Preempting Democracy: The Bush Administration vs. the World

Preempting Democracy: The Bush Administration vs. the World Congresswoman Barbara Lee* INTRODUCTION Today we have assembled to participate in the African-American Law & Policy Report's symposium, The Role of Law & Policy. Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States. In talking about the role of law today, I would especially like to focus on the rule of law, and its place in American foreign policy. The answers may seem self-evident, but it remains important to pose two vital questions: (1) What makes the rule of law so important?; and (2) in an era in which the United States is the only superpower in the world, does the rule of law still matter a great deal? In addressing these questions, I specifically want to talk about the rule of law and foreign policy in the Bush Administration by looking first at the actions of the United States government during the recent coup d'etdt in Haiti and then by examining the Administration's broader assault on international law in the form of the Doctrine of Preemption.' * Ninth Congressional District Representative from California. Congresswoman Lee also serves on the International Relations Committee, the Financial Services Committee, as Co-Chair of the Progressive Caucus, Whip for the Congressional Black Caucus (CBC), Senior Democratic Whip, Chair of the CBC Task Force on Global HIV/AIDS, and Co-Chair of the CBC Haiti Task Force. I would like to thank the African-American Law & Policy Report at Boalt for inviting me to the [March 6, 2004] symposium, The Role of Law & Policy: Africa, the Caribbean, and the United States. Additionally, I want to take this opportunity to recognize the newly designated dean of Boalt Hall School of Law, Christopher Edley, and congratulate him on his appointment. Dean Edley will be the first African American to head one of the nation's premier law schools. We all know that the glass ceiling still exists. I am so pleased that Dean Edley has crashed right through it. 1. See THE NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf (last visited Feb. 8, 2005) [hereinafter NATIONAL SECURITY STRATEGY]. The Doctrine of Preemption is an official policy-the New National Security Strategy. The concept was first mentioned during a June 2002 presidential speech and later adopted as policy with the September 20, 2002 issuance of the National Security Strategy of the United States of America, commonly referred to as NSS. For an overview of the Doctrine of Preemption, see Michael E. O'Hanlon et al., The New National Security Strategy and (2002), available at Preemption, BROOKINGS INSTITUTION, POLICY BRIEF #113 http://www.brookings.edu/comrnpolicybriefs/pb I 13.htm. 30 AFRICAN-AMERICANLA W& POLICYREPORT [VOL. VII:29 The United Nations Charter provides the foundation for the rule of modem international law. The Charter calls on its members to live together in peace as good neighbors; united in strength to maintain international peace and security; to promote the economic and social advancement of all; and to ensure that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest. 2 The rule, as set forth in the Charter, is tremendously important because when it disintegrates, either within a country or between nations, the world is a less stable, less secure place. In fact, it is in our national interest for countries, including the United States, to abide by the rule of law. Our leaders recognized the importance of abiding by the rule of law when, in the wake of the terrible, awful destruction of World War II, which left fifty-five million dead,3 they helped establish the United Nations (UN).4 The UN codified the principles of international law and security in the UN Charter. The preamble to the Charter begins: We the Peoples of the United Nations Determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom .... 5 While the United States may be the world's only superpower, we are by no means all-powerful. It is important for the United States to abide by the rule of law because we are a part of the community of nations. That membership brings both benefits and obligations. Furthermore, as the most powerful country in the world, we must realize that we do not walk softly across the earth: each step that we take sends shockwaves that echo across the globe. If we trample international law by ignoring the rule of law, or refuse to take up the burdens of leadership, our actions have repercussions that may be felt around the world for generations to come. 2. U.N. CHARTER pmbl., available at http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/index.html (last visited Mar. 8, 2005). 3. 29 NEW ENCYLCOpREDIA BRITANNICA 1022 (15th ed. 1990). The exact number of World War II deaths is not universally agreed upon, but many reliable sources estimate the number of deaths to be anywhere from thirty-five to sixty million. 4. History of the UN, at http://www.un.org/aboutun/history.htm (last visited Feb. 8, 2005). 5. U.N. CHARTER pmbl., supra note 2. 2005] PREEMPTINGDEMOCRACY Two vivid and very recent examples bring to mind the importance of the rule of law and the chaos and loss of life that follow when it is undermined. First, and closest to home, in Haiti a fragile democracy was shattered not simply by Haitian rebels, but also by the U.S. government.6 Second, we have what may be the greatest threat to the rule of law of all: the Bush Administration's Doctrine of Preemption, which ignores international law. These two examples tell us an enormous amount about the Bush Administration's foreign policy and its approach to the rule of law. These two examples of the Administration's foreign policy are connected to one another in several ways. First, they are both central to the Bush Administration's view of the world. Second, they are both indicative of President Bush's failures to engage in multilateral cooperation. Finally, both examples reflect the Bush Administration's failure to uphold the rule of law and, in fact, the Administration's willingness to violate international law and the principles of democracy whenever it chooses. I. HAITI-A DEMOCRACY UNDER SIEGE Let's start with Haiti. On February 29, 2004, the Bush Administration helped bring down the first democratically elected government in Haiti's history.7 Moreover, the origins of the Administration's policies with respect to Haiti go back much further than a few weeks and show that the United States started to undermine the Aristide government long before Feb (...truncated)