The dismay situation of Haiti, particularly its economy, indicates the reality of adverse impact of outside intervention. Countries that are intervened heavily by outside entities typically failed in their economy: Russia comes as an example. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia received large amount of international aid for several years along with the “shock therapy” from Harvard economists. During that time, Russia experienced worsening economy year after year. We see that countries heavily intervened by the United States typically do worse than their neighboring countries. For example, Philippines, a country heavily intervened by US after World War II has much worse economy than Taiwan and Korea. Across Latin America, Honduras is experiencing much worse economy than Costa Rica.
When a country refuses outside intervention, like what Russia did today and China did in the last two decades, its economy is prospering. These countries may still have dictatorship, but their economy is more coherent and policy is more stable. I am not to promote dictatorship here. There are many democracies that get little US intervention and prosper. The main point I am trying to make is that less outside intervention is necessary for a stable economy.
In 1994, Haiti had its “democratic” president restored by US troops. At that time, there was big celebration in US media for democracy. Since then, US and international aid have poured into the country. However, for more than a decade, the country is struggling with abject poverty and lack of democracy. In fact, the only two countries in America that are still listed as non-free are Haiti and Cuba. Haiti’s situation is attested by another country in big trouble today: Afghanistan. Abject poverty continued and worsened by US influence in Afghanistan. The disintegration of a society is made worse by outside military and economic intervention.
The de-stabilization situation for Haiti continued for the last 15 years. The condition dictated by international aid does not make things better.
Given the new awareness of Haiti’s dismal situation, what should be our response and future policy toward Haiti? We should focus on building a coherent internal society. The less “intervention” we give, the better a society will become. A prosperous economy requires stable internal policy and coherent social structure. If a country is subject to external help or whim, its economy cannot be developed coherently.
Of course, less intervention is only a necessary condition for economic growth, but not a sufficient condition. Many African countries do not get US intervention, but still struggle with economic development. That comes back to the fundamental issues of economic development. However we can start with the necessary condition. For Haiti, less intervention is crucial for its future. While it is tempting to “help”, the United States has to temper its desire and appetite for “good deeds”. Like a person, a country has to stand on its own. Only then it will be strong. Let’s hope Haiti will get stronger soon.
