
                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: THURSDAY, September 15, 1994                   TAG: 9409160018
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: A-15   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: By JOSEPH H. BLATCHFORD
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

U.S. INVASION?

AS SO often happens in Washington, the unthinkable - the prospect of the United States invading Haiti - has rapidly traveled the distance from preposterous to expected. The long-range implications of such a strategy for dealing with Haiti's military rulers are being brushed aside. The priority is to demonstrate that President Clinton is a decisive leader: When he says the thugs who staged the coup must go and Jean-Bertrand Aristide must return, the Pentagon must make it so.

Is it no longer worth consideration that Americans will lose their lives for a cause that has nothing to do with our nation's security?

Is it not even worth mentioning the likelihood of our responsibility extending far beyond the reinstatement of Aristide? Should that effort succeed, Clinton and his administration will be held responsible for every action the volatile Aristide takes, particularly those that are deemed to be undemocratic.

Only when all the unpleasant consequences are upon us will the critics be out in force charging that the president acted hastily, ignoring other options, which by then will be obvious to anyone gifted with hindsight.

No one really believes that the United States can land troops in Haiti, hand the keys over to Aristide and leave. So the responsible approach would be to acknowledge at the outset that the U.S. government is assuming a trusteeship to oversee Haiti for years to come. If that sounds like another unthinkable option, rest assured that it will gain legitimacy once U.S. troops arrive for what will be the second attempt this century to establish democracy in Haiti. Call it ``Operation Get It Right This Time.''

Perhaps the president's advisers don't realize what a quagmire they are getting him into when they urge him to invade. For the sake of his own political well-being, he should cast beyond his present circle for more experienced emissaries to pursue new alternatives. Surely no one is better qualified to seek peace and avoid bloodshed in Haiti than Jimmy Carter, accompanied by someone of the stature of Gen. Colin Powell of Desert Storm fame.

Say what you will about the Carter presidency, his Camp David accords brought peace between Israel and Egypt. His Panama Canal treaty was a major leap forward in U.S.-Latin American relations, and as ex-president, his initiative to force the Sandinistas to call elections brought democracy back to Nicaragua. The returns aren't yet in on his mission to North Korea, but so far it has proved useful to all sides.

The purpose of a Carter mission would not be limited to simply threatening Haiti's military with the use of force. Rather, Carter would consult with Haiti's elected parliamentary leaders, who undoubtedly have their own ideas for avoiding bloodshed. Fruitful talks could possibly lead to a transition government of respected citizens who could set the terms for the retirement of the coup leaders, supervise the lifting of the embargo and, after a period of stability, bring back Aristide to finish his term. Then, new elections.

The arrival of such prominent emissaries, perhaps including other leaders in the hemisphere, should impress the Haitian military with Clinton's willingness to make one last attempt to find a peaceful way out before an invasion is launched.

President Carter, your peacekeeping days are not over. Please, go to Haiti.

Joseph H. Blatchford, director of the Peace Corps from 1969 to 1973, is a lawyer in Washington.

Los Angeles Times

by CNB