The fat lady has yet to sing, it seems

What had seemed to be a coda for Haiti is increasingly appearing to have been a quarter rest. Jean-Bertrand Aristide, now in the Central African Republic with his family under virtual house arrest, has said that he was made to leave Haiti by American forces under a threat of "thousands" of deaths in a thug attack on Port-au-Prince and flatly denies that he resigned. That story was first broken by Democracy Now! on March 1 in a broadcast interview with Rep. Maxine Waters and Randall Robinson of TransAfrica, both of who had spoken to Aristide by phone.

Colin Powell called the allegation "absolutely baseless, absurd." (Then again, this was the guy who claimed "irrefutable" evidence that Saddam Hussein held massive amounts of illegal biochemical weapons.) But as the Guardian pointed out on March 3,

[w]hile it is unlikely that Mr Aristide was led to the airport in handcuffs, it is equally disingenuous to suggest that his departure was in any way voluntary. In either case it is significant that he resigned to the US rather than to the chief supreme court justice, his constitutional successor.

The fact that the day before he fled he vowed to remain and fight, and that he left without any clear destination in mind, suggests that he left in a hurry.

In the meantime, the rebel demands have escalated. Recall that they and their "political" allies insisted that the goal was to get rid of Aristide. Having accomplished that, however, they immediately started demanding more. First, the Guardian notes, the political opposition

refused to negotiate with Mr Aristide's prime minister, Yvon Neptune, about forming a new government.

After the rebel leader, Guy Philippe, said he intended to have Mr Neptune arrested on corruption charges, a rebel group converged on the prime minister's official residence, from which he had to be rescued by US marines.

Again, the international community caved to the rebel demands, this time without even the pretense of objection. A tripartite commission of one representative each chosen by the opposition, the government, and the occupying powers is to form a "council of elders" to prepare for a new government. (Noted in passing: This gives the "opposition," which had never polled more than about 12% in elections, 1/3 of the power in arranging for a new government and 1/2 the Haitian role in that.) But one of the first tasks of the commission is to find a replacement for Neptune, which they hope to do by Tuesday, says AP.

Meanwhile,

Louis-Jodel Chamblain, a convicted killer who led army death squads and is accused of ordering hundreds of executions, has demanded a voice in the new political settlement. "What's mine is mine," he said.

For his part, Philippe said he wanted to re-establish the Haitian army (having declared himself the "military chief" of Haiti's security forces on Tuesday) and was clearly disappointed when US officials demanded he disarm. He promised to comply but as of Friday

[US Commander] Gen. James T. Hill said the rebels had not laid down their weapons as they had promised, though some had withdrawn from the capital.

Their most prominent leader, Guy Philippe, "is still in the city, and we are still looking for him to lay down his arms," said General Hill,

according to Saturday's New York Times. If they have been laid down, they're apparently still within easy reach, as AP notes in a March 6 story datelined Gonaives.

Rebels who choose not to show their weapons in public openly admit they have stashed them for later use. At a street corner where an offering of metal and herbs burned for Ogun Feray, the war god, reminders abound that Haiti's bloody uprising might not be over.

"In terms of where the guns are and who we will surrender them to, that's a secret," said local rebel commander Winter Etienne, 40. "When you lay down your arms you always want to have them someplace where you can pick them up again if you need them." ...

Until a new government and electoral commission is formed - and their pro-Aristide enemies forcibly disarmed - the rebels have no plans to surrender their weapons.

While this was going on, the pro-Aristide side had been stunned into silence by the suddenness of the changes and his departure. But they've found their voice again.

Port-au-Prince, Haiti, March 5 (Reuters) - Thousands of outraged supporters of exiled President Jean-Bertrand Aristide poured out of Haiti's slums and into the streets on Friday, marching on the U.S. Embassy to denounce the "occupation" of their homeland and demand Aristide's return.

Hurling slurs at U.S. Marines and calling President George W. Bush a "terrorist," a crowd estimated at more than 10,000 materialized in the capital, seething with anger at Aristide's flight to Africa five days ago after a bloody rebellion and U.S. pressure.

"Bush terrorist! Bush terrorist!," chanted the crowd...

Hundreds held up their hands with five fingers extended, shouting "Aristide five years," the rallying cry of his supporters who wanted him to finish his five-year term in office....

Aristide partisans vowed to demonstrate daily for the return of their president.

They blamed Haiti's wealthy elite, Bush and French President Jacques Chirac for what they called the "foreign occupation" of Haiti.

It's reasonable to think that some of the nations involved here, especially those from the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), have at least some interest in genuine justice for Haiti. It's also reasonable to think that others, such as the US, don't. Indeed, the US has done a great deal to undermine Aristide, as I've previously mentioned, noting disturbing parallels between what's happened to Haiti under Aristide with what happened to Chile under Salvador Allende. Whether or not there will be a Haitian Pinochet (or, I should say, another Haitian Pinochet) is yet to be seen. But if there isn't, it certainly won't be the result of anything we've done as a nation.

But apparently that's a good thing, or so says the State Department. You see, Aristide was a "failed" leader, and

State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said that even if the United States "recognized a leader had been elected," he could not rely on U.S. support against an armed revolt if America considered he had misgoverned.

"We can't be called upon, expected or required to intervene every time there is violence against a failed leader," Boucher told reporters. "We can't spend our time running around the world and the hemisphere saving people who botched their chance at leadership."

Boucher said that's not "ultimately good for democracy in the hemisphere." Which means, apparently, what's good for democracy in the hemisphere is to act in accordance with US wishes. Obedience is Freedom. And War is Peace. And Up is Down. And Aristide, even after being chastened by Clinton as the price for being restored as president, still wasn't completely with the program. So we set him up and giggled as he came down.

Footnote 1: The Reuters story linked above twice refers to what happened as a "bloody rebellion" and says it began with "an anti-Aristide gang." Isn't it interesting that before Aristide's ouster, it was a "popular uprising" by "disaffected" people and "former supporters" upset over "flawed elections?" And now that he's (apparently safely) out it's okay for the media to use different descriptions?

Footnote 2: It's widely thought that Boucher's dismissal of "failed leaders" who won't get help was also aimed at leftist Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, who has been a thorn in the Bushites' collective side. He was briefly overthrown in a 2002 coup which the White House seemed to welcome until it became obvious it was going to fail. Boucher's remarks could easily be taken as - and I do take them as - a signal that the US would not oppose another military coup.

Footnote 3: According to the BBC, South Africa has joined with CARICOM in calling for an investigation of the circumstances surrounding Aristide's flight from Haiti. On behalf of the Bush administration, Boucher rejected that call, saying there's nothing to investigate.

Oh, now I really do want an investigation!