Ron Paul: No Military Occupation Of Haiti

Statement of Congressman Ron Paul,  United States House of Representatives Statement in Opposition to H Res 1021, Condolences to Haiti, January 21, 2010

I rise in reluctant opposition to this resolution. Certainly I am moved by the horrific destruction in Haiti and would without hesitation express condolences to those who have suffered and continue to suffer. As a medical doctor, I have through my career worked to alleviate the pain and suffering of others. Unfortunately, however, this resolution does not simply express our condolences, but rather it commits the US government “to begin the reconstruction of Haiti” and affirms that “the recovery and long-term needs of Haiti will require a sustained commitment by the United States….” I do not believe that a resolution expressing our deep regret and sorrow over this tragedy should be used to commit the United States to a “long-term” occupation of Haiti during which time the US government will provide for the reconstruction of that country.

I am concerned over the possibility of an open-ended US military occupation of Haiti and this legislation does nothing to alleviate my concerns. On the contrary, when this resolution refers to the need for a long term US plan for Haiti, I see a return to the failed attempts by the Clinton and Bush Administrations to establish Haiti as an American protectorate. Already we are seeing many argue that this kind of humanitarian mission is a perfect fit for the US military. I do not agree.

Certainly I would support and encourage the efforts of the American people to help the people of Haiti at this tragic time. I believe that the American people are very generous on their own and fear that a US government commitment to reconstruct Haiti may actually discourage private contributions. Mr. Speaker, already we see private US citizens and corporations raising millions of dollars for relief and reconstruction of Haiti. I do not believe the US government should get in the way of these laudable efforts. I do express my condolences but I unfortunately must urge my colleagues to vote against this resolution committing the United States government to rebuild Haiti.

One thought on “Ron Paul: No Military Occupation Of Haiti

  1. What concerns me most other than the U.S. at this point with our economy devastated, and still with damage and fallout from our own natural disasters Katrina and Gustav (and Ivan and Rita before that, when reconstruction is still ongoing from those) giving again more foreign aid to foreign governments and countries in the wake of this disaster, is the fact that nuclear testing itself may have been the cause, and France and North Korea two countries that engaged in this type of activity even longer than the U.S., if that is possible.

    And whether public or private, it would appear that encouraging private donations of a monetary nature did not bode well for the American people in the past, since a great deal of the monies for Katrina never went to the victims, but to “administrate” those donations – and at this point in time it would appear that there is the technology to post on the internet or broadcasts a central location where truly worthwhile donations such as food, blankets, clothing could be mailed and U.S. military or private industry drops the best course of action to aid those most effected in the short term (and long term, in lumber or hard goods). Since there are no stores to speak of in Haiti, wouldn’t that seem more logical and effective.

    And I do have problems with the Hollywood set that uses these disasters for promotion of their latest stars, or begging the American public to give, when in giving 10% of their income alone would get Haiti rebuilt by the end of the year, or their agents.

    In fact, the government in this country is attempting to use Katrina in what massive land grab, since local ordinances now passed by the New Orleans Chamber of Commerce calls for people to rebuild on their land by a certain date, or forefeit it, thus not even affording them to use that land as collateral to buy another, since insurance and building standards now make a great deal of those poorer residents unable to rebuild, or even sue their insurance companies that are still fighting payment on those losses.

    Incredible.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *