24 ms·

Haiti’s President Is Assassinated

471 points by jbegley 5y ago

sundarurfriend 5y ago
I was curious if Haiti's political system was like India's - where the President is a figurehead position and the Prime minister has the practical authority, or if it was like the US - with President at the helm. It seems like it's a bit of both, a "semi-presidential" system like France. Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government"... but that doesn't really help me understand the role and powers of each in practice.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  > Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government" I grew up in the USA and this is exactly how those terms were defined for us in school. The head of state is the leader of the country. They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military. The head of government is the top bureaucrat. They do governmenty bureaucratty stuff like meet with their cabinet and manage the executive branch.
  - boxed 5y ago
    That's not universally true though. Swedens head of state is the King. He has no power.
    - squiggleblaz 5y ago
      According to Wikipedia: * The speaker of parliament is responsible for nominating and dismissing the prime minister (who appoints the prime minister? the parliament as a whole appoint the prime minister? does the king get to, but is compelled to appoint whoever the speaker nominates? does wikipedia mean "appoint" when it says "nominate"?) * The king is not part of parliament, and bills do not need royal assent to become law. * The king is not part of an executive council like the UK privy council. Formerly there was a Council of State. However the king does have royal immunity from criminal prosecution. If the Swedish King killed you, they would probably have a crisis over whether the absolute immunity the king possesses is in fact not absolute. So the king is clearly a special person in Sweden, but it does seem they are almost powerless according to the constitution, unlike say the British queen.
      - OlleTO 5y ago
        >who appoints the prime minister? Parliament votes on whoever the speaker nominates. If that person is tolerated (<50% of parliament votes against the nominee) they become prime minister. If the vote fails the speaker gets to nominate someone else. After 4 failed such votes, an extra election is called.
        squiggleblaz 5y ago
        Thanks for the clear answer. I think I like that system. Sometimes minority governments make more sense that slightly larger but more fractious coalitions. If I was trying to design a republican constitution for my own country I think I would include a similar provision.
      - doikor 5y ago
        > who appoints the prime minister? the parliament as a whole appoint the prime minister? does the king get to, but is compelled to appoint whoever the speaker nominates? does wikipedia mean "appoint" when it says "nominate"? Prime minister is whoever gets the majority of the parliament behind them in a vote. In practice in Sweden’s case the leader of the biggest party in the coalition that makes the majority. (Due to how the voting system works in Sweden more than 2 parties exist in the parliament and thus coalitions of parties make up the government as no party manages to get 50% if the seats)
  - Denvercoder9 5y ago
    > The head of state is the leader of the country. They [..] typically are in control of the military. This isn't true, at least in Western states. E.g in the Netherlands and Germany the king and the President respectively are head of state, but neither of them controls the military, which is done by respectively the Prime Minister and the Chancellor. It's really hard to make a universal definition for heads of state and government, since they fulfill different roles in forms of government. However, generally, the head of state is a more ceremonial role while the head of government actually governs. But there are exceptions.
    - namdnay 5y ago
      In a parliamentary system, the head of state is more ceremonial. In a presidential system, the head of state has the power (e.g. France, USA)
      - Denvercoder9 5y ago
        The US has combined the head of state and head of government in a single position (President), so it doesn't make sense to say either has more power. France is indeed one of the (many) exceptions with a semi-presidential system where the head of state has more power.
    - pintxo 5y ago
      Actually, for Germany, the head of the military is the Minister of Defence. Only if the parliament declares Germany to be in a situation of defence (Verteidigungsfall), will the command of the military be given to the Chancellor.
    - brummm 5y ago
      The head of the military in Germany actually is the parliament.
  - chadash 5y ago
    In general, head of state is more ceremonial and has less power, but there are so many exceptions that making a rule of thumb is tough because it varies so much state-by-state. In the US, head of state and head of gov are the same (the President). In Russia, the head of state is Putin. He's not officially head of gov, but c'mon, we all know who controls the show there. In Canada, the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II. But for all practical purposes, Justin Trudeau holds both rows. It's not like the Queen is handling Canada's foreign policy. She technically has the power to dissolve Canada's parliament, but it would be hard to imagine her exercising this power. When foreign leaders visit Canada, they aren't going to see the Queen, whereas they might if they visit the UK.
    - peeters 5y ago
      > When foreign leaders visit Canada, they aren't going to see the Queen, whereas they might if they visit the UK. Though they would typically be hosted by the Queen's representative in Canada, the Governor General (as of yesterday, R.H. Mary Simon). The Queen would never directly exercise her head-of-state powers in Canada. However, the GG does have to make some controversial decisions about choosing governments from time to time.
    - rgblambda 5y ago
      >In Canada, the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II. But for all practical purposes, Justin Trudeau holds both rows. Does Canada not have a Governor General, like other countries where Elizabeth II is the absentee monarch? The Governor General performs most of the functions of the head of state and technically has the power to appoint or dismiss the Prime Minister, but much like the Queen the role is mostly ceremonial.
      - zinekeller 5y ago
        There is, but in all seriousness outside of events that will probably also happen in a republican state (like tension between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition) the Government-General takes a hands-off approach, so effectively (de facto, in practice) the prime minister is the head of state.
  - throwaway894345 5y ago
    In Great Britain at least the Prime Minister frequently meets with other heads of state, e.g., Churchill meeting with Roosevelt. Of course the monarch is the head of the state in Great Britain and she does meet with other heads of state as well, but it seems less clear-cut than you describe? Is this a peculiarity of Britain? Or does “head of state” imply a sort of figurehead position?
    - Denvercoder9 5y ago
      > In Great Britain at least the Prime Minister frequently meets with other heads of state, e.g., Churchill meeting with Roosevelt. The exception here is that the US President is both head of state and head of government, so Churchill meeting Roosevelt is actually a meeting between two heads of government.
      - throwaway894345 5y ago
        But they were meeting about military matters which is a responsibility attributed to head of state according to OP.
  - fullahbandit 5y ago
    One thing to add is that the prime minister is often appointed by the president so he does not really hold any real power. I think the closest equivalent in the US system would be the Vice President, except that the prime minister can often be replaced at the president's discretion before the end of the term.
    - liversage 5y ago
      Or the opposite. The German prime minister is Angela Merkel while the president is Frank-Walter Steinmeister. I had to look the second up because I didn't know who it was but I know that he doesn't have political power like Merkel.
  - PeterWhittaker 5y ago
    > The head of state is the leader of the country. They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military. Not quite true, at least not in limited constitutional monarchies, like the UK and Canada (I'm Canadian): The Queen is the Head of State for both the UK and Canada (and for many other countries) and her role is almost exclusively ceremonial (without getting into the role of the Governor General, who represents Her Majesty when she is out of the country). In both the UK and Canada, the head of government is the Prime Minister, that is, the leader of the party that controls the House of Parliament. In both countries, they do far more than "bureaucratty stuff" since, among other things, they choose and chair the cabinet, set the overall government agenda, etc. The military reports to cabinet through the appropriate minister(s). (Mitchell Sharp once wrote a book on Canadian government in which he rightly asserted that ours is government-by-cabinet, more than government by parliament....) In both countries, the PM is effectively head of the executive branch, but definitely not head of state, as well as sitting atop the legislative branch.
  - Macha 5y ago
    Yeah, the obvious example is the UK, where the Queen is head of state and the PM is the head of government. Other westminster inspired systems sometimes keep around the monarchy (represented by the governor general) or replace the role with an elected president. Usually such a role is a literal figurehead, or a de facto figurehead who de jure has power but culturally is not supposed to exercise them, (such as the aforementioned Queen, or the Irish President). Attempts by such a de facto figurehead to use powers they officially have have led to controversy, such as the 1975 incident with the Australian Governor General (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional...)
    - deregulateMed 5y ago
      Yikes I can't believe that 1975 event happened and the royal family still remains in their seats. All of these former British territories are 1 terrorist attack and 1 ambitious politician away from a political crisis. Roll the dice 10 times, each time one of these monarchs could make a play for power. Although I'm not even sure how to handle the dissolution of the monarchy without executing everyone. Taking their property only means a foreign state would prop them up.
      - ylyn 5y ago
        The British royal family had very little to do with that incident. Yes, the monarch is the de jure head of state, but again in practice she delegates all decisions to the GG.
    - fionnoh 5y ago
      There is precedent to the Irish president exercising their power. In 1994 Mary Robinson refused Albert Reynold's request to have the Dáil dissolved (well, let it be known that such a request would be refused), leading to a new government being formed without a general election. If the Queen refused a similar request from a Prime Minister that would be a shock though.
      - Macha 5y ago
  - simonh 5y ago
    In the US system the President basically assumes the constitutional position of George III circa 1770. Executive orders are Royal decrees. The president signing laws is Royal Assent. Presidential pardons are Royal pardons. The power to adjourn Congress is proroguation. The oddity to me is the position of the Speaker of the House, which is a weird amalgam of the role of the Speaker of Parliament and also acting as a de facto Prime Minister although there really isn't an explicit equivalent role in the US.
  - rsj_hn 5y ago
    > They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military No head of state is in control of the military. Head of state is a ceremonial role. They may be the ceremonial "head" of the military, as in "her majesty's ship".
    - nybble41 5y ago
      > No head of state is in control of the military. In the U.S. the office of the President unifies the roles of head of state, head of government, and Commander in Chief of the military. This is not merely a ceremonial role. As the saying goes, the exception proves the rule false.
    - Denvercoder9 5y ago
      > No head of state is in control of the military. In France the President, the head of state, commands the military, and not the Prime Minister, the head of government.
- mannykannot 5y ago
  Following the assassination, the prime minister (Claude Joseph) has said he is now running the country, which suggests that the president has real power.
- squiggleblaz 5y ago
  In several states with such a semi-presidential system, if the prime minister and the president are oppositional, the prime minister will take primary responsibility for more domestic matters like education and health, whereas the president will take primary responsibility for most national/international matters like trade, the economy and foreign affairs. When the president and the prime minister are allied, the president often takes the lead on most matters. I have never seen a semi-presidential federation, and my intuition has become that in a semi-presidential system, the president is holds the responsibilities of a prime minister/president of a federal government, whereas the prime minister is holds the responsibilities normally given to the premier/governor of state - as if there's only a single state and a single legislature for the state and the federation. Of course, as with federations, the exact boundaries will depend on the country concerned. Whether Haiti works that way, I cannot say.
- fx18011 5y ago
  It is more like France of Russia.
  - rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
    François Fillon does work for Russia but the country remains sovereign.
- pyduan 5y ago
  There are multiple types of semi-presidential systems in practice. Those where the Prime Minister is appointed by and accountable to the President (and not just by Parliament) are typically much closer to a pure presidential system in practice. In France (source: I'm French) the President is typically extremely strong despite it being nominally a semi-presidential system, in some respects even stronger than his US counterpart. Also note that this depends a lot on practical details, like political customs — former President Nicolas Sarkozy famously publicly called his Prime Minister his "collaborator", for instance — and electoral timings. There was a reform in the early 00s to sync Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections, meaning that even though the Prime Minister is accountable to the Parliament, in practice the latter tends to be of the same majority as the President (whereas before, we had cases of Presidents and Primes being of opposing parties, which is known as 'cohabitation'), which gives him enormous power.
- s_dev 5y ago
  > Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government"... but that doesn't really help me understand the role and powers of each in practice. This is like Ireland. The head of government is responsible for running the country day to day. While the president is responsible for representing the country in a ceremonial way (far less powerful but often more popular). Often they rubber stamp some legislation but often have little power. In the US the roles are combined in to the Presidency. In the UK the Queen is the head of state and Boris Johnson is head of government.
brettermeier 5y ago
https://archive.is/O2KbS https://archive.is/O2KbS
caseyross 5y ago
For those interested, VICE recently did a fantastic report about the street violence that's consuming parts of Port-au-Prince, and how it's connected to Haiti's current political climate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp1WVl6nrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp1WVl6nrY
- dmos62 5y ago
  Unavailable in Europe. What kind of news outlet censors reports based on reader's location?
  - bargle0 5y ago
    The kind that doesn’t want to deal with Europe’s laws, for better or worse.
    - dmos62 5y ago
      What laws are those? This is surely not GDPR, if that's what you mean.
      - xeromal 5y ago
        I'm not seeing a problem?
        dmos62 5y ago
        Because Youtube doesn't have problems complying with GDPR, as far as I know. Also, other videos would be unavailable as well. Edit: you've completely changed your comment.
        bombcar 5y ago
        Just because the largest video sharing platform ever know is willing to comply with GDPR doesn't mean there isn't a cost associated, or that everyone is willing to pay that cost. Regulatory moats are a thing.
marsven_422 5y ago
Probably threatened to expose the Clinton's Haiti shenanigans.
KoftaBob 5y ago
Earlier post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652
black_puppydog 5y ago
> “A group of unidentified individuals, some of them speaking Spanish, attacked [...]” This is peculiar. Might just be too early for the dust to have settled, but both tagesschau.de [1] and Le Monde [2] report both Spanish and English for to be spoken by the attackers. Edit: The Guardian [3] also quotes only Spanish, but later speaks of an English-language announcement on a megaphone. Guess we'll have to wait for a bit until things converge to The Truth™ here. [1]: https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/haiti-praesident-moise-mord-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/haiti-praesident-m... [2]: https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/07/07/haiti-le-premier-ministre-annonce-l-assassinat-du-president-jovenel-moise_6087360_3210.html https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/07/07/hait... [3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/07/haiti-president-jovenel-moise-reportedly-assassinated https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/07/haiti-presiden...
- ecedeno 5y ago
  Here they have the video where you can hear that announcement: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/haiti/article252616688.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas...
  - black_puppydog 5y ago
    You mean the megaphone part, right? Yeah, that seems to be it. I'm just curious because all four outlets I checked marked the "Spanish" or "English and Spanish" as direct quotes so I'm not sure if they got different sources or what happened.
    - neom 5y ago
      The New York Post (ugh) has a longer version, and it doesn't include the American voice at the start shouting about DEA operations. https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/haitian-president-jovenel-moise-assassinated-in-his-home/ https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/haitian-president-jovenel-mois...
    - RobertoG 5y ago
seibelj 5y ago
Anyone who honestly thinks the USA is a "failed state" needs to contextualize what an actual failed state looks like. Murdering the president in his sleep is not a good look!
- moksly 5y ago
  Didn’t right wing extremists seize the legitimate American government while it was in session a few months back?
  - variant 5y ago
    No.
  - squiggleblaz 5y ago
    They didn't. They occupied the legislative building, but they didn't seize the government because they made no attempt to exercise power, and if they had it wouldn't have been taken seriously.
  - viro 5y ago
    no?
  - gifwithaj 5y ago
    No, a handful of Trump supporters walked around taking selfies for a few minutes inside a building because they mistakenly believed the election was fraudulent. They did not hold any power at any point and were not right wing nor driven by a left/right idealogical divide, they were fools mislead about vote integrity. That said, left wing extremists did actually seize and hold a section of Seattle for an extended period of time, which would be a more genuine example of a failed state- violent rebels holding territory inside a major city.
    - da39a3ee 5y ago
      Reasonable comment except > and were not right wing nor driven by a left/right idealogical divide, What were you thinking when you wrote that?
_Microft 5y ago
There was an earlier submission from another site that got eventually flagged. It had not attracted that many on-topic comments but here is the link anyways: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652
techbrobane 5y ago
Colonizers still gonna get paid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_debt_of_Haiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_debt_of_Haiti
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
dweekly 5y ago
BBC coverage at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-57750358 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-57750358 (no paywall)
cryptohacks 5y ago
"But debt is not just victor's justice; it can also be a way of punishing winners who weren't supposed to win. The most spectacular example of this is the history of the Republic of Haiti - the first poor country to be placed in permanent debt peonage. Haiti was a nation founded by former plantation slaves who had the temerity not only to rise up in rebellion, amidst grand declarations of universal rights and freedoms, but to defeat Napoleon's armies sent to return them to bondage. France immediately insisted that the new republic owed it 150 million francs in damages for the expropriated plantations, as well as the expenses of outfitting the failed military expeditions, and all other nations, including the United States, agreed to impose an embargo on the country until it was paid. The sum was intentionally impossible (equivalent to about 18 billion dollars), and the resultant embargo en sured that the name "Haiti" has been a synonym for debt, poverty, and human misery ever since." - Debt: The First 5000 Years by David Graeber
- haskellandchill 5y ago
  Bitcoin fixes this.
  - underdeserver 5y ago
    No, it doesn't.
    - haskellandchill 5y ago
      Tongue meet cheek.
    - thrthrthrow 5y ago
      Could you please explain why you think it doesn't?
      - jethro_tell 5y ago
        How does it fix it?
walrus01 5y ago
The roots of the presently dire economic situation go back much further, but for persons interested in learning more about the current instability in Haiti, I would suggest researching/reading more about the 2010 earthquake and its aftermath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Haiti_earthquake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Haiti_earthquake
- wyager 5y ago
  Haiti has been in dire economic straits since achieving independence in 1804.
  - BoiledCabbage 5y ago
    Many countries are in tough economic situations after a prolonged fight for independence. What stopped Hati from growing was 20 years after independence, the arrival of France with warships demanding 150 million gold francs as "reparations" for the slave-holders losing their "property". An absurd demand which was still being repaid until almost the 1950s. That's what screwed the country over.
    - pepperonipizza 5y ago
      Still does not explain why since the 50's it never developed, lot of examples of quick development like South Korea, Israel, baltic countries ... I guess it's a combination of a lot of factors, with Papa Doc not helping either. Just next to the border, the Dominican Republic, a former colony is doing way better.
      - azinman2 5y ago
        Don’t forget Germany and America occupied Haiti for decades each.
      - BoiledCabbage 5y ago
        Different circumstances. Israel received large amounts of foreign aid particularly from the US. South Korea's growth coincided with the Vietnam war and was a combination of domestic changes, and economic growth indirectly supported a lot by the US via aid and purchasing its exports (ex. textiles) - also part of Cold War geo-politics. (both of these are very handwavy summaries). Similarly for Haiti the summary is: post independence country was in debt as most are. 20 years later France demands payment. By late 1800s 80% of GDP is going to paying back that debt and loans taken out to cover the debt. Top holders of the debt are France, Germany, USA. Early 1900s US businesses (mainly banks) want to ensure they'll be repaid, so convince govt to invade Haiti. US occupies Haiti for 20 years. Takes over the national bank, takes the national gold reserves moves it to Wall St for "safe keeping". US puts in place propped up presidents from the mulatto elite vs the black majority population. Causes more economic issues, introduces things like Jim Crow - all of this leads to more racial and class strife. Great depression hits. US and and mulatto elites still controlling the country in the 1940s. This eventually causes the backlash and revolution of 1946 of which Estime then is the first elected on a platform of helping the working class and supporting the poor. Papa Doc rides this same platform of resentment of external intervention particularly in finances, and the poor and black working class being ignored and takes over. He's incredibly corrupt and horrible, but raises to power given the circumstances. Their family rules until the mid 1980s. The country shows some growth, then a massive earthquake hits and it hasn't fully recovered economically. Summary, US banks wanted to be ensured they'd get paid back so convinced US govt to take over the country. The violence and racism of the US occupation along with poor economics lead to a growth of populism in the country, which set the stage for Papa Doc whose family was a disaster. And there hasn't been much time since then to get back on track. So while not the same, a story that rhymes with the US propping up the Shah of Iran and setting the stage for a worse govt, and Batista in Cuba and then getting a worse govt. Here post the US occupation it took longer to develop, but the movement that Papa Doc rode was born out of the US occupation of Haiti.
gadders 5y ago
One thing that's always puzzled me - why are Haiti and Dominican Republic so different politically and economically? They both share the same island. Curious as to why their fortunes seem to have diverged so dramatically.
- mjw1007 5y ago
  The history summarised here is the main reason. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 (You might hope that that quote exaggerates what was done to Haiti, but if anything it underplays it.)
- objectivetruth 5y ago
  This poster explains exactly why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  The western part of the island was a French colony and gained independence early by force. The population was made of black former slaves so they might not have had a lot going for them in the beginning, even just in terms of organizational capacity, and none of the neighbouring countries particularly wanted them to do well (slavery was a thing in all of them). Spain colonized the East of the island and government and power remained in the hands of European settlers. Haiti was also occupied by the US in the early 20th century, which was not exactly a glorious episode, either, and certainly did not help.
- Simplicitas 5y ago
  crytohacks comments above are a good place to start to understand Haiti's troubled history. Neither have faired so well as American neocolonies, not that foreign influence is the only factor. In "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed", Jared Diamond contrasts the two countries ecological policies in recent decades, and that may have something to do with DR slight edge.
- sorokod 5y ago
  Dominican republic is rooted in Spanish colonialism, Haiti in French.
spinny 5y ago
did he hang himself?
- logicchains 5y ago
  Needs to be something more believable, like multiple self-inflicted shotgun blasts to the chest.
3maj 5y ago
+1 for Killary
15charlimitdumb 5y ago
Clinton foundation is a key player in Haiti's debt prison. https://www.coreysdigs.com/clinton-foundation/5-shocking-facts-about-the-clintons-and-haiti-you-likely-dont-know/ https://www.coreysdigs.com/clinton-foundation/5-shocking-fac...
- YinglingLight 5y ago
  ctrl+F "clinton", very bottom comment. Stay blissfully ignorant, HN.
- ManuelKiessling 5y ago
  More on the Clintons and Haiti at BBC.com: https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37826098 https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37826098
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Specifically, it largely debunks the claim: > While the Clintons in their respective roles clearly had a say over where some of the quake relief cash flowed, their political enemies have wrongly claimed the family foundation directly controlled all the billions in funds. > The foundation itself raised a relatively modest $30m for aid projects in Haiti.
Leader2light 5y ago
Yep, sounds like this guy had it coming. Good work to the men willing to put their lives on the line!
neom 5y ago
Apparently this has also created somewhat of a constitutional crisis for them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rN76uqM_6U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rN76uqM_6U
- Clewza313 5y ago
  Haiti was already in a constitutional crisis, because Moise's election in 2016 was a complete mess.
jurassic 5y ago
I don’t have a horse in this race, but from the WSJ article I read it sounds like the dead president was a Trump-style wannabe dictator who was narrowly elected in 2016 and then refused to leave office when his term was up. When people don’t respect the law and democratic process it shouldn’t be a surprise when others also choose to disregard the law and take matters into their own hands.
baybal2 5y ago
Why they killed him?
londons_explore 5y ago
An announcement over a megaphone in a language not spoken by the locals seems... like it must be Americans... Nobody else would be so culturally blind.
- loceng 5y ago
  I mean it's not like it'd be hard to try to frame a specific nation or use it as propaganda.
- samatman 5y ago
  Nah. Anyone would use English if the announcement was for worldwide consumption. Which, when assassinating a head of state, it obviously is. There are other reasons to expect the involvement of Americans, if not a TLA of USG itself. This one clue is not dispositive.
- paperwasp42 5y ago
  Having worked with former US military and three-letter-agency translators, I have to disagree. They undergo large amounts of cultural competence training, and when working, they are expected to translate not just the language, but also the cultural expectations. Even low-level grunts are given basic cultural competence training. "Cultural blindness" is considered a threat to safety, and especially in recent years, there's a lot of effort to reduce it as much as possible. I cannot imagine this sort of flagrant "cultural blindness" coming from the US military. I also cannot imagine what sort of benefit this sort of operation would gain the US, or why a country with the most highly-trained stealth operatives in the world would pick such a loud, public way of assassinating an enemy. This reeks of a false flag to me. Are there particular reasons you think differently?
- dang 5y ago
  Please don't post cheap flamebait to HN and certainly please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. Last thing we need here. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761583.
  - 5y ago
darepublic 5y ago
Is it just me or is this article badly written ? There are mentions of tryannical leaders of the past such as Papa and baby doc but no mention of where Mr moise comes from, how many years he has ruled, how he came to power, etc
- yardie 5y ago
  Rule? The guy wasn't a despot he was the elected president in 2 largely uncontroversial elections. He comes from the political elite as a member of the popular Tet Kale party where he eventually won 55% of the vote to become president. He wasn't a dictator, he didn't emerge from a military junta, or as a foreign backed darkhorse candidate. He was just your typical, center-right, Caribbean politician who had to make unpopular choices after taking office. Until something emerges there is nothing that says this guy deserved assassination. And that is the worrying bit, by all accounts he was popular which means his replacement will be under a great deal of scrutiny.
  - permo-w 5y ago
    >Rule? The guy wasn't a despot he was the elected president in 2 largely uncontroversial elections The word “rule” is not the same as “dictate”. Have you ever heard the phrase “ruling party”?
    - yardie 5y ago
      Then maybe it's a quirk in the American English vernacular. A president presides but never rules. A dictator (or absolute king) rules not dictates. A public speaker dictates but only occasionally speaks. Ruling party is an English term, Americans using majority/minority parties to describe in power and out of power.
      - permo-w 5y ago
        I’m not sure those rules are as hard and fast as you think they are
eynsham 5y ago
As US forces withdraw from Afghanistan and the West’s loss of confidence finally results in actual withdrawals (though see the reversal by the French in Mali), it’s worth noting that old-style selfish neocolonialism is still alive and kicking e.g. in Haiti. Whether or not it is wise to withdraw Afghanistan-style, it seems sad that this blatant selfishness and incompetence—which does not benefit Western peoples terribly much these days anyway—continues despite a change in the thinking of Western foreign policy élites. > Moïse says he is entitled to another year in office. Legal experts agree that his interpretation of the law requires twisting it beyond recognition, but there’s an old Haitian saying that the constitution is paper and guns are steel, and Moïse has the backing he needs from the OAS and the USA. At a press conference on 5 February, the State Department took Moïse’s side in the end-of-term argument. Perhaps this was mere expediency from the White House – Haiti is a small country and the Biden administration has inherited a myriad messes – but Moïse saw a green light. > American ignorance and blitheness was on full display this month during a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. When one of the Haitian witnesses, Guerline Jozef, urged legislators to examine the root causes of Haiti’s predicament, going back to the indemnity Haiti was forced to pay in 1825 to compensate France for its slaves,Congressman Brian Mast (R-FL) cut her off. He mansplained: > > Haitians individually within Haiti [need to] look in the mirror and say: ‘We can’t rely on America, we can’t rely on France, we can’t rely on others. We’re hopeful for their assistance. But we have to look in the mirror and say, how do we do this?’ And that’s what I hope we can really really get to the root of, is ... what is it that they can look in the mirror and do to correct what is missing there? > A few minutes later, the Haitian activist Emmanuela Douyon tried to set Mast straight. ‘Haiti is not waiting for the US, France or any other country in the international community,’ she said: > > We’ve already decided what we want to do. What we’re asking is for the international community to listen and respect our choice. We have a president whose term ended last February. He has benefited from the support of the OAS [and] the US State Department, despite the fact that most of Haitian civil society acknowledges that his term has ended, according to the constitution ... This is what we’re facing now. And this is a perfect example of how when we don’t listen to Haitians, we can’t blame them later for the outcome. We want to end with all this corruption and impunity, we want to end with the old practices. [But] so many people do not want to give us a chance to decide for ourselves. https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/march/haitian-democracy https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/march/haitian-democracy
londons_explore 5y ago
A group who spoke English and Spanish, claimed to be the US Drug Enforcement Agency, had a US registered helicopter, killed the Haiti president... The same guy pushing a change to the Haiti constitution that the US strongly opposed... And the US has a history of getting rid of leaders it doesn't like... Although US clandestine operations at least usually have some level of plausible deniability... Which this does not.
- booi 5y ago
  could be a false flag operation
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    Nobody false-flags the US... Do that, and you'll probably have a drone fall on you overnight...
- Fauntleroy 5y ago
  But why would the DEA outwardly announce itself while assassinating someone?
  - londons_explore 5y ago
    Perhaps because they believe they are killing a drug lord, and didn't do their research to find out this was the address of the president (who also may be the drug lord)?
    - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
      You are starting to sound like those YouTube videos that pick out a bunch of numbers at random and then end with "And see!! ILLUMINATI!!"
      - airhead969 5y ago
        I prefer tea leaves and coffee grounds. :) HN has been gradually colonized by Trump truthers, anti-science, antivaxx, conspiracy theorist, uneducated individuals, trolls, and people outside startups who can't out down irrationality or their egos.
grouphugs 5y ago
nice
wonderwonder 5y ago
Surprised China has not stepped in here and offered to provide the Haitian government with funding and security. Seems the perfect situation for them to establish a foothold similar to how they have done in Africa.
- rossdavidh 5y ago
  Wayyyyy too close to the U.S.A. to do that. I am virtually certain it would result in a military response from the US.
  - wonderwonder 5y ago
    I agree with you in general theory but not sure how it would play out in real life. China would claim they are stepping in to help a country that clearly needs it. Would the US be willing to go to war over that? Taiwan would be a Chinese colony the next day. Lots of complicating factors.
    - rossdavidh 5y ago
      Given that the U.S. has already been involved in Haiti, and that the President was arguably not legal (i.e. there is no current valid President), I have little doubt. The Taiwan precedent makes sense in the abstract, but militarily the prospect of potentially being in conflict over Taiwan makes it all the less likely the U.S. would let China get a foothold that close to it.
wonderwonder 5y ago
Entire GDP of Haiti was ~14 billion last year. Seems like the entire nation could be stood on its feet if world nations provided a grant of ~100 billion. Very important it be a grant and not a loan. A lot of money for sure but not that much in the grand scheme of things. If that money is administered by non corrupt foreign entities and spent on infrastructure you could have a brand new country in a decade.
- naveen99 5y ago
  what if it was just a single trillionaire ? What would you think of them becoming a benevolent dictator ? If the people could agree to an election where buying votes was allowed, how much would it cost to win the election if the people believed in such a dictator's benevolence ? There are 11 million people living there. It would cost 3 trillion dollars to give each about $300,000 or about the mean wealth of an american. It would probably cost less than 3 trillion to win such an election.
  - wonderwonder 5y ago
    There are no trillionaires. I mean in reality I am pretty sure you could get every vote you wanted for $5,000 each. Average annual income in Haiti is $500. So 10 years of salary. Also only about 6 million voters in Haiti and you only need half of them so you could be president for $15 billion. Likely most people would sell their vote for their annual income, that means a total of $1.5 billion. I would not blame them either, extreme poverty is a terrible thing and for many the adage 'any port in a a storm' is likely true. This assumes that people would agree to sell their votes. With that said, I am very much against dictators, benevolent or otherwise. But I would understand.
    - cdolan 5y ago
      I would argue none of us have any idea if there is a "trillionaire" in the world because we are notoriously bad at guessing someone's total net worth. As support, I would point you to this 10 year old article on Moammar Gadhafi, where he was estimated to actually be worth roughly $200b USD - an unheard of number in 2011. https://www.forbes.com/sites/edwindurgy/2011/10/25/did-moammar-gadhafi-die-the-richest-man-in-the-world/?sh=baccb5876cf2 https://www.forbes.com/sites/edwindurgy/2011/10/25/did-moamm... This week, if Bezos were not divorced, he would be worth $300b USD: https://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/billionaire-news/had-jeff-bezos-never-gotten-divorced-today-his-net-worth-would-have-topped-300-billion-for-the-first-time/ https://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/billionaire-news/... And finally, the ProPublica Peter Thiel $5b USD ROTH IRA is worth *double what Forbes thought Thiels entire net worth is per the 2020 Forbes Billionaire List* (he is on page 3... look at the massive jump in the animated graph!): https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/ https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/ That said, the IRS had 20 years of tax returns stolen from it which would detail the richest Americans, and so it is unlikely anyone in the USA is a trillionaire.
airhead969 5y ago
I don't see how this article is noteworthy or relevant for HN. We don't need mainstream news, politics, geopolitics, or conspiracy theories here.
bladefire 5y ago
He kinda got what he deserved.... People don't like dictators.
- dang 5y ago
  Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to Hacker News.
eutropia 5y ago
I don't know much about Haiti's international affairs, but I'm curious if other countries will be involved at all in the investigation of this murder (because the victim was a head of state). Complicating the situation of course, is the english and spanish speaking assailants, indicating that they might be foreigners. Will the D.E.A. (audio of the event being shared has a clip of someone yelling "this is a DEA operation, stand down" in a southern american accent) be expected to make some sort of statement regarding this? Should we believe them without a formal investigation and evidence?
idoubtit 5y ago
So, an American newspaper writes about Haiti, including a few paragraphs about the historical context: the independence from France in 1803, the thirty years of the Duvalier dictatorship, etc. And they forgot to mention the 20 years of American occupation ! Would they write that Vietnam fought against the French occupation, then suffered under communist rule? I don't expect a random American to know any of the various countries that the USA invaded and occupied, apart from Vietnam, but I sure expect a big newspaper to give this basic context.
wayneftw 5y ago
Where are the global surveillance satellites when you need them?
flarco 5y ago
My parents live in Haiti. This looks like it was an inside job/collaboration. He was assassinated inside his home, in the middle of the night. His home has multiple gates/barriers to get inside, very secured by guards, yet only him died. No guards or 3rd parties were injured. No resistance or loud gun exchanges to prevent them from getting in. His wife was shot and injured, but is currently stable in a US hospital. From what I heard, the gunmen were all Spanish speaking. 5-7 of them arrived in multiple cars, killed him and left without issues. Very disturbing, but that's the world we live in.
- iamwatson 5y ago
  Sherlock, is that you?
beaugunderson 5y ago
For anyone who wants a thorough history of intervention (US and otherwise) in Haiti check out Paul Farmer's "The Uses of Haiti". Gripping read.

471 points by jbegley 5y ago

I was curious if Haiti's political system was like India's - where the President is a figurehead position and the Prime minister has the practical authority, or if it was like the US - with President at the helm. It seems like it's a bit of both, a "semi-presidential" system like France. Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government"... but that doesn't really help me understand the role and powers of each in practice.

dahfizz 5y ago
> Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government" I grew up in the USA and this is exactly how those terms were defined for us in school. The head of state is the leader of the country. They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military. The head of government is the top bureaucrat. They do governmenty bureaucratty stuff like meet with their cabinet and manage the executive branch.
- boxed 5y ago
  That's not universally true though. Swedens head of state is the King. He has no power.
  - squiggleblaz 5y ago
    According to Wikipedia: * The speaker of parliament is responsible for nominating and dismissing the prime minister (who appoints the prime minister? the parliament as a whole appoint the prime minister? does the king get to, but is compelled to appoint whoever the speaker nominates? does wikipedia mean "appoint" when it says "nominate"?) * The king is not part of parliament, and bills do not need royal assent to become law. * The king is not part of an executive council like the UK privy council. Formerly there was a Council of State. However the king does have royal immunity from criminal prosecution. If the Swedish King killed you, they would probably have a crisis over whether the absolute immunity the king possesses is in fact not absolute. So the king is clearly a special person in Sweden, but it does seem they are almost powerless according to the constitution, unlike say the British queen.
    - OlleTO 5y ago
      >who appoints the prime minister? Parliament votes on whoever the speaker nominates. If that person is tolerated (<50% of parliament votes against the nominee) they become prime minister. If the vote fails the speaker gets to nominate someone else. After 4 failed such votes, an extra election is called.
      - squiggleblaz 5y ago
        Thanks for the clear answer. I think I like that system. Sometimes minority governments make more sense that slightly larger but more fractious coalitions. If I was trying to design a republican constitution for my own country I think I would include a similar provision.
    - doikor 5y ago
      > who appoints the prime minister? the parliament as a whole appoint the prime minister? does the king get to, but is compelled to appoint whoever the speaker nominates? does wikipedia mean "appoint" when it says "nominate"? Prime minister is whoever gets the majority of the parliament behind them in a vote. In practice in Sweden’s case the leader of the biggest party in the coalition that makes the majority. (Due to how the voting system works in Sweden more than 2 parties exist in the parliament and thus coalitions of parties make up the government as no party manages to get 50% if the seats)
- Denvercoder9 5y ago
  > The head of state is the leader of the country. They [..] typically are in control of the military. This isn't true, at least in Western states. E.g in the Netherlands and Germany the king and the President respectively are head of state, but neither of them controls the military, which is done by respectively the Prime Minister and the Chancellor. It's really hard to make a universal definition for heads of state and government, since they fulfill different roles in forms of government. However, generally, the head of state is a more ceremonial role while the head of government actually governs. But there are exceptions.
  - namdnay 5y ago
    In a parliamentary system, the head of state is more ceremonial. In a presidential system, the head of state has the power (e.g. France, USA)
    - Denvercoder9 5y ago
      The US has combined the head of state and head of government in a single position (President), so it doesn't make sense to say either has more power. France is indeed one of the (many) exceptions with a semi-presidential system where the head of state has more power.
  - pintxo 5y ago
    Actually, for Germany, the head of the military is the Minister of Defence. Only if the parliament declares Germany to be in a situation of defence (Verteidigungsfall), will the command of the military be given to the Chancellor.
  - brummm 5y ago
    The head of the military in Germany actually is the parliament.
- chadash 5y ago
  In general, head of state is more ceremonial and has less power, but there are so many exceptions that making a rule of thumb is tough because it varies so much state-by-state. In the US, head of state and head of gov are the same (the President). In Russia, the head of state is Putin. He's not officially head of gov, but c'mon, we all know who controls the show there. In Canada, the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II. But for all practical purposes, Justin Trudeau holds both rows. It's not like the Queen is handling Canada's foreign policy. She technically has the power to dissolve Canada's parliament, but it would be hard to imagine her exercising this power. When foreign leaders visit Canada, they aren't going to see the Queen, whereas they might if they visit the UK.
  - peeters 5y ago
    > When foreign leaders visit Canada, they aren't going to see the Queen, whereas they might if they visit the UK. Though they would typically be hosted by the Queen's representative in Canada, the Governor General (as of yesterday, R.H. Mary Simon). The Queen would never directly exercise her head-of-state powers in Canada. However, the GG does have to make some controversial decisions about choosing governments from time to time.
  - rgblambda 5y ago
    >In Canada, the Head of State is Queen Elizabeth II. But for all practical purposes, Justin Trudeau holds both rows. Does Canada not have a Governor General, like other countries where Elizabeth II is the absentee monarch? The Governor General performs most of the functions of the head of state and technically has the power to appoint or dismiss the Prime Minister, but much like the Queen the role is mostly ceremonial.
    - zinekeller 5y ago
      There is, but in all seriousness outside of events that will probably also happen in a republican state (like tension between the prime minister and the leader of the opposition) the Government-General takes a hands-off approach, so effectively (de facto, in practice) the prime minister is the head of state.
- throwaway894345 5y ago
  In Great Britain at least the Prime Minister frequently meets with other heads of state, e.g., Churchill meeting with Roosevelt. Of course the monarch is the head of the state in Great Britain and she does meet with other heads of state as well, but it seems less clear-cut than you describe? Is this a peculiarity of Britain? Or does “head of state” imply a sort of figurehead position?
  - Denvercoder9 5y ago
    > In Great Britain at least the Prime Minister frequently meets with other heads of state, e.g., Churchill meeting with Roosevelt. The exception here is that the US President is both head of state and head of government, so Churchill meeting Roosevelt is actually a meeting between two heads of government.
    - throwaway894345 5y ago
      But they were meeting about military matters which is a responsibility attributed to head of state according to OP.
- fullahbandit 5y ago
  One thing to add is that the prime minister is often appointed by the president so he does not really hold any real power. I think the closest equivalent in the US system would be the Vice President, except that the prime minister can often be replaced at the president's discretion before the end of the term.
  - liversage 5y ago
    Or the opposite. The German prime minister is Angela Merkel while the president is Frank-Walter Steinmeister. I had to look the second up because I didn't know who it was but I know that he doesn't have political power like Merkel.
- PeterWhittaker 5y ago
  > The head of state is the leader of the country. They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military. Not quite true, at least not in limited constitutional monarchies, like the UK and Canada (I'm Canadian): The Queen is the Head of State for both the UK and Canada (and for many other countries) and her role is almost exclusively ceremonial (without getting into the role of the Governor General, who represents Her Majesty when she is out of the country). In both the UK and Canada, the head of government is the Prime Minister, that is, the leader of the party that controls the House of Parliament. In both countries, they do far more than "bureaucratty stuff" since, among other things, they choose and chair the cabinet, set the overall government agenda, etc. The military reports to cabinet through the appropriate minister(s). (Mitchell Sharp once wrote a book on Canadian government in which he rightly asserted that ours is government-by-cabinet, more than government by parliament....) In both countries, the PM is effectively head of the executive branch, but definitely not head of state, as well as sitting atop the legislative branch.
- Macha 5y ago
  Yeah, the obvious example is the UK, where the Queen is head of state and the PM is the head of government. Other westminster inspired systems sometimes keep around the monarchy (represented by the governor general) or replace the role with an elected president. Usually such a role is a literal figurehead, or a de facto figurehead who de jure has power but culturally is not supposed to exercise them, (such as the aforementioned Queen, or the Irish President). Attempts by such a de facto figurehead to use powers they officially have have led to controversy, such as the 1975 incident with the Australian Governor General (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional...)
  - deregulateMed 5y ago
    Yikes I can't believe that 1975 event happened and the royal family still remains in their seats. All of these former British territories are 1 terrorist attack and 1 ambitious politician away from a political crisis. Roll the dice 10 times, each time one of these monarchs could make a play for power. Although I'm not even sure how to handle the dissolution of the monarchy without executing everyone. Taking their property only means a foreign state would prop them up.
    - ylyn 5y ago
      The British royal family had very little to do with that incident. Yes, the monarch is the de jure head of state, but again in practice she delegates all decisions to the GG.
  - fionnoh 5y ago
    There is precedent to the Irish president exercising their power. In 1994 Mary Robinson refused Albert Reynold's request to have the Dáil dissolved (well, let it be known that such a request would be refused), leading to a new government being formed without a general election. If the Queen refused a similar request from a Prime Minister that would be a shock though.
    - Macha 5y ago
- simonh 5y ago
  In the US system the President basically assumes the constitutional position of George III circa 1770. Executive orders are Royal decrees. The president signing laws is Royal Assent. Presidential pardons are Royal pardons. The power to adjourn Congress is proroguation. The oddity to me is the position of the Speaker of the House, which is a weird amalgam of the role of the Speaker of Parliament and also acting as a de facto Prime Minister although there really isn't an explicit equivalent role in the US.
- rsj_hn 5y ago
  > They deal with other heads of states, and typically are in control of the military No head of state is in control of the military. Head of state is a ceremonial role. They may be the ceremonial "head" of the military, as in "her majesty's ship".
  - nybble41 5y ago
    > No head of state is in control of the military. In the U.S. the office of the President unifies the roles of head of state, head of government, and Commander in Chief of the military. This is not merely a ceremonial role. As the saying goes, the exception proves the rule false.
  - Denvercoder9 5y ago
    > No head of state is in control of the military. In France the President, the head of state, commands the military, and not the Prime Minister, the head of government.
mannykannot 5y ago
Following the assassination, the prime minister (Claude Joseph) has said he is now running the country, which suggests that the president has real power.
squiggleblaz 5y ago
In several states with such a semi-presidential system, if the prime minister and the president are oppositional, the prime minister will take primary responsibility for more domestic matters like education and health, whereas the president will take primary responsibility for most national/international matters like trade, the economy and foreign affairs. When the president and the prime minister are allied, the president often takes the lead on most matters. I have never seen a semi-presidential federation, and my intuition has become that in a semi-presidential system, the president is holds the responsibilities of a prime minister/president of a federal government, whereas the prime minister is holds the responsibilities normally given to the premier/governor of state - as if there's only a single state and a single legislature for the state and the federation. Of course, as with federations, the exact boundaries will depend on the country concerned. Whether Haiti works that way, I cannot say.
fx18011 5y ago
It is more like France of Russia.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 5y ago
  François Fillon does work for Russia but the country remains sovereign.
pyduan 5y ago
There are multiple types of semi-presidential systems in practice. Those where the Prime Minister is appointed by and accountable to the President (and not just by Parliament) are typically much closer to a pure presidential system in practice. In France (source: I'm French) the President is typically extremely strong despite it being nominally a semi-presidential system, in some respects even stronger than his US counterpart. Also note that this depends a lot on practical details, like political customs — former President Nicolas Sarkozy famously publicly called his Prime Minister his "collaborator", for instance — and electoral timings. There was a reform in the early 00s to sync Presidential elections and Parliamentary elections, meaning that even though the Prime Minister is accountable to the Parliament, in practice the latter tends to be of the same majority as the President (whereas before, we had cases of Presidents and Primes being of opposing parties, which is known as 'cohabitation'), which gives him enormous power.
s_dev 5y ago
> Wikipedia says the President is the "head of state" and the Prime minister is the "head of government"... but that doesn't really help me understand the role and powers of each in practice. This is like Ireland. The head of government is responsible for running the country day to day. While the president is responsible for representing the country in a ceremonial way (far less powerful but often more popular). Often they rubber stamp some legislation but often have little power. In the US the roles are combined in to the Presidency. In the UK the Queen is the head of state and Boris Johnson is head of government.

brettermeier 5y ago

https://archive.is/O2KbS https://archive.is/O2KbS

caseyross 5y ago

For those interested, VICE recently did a fantastic report about the street violence that's consuming parts of Port-au-Prince, and how it's connected to Haiti's current political climate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp1WVl6nrY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qvp1WVl6nrY

dmos62 5y ago
Unavailable in Europe. What kind of news outlet censors reports based on reader's location?
- bargle0 5y ago
  The kind that doesn’t want to deal with Europe’s laws, for better or worse.
  - dmos62 5y ago
    What laws are those? This is surely not GDPR, if that's what you mean.
    - xeromal 5y ago
      I'm not seeing a problem?
      - dmos62 5y ago
        Because Youtube doesn't have problems complying with GDPR, as far as I know. Also, other videos would be unavailable as well. Edit: you've completely changed your comment.
        bombcar 5y ago
        Just because the largest video sharing platform ever know is willing to comply with GDPR doesn't mean there isn't a cost associated, or that everyone is willing to pay that cost. Regulatory moats are a thing.

marsven_422 5y ago

Probably threatened to expose the Clinton's Haiti shenanigans.

KoftaBob 5y ago

Earlier post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652

black_puppydog 5y ago

> “A group of unidentified individuals, some of them speaking Spanish, attacked [...]” This is peculiar. Might just be too early for the dust to have settled, but both tagesschau.de [1] and Le Monde [2] report both Spanish and English for to be spoken by the attackers. Edit: The Guardian [3] also quotes only Spanish, but later speaks of an English-language announcement on a megaphone. Guess we'll have to wait for a bit until things converge to The Truth™ here. [1]: https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/haiti-praesident-moise-mord-101.html https://www.tagesschau.de/ausland/amerika/haiti-praesident-m... [2]: https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/07/07/haiti-le-premier-ministre-annonce-l-assassinat-du-president-jovenel-moise_6087360_3210.html https://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2021/07/07/hait... [3]: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/07/haiti-president-jovenel-moise-reportedly-assassinated https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/jul/07/haiti-presiden...

ecedeno 5y ago
Here they have the video where you can hear that announcement: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas/haiti/article252616688.html https://www.miamiherald.com/news/nation-world/world/americas...
- black_puppydog 5y ago
  You mean the megaphone part, right? Yeah, that seems to be it. I'm just curious because all four outlets I checked marked the "Spanish" or "English and Spanish" as direct quotes so I'm not sure if they got different sources or what happened.
  - neom 5y ago
    The New York Post (ugh) has a longer version, and it doesn't include the American voice at the start shouting about DEA operations. https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/haitian-president-jovenel-moise-assassinated-in-his-home/ https://nypost.com/2021/07/07/haitian-president-jovenel-mois...
  - RobertoG 5y ago

seibelj 5y ago

Anyone who honestly thinks the USA is a "failed state" needs to contextualize what an actual failed state looks like. Murdering the president in his sleep is not a good look!

moksly 5y ago
Didn’t right wing extremists seize the legitimate American government while it was in session a few months back?
- variant 5y ago
  No.
- squiggleblaz 5y ago
  They didn't. They occupied the legislative building, but they didn't seize the government because they made no attempt to exercise power, and if they had it wouldn't have been taken seriously.
- viro 5y ago
  no?
- gifwithaj 5y ago
  No, a handful of Trump supporters walked around taking selfies for a few minutes inside a building because they mistakenly believed the election was fraudulent. They did not hold any power at any point and were not right wing nor driven by a left/right idealogical divide, they were fools mislead about vote integrity. That said, left wing extremists did actually seize and hold a section of Seattle for an extended period of time, which would be a more genuine example of a failed state- violent rebels holding territory inside a major city.
  - da39a3ee 5y ago
    Reasonable comment except > and were not right wing nor driven by a left/right idealogical divide, What were you thinking when you wrote that?

_Microft 5y ago

There was an earlier submission from another site that got eventually flagged. It had not attracted that many on-topic comments but here is the link anyways: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27759652

techbrobane 5y ago

Colonizers still gonna get paid. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_debt_of_Haiti https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_debt_of_Haiti

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

dweekly 5y ago

BBC coverage at https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-57750358 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-latin-america-57750358 (no paywall)

cryptohacks 5y ago

"But debt is not just victor's justice; it can also be a way of punishing winners who weren't supposed to win. The most spectacular example of this is the history of the Republic of Haiti - the first poor country to be placed in permanent debt peonage. Haiti was a nation founded by former plantation slaves who had the temerity not only to rise up in rebellion, amidst grand declarations of universal rights and freedoms, but to defeat Napoleon's armies sent to return them to bondage. France immediately insisted that the new republic owed it 150 million francs in damages for the expropriated plantations, as well as the expenses of outfitting the failed military expeditions, and all other nations, including the United States, agreed to impose an embargo on the country until it was paid. The sum was intentionally impossible (equivalent to about 18 billion dollars), and the resultant embargo en sured that the name "Haiti" has been a synonym for debt, poverty, and human misery ever since." - Debt: The First 5000 Years by David Graeber

haskellandchill 5y ago
Bitcoin fixes this.
- underdeserver 5y ago
  No, it doesn't.
  - haskellandchill 5y ago
    Tongue meet cheek.
  - thrthrthrow 5y ago
    Could you please explain why you think it doesn't?
    - jethro_tell 5y ago
      How does it fix it?

walrus01 5y ago

The roots of the presently dire economic situation go back much further, but for persons interested in learning more about the current instability in Haiti, I would suggest researching/reading more about the 2010 earthquake and its aftermath. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Haiti_earthquake https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Haiti_earthquake

wyager 5y ago
Haiti has been in dire economic straits since achieving independence in 1804.
- BoiledCabbage 5y ago
  Many countries are in tough economic situations after a prolonged fight for independence. What stopped Hati from growing was 20 years after independence, the arrival of France with warships demanding 150 million gold francs as "reparations" for the slave-holders losing their "property". An absurd demand which was still being repaid until almost the 1950s. That's what screwed the country over.
  - pepperonipizza 5y ago
    Still does not explain why since the 50's it never developed, lot of examples of quick development like South Korea, Israel, baltic countries ... I guess it's a combination of a lot of factors, with Papa Doc not helping either. Just next to the border, the Dominican Republic, a former colony is doing way better.
    - azinman2 5y ago
      Don’t forget Germany and America occupied Haiti for decades each.
    - BoiledCabbage 5y ago
      Different circumstances. Israel received large amounts of foreign aid particularly from the US. South Korea's growth coincided with the Vietnam war and was a combination of domestic changes, and economic growth indirectly supported a lot by the US via aid and purchasing its exports (ex. textiles) - also part of Cold War geo-politics. (both of these are very handwavy summaries). Similarly for Haiti the summary is: post independence country was in debt as most are. 20 years later France demands payment. By late 1800s 80% of GDP is going to paying back that debt and loans taken out to cover the debt. Top holders of the debt are France, Germany, USA. Early 1900s US businesses (mainly banks) want to ensure they'll be repaid, so convince govt to invade Haiti. US occupies Haiti for 20 years. Takes over the national bank, takes the national gold reserves moves it to Wall St for "safe keeping". US puts in place propped up presidents from the mulatto elite vs the black majority population. Causes more economic issues, introduces things like Jim Crow - all of this leads to more racial and class strife. Great depression hits. US and and mulatto elites still controlling the country in the 1940s. This eventually causes the backlash and revolution of 1946 of which Estime then is the first elected on a platform of helping the working class and supporting the poor. Papa Doc rides this same platform of resentment of external intervention particularly in finances, and the poor and black working class being ignored and takes over. He's incredibly corrupt and horrible, but raises to power given the circumstances. Their family rules until the mid 1980s. The country shows some growth, then a massive earthquake hits and it hasn't fully recovered economically. Summary, US banks wanted to be ensured they'd get paid back so convinced US govt to take over the country. The violence and racism of the US occupation along with poor economics lead to a growth of populism in the country, which set the stage for Papa Doc whose family was a disaster. And there hasn't been much time since then to get back on track. So while not the same, a story that rhymes with the US propping up the Shah of Iran and setting the stage for a worse govt, and Batista in Cuba and then getting a worse govt. Here post the US occupation it took longer to develop, but the movement that Papa Doc rode was born out of the US occupation of Haiti.

gadders 5y ago

One thing that's always puzzled me - why are Haiti and Dominican Republic so different politically and economically? They both share the same island. Curious as to why their fortunes seem to have diverged so dramatically.

mjw1007 5y ago
The history summarised here is the main reason. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 (You might hope that that quote exaggerates what was done to Haiti, but if anything it underplays it.)
objectivetruth 5y ago
This poster explains exactly why: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761407
mytailorisrich 5y ago
The western part of the island was a French colony and gained independence early by force. The population was made of black former slaves so they might not have had a lot going for them in the beginning, even just in terms of organizational capacity, and none of the neighbouring countries particularly wanted them to do well (slavery was a thing in all of them). Spain colonized the East of the island and government and power remained in the hands of European settlers. Haiti was also occupied by the US in the early 20th century, which was not exactly a glorious episode, either, and certainly did not help.
Simplicitas 5y ago
crytohacks comments above are a good place to start to understand Haiti's troubled history. Neither have faired so well as American neocolonies, not that foreign influence is the only factor. In "Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed", Jared Diamond contrasts the two countries ecological policies in recent decades, and that may have something to do with DR slight edge.
sorokod 5y ago
Dominican republic is rooted in Spanish colonialism, Haiti in French.

spinny 5y ago

did he hang himself?

logicchains 5y ago
Needs to be something more believable, like multiple self-inflicted shotgun blasts to the chest.

3maj 5y ago

+1 for Killary

15charlimitdumb 5y ago

Clinton foundation is a key player in Haiti's debt prison. https://www.coreysdigs.com/clinton-foundation/5-shocking-facts-about-the-clintons-and-haiti-you-likely-dont-know/ https://www.coreysdigs.com/clinton-foundation/5-shocking-fac...

YinglingLight 5y ago
ctrl+F "clinton", very bottom comment. Stay blissfully ignorant, HN.
ManuelKiessling 5y ago
More on the Clintons and Haiti at BBC.com: https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37826098 https://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37826098
- ceejayoz 5y ago
  Specifically, it largely debunks the claim: > While the Clintons in their respective roles clearly had a say over where some of the quake relief cash flowed, their political enemies have wrongly claimed the family foundation directly controlled all the billions in funds. > The foundation itself raised a relatively modest $30m for aid projects in Haiti.

Leader2light 5y ago

Yep, sounds like this guy had it coming. Good work to the men willing to put their lives on the line!

neom 5y ago

Apparently this has also created somewhat of a constitutional crisis for them: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rN76uqM_6U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6rN76uqM_6U

Clewza313 5y ago
Haiti was already in a constitutional crisis, because Moise's election in 2016 was a complete mess.

jurassic 5y ago

I don’t have a horse in this race, but from the WSJ article I read it sounds like the dead president was a Trump-style wannabe dictator who was narrowly elected in 2016 and then refused to leave office when his term was up. When people don’t respect the law and democratic process it shouldn’t be a surprise when others also choose to disregard the law and take matters into their own hands.

baybal2 5y ago

Why they killed him?

londons_explore 5y ago

An announcement over a megaphone in a language not spoken by the locals seems... like it must be Americans... Nobody else would be so culturally blind.

loceng 5y ago
I mean it's not like it'd be hard to try to frame a specific nation or use it as propaganda.
samatman 5y ago
Nah. Anyone would use English if the announcement was for worldwide consumption. Which, when assassinating a head of state, it obviously is. There are other reasons to expect the involvement of Americans, if not a TLA of USG itself. This one clue is not dispositive.
paperwasp42 5y ago
Having worked with former US military and three-letter-agency translators, I have to disagree. They undergo large amounts of cultural competence training, and when working, they are expected to translate not just the language, but also the cultural expectations. Even low-level grunts are given basic cultural competence training. "Cultural blindness" is considered a threat to safety, and especially in recent years, there's a lot of effort to reduce it as much as possible. I cannot imagine this sort of flagrant "cultural blindness" coming from the US military. I also cannot imagine what sort of benefit this sort of operation would gain the US, or why a country with the most highly-trained stealth operatives in the world would pick such a loud, public way of assassinating an enemy. This reeks of a false flag to me. Are there particular reasons you think differently?
dang 5y ago
Please don't post cheap flamebait to HN and certainly please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. Last thing we need here. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761583 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27761583.
- 5y ago

darepublic 5y ago

Is it just me or is this article badly written ? There are mentions of tryannical leaders of the past such as Papa and baby doc but no mention of where Mr moise comes from, how many years he has ruled, how he came to power, etc

yardie 5y ago
Rule? The guy wasn't a despot he was the elected president in 2 largely uncontroversial elections. He comes from the political elite as a member of the popular Tet Kale party where he eventually won 55% of the vote to become president. He wasn't a dictator, he didn't emerge from a military junta, or as a foreign backed darkhorse candidate. He was just your typical, center-right, Caribbean politician who had to make unpopular choices after taking office. Until something emerges there is nothing that says this guy deserved assassination. And that is the worrying bit, by all accounts he was popular which means his replacement will be under a great deal of scrutiny.
- permo-w 5y ago
  >Rule? The guy wasn't a despot he was the elected president in 2 largely uncontroversial elections The word “rule” is not the same as “dictate”. Have you ever heard the phrase “ruling party”?
  - yardie 5y ago
    Then maybe it's a quirk in the American English vernacular. A president presides but never rules. A dictator (or absolute king) rules not dictates. A public speaker dictates but only occasionally speaks. Ruling party is an English term, Americans using majority/minority parties to describe in power and out of power.
    - permo-w 5y ago
      I’m not sure those rules are as hard and fast as you think they are

eynsham 5y ago

As US forces withdraw from Afghanistan and the West’s loss of confidence finally results in actual withdrawals (though see the reversal by the French in Mali), it’s worth noting that old-style selfish neocolonialism is still alive and kicking e.g. in Haiti. Whether or not it is wise to withdraw Afghanistan-style, it seems sad that this blatant selfishness and incompetence—which does not benefit Western peoples terribly much these days anyway—continues despite a change in the thinking of Western foreign policy élites. > Moïse says he is entitled to another year in office. Legal experts agree that his interpretation of the law requires twisting it beyond recognition, but there’s an old Haitian saying that the constitution is paper and guns are steel, and Moïse has the backing he needs from the OAS and the USA. At a press conference on 5 February, the State Department took Moïse’s side in the end-of-term argument. Perhaps this was mere expediency from the White House – Haiti is a small country and the Biden administration has inherited a myriad messes – but Moïse saw a green light. > American ignorance and blitheness was on full display this month during a hearing of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. When one of the Haitian witnesses, Guerline Jozef, urged legislators to examine the root causes of Haiti’s predicament, going back to the indemnity Haiti was forced to pay in 1825 to compensate France for its slaves,Congressman Brian Mast (R-FL) cut her off. He mansplained: > > Haitians individually within Haiti [need to] look in the mirror and say: ‘We can’t rely on America, we can’t rely on France, we can’t rely on others. We’re hopeful for their assistance. But we have to look in the mirror and say, how do we do this?’ And that’s what I hope we can really really get to the root of, is ... what is it that they can look in the mirror and do to correct what is missing there? > A few minutes later, the Haitian activist Emmanuela Douyon tried to set Mast straight. ‘Haiti is not waiting for the US, France or any other country in the international community,’ she said: > > We’ve already decided what we want to do. What we’re asking is for the international community to listen and respect our choice. We have a president whose term ended last February. He has benefited from the support of the OAS [and] the US State Department, despite the fact that most of Haitian civil society acknowledges that his term has ended, according to the constitution ... This is what we’re facing now. And this is a perfect example of how when we don’t listen to Haitians, we can’t blame them later for the outcome. We want to end with all this corruption and impunity, we want to end with the old practices. [But] so many people do not want to give us a chance to decide for ourselves. https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/march/haitian-democracy https://www.lrb.co.uk/blog/2021/march/haitian-democracy

londons_explore 5y ago

A group who spoke English and Spanish, claimed to be the US Drug Enforcement Agency, had a US registered helicopter, killed the Haiti president... The same guy pushing a change to the Haiti constitution that the US strongly opposed... And the US has a history of getting rid of leaders it doesn't like... Although US clandestine operations at least usually have some level of plausible deniability... Which this does not.

booi 5y ago
could be a false flag operation
- londons_explore 5y ago
  Nobody false-flags the US... Do that, and you'll probably have a drone fall on you overnight...
Fauntleroy 5y ago
But why would the DEA outwardly announce itself while assassinating someone?
- londons_explore 5y ago
  Perhaps because they believe they are killing a drug lord, and didn't do their research to find out this was the address of the president (who also may be the drug lord)?
  - hn_throwaway_99 5y ago
    You are starting to sound like those YouTube videos that pick out a bunch of numbers at random and then end with "And see!! ILLUMINATI!!"
    - airhead969 5y ago
      I prefer tea leaves and coffee grounds. :) HN has been gradually colonized by Trump truthers, anti-science, antivaxx, conspiracy theorist, uneducated individuals, trolls, and people outside startups who can't out down irrationality or their egos.

grouphugs 5y ago

nice

wonderwonder 5y ago

Surprised China has not stepped in here and offered to provide the Haitian government with funding and security. Seems the perfect situation for them to establish a foothold similar to how they have done in Africa.

rossdavidh 5y ago
Wayyyyy too close to the U.S.A. to do that. I am virtually certain it would result in a military response from the US.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  I agree with you in general theory but not sure how it would play out in real life. China would claim they are stepping in to help a country that clearly needs it. Would the US be willing to go to war over that? Taiwan would be a Chinese colony the next day. Lots of complicating factors.
  - rossdavidh 5y ago
    Given that the U.S. has already been involved in Haiti, and that the President was arguably not legal (i.e. there is no current valid President), I have little doubt. The Taiwan precedent makes sense in the abstract, but militarily the prospect of potentially being in conflict over Taiwan makes it all the less likely the U.S. would let China get a foothold that close to it.

wonderwonder 5y ago

Entire GDP of Haiti was ~14 billion last year. Seems like the entire nation could be stood on its feet if world nations provided a grant of ~100 billion. Very important it be a grant and not a loan. A lot of money for sure but not that much in the grand scheme of things. If that money is administered by non corrupt foreign entities and spent on infrastructure you could have a brand new country in a decade.

naveen99 5y ago
what if it was just a single trillionaire ? What would you think of them becoming a benevolent dictator ? If the people could agree to an election where buying votes was allowed, how much would it cost to win the election if the people believed in such a dictator's benevolence ? There are 11 million people living there. It would cost 3 trillion dollars to give each about $300,000 or about the mean wealth of an american. It would probably cost less than 3 trillion to win such an election.
- wonderwonder 5y ago
  There are no trillionaires. I mean in reality I am pretty sure you could get every vote you wanted for $5,000 each. Average annual income in Haiti is $500. So 10 years of salary. Also only about 6 million voters in Haiti and you only need half of them so you could be president for $15 billion. Likely most people would sell their vote for their annual income, that means a total of $1.5 billion. I would not blame them either, extreme poverty is a terrible thing and for many the adage 'any port in a a storm' is likely true. This assumes that people would agree to sell their votes. With that said, I am very much against dictators, benevolent or otherwise. But I would understand.
  - cdolan 5y ago
    I would argue none of us have any idea if there is a "trillionaire" in the world because we are notoriously bad at guessing someone's total net worth. As support, I would point you to this 10 year old article on Moammar Gadhafi, where he was estimated to actually be worth roughly $200b USD - an unheard of number in 2011. https://www.forbes.com/sites/edwindurgy/2011/10/25/did-moammar-gadhafi-die-the-richest-man-in-the-world/?sh=baccb5876cf2 https://www.forbes.com/sites/edwindurgy/2011/10/25/did-moamm... This week, if Bezos were not divorced, he would be worth $300b USD: https://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/billionaire-news/had-jeff-bezos-never-gotten-divorced-today-his-net-worth-would-have-topped-300-billion-for-the-first-time/ https://www.celebritynetworth.com/articles/billionaire-news/... And finally, the ProPublica Peter Thiel $5b USD ROTH IRA is worth *double what Forbes thought Thiels entire net worth is per the 2020 Forbes Billionaire List* (he is on page 3... look at the massive jump in the animated graph!): https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/ https://www.forbes.com/billionaires/ That said, the IRS had 20 years of tax returns stolen from it which would detail the richest Americans, and so it is unlikely anyone in the USA is a trillionaire.

airhead969 5y ago

I don't see how this article is noteworthy or relevant for HN. We don't need mainstream news, politics, geopolitics, or conspiracy theories here.

bladefire 5y ago

He kinda got what he deserved.... People don't like dictators.

dang 5y ago
Maybe so, but please don't post unsubstantive and/or flamebait comments to Hacker News.

eutropia 5y ago

I don't know much about Haiti's international affairs, but I'm curious if other countries will be involved at all in the investigation of this murder (because the victim was a head of state). Complicating the situation of course, is the english and spanish speaking assailants, indicating that they might be foreigners. Will the D.E.A. (audio of the event being shared has a clip of someone yelling "this is a DEA operation, stand down" in a southern american accent) be expected to make some sort of statement regarding this? Should we believe them without a formal investigation and evidence?

idoubtit 5y ago

So, an American newspaper writes about Haiti, including a few paragraphs about the historical context: the independence from France in 1803, the thirty years of the Duvalier dictatorship, etc. And they forgot to mention the 20 years of American occupation ! Would they write that Vietnam fought against the French occupation, then suffered under communist rule? I don't expect a random American to know any of the various countries that the USA invaded and occupied, apart from Vietnam, but I sure expect a big newspaper to give this basic context.

wayneftw 5y ago

Where are the global surveillance satellites when you need them?

flarco 5y ago

My parents live in Haiti. This looks like it was an inside job/collaboration. He was assassinated inside his home, in the middle of the night. His home has multiple gates/barriers to get inside, very secured by guards, yet only him died. No guards or 3rd parties were injured. No resistance or loud gun exchanges to prevent them from getting in. His wife was shot and injured, but is currently stable in a US hospital. From what I heard, the gunmen were all Spanish speaking. 5-7 of them arrived in multiple cars, killed him and left without issues. Very disturbing, but that's the world we live in.

iamwatson 5y ago
Sherlock, is that you?

beaugunderson 5y ago

For anyone who wants a thorough history of intervention (US and otherwise) in Haiti check out Paul Farmer's "The Uses of Haiti". Gripping read.