Connect with us

America

The bells of an imperialist intervention tolls for Haiti

Published

on

Some headlines by the American and the British media, covered throughout the month of October were quite interesting per se: “Intervening in Haiti, Again”, “Nations consider sending troops to Haiti, despite troubled past foreign intervention” or, “The history of US intervention in Haiti is stopping US officials from intervening” so on and so forth.

The bells of a new imperialist intervention, indeed tolls for Haiti. The Haitian government has authorized the Prime Minister Ariel Henry to request a military assistance, in context of a humanitarian crisis risk (which we will explain what these risks mean shortly). And one of the first official reactions from the United Nations (UN), was to impose sanctions on the infamous gang leader and a former policeman known as Jimmy “Barbecue” Chérizier. But what is worse is that the Biden administration hinted for a “non-UN” military intervention in Haiti, in a coalition with Mexico and Canada. Finally, the US Secretary of State Antony Blinken and the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau held a meeting, and discussed on an coalition intervention, with the pretext of “restoring the order”.

Yet another invasion

Haiti had always caused a concern for the white, slave-owning nations in the region all the way since it gained independence in 1804 after a revolt of African slaves when it was a French colony based on sugar cane plantations. And when the US invaded Haiti first in 1915, it has used the “instabilities” in the country as a pretext and ruled it as its colony for around 19 years. Of course, the main motivation for this occupation had been economic and colonialist interests; along with ideological motivations such as white supremacism and a fear of revolution.

Both the direct American military administration, and the governmental body it has left behind in the capital Port-au-Prince after the withdrawal of the American troops in 1934, has ensured that Haiti would not be able to get back on its feet for quite some time. And François Duvalier, who took over the government in 1957, has established a violent dictatorship with the support of especially the United States, but was forced into exile together with his family, in a popular uprising back in 1986.

Haiti’s later history was shaped with the struggle between the popular movements and international coalitions (together with collaborationist dictators). The ‘democratic’ elections, that were planned for the year 1987, were postponed up to 1990 by pro-Duvalier establishment circles. And when a former Catholic priest that can arguably be called a left-wing populist, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, came out from the elections, a sudden military coup d’etat has hit the country. Then the former US President Bill Clinton has once more deployed troops to Haiti in 1994, and overthrew the military junta in order to bring Aristide back to power.

Aristide was overthrown a second time in 2004, and the United States has deployed an international military force in the country again, this time in coalition with France and Canada, and ensured that elections were held. And after that, a UN Peacekeeping Force led by Brazil, was deployed into the country for 6 months at first; however this deployment was extended all the way until 2017…

Interestingly, one of the ugliest examples of this imperialist intervention were the so-called “international aid” campaigns after the tragic earthquake of 2010. It was revealed that a total of 13.5 billion USD, was collected together with the support of numerous NGOs, and celebrity campaigns including Hollywood stars. And how much of this great sum actually made it into Haitian institutions? Perhaps a few cents! The Journalist Jonathan Katz, who authored a book on the so-called humanitarian aid to Haiti, finds out that most of the money promised as humanitarian aid by the donor countries, never even left these countries in the first place. Noting that most of the humanitarian aid are urgent aid (food packages, first aid kits etc.), Katz points out that not a single penny out of these billions of dollars we hear about in such campaigns, are never used for the reconstruction of the country in need.

Let us also note that much of that American humanitarian aid, is a revenue source for some other American companies. After the earthquake that killed around 220 thousand people, the per unit cost of the housing to be built by American contractors was determined to be around 33 thousand USD at the time, while the actual cost of a house that could be built by domestic contractors was only one-fifth that of the American contractors. In other words, the US has somewhat turned this earthquake into an opportunity and made its own companies a fortune through the “humanitarian aid funds”, without earning the Haitian institutions a single penny.

Gang wars and the US involvement

And the UN peacekeeping force has publicly elected a former pop singer with the open support of the former US Secretary of State, Michel Martelly who immediately got corrupt. Martelly suddenly appointed a banana plantation owner Jovenel Moïse, as his successor in 2015, and was elected into office in November 2016.

Moïse dissolved the parliament in 2020, and allegedly collaborated with the local gangs to repress his political opponents. In the end Moïse was a victim to assassination in 2021. And his replacement Ariel Henry was rumored to have ties to the assassination plot of Moïse, was appointed into office instead of being elected, which caused severe public backlash.

Finally, a gang called “G9 Family and Allies” headed by a former policeman named Jimmy “Barbeque” Chérizier, blockaded the largest fuel terminal in the capital city back in mid-September, and this crisis has been escalating ever since. Barbeque demanded Henry to either step down, or to co-rule with him.

Jimmy Chérizier had been in charge of the police force’s infamous Unit for the Maintenance of Order. This unit was essentially in charge of suppressing the public riots and was actually doing a “good job” at it. Speaking to the EP in 2019, Barbeque said that the leader who inspired him was François Duvalier.

Being expelled from the agency in December 2018, Chérizier is now accused of involving in many massacres during the years 2017, 2018 and 2019, in which dozens of people were brutally murdered. Alongside being known for committing acts of terrorism and massacres against the political opponents of Moïse, Chérizier was also accused of many incidents of rape. It was alleged that Barbeque had the political support from Moïse, and while still having numerous supporters within the police force.

Chérizier on the other hand, denies the allegations, and claims he is waging an “armed revolution”. According to Chérizier, it is not possible for him to organize massacres that target the impoverished communities in particular, stating: “I would never massacre anyone who belongs to the same social class as me. I live in the ghetto. I have that ghetto life in me”. He said that this “armed revolution” was aimed all against the government, the opposition and the “Haitian bourgeoisie”. Barbeque, who involved the public in a mass looting he carried out with his own militia, called on “The money in these banks, shops and supermarkets is your money, go and get what is yours”. As a result, Barbeque gives a bad impression of a Robin Hood, with a dark background and creates the image of an unreliable man.

On the other hand, Haitians seem to have already taken up arms against this possible imperialist occupation. As groups gathered in front of the French Embassy in Port-au-Prince protesting against the occupation, some groups were seen carrying Chinese and Russian flags. Reacting to the UN force, the protesters were calling on: “The only thing that the UN brought here is kidnapping, rape and cholera”. One of the protesters said they would fight against the UN, if they decide to send troops to Haiti. The human rights activist Pierre Esperance said that the United States has turned a blind eye to the gang violence against the opposition for many years and even helped governments that support these violent gangs.

On the other hand, protests were held all over the United States, expressing the support for the Haitian people against a possible American intervention in Haiti.

America

Pentagon and Justice Department form joint task force to combat media leaks

Published

on

US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth announced on Monday that the Department of Defense and the Department of Justice have established a joint task force as part of efforts to prevent the unauthorized disclosure of sensitive information to the public.

Hegseth stated that the Office of the General Counsel (OGC) of the Department of Defense will have the authority to request and receive all information, support, and records across the Pentagon related to media leak investigations.

The Defense Secretary noted that all departments and personnel within the ministry will prioritize these requests. He added that a complete and comprehensive response to any instruction issued by the OGC under this authority must be provided within two days of the submission of the request.

“Leaked information risks lives. These new tools and processes will greatly assist us in protecting our collective strength. Our nation’s security cannot be a bargaining chip for those chasing instant headlines,” Hegseth said in an approximately two-and-a-half-minute video message published on the social media platform X.

Hegseth also stated, “Access to classified and confidential information is a sacred trust, and those who betray this trust will face the full force of the law.”

The announcement of the task force came a few days after the Department of Justice issued subpoenas to four New York Times reporters. The journalists, summoned to testify before a federal grand jury, had reported on security concerns regarding President Donald Trump’s flight to Türkiye for a NATO summit on an aircraft donated by Qatar.

The subpoenas drew sharp criticism from The New York Times and press freedom advocates. Opponents argue that the government is attempting to intimidate news organizations.

“Our journalists report the facts and defend the American public’s right to know how their government operates and how taxpayer dollars are spent,” New York Times attorney David McCraw said in a statement. “This brazen action is nothing less than an attempt to deter journalists from doing their jobs, thereby preventing the public from learning what is happening in the country.”

Hegseth has been taking steps to prevent leaks to the press since the beginning of his tenure at the Pentagon. Last year, the department launched investigations into personnel alleged to have leaked classified information to the media and threatened to administer polygraph tests.

Leak allegations were also directed at some of Hegseth’s advisers last year. Former senior adviser Dan Caldwell and former deputy chief of staff Darin Selnick are among those individuals. Caldwell, Selnick, and Colin Carroll, the former chief of staff to Deputy Secretary of Defense Stephen A. Feinberg, were first suspended and subsequently dismissed from their positions and removed from the Pentagon as part of the internal leak investigation.

A government official, speaking to The Hill in mid-March, stated there was no evidence that Caldwell, who began working at the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) earlier this year, had leaked information from the Pentagon.

Defense Secretary Hegseth has previously been the target of criticism himself for allegedly sharing sensitive information. Last year, Hegseth discussed planned US strikes against the Houthis in Yemen in a Signal group chat to which an editor of The Atlantic magazine had been mistakenly added. A report published in December by the Pentagon’s Office of the Inspector General determined that Hegseth had compromised military security and violated department policy by using the Signal application on his personal mobile phone.

“It is highly ironic that Hegseth himself shared sensitive national defense information with his wife over Signal last year and faced no consequences, yet now speaks of the need to protect this information,” said former Pentagon spokesperson John Ullyot. “In 2012, CIA Director David Petraeus resigned from his post for a similar situation involving his girlfriend, and was sentenced in federal court to two years of probation and a $10,000 fine.”

Ullyot, who also served as the spokesperson for the National Security Council during Trump’s first term, told The Hill on Monday: “The President deserves better from his national security leaders. Hegseth should start holding himself accountable before holding others accountable.”

Reporters have been largely blocked from entering the Pentagon after Hegseth revoked access to most of the facility. Pentagon correspondents returned their press credentials in October, refusing to sign a new media policy that required a commitment not to solicit unauthorized materials.

Hegseth and his supporters argue that the policy will protect national security by preventing the leak of classified information. Press freedom groups and critics, conversely, characterize the practice as a violation of the constitutional rights of journalists.

Most recently, the department further restricted press access by declaring the Pentagon building a classified space and banning journalists from entering.

Offering historical references in his statement on Monday, Hegseth said, “Leaking sensitive national defense information and secrets is a betrayal of the men and women who wear the uniform of our country. This is a principle as old as the history of warfare, reaching back to the founding of our republic in the United States. George Washington himself combated leaks, insider threats, and espionage.”

Continue Reading

America

SpaceX shares fall 40% from peak to approach IPO floor as regulatory scrutiny weighs

Published

on

Shares of the American aerospace company SpaceX fell to as low as $136.78 at the trough of the trading session on Monday, July 13, representing a 5.87% decline compared to the close of trading on July 10. According to data from the US-based NASDAQ exchange, this retreat marks a depreciation of approximately 40% from the company’s historic peak of $225.64, which was recorded on June 16. With this latest decline, the company’s shares have approached their initial public offering (IPO) price threshold of $135.

As of 21:25 Moscow time on the trading day in question, the shares continued to trade at $137.4, down 5.4%.

The downward trend in the shares was driven by reports that the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had concluded its investigation into the emergencies and malfunctions during the May 22 launch of Starship, the largest and most powerful rocket model developed by SpaceX.

According to CNBC, the agency reviewed and approved the findings and corrective measures submitted by the company following its internal investigation into the incident.

The Starship project, a massive, reusable rocket designed to carry crew and cargo to the Moon and Mars and to perform other space missions, is considered one of the most critical elements of Elon Musk’s space program.

In a statement issued by the FAA, it was noted that following the approved corrective actions, SpaceX is permitted to begin preparations for the Starship Flight 13 flight, provided that the company meets all safety requirements and licensing conditions.

The FAA had previously issued a statement regarding the malfunction during the launch attempt at the end of May. The statement noted: “The anomaly occurred during the Super Heavy booster’s flip maneuver over the Gulf of America.”

The region referred to as the Gulf of America by US authorities in official correspondence is commonly known as the Gulf of Mexico.

According to official data, the booster parts fell within the boundaries of pre-established hazard areas. Six flights were delayed and five aircraft remained in holding patterns for a period due to the incident, though no changes were made to flight routes.

SpaceX shares, which began trading on the NASDAQ exchange at the beginning of June, gained 25% at the opening. As part of the initial public offering, the company offered 555.6 million shares for sale at a fixed price of $135 per share.

The SpaceX IPO was recorded as the largest initial public offering in financial history. The company initially raised $75 billion, and the total funds raised reached $85.7 billion after consortium members exercised their over-allotment option to purchase an additional 83.3 million shares.

In a statement to his employees, company founder Elon Musk stated that going public was necessary to generate capital during a phase of rapid growth. It was announced that the proceeds would be used to complete the development process of the Starship rockets, bring them to commercial readiness, and expand the Starlink satellite network.

The post-IPO surge in SpaceX shares had briefly made Elon Musk the world’s first trillionaire. Bloomberg had estimated Musk’s wealth at $1.05 trillion, while Forbes valued it at $1.1 trillion.

However, with the decline in share prices and the company’s market value that began in late June, Musk lost his trillionaire title after holding it for 12 days.

According to an analysis by Bloomberg, the decline was driven by SpaceX’s preparations to issue at least $20 billion in bonds to finance artificial intelligence projects, alongside the signing of a multi-billion-dollar agreement with AI startup Reflection AI to provide computing resources.

Assessments by S&P Global projected that SpaceX will continue to incur expenditures without generating revenue until at least 2029.

Continue Reading

America

Trump notifies Congress of renewed war with Iran, resetting War Powers clock

Published

on

US President Donald Trump has formally notified lawmakers that the country is back at war with Iran, according to an official notification sent to Congress over the weekend.

In the letter dated July 10 and obtained by Politico, Trump stated that airstrikes beginning on July 7 constituted “military actions consistent with my responsibility to protect Americans and US interests both at home and abroad.”

The notification triggers a new 60-day statutory window under which the US administration can utilize military force in the region without prior congressional approval.

The conflict, which has repeatedly paused and restarted over control of the Strait of Hormuz—a crucial chokepoint for global energy supplies—has become a persistent challenge for the Trump administration.

Trump has expressed frustration over the failure to secure a peace agreement with Iran, while congressional Republicans remain concerned about being blamed for rising fuel prices ahead of the upcoming midterm elections.

On Monday, Trump intensified military pressure on Tehran, declaring that the US would reimpose a blockade on the region, seize control of the Strait of Hormuz, and levy fees on transiting vessels.

Ceasefire process officially ends

The notification to Congress follows Trump’s announcement that a two-month-old ceasefire with Iran has officially ended.

The ceasefire, originally declared in April, had been fragile from the outset due to reciprocal attacks by both nations. Despite the friction, the Trump administration had previously maintained that a full-scale war had not resumed.

Officials from US Central Command (CENTCOM) announced that US forces have struck more than 300 Iranian military targets over the past week in retaliation for Tehran’s hostile actions in the Strait of Hormuz.

On Monday, CENTCOM released a statement confirming that US forces had conducted additional airstrikes against Iran “at the direction of the Commander-in-Chief.”

“These strikes will continue to impose heavy costs on Iranian forces, degrading their capability to attack innocent civilians and commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz,” the statement read.

War powers debate

Trump had previously notified Congress that the war, which began in February, had “ended” in May, thereby resetting the 60-day statutory clock that would otherwise require the cessation of military operations without congressional authorization.

With the April ceasefire intended to run indefinitely, the White House argued that the timeline mandated by the War Powers Act had been paused.

However, anti-war lawmakers in Congress challenged this interpretation. They argued that the government was misapplying the law, noting that even when major combat operations subsided, the US Navy maintained its blockade to exert pressure on Tehran.

The new notification complicates ongoing efforts within Congress to limit military action against Iran. Last month, the Senate passed a symbolic resolution calling for an end to the hostilities, signaling waning support for Trump’s military campaign against Tehran.

The resolution, which passed 50 to 48 after four Republican senators voted with Democrats, sought to make congressional approval a requirement for continued military operations.

A similar measure had previously passed the House of Representatives by a vote of 215 to 208, also drawing the support of four Republicans.

The legislative impact of these measures remains limited, however, as joint resolutions are not sent to the president for signature, and any bill seeking to restrict executive war powers would face a certain White House veto.

In his letter to Congress, Trump emphasized that US military forces remain deployed to counter threats against allies.

“United States Armed Forces remain postured to take additional steps, as necessary and appropriate, to address further threats or attacks against the United States, its allies, or its partners, and to ensure that the Government of the Islamic Republic of Iran ceases to pose a threat to the United States and its partners,” Trump wrote.

Continue Reading

MOST READ

Turkey