How would Jim Baker or Dick Cheney handle Haiti? Of the potential Republican presidential nominees in 1996, the former secretaries of State and Defense are the best qualified to speak about foreign affairs, and both would avoid the invasion Bill Clinton seems ready to launch. For Baker and Cheney, the bottom line is simple: restoring Haiti's deposed President, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, isn't worth a single American life. From there, however, their positions diverge. Both would stay out of Haiti, but Cheney would also stay away.
Ever consistent, the cerebral but dull Cheney (he makes Baker appear charismatic by comparison) reflects the views he unsuccessfully advanced when Haiti was his headache. "I said during the Bush Administration and I say today that we should forget about it," Cheney says. "Haiti's a mess. That's too bad. It was a mistake for us to begin the sanctions Clinton's continued. They only hurt the poor, the people who deserve better since we won't allow them into the U.S., which is the right policy. We should lift the embargo and focus on really important things, like rolling back North Korea's nuclear program."
Baker, too, echoes the policy he favored as Secretary of State. "Turn back the refugees and toughen the sanctions," he argues. "Haiti's border with the Dominican Republic has yet to be sealed effectively." Baker concedes embargoes hurt the innocent most, but says "you can't conclude they can't work until you've imposed them seriously."
This disagreement on sanctions reflects a deeper difference about U.S. support for fledging democracies. Cheney and Baker both describe Aristide as "a leftist," but Baker insists that the exiled leader's politics are immaterial. Those like Cheney "who urge walking away because Aristide isn't our kind of democrat are wrong," says Baker. "If supporting democracy is a cornerstone of our foreign policy, which it is and should be, then you can't treat what democracy produces as a fruit salad, taking a raisin here while rejecting a pecan there. The test should be whether Aristide was chosen in a free and fair election. He was. Supporting him is therefore an American interest. It isn't an interest that justifies war, but it does justify rigorous sanctions."
Neither Baker nor Cheney believes returning Aristide to power in Haiti will encourage other Caribbean countries to become more democratic. In fact, both discredit signal sending as particularly important in foreign affairs, except as a "negative incentive," says Baker. "I never thought our resolve in getting Saddam out of Kuwait would deter the Serbs in Bosnia or the coup that overthrew Aristide," explains Cheney in an analysis Baker shares. "It doesn't work that way unless, like Clinton, you talk loudly about using force and then fail to follow through. When you project weakness consistently you do embolden bad guys. But standing up for a truly vital interest, as we did in the Gulf, has never had much of a deterrent effect elsewhere, even during the cold war."