28056: Preval and the case for retribution (an opinion) Math Jay (fwd)

[Bob Corbett <corbetre@webster.edu>]

jepiem@aol.com
Lieutenant General baron Pamphile de Lacroix, in his â??Memoires pour  servir
a
lâ??Histoire de Saint Domingueâ?? laid down for the consummation of the
rulers
at the former Metropole the arguments for pressuring Haiti to pay restitution
to France for it  having lost the colony. Among his arguments he cites that
events had deprived  France of its colony but not of its rights, that the
Haitian territory was  robbed (â??usurpeâ??) from France, that the newly
liberated
Haitians had massacred  French citizens in cold blood fifteen months after the
emancipation, that  material good when ill acquired canâ??t be enjoyed with a
peaceful conscience,  that no regular government can can recognize those of
Haiti
without causing an  affront to France and without violating the morality of
human and divine  laws, that by granting recognition to  Haiti through a
treaty
following payment of adequate indemnity, the door would  be open for other
nations to follow suit.
What Mr de Lacroix did not say of course, being the advocate for the  cause
of France is that  France had gotten the  land of  Saint Domingue after his
pirates the Flibustiers had fought the Spaniards and rampaged their property
which they themselves had stolen from the Natives, the so called Indians.
There
was no mention of indemnity paid to  Spain. How much did  Spain get for all
the latin American  countries that were liberated later through the actions of
Simon Bolivar and his  warriors? How much did the newly born U S of A  pay to
England for  having thrown its tea to the sea and robbed it of its vast
colony? What Mr de  Lacroix didnâ??t say is that the former slaves had fought
the
French in a  relentless guerilla warfare which forced their latest general
commander  Rochambeau to capitulate and that in all wars, to the victor comes
the
spoils.  Mr de Lacroix was silent on all the atrocicities committed on the
slaves
by the  colon masters and even on those that were caught during the times of
the war. â??  Civilized and educatedâ?? opinion of the time was of course
quick
to blame the yellow fever for that  defeat, but such are the incidentals of
war. You have to take what comes to you  or else you donâ??t declare war.
Talking
about sore losers. Hadnâ??t the French and  the British and the Spanish been
living and prospering in the land for more than  two hundred years before the
Leclerc expedition? Even after tricking Louverture  and deporting him, they
could
not quell the rebellion. We all know what happened  afterwards. A hundred and
sixty millions francs indemnity bill which the new  struggling country
previously destroyed by the war imposed on it by the French,  later reduced to
sixty
millions. Two hundred years later, Mr Aristide the  president of Haiti during
the  commemorative year presented a return bill to France to  redress that
injustice and calculated the accrued value to be twenty five  billion dollars
in
todayâ??s money. No wonder an embarrassed France was so  quick in supporting
moves to get rid of Mr Aristide. Once this  embarrassing skunk was thrown out
of
the civilized society party,  their "haitian" ruler Mr Latortue with one
swipe of the tongue  declared null and void all Haitiâ??s claims to
retribution.
France didnâ??t have to pay a dime  declared he. I thought Mr Latortue was
there
just to prepare elections or so  they said, and he didnâ??t even do a good job
at
that. No Mr Latortue your swipe  of tongue can not erase Haitiâ??s rights to
reclamation. Mr  Preval, if he wants to be a true defender of Haitian rights
must bring that  issue back on the table, but this time the best brains must
be
gathered to  present a solid case and make France pay back money that it stole
through  pressure and coercion after having lost all claims on the
battlefield. This time  and at least for once haitian society must forget
their class
divisions and  unite behind the president for the good of Haiti and also for
theirs. The elite  must put aside this age old desire to be french and not do
anything to displease  their former master. No matter if Mr Chirac says that
Haiti
never was â??a proprement parlerâ??  a colony  of France. Mr de  Lacroix and
every French statesman at the time including Napoleon  Bonaparte acknowledged
it
as such. That it changed its name back to Haiti  from Saint Domingue does not
change it geography nor its history.. Itâ??s all the  same land. And there is
a
job for you, now that you have gotten your wish and  become again Haitiâ??s
leader, Mr President  Preval.