POLITICS : Fear of the Future Prods Haiti Foes Toward Talks

In this nation where concepts of the national good always seem to dissolve in the face of self-interest, the two major rival groups may finally be driven to a settlement by a powerful emotion--the fear of the unknown.

Uncertainty over what President-elect Bill Clinton might do is forcing the two sides into a serious effort to set aside selfishness and end Haiti’s political and economic crisis, according to diplomats and other experts.

Given past failures, there remains plenty of reason for skepticism, if not outright cynicism. But even representatives of the warring sides, discouraged by those failures, now argue that the time is right for solving the problems.

Both the army, which has controlled Haiti since it overthrew the country’s first democratic government Sept. 29, 1991, and President Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the radical Catholic priest who was forced into exile by the coup, are prepared for unprecedented direct negotiations in the immediate future, the sources say.

Since the outline for a prospective settlement closely resembles those earlier abortive attempts, the only reason to speculate on success this time is the new ingredient--Haitians’ fear of what measures Clinton might take on Haiti after he is inaugurated Jan. 20.

“Fear of the unknown is pushing them,” said one diplomat, “Fear is the ultimate motivation” to negotiate now.

For the army, there is the fear that Clinton will carry out his campaign promise to go further than President Bush has done to restore democracy by reinvigorating what is now a moribund economic embargo of Haiti and by totally isolating the little country.

Adding to this perception is what Haitian military officials see as suggestions from Washington that the new President would use armed force to restore Aristide if thousands of Haitian refugees were to set out for Florida to claim political asylum.

“We’ve been told that Clinton will do anything to stop new refugees,” one army officer said in an interview. “And we know he thinks that there won’t be any refugees if Aristide comes back. So what other conclusion is there?”

For his part, Aristide--who has been living in Washington and bitterly blaming Bush for not restoring him to power--is described as fearful that Clinton will hold him responsible if there is no settlement soon and a refugee exodus is the result.

“In essence, Aristide is afraid that Clinton will come to the same conclusion that Bush did--that he (Aristide) is stubborn and uncompromising,” said a Southern Hemisphere diplomat. “So he figures he had better take what he can get now or face getting nothing.”

According to diplomats, the key proposed ingredients for a settlement include total amnesty and security for all military personnel, particularly the army commander in chief, Gen. Raoul Cedras; the appointment of a prime minister unconnected to Aristide; reduced presidential powers; an official end to the international embargo; a resumption of foreign aid, and specific financial assistance to the military.

Once these elements are agreed to, Aristide would be permitted to return and serve out the remaining three years of his term with his security guaranteed by the military.

All these provisions were agreed to previously but fell through.

But despite the fear of Clinton and the feeling here that, as a key diplomat put it, “this is a window of opportunity not to be missed,” the obstacles remain formidable.

For Aristide to publicly declare amnesty for Cedras would be a 180-degree turn from his previous stand and to betray promises he has made to his stronger supporters.

Cedras would also have to turn his back on promises he made to his fellow officers, who have been constantly told that the return of Aristide would mean the end of their privileged status.

“The hope for a change in these attitudes,” said the Southern Hemisphere diplomat, “is the realization that there is no status quo. If they don’t work it out now, everything will change--and no doubt for the worse.”