Title: Political Sovereignty and External Intervention: Haiti’s Leadership Defies U.S. Pressure in the Proposed Removal of the Prime Minister
Abstract
This paper examines the recent political maneuver by two Haitian leaders to proceed with the removal of the Prime Minister despite explicit warnings and potential sanctions from the United States. It situates the ongoing leadership crisis within the broader context of Haiti’s protracted state fragility, historical patterns of foreign intervention, and recent constitutional and governance challenges. The analysis draws on official statements, regional diplomatic reports, scholarly literature on neo-imperialism and sovereignty, and primary sources from Haitian political actors. Findings suggest that the defiance of U.S. diplomatic pressure reflects both an assertion of national self-determination and a symptom of deep institutional fragmentation. The paper argues that external coercion, particularly from powerful bilateral actors like the United States, risks undermining democratic legitimacy in fragile states unless paired with inclusive dialogue and respect for local institutions. Ultimately, this case study illustrates the complexities of sovereignty, legitimacy, and foreign influence in post-colonial states navigating political transitions amidst chronic insecurity.
Keywords: Haiti, sovereignty, foreign intervention, U.S.-Haiti relations, Prime Minister, democratic governance, political crisis, Caribbean politics
Introduction
On March 28, 2024, two prominent Haitian political figures—Senate President Joseph Lambert and Provisional Electoral Council (CEP) Secretary General Leon Charles—announced their intention to proceed with legislative procedures aimed at removing Prime Minister Ariel Henry from office, despite reported diplomatic warnings from the United States government (Le Nouvelliste, 2024; Reuters, 2024). The move triggered renewed international scrutiny of Haiti’s governance crisis and reignited debates over the role of external actors in Haitian political processes. This paper analyzes the significance of this development, exploring its implications for Haiti’s sovereignty, democratic institutions, and complex relationship with the United States.
Haiti, the Western Hemisphere’s poorest nation and the first Black republic born out of a successful slave revolt in 1804, has endured a century of political instability, foreign interventions, and socioeconomic collapse. Since the 2021 assassination of President Jovenel Moïse, the country has operated without an elected president, with Prime Minister Ariel Henry assuming de facto leadership under contested constitutional authority. Amid rampant gang violence, food insecurity, and the paralysis of public institutions, Haiti’s political leadership continues to fracture. The announcement by Lambert and Charles to initiate a legislative process to remove Henry marks not merely a political dispute but a critical juncture testing the resilience of Haiti’s governance framework and the limits of external influence.
Background: Haiti’s Political Crisis and the Role of the United States
2.1 The Constitutional Vacuum Post-Moïse
Following the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse on July 7, 2021, Haiti entered a prolonged constitutional limbo. Moïse had ruled by decree after the dissolution of parliament in January 2020, and no general elections had been held before his death. As per the 1987 Haitian Constitution, in the absence of both a president and a parliament, the Senate President should assume interim authority. However, the Senate had expired its term, and many senators’ mandates ended in January 2023, leaving no constitutionally legitimate body to confirm a new Prime Minister (Dupuy, 2023).
Nonetheless, Prime Minister Ariel Henry—who was named by Moïse just days before his death—claimed authority based on a controversial appointment and recognition by the international community, particularly the United States, United Nations, and Organization of American States (OAS). Henry’s legitimacy has since been widely contested by civil society groups, opposition politicians, and constitutional experts who argue that he lacks democratic mandate or constitutional basis for rule (IACHR, 2023).
2.2 Patterns of U.S. Intervention in Haitian Politics
The United States has a long and contentious history of involvement in Haiti, including a 19-year military occupation from 1915 to 1934 and repeated interventions during periods of political instability (Trouillot, 1990). In recent decades, the U.S. has acted as a key broker in Haitian politics, exerting influence through diplomatic support, foreign aid, immigration policy, and coordination with international bodies.
Following Moïse’s assassination, the U.S. played a pivotal role in recognizing Henry’s government, providing logistical and political backing. This support has been criticized by Haitian civil society as reinforcing authoritarian continuity under the guise of stability (Fatton, 2022). More recently, the U.S. State Department has warned Haitian officials against unilateral actions that could destabilize the current transitional framework. In a March 27, 2024 statement, a senior U.S. official cautioned that “any effort to remove Prime Minister Henry outside of established constitutional processes could trigger a reassessment of bilateral assistance” (U.S. Department of State, 2024).
These warnings reflect broader U.S. strategic concerns about migration flows, regional security, and the potential for further state collapse. However, such pronouncements are often perceived in Haiti as neo-colonial overreach, reviving historical grievances over external control (Segal, 2021).
The Political Move: Senate President and CEP Official Defy U.S. Pressure
3.1 Actors and Institutions at Play
Despite constitutional ambiguities, Senate President Joseph Lambert—a vocal critic of Ariel Henry—has maintained that the Senate, even with limited membership, retains a role in oversight and appointments. According to Article 149 of the Haitian Constitution, the Senate has the authority to consent to the appointment of a Prime Minister and can express a vote of no confidence. Lambert argues that these provisions remain applicable despite the legislative vacuum (Lambert, 2024 interview with Radio Métropole).
Similarly, Leon Charles, Secretary General of the Provisional Electoral Council (CEP), has advocated for immediate electoral preparations and a transition to constitutional rule. In a joint statement on March 28, 2024, Lambert and Charles announced plans to convene a meeting of the remaining Senate members to initiate a process of censure against Henry, citing his failure to hold elections, manage gang violence, and deliver basic services (Haiti Libre, 2024).
3.2 Motivations Behind the Defiance
The decision by Lambert and Charles to proceed despite U.S. pressure stems from several converging factors:
Legitimacy Crisis: Their move is framed as a constitutional corrective, asserting the need for representative governance. They argue that Henry’s prolonged tenure without elections violates democratic norms.
Domestic Pressure: Civil society coalitions, such as the Platfòm Pitit Desalin and the Conseil d’Églises, have called for Henry’s resignation, citing human rights abuses and mismanagement.
Regional Dynamics: Support from certain Caribbean Community (CARICOM) members, particularly Jamaica and The Bahamas, has emboldened domestic actors to resist U.S.-backed continuity (CARICOM Statement, March 25, 2024).
Symbolic Sovereignty: The defiance is also a statement against perceived neo-colonialism. As Senator Lambert stated, “Haiti must decide its destiny. We are not a protectorate” (Le Nouvelliste, March 29, 2024).
U.S. Threats and the Discourse of Conditionality
The U.S. response to the potential removal of Henry has drawn criticism from scholars of international relations. Threats to withhold aid or impose sanctions are seen as exercises of coercive diplomacy that prioritize U.S. interests—such as stemming migrant flows and countering criminal networks—over democratic principles (Schuller, 2023).
This approach reflects a broader trend in U.S. foreign policy toward the Global South, where aid and recognition are instrumentalized to maintain preferred political arrangements. Critics argue that this undermines authentic democratic processes, particularly in fragile states where institutional capacity is already weak (Krause, 2022).
Moreover, conditionality-based diplomacy often fails to produce sustainable outcomes. In Haiti, past U.S.-supported leaders, including Michel Martelly and Jovenel Moïse, eroded democratic institutions while maintaining outward alignment with Washington. The expectation that stability equates to legitimacy has repeatedly proven false (Fatton, 2022).
Implications for Haitian Sovereignty and Governance
5.1 Asserting National Autonomy
The defiance of U.S. pressure by Lambert and Charles represents a rare assertion of Haitian political agency. It underscores a longstanding demand among Haitian intellectuals and activists for endogenous solutions to governance crises. As historian Michel-Rolph Trouillot observed, “The world is not made only by those who dominate; it is also made by those who resist” (Trouillot, 1995).
However, the legitimacy of this resistance depends on its democratic grounding. The Senate currently lacks a quorum, and its claim to legislative authority is constitutionally tenuous. Without broad-based consultation and public support, the move risks being perceived as another elite power grab rather than a democratic renewal.
5.2 Risks of Fragmentation and Violence
Proceeding with Henry’s removal without a clear constitutional or transitional roadmap heightens the risk of political fragmentation and civil unrest. Haiti already suffers from one of the world’s highest levels of gang violence, with armed groups controlling over 80% of the capital, Port-au-Prince (UN Integrated Office in Haiti, 2024). A power vacuum could empower these groups and lead to increased humanitarian suffering.
Moreover, the international community remains divided. While the U.S. supports Henry, other actors—including some UN officials and European donors—have called for a transitional government inclusive of civil society. This lack of consensus complicates any transition effort.
Conclusion
The decision by two Haitian leaders to proceed with the removal of Prime Minister Ariel Henry, despite U.S. threats, is a pivotal moment in Haiti’s ongoing political crisis. It reflects both a rejection of external interference and an internal struggle to reclaim democratic legitimacy. While the move is symbolically significant, its success depends on adherence to constitutional principles, inclusive dialogue, and public accountability.
This case underscores the limitations of foreign powers in shaping political outcomes in fragile states. While the United States and other international actors have legitimate security and humanitarian concerns, coercive diplomacy risks deepening resentment and undermining local ownership of governance. For Haiti to transition toward stability, external actors must shift from conditionality to accompaniment—supporting Haitian-led processes rather than imposing outcomes.
Future research should examine how subaltern sovereignty is negotiated in post-colonial contexts and the role of regional bodies like CARICOM in counterbalancing Western influence. Ultimately, Haiti’s path forward must be determined not in Washington, but in Port-au-Prince—by its people, institutions, and elected representatives, when they are finally allowed to speak.
References
Dupuy, A. (2023). Haiti’s Predatory Republic: The Unending Transition to Democracy. Lynne Rienner Publishers.
Fatton, R. (2022). Politics in Haiti: The Electoral Arena and the Demise of Democracy. University of Virginia Press.
Haiti Libre. (2024, March 28). Deux dirigeants haïtiens annoncent la procédure de destitution du PM Henry. Retrieved from https://www.haitilibre.com
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR). (2023). Report on the Human Rights Situation in Haiti. OAS.
Krause, K. (2022). “Foreign Aid and Democratic Backsliding: The Case of Haiti.” Third World Quarterly, 43(4), 887–905.
Le Nouvelliste. (2024, March 29). Lambert et Charles déterminés à destituer Henry. Retrieved from https://www.lenouvelliste.com
Organization of American States (OAS). (2021). Statement on the Situation in Haiti. October 9, 2021.
Reuters. (2024, March 28). Haiti leaders plan PM removal despite U.S. warnings. Retrieved from https://www.reuters.com
Schuller, M. (2023). Humanitarian Aftershocks in Haiti. Rutgers University Press.
Segal, R. (2021). “Neocolonialism in the Caribbean: The U.S. and Haitian Political Instability.” Latin American Perspectives, 48(6), 112–130.
Trouillot, M.-R. (1990). Haiti: State Against Nation – The Origins and Legacy of Duvalierism. Monthly Review Press.
Trouillot, M.-R. (1995). Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History. Beacon Press.
U.S. Department of State. (2024). Press Statement on Haiti. March 27, 2024. Retrieved from https://www.state.gov
UN Integrated Office in Haiti (BINUH). (2024). Quarterly Report on the Security Situation in Haiti. February 2024.