Floyd Spence: “let me begin by commending the efforts of my colleagues, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl, in bringing this matter to the floor…”

“let me begin by commending the efforts of my colleagues, Porter Goss and Jon Kyl, in bringing this matter to the floor of the House. It is due to their diligence that the House has this timely opportunity to debate and consider the various directions of the administration's Haiti policy. A few short weeks ago, the President signed ``PDD-25'' which attempts to map out administration policy on peacekeeping. A central element of this document is a checklist of conditions used to evaluate whether the United States should undertake any given peacekeeping operation. However, when you apply the Clinton Peacekeeping Doctrine to Haiti, the first test since the PDD was signed, it flunks the test. The first criteria for U.S. involvement is: ``Is there a threat to international peace and security?'' The answer in Haiti is obviously no. If such a threat to international security existed the only country sharing land with Haiti--the Dominican Republican--would be clamoring for action. The second criteria for U.S. involvement is: ``Does the mission have a clear objective?'' The answer is once again no. The only mission objective seems to be to restore Aristide to power, even if that may not be the most realistic or viable approach to achieving a lasting democracy in Haiti. The long-term mission of U.S. military is very unclear. The third criteria for U.S. involvement is: ``Do all parties agree to a U.N. presence?'' The answer for Haiti is no.…”