The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) voted in favor of a US-sponsored resolution that authorizes a deployment of Kenyan-led troops to Haiti. The Washington-backed government in Port-au-Prince requested the mission after gangs captured large swaths of the capital city. The US has pledged financial support and training for the international force deployed to Haiti under the UN flag.
During a meeting of the UNSC on Monday, the body approved a measure that gives Kenya the authority to send troops into Haiti aimed at restoring order. The measure calls for the troops to work with local police to plan “and conduct joint security support operations as it works to counter gangs and improve security conditions in Haiti.” The force will help secure “critical infrastructure sites and transit locations such as the airport, ports, and key intersections.”
It was unclear if Russia or China would veto the measure. Beijing’s representative to the council voiced some support for the mission, but China abstained. The Russian ambassador said Moscow would withhold support for the operation but would not veto the measure because it was requested by the Haitian government. The measure passed with 13 yes votes and two abstentions.
The Prime Minister of Haiti, Ariel Henry, rose to power with Washington’s support after President Jovenal Moise was assassinated in 2021. Since taking office, the streets of Port-au-Prince have become a battleground between rival gangs and vigilante groups of civilians frustrated with the rampant violence.
While Henry supports the UN mission, the Haitian people have protested against deploying foreign soldiers. Additionally, various Haitian groups have issued letters demanding the UN drop the plan to send troops and for the White House to withdraw its support from Henry.
UN soldiers have a dark legacy in Haiti. The last UN mission to Haiti lasted from 2004-2017. During that time, the troops committed sexual abuses against women and killed nearly 10,000 Haitians by causing a cholera outbreak. The State Department Human Rights report found Kenyan security forces commit rampant human rights abuses with little accountability.
The Joe Biden administration has been pushing for the UNSC to authorize a deployment to Haiti for a year. Washington hoped to enlist Ottawa to lead the mission, but the Canadian government rebuffed the US.
Kenya agreed to lead the mission. The US agreed to provide Nairobi with $100 million to aid the mission, and US troops will train the Kenyan soldiers. After Nairobi committed to sending its troops to Port-au-Prince, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin traveled to Kenya to ink an agreement to increase military ties between the two nations.
Kyle Anzalone is the opinion editor of Antiwar.com, news editor of the Libertarian Institute, and co-host of Conflicts of Interest.
Is there a Status of Force Agreement and if so, what is in it?
We don’t clean up our messes. U.S. personnel committing a crime there will not be prosecuted there, will be sent home for a slap on the wrist.
Confusing, is it not?
The UN is using Kenyan troops in Haiti so as not to show the world that- once again- the White Man in all his colonial splendor isn’t oppressing that country. At least not this time, although we know who is calling the shots for the Kenyans. Why else use Kenyans when the US is right next door? It’s not like we haven’t occupied Haiti before, you know.
Third world tin pot military leaders and their “soldiers” LOVE “UN missions”; they get equipped and supported (food, medical care, transportation, lodging) courtesy of the US taxpayer; and are allowed to loot, bully and rape (errrr….”molest”) the local citizens as they please; and if there’s ever any shooting, they can hide behind trucks and the US air force will come to their aid. Beats the hell out of fighting guerillas in their own countries.
Biden will contribute by air-dropping a giant pecker from one of our invisible MIC flying miracles. That ought to do it.
I’m even more confused than usual. Yes, Thomas Knapp. That $hit happens. Are you all saying we had not destabilized Haiti and not had anything to do with killing their President? My world is upside down. Is it that we made a mess that we don’t want to mess further? …When in the HELL did we ever do that!? We usually make messes worse!? In fact, that’s why we’re here and everywhere– to do exactly that! What gives???? Sorry, Kyle. It’s as clear as mud. (Sarcasm)
I’m not sure why you’re addressing me in particular. My position that US and US-backed interventions in Haiti have uniformly been disastrous for the Haitian people and should never be supported.
We’ve had discussions about how confused I can be, but I am happy you seem to have forgotten them. I actually hoped you would give more explanation on US motive. Is it possible we are financing this intervention because we’re nice and care about Haitians?
Haiti has lots of not yet exploited natural resources, and I suspect the US regime would like to get the country both stable and US-dominated enough to let its commercial interests in to grab them. There’s also been a general “anything in the western hemisphere is a US interest” angle ever since the Monroe Doctrine (and, later, the Roosevelt corollary). And there were Cold War motivations, especially after the Cuban revolution.
Since the 1990s, I think, a lot of US “concern” for Haiti has been about giving the political class (especially the Clintons) to launder money in the guise of “humanitarian aid.”
That Monroe Doctrine/Roosevelt corollary stuff doesn’t really fit very well with the idea of letting a Kenyan force come in under UN auspices. Maye the US is in the process of moving full-on toward the use of Janissary/foreign legion troops for infantry and “peacekeeping” functions abroad.
I suspected as much but the thoughts weren’t as organized in my head. Do you feel Russia and China abstaining without a fight was in return for other favors to be disclosed later? It seemed way too easy.
Who knows?
If I was thinking suspiciously, I might say that they expect it to go bad and to end up requiring direct US intervention to save the Kenyan troops, and anything that distracts the US regime is probably welcome.
If I was thinking slightly less suspiciously, I’d note that Russia and Cuba seem to be on the outs lately, and the Cubans are likely to view this whole thing with suspicion, so the Russians are getting a dig in there; while China and Cuba seem to be on very good terms, and Cuban suspicion of US-backed ops in Haiti might grease the skids for a larger Chinese naval/military presence to calm their nerves.
If I wasn’t thinking suspiciously at all, I might say that they just think it’s a good idea and since they’re not the ones paying for it or providing the troops, why not score some Good Guy Points by letting it happen?
I think you are right. This sounds suspiciously like the operating scheme for Somalia; coerce third world countries into providing “peacekeepers” who are the day to day face of the operation; but always under “overall US control”, for unity of command, and have contingents of our own super extra special forces ready to do whatever serious dirty work we feel is needed. And, if the local fallout from our extra special forces raids results in the locals attacking the foreign troops (Kenyans, Pakistani, Malaysian, whoever else we coerced) well, so what?
Thank you for trying to make sense out of this situation, Thomas. I could not make the math work on my own.
Sorry I couldn’t be more helpful. Personally I think the only way Haiti will ever have a chance at peace is for the US to butt out. But that probably won’t happen until the US loses its capacity to be buttinskyish.
“buttinskyish” LOL. Brilliant!
Etymology
From butt in (“to join a conversation or situation in which one is not welcome or invited, interject”) + -sky (a variant of -ski (suffix added to a word, name, or phrase to invoke Russianness, Polishness, or a more general Slavicness)), humorously modelled after Russian surnames, and originally and often used in the form of a surname.
“I wish I had never met that nosy buttinsky!” Only worse, it’s a super bully buttinsky.
Oh Good; US troops will “train the Kenyan soldiers”. How lucky for the Kenyans; with all our expertise, they should quickly become nearly as effective as the Afghan National Army, or the Iraqi military and police, or the Lebanese army, that we also trained and turned into crackerjack first class highly disciplined combat troops. Or….Not.
Just MORE money for retired US generals to set up bogus, half assed “training plans” and go on site visits to “evaluate progress” while scarfing down government paid for surf-n-turf and discount liquor.
Smartest thing the Ukrainians did was to start ignoring all NATO training and revert to their own methods. NO ONE in NATO, and particularly in the US, has EVER fought in a real war against a real near-peer enemy, and has no idea what they are “training”. “Duhhh…it says in the book the army done give me that….so go do that!!! You are now….Trained!!”