Mixed Reactions to Haiti’s Election
21 February 2006

Reaction and interpretations of the February 7 presidential election in Haiti differ among the editorial boards of major US newspapers.  The greatest differences appear when examining the legitimacy of the vote.  Some editorials call for continued international and US support of Haiti.

René Préval was declared president after negotiations between his party, the election council, the interim government, the UN mission, and international diplomats lead to an agreement to proportionately allocate thousands of blank ballots in the final tally, pushing Préval’s vote total over the 50% threshold necessary to avoid a runoff election.  Préval’s vote total prior to the agreement had been just under 49%. The first returns had given around 60% of the votes to Préval, yet as his numbers dropped, allegations of fraud arose.  The allegations were strengthened after thousands of marked ballots were discovered in a landfill near Port-au-Prince.  Préval supporters argued that thousands of blank ballots had been added to the count to decrease Préval’s total.  Before the compromise, Préval’s supporters protested in Port-au-Prince; while their protests were largely peaceful, many threatened violence if Préval were not declared the winner.  The second and third place vote winners, getting 11% and 8% of the vote, have not acknowledged the legitimacy of the election.

Summaries of the positions the editorial boards follow:

The Miami Herald argued that the election results should be welcomed, noting that Préval had won a clear majority and the compromise prevented violence.  The editors look forward to Préval working with the UN to “heal [Haiti’s] fractured society.”

The Chicago Tribune worries that even though Préval would obviously have been the winner in a runoff election, the compromise will cause the election to be viewed as illegitimate and rigged.  “A second-round victory,” the editors write, “would have cemented Préval's authority and instilled confidence in the electoral process.”

The New York Times editorial board took a middle ground noting that while the compromise “tarnishes the democratic legitimacy this election was supposed to provide,” it was the “best available exit” from a situation that could escalate into violence.  After examining the tricky political situation facing Préval, the editors note, “Under any circumstances, Haiti will need international support for a long time.”

The Los Angeles Times argues that “only a concerted international effort will keep incoming populist President Rene Préval from steering his failed state even deeper into misery.”  The editors worry that US support might not be forthcoming, arguing that the US should increase aid “for three strategic reasons: Florida, drugs and Hugo Chavez.”  It explains that a failed economy might result in Haitians taking to the seas in an attempt to reach Florida, that 14% of the cocaine trafficked to the US passes through Haiti, and that Chavez might use foreign aid there to challenge US influence in the hemisphere.  Noting that 60% of Haitians voted, the editors argue, “Their faith in democracy, such as it is, should be rewarded.”

The Washington Post responded to the elections hailing the decision to give the election to Préval saying, “Fortunately, a crisis was averted by that rarest of Haitian events, political compromise.”  However, they note, much of the credit for the compromise goes to the international community.  Concerned that Préval alone will not be able to solve Haiti’s problems, the editors call for increased international help including aid, an extended UN peacekeeping mandate, and for the US to overcome its own polarized views about Haitian politics.

The Houston Chronicle argues that in light of Haiti’s troubled past, “that the candidate of the majority is declared the winner can be fairly called success.”  After calling for former President Aristide to “stay away,” the editors call on the United States to “raise the bar for Haitian success. It can do so with respectful foreign policy and consistent, wisely chosen aid.”