Do Not Intervene in Haiti

Haitian President Jovenel Moïse was assassinated in his home by gunmen earlier today. The last time that a Haitian president was assassinated, the U.S. intervened militarily and then occupied the country for the next 19 years. There is absolutely no good reason why the US should do anything like this again today, and I assumed that would be obvious to almost everyone, but we already have The Washington Post clamoring for intervention this evening:

Swift and muscular intervention is needed.

The Post prefers a U.N.-led intervention, but it goes without saying that a “swift and muscular intervention” in a country so close to the United States would almost certainly involve US forces if it were to happen at all. The editorial calls for a U.N. peacekeeping force, but knowing the abysmal record of UN peacekeepers in Haiti, including widespread sexual abuse of young girls, that seems like an invitation for more abuses at the expense of the civilian population. This is what the editorial describes as being “a far cry from perfect,” which may be the understatement of the year.

Read the rest of the article at SubStack

Daniel Larison is a weekly columnist for Antiwar.com and maintains his own site at Eunomia. He is former senior editor at The American Conservative. He has been published in the New York Times Book Review, Dallas Morning News, World Politics Review, Politico Magazine, Orthodox Life, Front Porch Republic, The American Scene, and Culture11, and was a columnist for The Week. He holds a PhD in history from the University of Chicago, and resides in Lancaster, PA. Follow him on Twitter.