Haiti old and new

The situation in Haiti continues to be bloodily unclear. But one thing is clear: We're seeing a rerun of the slant that we saw when Aristide was overthrown in 1991. As the New York Times has it on February 12,

Mr. Aristide has come under harsh criticism, and even some supporters voice dismay at his autocratic style. In elections in 2000, Mr. Aristide's opponents disputed the victories of several legislators aligned with the president; the opponents then boycotted the vote later that year that re-elected Mr. Aristide. The dispute has effectively paralyzed the government, and Mr. Aristide has failed to reach out to critics with jobs or resources.

Not a word about the nature of the opposition, not a word about the powerful (powerful in Haitian terms) economic and military elites that have sought to undermine his government at every turn and from the very start, nothing about the thugs and gangs that have burned and shot their way through a number of towns. It is, now as then, presented as entirely a matter of Aristide's failings.

Oh, wait, there is a word about the opposition from the BBC: It refers to Democratic Convergence, the amalgamation of every right-wing party in Haiti, which has engaged in its own long-standing pattern of thuggery, as "the moderate opposition."

As I said before, no one - including Aristide - can claim clean hands in this. But that is no excuse for blatantly biased coverage.

Meanwhile, the Bushites continue to show their commitment to democracy.

As the Haitian crisis deepens, with violence flaring and President Jean-Bertrand Aristide locked in an impasse with his opponents, the Bush administration has placed itself in the unusual position of saying it may accept the ouster of a democratic government.

The stance recalls the administration's initial response to the April 2002 coup attempt against another elected, populist leader in the hemisphere, President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela. American officials touched off an outcry by appearing to blame Mr. Chavez for the uprising and consulting with his would-be successors.

That's a stance the White House ran away from at top speed as soon as it became clear the coup would not succeed. This time, they're being more subtle, but just as clearly indicating their support for monied elites over populist presidents, even if they were democratically elected.