La Guerre Totale Contre les Gangs : L’ONU Fait-elle le Jeu des Terroristes en Haïti ?

Total War Against Gangs: Is the UN Playing into the Hands of Terrorists in Haiti?

By Patrick Prézeau Stephenson (Le Francais suit)

As Haiti plunges deeper into crisis, with terrorist gangs controlling vast portions of the capital and brutalizing civilians daily, the United Nations has chosen to focus its ire not on the criminals, but on the Haitian government's use of explosive drones. According to Roudy Thomas, anchor of « Se sa nou vle » radio show, the UN has requested the Haitian government to immediately suspend the use of explosive drones against gangs [1]. This stance is not only hypocritical—it is an outright affront to Haiti’s sovereignty, its right to self-defense, and the fundamental principle of self-determination.

A Nation at War, Abandoned by the International Community

For years, Haiti has pleaded for international intervention as its capital, Port-au-Prince, fell under the control of well-armed gangs terrorizing its population. The Multinational Security Support (MSS) Mission, championed by the UN as a solution, has proven ineffective. Nearly a year after its deployment, the situation on the ground has only worsened. Massacres, kidnappings, rapes, and extortion remain daily occurrences, with gangs operating with impunity.

Yet, rather than supporting Haiti’s efforts to combat these domestic terrorists, UN officials are reportedly pressuring the transitional government to halt its drone strikes on gang strongholds. This, despite the fact that these criminal organizations have murdered over 5,000 people, displaced over a million, and effectively taken 11 million citizens hostage.

If Haiti were any other nation, would the UN dare to make such a demand? Would the United States be expected to refrain from using drones against ISIS? Would France be condemned for bombing terrorist hideouts? The double standard is glaring.

The UN’s Failure and the Justification for Total War

The Haitian state is fighting for its survival against an existential threat. When the traditional mechanisms of law enforcement have failed—when police stations have been overrun, officers have been assassinated, and the justice system is powerless—the only remaining course of action is to escalate the fight.

This is not an abstract legal debate; it is a matter of national survival. The UN’s position ignores the fact that Haiti is engaged in an asymmetric war, where the enemy does not respect the laws of war, does not wear uniforms, and does not hesitate to use civilians as human shields. The doctrine of total war—in which a state uses all available means to eradicate an existential threat—becomes not just a necessity, but a moral imperative.

Haiti's use of explosive drones is not an act of aggression; it is a defensive measure against gangs that have already declared war on the population. The country’s leadership has a duty to protect its people by any means necessary.

The UN’s Own History with Drones

The hypocrisy of the UN’s condemnation is striking. The very same institution that warns against drone strikes in Haiti has turned a blind eye when powerful nations employ similar tactics. The United States, a UN Security Council member, has used drones extensively in the Middle East and Africa with little international outcry. Israel’s ongoing drone campaigns in Gaza receive, at worst, muted criticism.

The UN has conveniently ignored these realities while singling out Haiti for condemnation. This selective outrage reveals the underlying problem: Haiti, as a small, Black, and historically oppressed nation, is not granted the same right to self-defense as its Western counterparts.

Haiti’s Right to Self-Determination

The concept of self-determination is enshrined in international law. The UN Charter itself upholds the right of nations to determine their own future and defend their sovereignty. Yet, time and again, Haiti is treated as a ward of the international community rather than a nation with agency and the right to chart its own path.

By calling for an end to drone strikes, the UN is effectively demanding that Haiti surrender to the terrorists that have already crippled the nation. This is unacceptable. If the UN truly cared about human rights and stability, it would be working to ensure that Haiti has the tools and resources to eliminate these criminal groups—not standing in the way of its survival.

Conclusion: The World Must Choose

Haiti is at a breaking point. It can either reclaim its sovereignty through decisive military action, or it can succumb to lawlessness and gang rule. The UN’s position, whether intentional or not, serves only to embolden the very criminals who have turned the nation into a war zone.

The Haitian government has made its choice: to fight back. It is now up to the world to decide whether it will stand on the side of justice and self-determination—or continue to enable the forces of chaos.