Meanwhile: Gangs attack, hunger gets worse, politicians argue: the latest on the situation in Haiti (Miami Herald) … It seems like money won’t do much except in combination with some larger plan?...
It’s week seven into the gang insurgency in Haiti and the armed violence continues to upend life in Port-au-Prince and drive a deepening humanitarian crisis, as 5.5 million Haitians remain in need of help. Medical care continues to be disrupted as hospitals remain closed and the few that are operating face supply and staff shortages. Port-au-Prince remains a no-go zone for commercial U.S. flights, but helicopters are buzzing as those with deep pockets — and visas or foreign passports — make their way to Cap-Haïtien in the north to catch the only airline currently flying into the United States.
They are being joined by scores of Haitian nationals who have qualified to come to the U.S. as part of the two-year-humanitarian parole program launched by the Biden administration in January 2023.
…
And the dire humanitarian crisis remains front and center. The United Nations is still struggling to raise $674 million from an international community that has only managed to send in $45 million; the main seaport in Haiti remains closed, meaning store shelves are increasingly bare, and Haitians are trying hard not to break under the pressure as mental health emerges as problem amid the deepening hunger.
It seems like money won’t do much except in combination with some larger plan? I think what they really need is for some outside country to capture the port and provide the security to keep it open. But I haven’t seen anyone arguing for that.
Yeah there’s no point in giving billions of dollars to gangs. At least needs to be a government with power. There was talk of an intervention by Kenya but not only has that stalled in the Kenyan...
Yeah there’s no point in giving billions of dollars to gangs. At least needs to be a government with power.
There was talk of an intervention by Kenya but not only has that stalled in the Kenyan side, but the question becomes of what they would even be protecting. With no real government, they’d practically have to run whatever they capture themselves
Interesting, why is Kenya taking the lead (or planning to do so)? I have very little knowledge of Haitian history, overall, but I definitely wasn't aware of those links. I've just read some...
Interesting, why is Kenya taking the lead (or planning to do so)? I have very little knowledge of Haitian history, overall, but I definitely wasn't aware of those links. I've just read some stories about the intervention I think you were talking about - but why did those come about? From whatI'mreading, Kenya is relatively involved in this kind of overseas mission, which I wouldn't have guessed, although it does chime with the fact that the UN has a duty station in Nairobi, I suppose.
Yeah. I had this passing thought, but quickly dismissed it because I don't even know who would accept the money. The government is in such a state of disarray that right now, it would likely just...
Yeah. I had this passing thought, but quickly dismissed it because I don't even know who would accept the money. The government is in such a state of disarray that right now, it would likely just disappear. It would be wasted to give it now.
With how things are, I don't see the situation improving anytime soon. Sending in supporting troops isn't enough. The "easiest" solution I can come up with is a full-blown foreign takeover with the explicit intent of stabilizing Haiti, followed by a smooth transition of power so that Haiti could operate independently. However, there is absolutely no incentive for any country to do that without some ulterior motives. Hell, I don't think there's incentive for any country to do that with ulterior motives given how bad Haiti is right now.
There's not much to gain from getting involved beyond basic human empathy, which sadly isn't always enough to justify the resources needed for a situation like this.
How does this: Lead you to: It seems like there is a plan in place that is insufficiently funded, which wouldn't be a problem if France returned just a portion of their mis-got goods.
How does this:
And the dire humanitarian crisis remains front and center. The United Nations is still struggling to raise $674 million from an international community that has only managed to send in $45 million; the main seaport in Haiti remains closed, meaning store shelves are increasingly bare, and Haitians are trying hard not to break under the pressure as mental health emerges as problem amid the deepening hunger.
Lead you to:
It seems like money won’t do much except in combination with some larger plan? I think what they really need is for some outside country to capture the port and provide the security to keep it open. But I haven’t seen anyone arguing for that.
It seems like there is a plan in place that is insufficiently funded, which wouldn't be a problem if France returned just a portion of their mis-got goods.
Cash injections generally don’t help without a clear framework to take the cash in. Hell they can even make things worse. I invite you to run through the scenario in your head, that starts with...
Cash injections generally don’t help without a clear framework to take the cash in. Hell they can even make things worse.
I invite you to run through the scenario in your head, that starts with “Haiti gets a billion euros in aid. Now what?”
My background was in international program development, specifically in conflict zones. I've worked in Syria during the expanse of ISIS, Somalia with Al Shaba, and Pakistan in areas controlled by...
Exemplary
My background was in international program development, specifically in conflict zones. I've worked in Syria during the expanse of ISIS, Somalia with Al Shaba, and Pakistan in areas controlled by the Taliban. When you work with the UN there is never carte blanche with funding, specifically because of what everyone is calling out: it looks really bad if you directly fund terrorists. But that doesn't mean everyone in those regions are terrorists. There are still normal folks providing all of the normal services under very abnormal circumstances.
All that to say, I doubt the UN would distribute funds to "gangs", unless the gangs currently oversee the federal level government. Even then, funds are normally ear marked for specific groups within the administration. I worked in Syria during the heart of the civil war and worked with and funded groups within Assad's administration. The funding didn't go to new weapons or back pockets, it went to training folks to preserve some of the many endangered heritage sites across the country. I see Haiti as little different. Even if there is instability at the top, likely most of the branch organizations can maintain.
Later in that very same article they say:
Good news: Open Society Foundation, the philanthropic group founded by billionaire George Soros that has been funding initiatives in Haiti since 1995, announced Wednesday that it will provide millions of dollars to help deal with urgent needs in Haiti.
So why is the funding provided by the Open Society Foundation likely going to find a successful home while UN funds will end up in the hands of "gangs". I would be shocked if there wasn't already a well placed and thought out distribution plan. The UN has been active in Haiti for years and there are few organizations I would trust more to deploy that level of financing.
Giving millions of dollars is a different ball game to giving hundreds of billions of dollars which the article is referring to. The article also refers to similar donations done by France to the...
Giving millions of dollars is a different ball game to giving hundreds of billions of dollars which the article is referring to. The article also refers to similar donations done by France to the one you mention.
To be honest the whole thing reeks to me as a political game for something completely different; I would bet money that the players involved don’t care about Haiti one bit.
I haven't read about Haiti in a few weeks, so I went looking for that an article to see what's happening and whether the port is still closed. That article confirmed that it is. That's the bit...
I haven't read about Haiti in a few weeks, so I went looking for that an article to see what's happening and whether the port is still closed. That article confirmed that it is. That's the bit that mattered to me. The port being closed is catastrophic.
I believe logistics are the most important thing. People are starving. How are they going to get food in, airdrop it? Anything other than shipping it, by ship, will be dramatically more expensive. (Although, I suppose a land connection from the Dominican Republic would also help.)
It's also disheartening that they're having trouble raising funds, but perhaps fundraising would go better if there were a clear way of getting the food in? Maybe there is a plan to open the port that just needs funding, but that's not how I read it.
(Gaza is another example where logistics, not funding, is the problem for getting food in, though in that case, the logistics failure seems a lot harder to solve than finding a military force that can go up against a few gangs.)
I think there are 2 unique differences. This feels like a chicken and egg senario. We can't establish an entrepoint without funding, but without an entrepoint we can't convince folks to provide...
I think there are 2 unique differences.
It's also disheartening that they're having trouble raising funds, but perhaps fundraising would go better if there were a clear way of getting the food in? Maybe there is a plan to open the port that just needs funding, but that's not how I read it.
This feels like a chicken and egg senario. We can't establish an entrepoint without funding, but without an entrepoint we can't convince folks to provide funding. The UN has worked in Haiti for decades. They did during the 2010 earthquake, which posed similar issues, so I'm not sure why everyone is making the assumption they don't have a plan and will be blindly throwing money at the problem. The UN has a long record of working in conflict zones and I have confidence they will be able to direct humanitarian effectively.
Secondly,
(Gaza is another example where logistics, not funding, is the problem for getting food in, though in that case, the logistics failure seems a lot harder to solve than finding a military force that can go up against a few gangs.)
Gaza's deployment of aid, or lack there of, is purposeful. It's been proven that supply trucks could be deployed effectively, but the IDF is not letting that happen. There is a clear difference in this case where an external force that controls the area is not allowing entry. We don't have that same hurdle for Haiti.
I was thinking that convincing a country with a military to intervene would have little to do with money. If the US were somehow convinced that they should take over the port (temporarily), they...
I was thinking that convincing a country with a military to intervene would have little to do with money. If the US were somehow convinced that they should take over the port (temporarily), they probably wouldn't be taking donations? The money could be useful for all sorts of other things, though.
The plan was put forth by the new presidential transitional council. My understanding is that the council was put together in Jamaica by the previous government in consultation with neighboring...
The plan was put forth by the new presidential transitional council. My understanding is that the council was put together in Jamaica by the previous government in consultation with neighboring regional governments, and it is virtually powerless because the gangs that do control Haiti reject it.
How do you even begin to fix this? A rather dark and cynical part of me thinks that the only solution would come from within but what would that look like? A gang taking over and forming a...
How do you even begin to fix this? A rather dark and cynical part of me thinks that the only solution would come from within but what would that look like? A gang taking over and forming a dictatorship? Devastating.
Meanwhile:
Gangs attack, hunger gets worse, politicians argue: the latest on the situation in Haiti (Miami Herald)
…
It seems like money won’t do much except in combination with some larger plan? I think what they really need is for some outside country to capture the port and provide the security to keep it open. But I haven’t seen anyone arguing for that.
Yeah there’s no point in giving billions of dollars to gangs. At least needs to be a government with power.
There was talk of an intervention by Kenya but not only has that stalled in the Kenyan side, but the question becomes of what they would even be protecting. With no real government, they’d practically have to run whatever they capture themselves
Interesting, why is Kenya taking the lead (or planning to do so)? I have very little knowledge of Haitian history, overall, but I definitely wasn't aware of those links. I've just read some stories about the intervention I think you were talking about - but why did those come about? From what I'm reading, Kenya is relatively involved in this kind of overseas mission, which I wouldn't have guessed, although it does chime with the fact that the UN has a duty station in Nairobi, I suppose.
Yeah. I had this passing thought, but quickly dismissed it because I don't even know who would accept the money. The government is in such a state of disarray that right now, it would likely just disappear. It would be wasted to give it now.
With how things are, I don't see the situation improving anytime soon. Sending in supporting troops isn't enough. The "easiest" solution I can come up with is a full-blown foreign takeover with the explicit intent of stabilizing Haiti, followed by a smooth transition of power so that Haiti could operate independently. However, there is absolutely no incentive for any country to do that without some ulterior motives. Hell, I don't think there's incentive for any country to do that with ulterior motives given how bad Haiti is right now.
There's not much to gain from getting involved beyond basic human empathy, which sadly isn't always enough to justify the resources needed for a situation like this.
How does this:
Lead you to:
It seems like there is a plan in place that is insufficiently funded, which wouldn't be a problem if France returned just a portion of their mis-got goods.
Cash injections generally don’t help without a clear framework to take the cash in. Hell they can even make things worse.
I invite you to run through the scenario in your head, that starts with “Haiti gets a billion euros in aid. Now what?”
My background was in international program development, specifically in conflict zones. I've worked in Syria during the expanse of ISIS, Somalia with Al Shaba, and Pakistan in areas controlled by the Taliban. When you work with the UN there is never carte blanche with funding, specifically because of what everyone is calling out: it looks really bad if you directly fund terrorists. But that doesn't mean everyone in those regions are terrorists. There are still normal folks providing all of the normal services under very abnormal circumstances.
All that to say, I doubt the UN would distribute funds to "gangs", unless the gangs currently oversee the federal level government. Even then, funds are normally ear marked for specific groups within the administration. I worked in Syria during the heart of the civil war and worked with and funded groups within Assad's administration. The funding didn't go to new weapons or back pockets, it went to training folks to preserve some of the many endangered heritage sites across the country. I see Haiti as little different. Even if there is instability at the top, likely most of the branch organizations can maintain.
Later in that very same article they say:
So why is the funding provided by the Open Society Foundation likely going to find a successful home while UN funds will end up in the hands of "gangs". I would be shocked if there wasn't already a well placed and thought out distribution plan. The UN has been active in Haiti for years and there are few organizations I would trust more to deploy that level of financing.
Giving millions of dollars is a different ball game to giving hundreds of billions of dollars which the article is referring to. The article also refers to similar donations done by France to the one you mention.
To be honest the whole thing reeks to me as a political game for something completely different; I would bet money that the players involved don’t care about Haiti one bit.
I haven't read about Haiti in a few weeks, so I went looking for that an article to see what's happening and whether the port is still closed. That article confirmed that it is. That's the bit that mattered to me. The port being closed is catastrophic.
I believe logistics are the most important thing. People are starving. How are they going to get food in, airdrop it? Anything other than shipping it, by ship, will be dramatically more expensive. (Although, I suppose a land connection from the Dominican Republic would also help.)
It's also disheartening that they're having trouble raising funds, but perhaps fundraising would go better if there were a clear way of getting the food in? Maybe there is a plan to open the port that just needs funding, but that's not how I read it.
(Gaza is another example where logistics, not funding, is the problem for getting food in, though in that case, the logistics failure seems a lot harder to solve than finding a military force that can go up against a few gangs.)
I think there are 2 unique differences.
This feels like a chicken and egg senario. We can't establish an entrepoint without funding, but without an entrepoint we can't convince folks to provide funding. The UN has worked in Haiti for decades. They did during the 2010 earthquake, which posed similar issues, so I'm not sure why everyone is making the assumption they don't have a plan and will be blindly throwing money at the problem. The UN has a long record of working in conflict zones and I have confidence they will be able to direct humanitarian effectively.
Secondly,
Gaza's deployment of aid, or lack there of, is purposeful. It's been proven that supply trucks could be deployed effectively, but the IDF is not letting that happen. There is a clear difference in this case where an external force that controls the area is not allowing entry. We don't have that same hurdle for Haiti.
Edit: my formatting was all off.
I was thinking that convincing a country with a military to intervene would have little to do with money. If the US were somehow convinced that they should take over the port (temporarily), they probably wouldn't be taking donations? The money could be useful for all sorts of other things, though.
The plan was put forth by the new presidential transitional council. My understanding is that the council was put together in Jamaica by the previous government in consultation with neighboring regional governments, and it is virtually powerless because the gangs that do control Haiti reject it.
How do you even begin to fix this? A rather dark and cynical part of me thinks that the only solution would come from within but what would that look like? A gang taking over and forming a dictatorship? Devastating.