25398: Hyppolite Pierre (point of view): The Third Factor (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

From: Hyppolite Pierre <hpierre@irsp.org>

On the other hand, perhaps we're not dealing with any "revolution" here. It may 
be a far-fetched idea as I hope it is. It may however be, something more 
cynical. Let's get back to some chronology here. 
A couple months ago, a group of armed men took over the largest prison in 
Port-au-Prince and freed most prisoners (common but hardened criminals), 
including former Prime Minister Neptune, and former Interior Minister Privert. 
Since then, the kidnapping game had been playing rather intensely in Haiti. 
Agence Haïtienne de Presse for instance, reported in their June 10 web news 
bulletin that as many as 10 people were kidnapped on that day. Simple 
coincidence, or something more sinister? 
There are different kinds of kidnappings in Haiti, as we know it. There are 
those who kidnapped even street merchants, and requiring ransom as petty as 30 
Haitian dollars. However, there is a bulk of kidnappings that seem to be much 
better thought out and organized. In these cases, the ransom demand goes for as 
much as US$25,000. Surprisingly also, those kidnapped and freed afterwards for 
large ransom report having seen iconic pictures of Fanmi Lavalas or Aristide in 
their detention center. 
It seems to me, viewed from that perspective, that something even more sinister 
may be occurring. There's indeed a lashing out against Lavalas by many among 
those in power, the same way that there is a lashing out against those in power 
by many of the most hardened Lavalas partisan. No middle ground here. 
Please bare with me. 
It then becomes easy for the speculated "third factor", third element in this 
power struggle to use Fanmi Lavalas icons as a protective shield. In other 
words, once the blame is put on Lavalas, the investigators will not focus as 
much on the real culprits who may be a quiet, taciturn group or individual, 
getting his or their cash ready to get to elections. Meanwhile, those from the 
Lavalas party who do have the "right" to speak are mostly loud-mouthed with 
very little to bring in terms of constructive analysis or else. They have yet 
for instance to denounce formally and publicly for us all to hear, the wave of 
kidnappings. Instead, just like in the good old tradition, they just denounce 
it as part of the insecurity brought about after the removal of Aristide. True 
and accurate but in politics, you don't simply stand on one leg. This is 
especially true when your party is under attack from all sides and you have to 
defend it effectively. 
Meanwhile, if that so-called here third element, third factor plays the cards 
well, he or they will have amassed some cash to be part of the next electoral 
process. But the true goal may not be money at all. No one will or would 
suspect them (this 3rd factor). They will promise security after the next 
elections. They may actually win and if so, will most certainly bring back a 
sense of stability and security in the country. 
This is entirely plausible, considering that supposing the premise here is true 
(i.e. that the prison breakout was well-planned and implemented by some 
political organization), those who had planned and committed the action can 
also, most certainly end it. They would just have to control those troops, or 
even kill a few of them depending on the need, in order to bring back that so 
sorely needed sense of security in Port-au-Prince and its surroundings. 
The problem here is that more likely than not (acknowledging that I am dealing 
here simply with hypothesis), those planning the kidnapings are neither 
Lavalas, nor the former Convergence opposition, nor the current government. 
This is why I think of it at least, as the third factor. It is somebody outside 
the "mainstream" and contentious box, of Lavalas, the current government, and 
the former Convergence. It is someone who's cunning and rather smart, who will 
also undercut both sides because they refuse to acknowledge each other and work 
by consensus. 
Far-fetched? Maybe. Maybe. But let's just remember this. 
After Magloire was deposed in 1956, the political struggle was basically 
between a populist figure named Daniel Fignolé (barely a "National"), and a 
more centrist, "Libéral" figure named Louis Déjoie. Fignolé spoke of the 
"rouleau compresseur", having the masses on his side. Déjoie had a different 
strategy, more in tune with rational politics (the last time perhaps when a 
member of the Haitian elite had genuine and well-deserved popular support). But 
they played the game so badly that François Duvalier became the "Third Factor". 
Quiet, cunning, and taciturn, he enlisted general Kébreau on his side, 
neutralized Fignolé (his friend), played the populist game, and won elections 
on September 22, 1957. Well of course afterwards he forced Kébreau into exile 
afterwards. But we all know what happend: "security" and "stability", which 
we're still paying for today. 
So unless these two parties (Lavalas and all others) decide to make a deal, 
some kind of a modus vivendi whereby they can eliminate the third factor and 
truly begin to do politics as politics should be done, we may be for a big and 
very unpleasant surprise, again for years to come. The international community 
is getting tired of us, and anyone who can bring "peace", "stability", and 
"security" to Haiti will be a welcome and appreciated figure. Haiti will then, 
be off "their" back. 
As DT would say in his funky French, in Haiti, "plus cela change, plus cela ne 
change pas" (the more things change, the more they stay the same). 
My best to you,
Hyppolite