The border between Haiti and the Dominican Republic. Photo by Alex Proimos, republished under Creative Commons License, and taken from original NACLA post.
This article by Amelia Hintzen was originally published on NACLA's website and is republished here as part of a content-sharing agreement.
On Wednesday June 17, the deadline for Haitian immigrants and people of Haitian descent to file paperwork with the Dominican government proving their legal right to reside in the country expired. This impacts recent immigrants without documentation as well as Dominicans who cannot prove they were born in the Dominican Republic and that their parents were legal residents.
Ominously, the Department of Immigration has reportedly been training officers to carry out deportations, and many Dominican-Haitians are fearful of being forced to leave the only country they know. Although the government has stated they will not begin widespread deportations, the estimated tens of thousands of Dominicans of Haitian descent that still do not have citizenship rights face an uncertain future. Amid international criticism, the Dominican government has repeatedly argued that it has a right to determine who qualifies for citizenship.
While it is easy to simplify these actions into a narrative about the culmination of ancient hatreds—that they are in some way the inevitable result of a blood feud between the two nations that stretches back to the Haitian occupation of the Dominican Republic from 1822-1844—the history is much more complex. Accepting such a line of reasoning only perpetuates a narrative created by Rafael Trujillo, one of the country’s most brutal dictators. Ruling the Dominican Republic from 1930 until his assassination in 1961, Trujillo used anti-Haitian ideology to rally Dominicans around his dictatorship by claiming his strict rule was needed to protect the nation from the new threat of “passive” invasion by Haitian immigrants. In 1937 he ordered the massacre of an estimated ten to twenty thousand Haitians living on the border.
While this incident is often cited as evidence of the irrepressible conflict between the two countries, Trujillo’s attempt to carry out mass deportations prior to the massacre failed because local communities opposed the illegal targeting of Haitian immigrants. Indeed, Haitians and Dominicans lived together all over the country, and were often openly hostile to attempts by the central government to intervene in their lives. Both countries had limited paved roads and communication infrastructure, and Haitian and Dominican peasants had more in common with each other than with a distant elite. Far from an expression of popular anti-Haitian sentiment, the Trujillo orchestrated massacre was an attempt to breakdown the long-standing connections between Haitians and Dominicans that limited his power over the country.
The despot could not, however, completely remove the Haitian population from the country. Sugar was one of the nation’s most important exports, and Haitians provided the backbone of the industry’s labor force. Facing this contradiction, the Trujillo government began to isolate Haitian immigrants throughout the country by forcing them to relocate onto sugar plantations. The government faced confusion and resistance from community members, who opposed the forced relocation of their neighbors. But Government officials pressured landlords to evict Haitians, and threatened to withhold immigration documents until Haitian migrants relocated. By quarantining Haitians on sugar plantations, the Trujillo regime began to erase the long history of Dominican-Haitian communities on the island of Hispaniola.
The government’s attempts to isolate Haitian immigrants and their children only increased when one of the architects of anti-Haitian ideology, Joaquin Balaguer, was elected to the presidency in 1966. Balaguer instituted policies that allowed Haitian immigrants to reside solely on plantations and to only work cutting sugar cane. At the beginning of each sugar cane harvest the army and National Police would search the country for Haitians and relocate them to plantations involuntarily, even if they possessed legal documentation. In addition, immigrants found without documentation were often forced onto a plantation, without the government regularizing their status. In the process, the legality of Haitian immigrants in the eyes of the Dominican state became untethered from documentation and only based on location and occupation. Both Trujillo and Balaguer believed that if Haitians could be contained on plantations they could contribute to the wealth of the Dominican nation without ever being acknowledged as part of it.
While the majority of Dominicans are of African descent, Balaguer argued that after the decimation of the island’s indigenous population the Dominican Republic was repopulated by white Spaniards. According to him, African characteristics in the Dominican population were a result of Haitian infiltration of the Dominican Republic. Because of his fear of racial “contamination,” Balaguer became increasingly concerned about Dominicans born to Haitian parents. In the 1970s he commissioned several investigations into the issue, and numerous government officials informed him that the government could not deport Dominican-Haitians, because, having been born in the Dominican Republic, they were constitutionally Dominican citizens. However, born on plantations far away from medical care, many never received official birth certificates.
Once the sugar industry began to fail in the 1990s, and the Haitian population could not be quarantined as easily, the government sought legal basis to retroactively strip the citizenship rights of Dominican-Haitians. In 2013 the Dominican Constitutional Tribunal ruled that anyone with Haitian parents born after 1929 could potentially lose their citizenship, blatantly violating the principle of non-retroactivity established in the Dominican constitution. In a plan drawn up after the ruling, residents were given until June 17, 2015 to prove legal residency. In addition to the difficulties many Dominicans face producing documentation and traveling long distances to government offices, there have been widespread complaints of long delays and inconsistent requirements.
The actions of the Dominican government are not simply attempts to protect their sovereignty, as they argue. Instead, potential deportations are the result of decades of clandestine government policies that did not base legal residency on documentation, but instead on where migrants resided and the work they did. Claims that Dominicans and Haitians cannot coexist ignore how anti-Haitian ideology was imposed to serve the goals of a dictator. Then, as today, there are Dominicans who speak up against these injustices and communities where Haitian and Dominican identities coexist and commingle.
63 comments
Article written by journaist:
Why US, EU and other countries do not want or accept Haitian nationals on its territory?
Santo Domingo, Rep.Dom.-circle this anonymous document on the Internet in 2008, referring to the events that occurred in 1993-1995, and contains a collection of the different reactions of some countries and governments of the Caribbean to proposals for government officials from the United States, that were installed temporary camps of Haitian refugees in various countries of the Caribbean, including in particular the Dominican Republic. The position of the then President Dr. Joaquín Balaguer refers to what is called plan to install exodus camps Haitians in Dominican territory.
Occupy this space in Digital Impact to offer readers the opportunity to remember the harassment he was subjected to force that country to accept the installation of Haitian camps on the border. And the deceased president Joaquin Balaguer refused responsibly. Which it costs the United States and its internal aláteres to cut back two years of the four that should govern from 2004.
As in the US and Europe, the leaders and citizens of Latin American and Caribbean countries, strongly reject the permanence of Haitians, children or adults, in their territories. Many of the tens of thousands of Haitians left their country in recent years tried to go to the United States (US). Others went to other countries in the region, Dominican Republic, Canada and the Bahamas. Some have been granted asylum, but most have been returned to Haiti, mainly from the US, Canada and the Bahamas.
Thousands of Haitians were confined at the US naval base at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba; but almost all of them were subsequently repatriated to Haiti, where in February 1997 “agreements” were reached with the government of the neighboring country to start moving them to the Dominican Republic.
Many Haitians tried to flee further, as in South America and Europe. However, in the mid-nineties, Switzerland and France imposed new restrictive visa requirements to enter its territory, in order to prevent the entry of African and Caribbean. Most of the thousands of Haitians headed to the US by sea after the coup of September 1991 were intercepted by the Coast Guard patrols the US before reaching US territory.
At sea, the Haitians requested were granted asylum in the United States, but all were taken to the US naval base at Guantanamo (in Cuba), where officials of the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) of the Department of Justice EU, the They were subjected to a selection process to determine (health conditions, education level) the possibility of granting asylum to some of them.
These selection procedures did not conform to international standards because they lacked essential guarantees such as access to legal counsel and to an effective appeal against the refusal. However, a few were allowed to reach the US, but the vast majority of them were returned to Haiti. The May 24, 1992, President George Bush (father) issued a Presidential Order that all Haitians intercepted at sea would be returned directly to Haiti, without paying any regard to his application for asylum in the US.
President Bill Clinton, who took office in January 1993, continued this policy despite promises of change made in the election campaign; thus violated EU recognized principle (non-refoulement), which is opposed to forced repatriation, and reneged on its obligations under Article 33 of the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees of 1951 internationally non-refoulement.
From the office of the special charge of the Department of State, Lawrence Pezzullo, it was stated that “the repatriation of Haitians is a policy of national priority and neither the UN nor any other national or international organization has to interfere in this decision because the EU, as a sovereign country it is, he is exercising the rights that correspond to these repatriations “.
In May 1994, partly as a result of ongoing national and international to the US policy of forced repatriation criticism, President Bill Clinton announced that Haitian asylum-seekers intercepted at sea by the US Coast Guard would no longer be returned and summary directly to Haiti, but they would be allowed to apply for asylum aboard US vessels, and later try to establish them in some other countries in the region, “but not on US territory”.
In early July 1994, the US government announced that Haitians intercepted at sea the option of being taken to “another country” in the region or be returned to Haiti would be offered. And they are not offer the opportunity for a hearing to present his request to be granted asylum in the EU. NGO defenders of human rights rooted in the US and the European Union, as well as black congressmen “Black Caucus”, artists and leaders of the Black movement in the United States described as racist as the new policy of President Clinton.
However, the US Supreme Court ruled that President Clinton had every right to repatriate all undocumented aliens and that “Haitians could be and continue to be repatriated if so decided by the President.” The US government then proceeded to negotiate with the governments of Latin American and Caribbean countries to agree to grant asylum to Haitians, but the rulers of these countries indignantly rejected that possibility. Either he accessed US desires, even in principle.
Reactions of some countries and governments of the Caribbean to the proposed government officials from the United States to grant temporary asylum to Haitians in boats left their country to the United States:
Venezuela
President Rafael Caldera (1994, during his second presidential term) “gives us much pain the deplorable situation of Haitians have always helped and we are ready to offer any kind of aid, but provide access to asylum in our country, it’s very different. That preposterous proposal is impossible to accept, the Venezuelans never forgive me, I would be unable to betray the trust for the second time have placed in me. ”
Costa Rica
President Jose Maria Figueres (November 1994) “… the abject poverty of the Haitian people is part of the causes for these migrations, but we can not accept them as refugees in Costa Rica. We also have our problems with undocumented Nicaraguans, but we are working to solve them … and we are succeeding. I do not think any country in Latin America is able to take over the huge problem posed by Haitian migrants. ”
Cuba
Fidel Castro R. (1993) “… in fragile and makeshift boats have arrived to our shores 460 Haitians in poor condition, sick, hungry and wearing rags. They are being treated in our hospitals, where they are administering the necessary drugs, good food and new clothes. Once the general conditions return to normal, everyone will be reshipped in their refurbished boats and boats towed by our navy, to the vicinity of the coast of Haiti. ”
Colombia
President Ernesto Samper (December 1994) “unacceptable … absolutely unacceptable. Colombia categorically rejected the possibility of allowing temporary camps deploy Haitian refugees on our soil. Absolutely absurd proposal unacceptable … ”
Dominican Republic
President Joaquin Balaguer (February 1994) “US government officials and international organizations have insisted that the Dominican Republic grant refuge to Haitians are leaving their country by boat to the United States and some other destinations; I also those officials reiterated the commitment of the US government to take responsibility, full, of all the expenses that would involve the construction of facilities that serve as camps in the Dominican Republic, the Haitian refugees. Also ensuring that food and medicines would provide all necessary therein.
In return promise to intercede favorably to foreign banks and other lending to our government, so we can continue our policy of building organisms. Nor was no lack of promises and offering awards and honors me by renowned foreign institutions.
My response was that since they were committed to bear all costs that would lead to the construction and maintenance of the camps in our country, then what was that made them suitable across our border in Haiti itself, but not this side of the border !, not on Dominican soil!
I appreciated the offer of loans, informing them that our government would continue the policy of building to the extent that our domestic savings would permit; aclarándoles well I do not need foreign honors and awards, let alone at such a high cost to our nation. As Dominican president. ”
“It would be for me a real nonsense accept the settlement of Haitians in Dominican lands !, ignorance … a denial and an offense to the memory of so many Dominicans who sacrificed everything for his country, for this homeland of Duarte, of Sanchez and Mella “.
Honduras
President Carlos Roberto Reina (March 1995) “by transigimos the persistent request of various representatives of the American government and the OAS, to the circumstantial and temporary site humanitarianism, for only 6 months in camps in Honduras for Haitian refugees. Five months have elapsed prescription deadline agreed that refugees should be returned to their country of origin or any other location outside of Honduras. We have insisted on our requirements, however it is truly shameful, outrageous and dishonest behavior of the OAS and the US government to achieve compliance. Evade fulfill its commitment.
My whole life has been dedicated to defending the rights of Hondurans, I want to change the Motherland his embarrassed face and from this moment I am giving the directives for the immediate closure of the camps and the shipment of all its occupants to their country of origin , Haiti. Honduras is poor, but shut up or resign, subordination, reverence or subjection, would be petty and embarrassing. Never permit nor allow the continuation of such abnormal and harmful situation to the detriment of our country and of Hondurans. As your President, I have the obligation and duty of government to improve the conditions of Honduras and of all Hondurans, not to make them worse … ”
Panama
In 1993 President Guillermo Endara, secretly agreed to the request of the US government to grant asylum to 10,000 (ten thousand) Haitian refugees in a small adjacent islands belonging to Panama. Some weeks later, when granting the President became public knowledge, the Panamanian people reacted angrily. There were many protest marches, media disapproved and unleashed campaigns against that decision, the intellectuals described as unacceptable, shameful and dishonorable presidential indulgence, student demonstrations became increasingly violent, until the National Assembly finally had to overrule the presidential award. President Endara was obliged to rectify his pleasure, and so informed the EU and the OAS. Haitians in Panama did not accept any of its territories.
Caribbean Community (CARICOM)
Belize, Jamaica *, Guyana, St. Kitts and Nevis, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, all strongly rejected the proposal of the US government to receive Haitians in their territories.
True and written by others: Haitians constantly impeach DR by claiming it is racist and that is a “Black” country in denial of it’s African roots, we are Hispanic country that is 34% white, 70% mulatto and 10% black. That is by no means a “black” country.
Haitians are not stateless; they are not being ethnically cleansed. Order has been restored and you should all applaud that fact, not continue with the useless mudslinging and hate mongering against a country that is doing all within it’s abilities to help Haitians and get them registered with Documents while attending to the needs of it’s own native born population. This while the Haitian government does, NOTHING.
Fiallo added the government realizes deportations in the past may not have involved the due process needed but that this time, the government would make sure people’s cases were investigated.”
New True news article on deportations of Haitians in other Caricom countries including the United States, Canada, Latin America and the Caribbean.
Bahamas has deported over the past seven months 3,369 Haitians with questionable methods in the context of Human Rights and the use of cages for transport. In addition, some of these deportees are minors, in some cases children under 10 who were arrested and deported alone without contact with their families.
Barbados has also taken a management regarding Haitians, evidenced this earthquake when the United States asked him to accept some injured in their public hospitals as refugees and the Government replied that “neither 20 or 5, and 1 in Haiti.”
Jamaica received orders to retreat some Haitians after the earthquake and the Government not only refused but also deported in March 2010 who had managed to enter 67 for protection after the tragedy.
All Caricom countries have strict immigration laws and some like Belize even have hardened to increase fines on employers of undocumented workers and transporters.
Guyana’s case is peculiar because, since most of the countries of Caricom, sweep operations to detain immigrants in this country and mass deportations, especially from Barbados, Trinidad and Suriname. The situation with Trinidad and Tobago is such that its Minister Gary Griffit put in deportation list more than 110 000 immigrants, mostly Haitians.
In some of the countries of Caricom they have made concessions to immigrants so that they have time to be regularized, but the longer term, given by St. Kitts in January 2010, was only ninety (90) days.
Grand Cayman is similar with immigrants to the above countries, especially Haitians, who carefully monitor predators drones to intercept at sea. The same goes for Turks and Caicos, whom the Daily Herald complained about the indiscriminate deportations did last year of legal residents who had beaten them permissions.
Given these examples and many more migratory practices of most countries of Caricom surprising that the agency questioned the Dominican Republic on Human Rights and based on false premises, as in many other countries in the region have been numerous violations real and verifiable to illegal immigrants, something that has never happened in our country that has been very respectful, and it has not taken any complaint on the international stage.”
En español
“…Bahamas ha deportado en los últimos 7 meses 3,369 haitianos con métodos cuestionables en el marco de los Derechos Humanos como el uso de jaulas para transportarlos. Además, algunos de estos deportados son menores de edad, en ciertos casos niños menores de 10 años que fueron detenidos y deportados solos y sin contacto con sus familiares.
Barbados también ha tenido un manejo duro respecto a los haitianos, evidenciado esto tras el terremoto cuando Estados Unidos le pidió que aceptara algunos heridos en sus hospitales públicos en calidad de refugiados y el Gobierno respondió “que ni 20, ni 5, ni 1 haitiano”.
Jamaica recibió pedidos de refugio de algunos haitianos tras el terremoto y no sólo el Gobierno se negó sino que además en marzo de 2010 deportó 67 que habían logrado entrar buscando protección luego de la tragedia.
Todos los países del Caricom tienen leyes migratorias estrictas y algunos como Belice incluso la han endurecido para aumentar las multas a los empleadores y transportistas de indocumentados.
El caso de Guyana es muy particular puesto que, desde la mayoría de los países del Caricom, se realizan redadas para detener inmigrantes de este país y deportaciones masivas, especialmente desde Barbados, Trinidad y Surinam. La situación con Trinidad y Tobago es tal que su Ministro Gary Griffit puso en lista de deportación a más de 110 mil inmigrantes, la mayoría haitianos.
En algunos de los países del Caricom se han dado concesiones a inmigrantes para que tengan plazos para regularizarse, pero el plazo más largo, otorgado por St. Kitts en enero de 2010, fue de apenas noventa (90) días.
Gran Cayman es similar con sus inmigrantes a los países citados, especialmente con haitianos, a los que vigilan cuidadosamente con drones predators para interceptarlos en el mar. Lo mismo ocurre con Turcas y Caicos, de quien el Daily Herald se quejó por las deportaciones indiscriminadas que hizo el año pasado de residentes legales a los que se les había vencido los permisos.
Ante estos ejemplos y muchos más de las prácticas migratorias de la mayoría de los países del Caricom sorprende que el organismo cuestione a la República Dominicana en materia de Derechos Humanos y partiendo de premisas falsas, cuando en tantos otros países de la región han existido numerosos atropellos reales y verificables a inmigrantes en situación irregular, algo que en ningún momento ha ocurrido en nuestro país que ha sido sumamente respetuoso, y sobre ello no se ha producido denuncia alguna en los escenarios internacionales.
News Article written. “RD sociologist proposes to France to settle million Haitians in French Guyana”
Sociologist and writer Cherezada (Chiqui) Vicioso proposed that France agrees to millions of Haitians in French Guyana to solve the problem of overpopulation of the island Hispaniola.
It explained that its proposal reflects the fact that Guyana is the area with less population density of the outermost region of the European Union, with an area of 92,300 square kilometers and only 208,000 inhabitants.
“Let’s get to the point: Although Haiti is part of the Latin American community, and the OAS or the United States they must resolve the serious problems of that sister nation,” Vicioso in an article published in the journal Veta.com.
Adds that “humanity knows that 250 years ago, Haiti was the richest colony of France, for its vast resources and goodwill of slavery, and we all know that after the slaves managed to free themselves and to establish the first black revolution in the world , defeating, among others, the powerful Napoleonic army, all countries with slaves made him a boycott and France, in particular, imposed a naval blockade and an embargo that forced Haiti to pay a debt for independence 150 million gold francs then reduced to 90 million, that Haiti could never pay, but devoted all their resources to do so at the expense of its incipient economic development. ”
“The results of this situation are felt to this day, with Haiti being the poorest country of America and with 10.32 million inhabitants, the third of Hispaniola, has eroded their environment so that today only has a two for a green area, “he added.
They argue that “Dominican Republic, on the other hand, has 10.4 million inhabitants, for a total of 21 million people on a small island of only 42,000 square kilometers.”
“To understand the seriousness of this situation, we just have to compare ourselves with Cuba, with only 11.27 million inhabitants, on an island where all the other small islands of the Caribbean fit. In Cuba, the rate of population is maintained through sex education and reproductive health programs, among other factors, making motherhood a choice, not a fate of poverty, “he explains.
He states that “whatever it says the OAS, the reality is that the island does not support this population density, and the only solution to the Haitian tragedy is that France will facilitate the massive transfer of several million Haitians French Guiana, an island It bordered by Suriname to the west and Brazil to the east and south, and only has 208,000 inhabitants. ”
“Why French Guiana? Because it is the area with less population density of the outermost region of the European Union, with an area of 92,300 square kilometers, ie much territory as Portugal, bordered by Suriname to the west and Brazil to the east and south, and only has 208,000 inhabitants “concludes the article.
None of this is based on facts, and I dare the author to cite her references. She got all of that from word of mouth, from people that don’t have the Dominican Republic best interests at hand.
The dare is made….
if you still read spanish try this
http://hoy.com.do/urge-recuperar-la-racionalidad/autor/juan-bolivar-diaz/
That same energy you and your kind should use to fix the disaster you have on your own kilombo
please do me a favor , read this article
http://hoy.com.do/urge-recuperar-la-racionalidad/autor/juan-bolivar-diaz/
I got a life unlike you I dont spend my energy trying to be what I am not, embarrassing frankly shame on you.