May 2006), as irrefutable proof. The left and the right of Haitian politics are still by-and-large too close to the edge, resulting in a much more polarized society.
There is on the other hand, a fresh opportunity at this juncture, with an executive branch seemingly more willing to work with different sectors of society regardless of their political points of view, so long as certain parameters are taken into consideration.
Interestingly enough, if only to prove that both extremes can be not neutered but neutralized, a good observer of Haitian politics can denote that despite many objections from the Haitian far left, they are still willing in large part, at least at this juncture, to adhere to the political desiderata of the current president even when they disagree with some of his decisions. A potent example is the choice of Mario Andresol as Chief of Haiti's National Police by Rene Preval. Andresol was originally chosen by the previous government of Latortue, a government with almost exclusively allies from the far right. Still, the response of the Haitian far left, to Preval's choice of Andresol has been at worse discomfort, and at best silent in regards to this choice.
This is how the political center itself can help neutralize passion in Haitian politics, so that the business of government for the improvement of society as a whole can take place. The stronger the center, left and right, the more stable the political system will be, and the more society in general will benefit.
Dynamism of the political center
Many may think that the political center is a static force, always pushing forth the same ideas and ideals. However, society itself is a dynamic force, and as ideas change, other ideas are born or perish based on their practical value. The center in that context, shifts concurrently.
The shift that usually occurs throughout society is due to internal reality, political, social, culture, and economic. Since the political center tends, in general, to attract politicians who are pragmatic and conciliatory while remaining principled, the ideological consideration is not muted when facing reality, but conjured upon for more realistic and fruitful decisions at societal level. There are for instance, many ideas today in Haitian society that are much more at the center of the country politics, which would have been considered just a few decades ago, anathema to the political reality.
If only as illustrations, it would have been inconceivable in the 1930's and 40's Haiti, to hear a Haitian head of state address the nation in the majority language, Haitian. Yet, Baby Doc in the early 1980's began to deliver speeches in Haitian. Aristide did the same and used the language to his benefit in a way that no one before him had, or perhaps could have. Most recently, this past May, Preval delivered his inaugural speech exclusively in Haitian. No one at least publicly complained about it. Politicians from the right and left now make sure that they express themselves in Haitian when addressing the public. This is a sociological shift that has also forced the political center, from the right and left, to change not the delivery of their discourse but the linguistic vehicle that they use for such delivery.
The same way, not even two decades ago, even center left Haitian politicians spoke of capitalism as the wrong alternative for Haiti. The right, center and extreme had the whole time insisted that the way to move Haiti out of its economic morass is by pushing forth capitalistic measures that will force the state to focus on matters that are more regulatory and infrastructural than economics. Eventually, most everyone from the left agreed, except of course the far left. The consensus, now, is that the business of government is not to run state enterprises and control the economic factors; it is instead to ensure that the system is fair to all. As proof, state enterprises have been sold by a left-leaning government between 1996 and 2001. The Haitian cement and flour companies, respectively Ciment d'Haiti and Minoterie d'Haiti, have been sold to entrepreneurs with the state having a meager stake in them both.
The same way that left-leaning intellectuals have succeeded in convincing politicians to address the nation in their original language, the same way that right-leaning intellectuals have convinced the entire political class that the business of government is not in creating jobs but to create the right structural environment for such. Once the political center has accepted those two premises, the left and right edges of the political establishment have accepted these premises as well. So in essence, the center itself is a dynamic force that can and does shift, depending on the reality. Moreover the center tends to be as a general rule, much more pragmatic.
A reasonable gamble
It is reasonable to not only hope for a stronger political center in Haitian politics with two poles, but it is also a highly desirable proposition. A two-party plus system in Haiti, with two political parties dominating that system, and even many different smaller parties on their periphery from the right and the left, is probably the better solution for Haiti. With such a political system, certain things become predictable. People begin to feel more comfortable with the overall system. Once that goal is reached, it will then become easier to deal with the very pressing issues of: healthcare, judicial reform, anti-corruption measures, and so forth. Gambling on a healthy and structured political center for a stable and successful Haitian democracy is more than just reasonable; it is in fact a highly desirable and achievable goal.
Hyppolite Pierre is author of "Haiti, Rising Flames from Burning Ashes" (University Press of America, April 2006). He is currently working on a historical fiction about the leader of Haiti's independence, Dessalines. The tentative title of that book, due out in 2008, is "Dialogue with Defile".
