THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Saturday, October 1, 1994 TAG: 9410010002
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A12 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 38 lines
Certainly no one wants the lives of American servicemen and -women put at risk, but I am confused by the strong opposition to any military involvement in Haiti. Five years ago, we ``invaded'' Panama to obtain the release of accused drug kingpin Manuel Noriega; I believe 23 Americans were killed in that operation. What other interests or threats did we have there beyond extraditing a drug trafficker to the United States?
President Reagan either instigated or allowed illegal support for the Nicaraguan rebels in their struggle to hold free elections.
Haiti held elections in 1990. While the choice, President Aristide, may not be faultless, he was a legitimate leader who could take part in world organizations and be held accountable for his actions. Since he was deposed in 1991, there have been numerous accounts of human-rights violations and, not coincidentally, a dramatic increase in refugees to Florida, an obvious vital national interest.
President Clinton has been widely criticized for his lack of a foreign policy; but it seems as if every decision he makes is put under a microscope, while during the Reagan-Bush years we all wore blinders (for some, even hindsight isn't 20/20). I suppose one reason for the increased attention is the plethora of TV and radio talk shows voicing opinions of everyone from Rush Limbaugh to the chronically whiny Ross Perot.
What we need are substantive debates in Congress regarding Haiti and the criteria for military intervention in the post-Cold War era.
MELODIE K. ROBERTS
Chesapeake, Sept. 14, 1994 by CNB