Annotations for Countries: Haiti

This week's feature deals with one case study in the controversy between multinational corporations and Latin American nationalist governments, which pose a threat to corporate investments in Latin America. The ITT secret memorandums concerning its interventions in Chile, have made the headlines again recently, calling attention to the strong power these companies wield in Latin America.

Senate hearings in Washington this week have been delving into the activities of ITT's busy Washington office, this time involving its campaign to get Nixon Administration help in protecting ITT properties in Chile from Marxist President Salvador Allende. The Wall Street Journal reports that ITT officials bombarded the White House with letters and visits, called on the State Department, huddled with the US ambassador to Chile, and lunched often with a Central Intelligence Agency spy boss, known as "Our Man." What ITT wanted during this hectic pleading in 1970 and '71, was for Washington to threaten the newly elected Allende government with economic collapse, according to William Merriam, who was then head of the company's Washington office. "If Allende was faced with economic collapse, he might be more congenial toward paying us off", Mr. Merriam told a Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee. The Chilean government had expropriate the ITT-controlled Chile Telephone Company without, the company says, offering adequate compensation.

The Wall Street Journal goes on to say that the Senate subcommittee, chaired by Senator Frank Church, was created especially to investigate the influence of big multinational companies like ITT on US foreign policy. ITT's involvement in the 1970 Chilean presidential election, was first brought to light a year ago in columns by Jack Anderson, who had obtained a stack of memos, cable grams, and letters between ITT officials. So far, ITT has had little luck protecting its investments in Chile. It claims that the ITT-controlled telephone company that was intervened by the Allende government in September 1971, has a book value of $153 million. ITT has filed a claim for $92 million with the US government's Overseas Private Investment Corporation, which ensures American property against foreign expropriation. But OPIC has a rule against provocations or instigation by its insurance clients, unless the activity was requested by the US government. So the question of who took the lead in meddling in the 1970 Chilean election, ITT or the CIA, could determine whether the insurance claim is valid.

Mr. Merriam told Senator Church that ITT Chairman Harold Geneen introduced him in July of 1970 to William Broe, the CIA's Latin American Director for Clandestine Services. Mr. Merriam said he was instructed to stay in touch with Mr. Broe in the future. Without saying who initiated this meeting in the Washington Hotel, Mr. Miriam made it clear that the CIA was impressed with political reporting on the Chilean situation by ITT'S operatives in Latin America. He said Mr. Broe sent CIA messengers to his office to get the reports. The September 17th, 1970 cable from Bob Barella and Hal Hendrix, two ITT officials in Latin America, suggested Mr. Allende's election might be headed off with help from we and other US firms in Chile. The cable recommended that advertising funds be pumped into a financially shaky conservative newspaper in Chile. The cable also suggests, concludes the Wall Street Journal account, "that ITT bring what pressure we can on the US information service to circulate the newspaper's editorials in Latin America and Europe."

In a memo dated September 14th, 1970, an ITT operative in Chile wrote that he had spoken with the state department's Latin American advisor to Henry Kissinger. "I told him of Mr. Geneen's deep concern about the Chile situation, not only from the standpoint of our heavy investment, but also because of the threat to the entire hemisphere." The threat to its interest explains in a nutshell why ITT worked so hard in the period between September 4th and November 4th to prevent the Allende government from taking power in Chile. ITT had a great deal to lose in Chile.

Its holdings consisted of six affiliates, employing about 8,000 workers and worth around $200 million. It operated the Chilean Telephone Company, one of ITT's biggest earners abroad, had investments in telephone equipment, assembling and manufacturing, directory printing and international communications, and operated hotels. Among foreign investors in Chile, only the copper holdings of Anaconda and Kennecott exceeded the worth of ITT's Chilean subsidiaries. In 1969, the Frei administration agreed that the telephone company be guaranteed a minimum annual profit of 10%. Profits for ITT have further been augmented by special foreign exchange arrangements for the communications monopolies in Chile.

The following memos illustrate how far ITT was willing to go to keep these investments. They also reveal the close ties between ITT executives and the US government, including the Central Intelligence Agency. And in the relations between ITT and the Chilean right. ITT had access to the centers of Chilean domestic power as well, having recruited prominent Chileans through career and investment ties. The memos expose ITT as a corporate nation on which the sun never sets. As Jack Anderson summarized, "ITT operates its own worldwide foreign policy unit, foreign intelligence machinery, counterintelligence apparatus, communications network, classification system, and airliner fleet with total assets equal to the combined gross national products of Paraguay, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Haiti, Bolivia, and Chile. ITT can wield its power almost at will."

The key memoranda begin on September 17th, 1970, 6 Weeks prior to the historic presidential election, which placed the Allende government in power. ITT field officials, Hendrix and Barella, advised an ITT vice President, E.J. Gerrity about the Chilean presidential campaign, suggesting alternatives which could thwart Allende's election chances.

The report stated that, "The surface odds and foreign news media appear to indicate that Salvador Allende will be inaugurated as president November 4th. But there is now a strong possibility that he will not make it. The big push has begun in Chile to assure congressional victory for Jorge Alessandri on October 24th as part of what has been dubbed the Alessandri formula to prevent Chile from becoming a communist state. Late September 15th, US Ambassador Edward Korry finally received a message from State Department giving him the green light to move in the name of President Nixon. The message gave him maximum authority to do all possible, short of Dominican Republic type action, to keep Allende from taking power."

The report further contended that the Mercurio newspapers are another key factor. "Keeping them alive and publishing between now and October 24th is of extreme importance. They're the only remaining outspoken anti-communist voice in Chile and under severe pressure, especially in Santiago. This may well turn out to be the Achilles heel for the Allende crowd. The Allende effort more than likely will require some outside financial support. The degree of this assistance will be known better around October 1st. We have pledged our support if needed."

Then on September 29th, Vice President Gerrity cabled ITT President Harold Geneen in Brussels, giving more details of the measures being considered to induce economic collapse in Chile. The cable says, "Subsequent to your call yesterday, I heard from Washington and a representative called me this morning. He was the same man you met with Merriam some weeks ago. We discussed the situation in detail and he made suggestions based on recommendations from our representative on the scene, and analysis in Washington. The idea presented is to follow economic pressure. The suggestions follow. Banks should not renew credits or should delay in doing so. Companies should drag their feet in sending money. And making deliveries in shipping, spare parts, etc. Savings and loan companies there are in trouble. If pressure were applied, they should have to shut their doors, thereby creating stronger pressure. We should withdraw all technical help and should not promise any technical assistance in the future.

A list of companies was provided, and it was suggested that we should approach them as indicated. I was told that of all the companies involved, ours alone had been responsive and understood the problem. The visitor added that money was not a problem."

He indicated, the cable continued, "that certain steps were being taken, but that he was looking for additional help aimed at inducing economic collapse. I discussed the suggestions with Guilfoyle, another ITT vice president. He contacted a couple of companies who said they had been given advice, which is directly contrary to the suggestions I received. Realistically, I did not see how we can induce others involved to follow the plan suggested. We can contact key companies for their reactions and make suggestions in the hope that they might cooperate. Information we receive today from other sources indicates that there is a growing economic crisis in any case."

The Gerrity cable was followed by a memorandum, dated October 9th, from another of the ITT vice presidents, William Merriam to John McCone, Director of the CIA from 1962 to 1965, and now a director of ITT. Merriam concluded that, "Practically no progress has been made in trying to get Latin American business to cooperate in some way so as to bring on economic chaos." GM and Ford, for example, say that they have too much inventory on hand in Chile to take any chances. And that they keep hoping that everything will work out all right. Also, the Bank of America has agreed to close its doors in Santiago, but each day keeps postponing the inevitable. According to my source, we must continue to keep the pressure on business. I was rather surprised to learn that in this man's opinion, the Nixon Administration will take a very, very hard line when and if Allende is elected.

As soon as expropriations take place, and providing adequate compensation is not forthcoming, he believes that all sources of American monetary help either through aid or through the lending agencies here in Washington will be cut off. He assures me that the president has taken, at this time better late than never, I guess, a long, hard look at the situation and is prepared to move after the fact. We had heard previously from the lower level at the State Department that Hickenlooper would not be invoked. This policy has either changed or the lower echelon does not know of this change. This is the first heartening thing that I have heard because with few exceptions, Nixon has paid very little attention to Latin America."

Subsequent memos indicate that, although both ITT and the CIA, gave verbal assurances of material support to Chilean general Roberto Viaux, who was maneuvering inside the army to stage a possible coup in late October. The attempt failed to materialize. None of ITT's efforts were effective in preventing Allende's election on November 4th, 1970. Although the memos indicate that the ITT maneuverings fail, we know that in the one and one half years that have passed since the Popular Unity government assumed power, the Chilean right aided by the US government and US business interests has continued to engage in subversive activity against the Allende government. This activity has taken many forms, including assassination attempts against the Chilean president outright, but abortive military coups, manipulation of food and other resources to exacerbate scarcities and create economic chaos, and of course the withholding of aid and loans as a big stick to whip the government in line. All of these tactics were suggested in the secret memos.

ITT has struggled for a year to ring from the UP a generous compensation for its interest in the Chilean telephone company, Chi Telco, which the Allende government earmarked for expropriation immediately upon its inauguration. Chi Telco was ITT's most profitable Chilean asset. Throughout the first part of 1971, ITT bickered over the terms of the expropriation, and finally on September 30th, 1971, the government took over operation of Chi Telco, claiming its services were highly deficient. Since then, ITT and UP have continued to negotiate over how much the government should pay for ITT's 70% share in Chi Telco. ITT valued the company at $153 million, but the government claimed it was only worth $24 million. Based on its past experiences in other Latin American countries, ITT has every reason to believe that it would be reimbursed. In the past three years, the governments of Peru, Ecuador, and Brazil have all nationalized the ITT-owned telephone companies in their countries on terms extremely favorable to ITT.

The memorandum that cited earlier may destroy ITT's chances for compensation from the Allende government, and may lead to further nationalization of ITT properties in Chile. In order to appropriate a corporation, the Chilean Congress must pass a constitutional amendment in each case. Presumably, these documents are giving the government more fuel in its effort to regain control of Chile's industries from the North American investors. As nationalism grows in Latin America, the threat to US corporations abroad also grows. As the documents make clear, US corporations are urging the US government to take a firm stand against unfriendly acts of expropriation by Latin American government, and are prepared to resist this trend by actively interfering in the internal affairs of other nations to safeguard their interests.

Tri-Continental News Service in New York reported this week on the expanding market in human blood, which Tri-Continental calls the ultimate commodity. The shortage of blood plasma in this country has provided some enterprising US businesses with a profitable new commodity and has created a new source of misery for the poorest people in America. Donations of blood in the United States cover only about 60% of the annual need. The deficit, about two and a half million pints, comes from people who sell their blood in order to survive. The going rate in urban slums and poor southern states of the United States is from five to $15 a pint, which the companies then sell to hospitals for up to $35. 

Now, United States companies have found an even cheaper source of this strategic raw material. They have set up blood banks in half a dozen Latin American capitals, where unemployment rates of up to 50% assure a virtually unlimited supply of people willing to open up their veins for these merchants. The plentiful supply of blood has driven the price down, and prices are from $2 to $3 a pint are common. 

The blood exporting countries include Haiti, Guatemala, Costa Rica, Honduras, Mexico, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Columbia, and Brazil. A recent survey carried out by the Department of Experimental Surgery at the Autonomous University of Mexico estimated that the export of blood from Mexico alone was a $10 million annual business. Latin American blood is sent to West Germany and Israel in addition to the United States. 

Tri-Continental claims that many of the people who sell their blood are undernourished and anemic, and yet they will come in week after week to make their sale. The companies, which are not licensed or controlled by medical authorities, are not concerned with the loss of iron, which often results in the slow death of the chronic blood donor. 

Tri-Continental suggests that the reason why such practices persist is government corruption. When defense minister Luckner Cambronne was dismissed from his post in Haiti in November 1972, it was learned that he had been a partner in Hemo Caribbean, a US controlled blood company that also has branches in the Dominican Republic. Similar financial connections have been revealed between Carlos Arana Osorio, president of Guatemala, and the Sedesa company, which exports blood from that country, and in the case of the Samosas family's holdings in blood exporting companies in Nicaragua. This report from New York's Tri-Continental News Service.

Excélsior also reports that the Bertrand Russell Tribunal declared last week in Rome that the governments of Brazil, Chile, Uruguay, and Bolivia were guilty of repeated and systematic violations of human rights. The president of the tribunal added that the accused governments constitute a continuing crime against humanity. 

The current Bertrand Russell Tribunal on repression in Brazil, Chile, and Latin America is a descendant of the Russell Tribunal on United States War crimes in Vietnam, which convened during the 1960's. The tribunal is an international jury composed of prominent intellectuals from Europe, Latin America, and the United States, including Jean Paul Sartre, former Dominican President, Juan Bosch, and Colombian writer, Gabriel García Márquez. During last week, it considered evidence presented by political refugees from Latin America. 

The tribunal concluded that civil law has been unknown in Brazil since the military coup in 1964, that there was political repression in Bolivia and that the Uruguayan military government used torture on its opponents. Concerning Chile, the tribunal's verdict labeled the current military government illegitimate. 

The tribunal stated that the Uruguayan regime has lost all respect for human rights and has arrested people without charge in order to terrorize the population. For example, the tribunal cited the case of banning the newspaper Marcha and the arrest of the prize-winning writer, Juan Carlos Onetti. 

The tribunal also affirmed that multinational companies, as well as what it called ruling classes in countries which are aligned with these firms are the major beneficiaries of these four regimes. The tribunal issued an appeal to the governments around the world to cut off all military and economic aid to these four South American countries and it urged a coordinated international campaign for the liberation of political prisoners. The tribunal will convene its next jury later this year to examine the role of the US government and multinational companies in Latin America, as well as to investigate cases of torture in other countries such as Paraguay, Guatemala, Haiti, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico. 

In addition to the findings of the Bertrand Russell Tribunal, Mexico City's Excélsior reports the following on similar actions taken by the London-based organization, Amnesty International. At its April 1st general meeting in the British capital, the group called on General Ernesto Geisel, the recently installed president of Brazil to free all of Brazil's political prisoners. 

Amnesty International is a prestigious organization which has defended political prisoners in both communist and non-communist countries throughout the world. Amnesty International's letter to President Geisel was made public on the 10th anniversary of the military coup in Brazil, which facilitated the present regime's assumption of power. The letter also asks that Geisel will release information on some 210 political prisoners who died under what was termed mysterious circumstances following their arrest. 

Amnesty International, continues Excélsior, has long defended in any country, political prisoners that have not employed acts of violence in opposing their governments. The London group recently presented the same list of prisoners to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights. In closing its session, Amnesty International affirmed that it would continue to collect documentation, which would prove that the torture of political prisoners is still being carried out by the new Brazilian regime. That from the Mexico City daily, Excélsior.

The British news weekly Latin America recently carried this story about political refugees from Haiti, a tiny Latin American country which shares the Caribbean island of Hispaniola with the Dominican Republic. 

Latin America begins by telling the story of Mrs. Marie Sanon, a woman who recently fled Haiti to escape the fear of beatings and the threat of jail. Mrs. Sanon thought when she fled Haiti that she would find asylum in the United States. Instead, she's one of some 400 Haitians in the United States, over 100 of them in jail, who are faced with deportation as illegal aliens. 

Since there are no immigration quotas for the Western hemisphere countries, immigrants may be admitted when they meet certain qualifications or if they are political refugees. Tens of thousands of Cubans are in this country because they are the type of refugees acceptable to the State Department. US authorities claim that escapees like Ms. Sanon are not political refugees because, they say, there is no political repression on that Caribbean island. The State Department says that since the death of Papa Doc Duvalier three years ago, his son, Jean-Claude, has brought about a more liberalized regime. But, says Latin America, Ms. Sanon and many others have charged that nothing has changed in Haiti and that the reform is just a cosmetic device to attract tourists to the island.

Mrs. Sanon lived in Port-au-Prince Haiti with her parents and nine other brothers and sisters in a small house. To meet increasing family expenses, her father rented a room to a man they later learned was a member of the Duvalier secret police, the Leopards. Early last year, after months of not receiving any rent from their boarder, one of the sisters went to ask for it and was brutally beaten. When the father went to find out what happened, he was arrested. Later, her mother was arrested too, and both were kept in jail for a month. 

After their release, the family lived in constant fear of further beatings or arrests. One of Mrs. Sanon's brothers, a law student, refused to help plan national sovereignty day observance at the university and declared his opposition to the regime. One day, Mrs. Sanon's friends told her that the Leopards were going to arrest her and her brother that night. With another brother, they left Port-au-Prince and made their way to Cap-Haitien where they met others who also wanted to escape. 

38 of them, including 30 men, seven women and a 16-year-old boy jammed into a small 20-foot sailboat they found and set sail for freedom, Miami, 750 miles away. But after two days out, the rudder broke and Gulf Currents brought them to the Cuban shore. Cuban officials offered them asylum, but they refused saying they were not Communists. They made repairs and set out again. Days later, the rudder failed again and the boat floundered. 

After nine days of helpless drifting, they were cited by some fishermen who then radioed the US Coast Guard. They were soon picked up and brought to Miami. The group, of course, asked for political asylum, but the State Department refused since it holds the view that no political repression is practiced on the island. 

Yet, says Latin America, despite proclamations of the Duvalier government to the contrary, terror and imprisonment have been documented by a number of human rights groups such as Amnesty International. In a report issued last year, Amnesty said no real changes have taken place in Haiti, except for an increasing struggle for power, both within the Duvalier family itself and among the ministers and other officials. For many years, hardly any information about political prisoners seeped out of Haiti. Prisoners who were released or exiled did not dare speak for fear of reprisals on themselves or their families. 

United States government officials say that many Haitians have come to this country for purely economic reasons, and that 30% never request asylum. They also say that the refugees who can't establish that they will be subject to persecution on account of race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular group cannot remain in the United States. Why the State Department is treating Haitians differently than other refugees is a question that has been posed by many groups supporting the Haitians. 

In Miami, a former Justice Department attorney who represents 250 of the refugees says what it boils down to is that the United States is unwilling to accept the fact that people who come from right-wing countries are oppressed. People who flee to the United States from Communist countries are always granted political asylum, but we have a long history of refusing those from right-wing or Fascist dictatorships. That from the British newswekly, Latin America.