One of the few surviving images of Haitian victims of the so-called Parsley Massacre. |
If
Americans recall Generalissimo Rafael Trujillo, the brutal and avaricious dictator of the Dominican
Republic, at all it is for
winding up dead in a bullet ridden Chevy
in 1961, the victim of an abortive coup d’état arranged with the
wink-and-not support of the Central
Inelegance Agency (CIA.) His death unleashed a decade of turbulence in
the Caribbean nation which
eventually “required” the intervention of American
Marines yet again.
His
death was just one bookend of a
career as President and/or
power-behind-the-throne for more than thirty years. The other book end was his rise to power as
an officer in the Dominican Army,
the protégée of Marines who occupied
the country on behalf of United Fruit
and other American interests through most of the 1920’s.
He
was Army Chief of Staff in 1930 who
allowed a revolution to topple a previous dictator, then quickly assumed power
as President winning 99% of the vote in an election that a U.S. State Department official admiringly reported earned him more
votes than there were voters.
Before
he even donned the Presidential sash for
the first time his soldiers and police were rounding up and quietly disposing
of any possible opponents. He ruled with
an iron hand, directly or indirectly until peppered with rounds from CIA
supplied M-1 carbines.
On
one hand, Trujillo set off on a modernizing campaign that built highways to tie
the nation more closely to the Capital Santo
Domingo which he eventually modestly renamed Ciudad
Trujillo as well as schools and
hospitals. He and his family also
appropriated most of the nation’s cattle
and dairy production as well as vast
sugar cane plantations and other
local economic powerhouses.
One key element of his nationalist policy
was assuring the continued mastery of a White
elite in the face of a nation that was largely Mestizo, with a
rapidly growing Black population. That
population included not only a high birthrate for the decedents of Spanish slaves, but increasing numbers
of Haitians spilling over a porous
and contested border from the Creole
French speaking western portion of the island of Hispaniola.
Relations between the two countries had always been difficult. Haiti had invaded and occupied the Dominican
Republic from 1822-44. When Trujillo
took power, the western provinces were poorly connected to the capital and to
Dominican markets, naturally trading across the border to Haiti. In the sparsely populated northwest as
Haitians, lured by jobs in the sugar industry, had been taking up residence for
decades. Many now were second or third
generation and while speaking Creole, were at least nominal Dominican citizens.
The border was poorly defined and both nations had outstanding
territorial demands of the other. Trujillo was concerned that Haiti would use
majority pockets of Haitian immigrants and their descendants to make further
claims. In 1933 and 1935, Trujillo met the Haitian President Stenio Vincent to settle the border issue and in 1936,
they reached and signed a settlement.
But that settlement did not include repatriation of Haitians in the
Dominican Republic. Trujillo had other
plans for that.
For
years his tightly controlled press had hyped any and all reports of crime
committed by Haitians. When there was
not enough, he would manufacture it. He
particularly pointed out nearly non-existent rustling of cattle from the large herds of local ranchers—of which
he and his family were the most important.
In the kinds of tactics Hitler would
later use to justify the invasion of Poland,
depredations were made up and highly publicized.
On
October 2, 1937 the President publicly signaled a brutal new policy already
underway in a speech given in the northwest provincial province capital of Dajabón.
For some months,
I have traveled and traversed the border in every sense of the word. I have
seen, investigated, and inquired about the needs of the population. To the Dominicans
who were complaining of the depredations by Haitians living among them, thefts
of cattle, provisions, fruits, etc., and were thus prevented from enjoying in
peace the products of their labor, I have responded, “I will fix this.” And we
have already begun to remedy the situation. Three hundred Haitians are now dead
in Bánica. This remedy will
continue.
Indeed
five days of unimaginable horror and brutality that came to be known in English
as the Parsley Massacre was
underway. In a well-organized campaign
elements of the Army, police, and Trujillo’s security force, the dreaded Servicio de Inteligencia Militar (SIM), fanned out across the border
region searching for Haitians. They were
not hard to find.
The
story circulated that soldiers brought with them sprigs of parsley—perejil in Spanish. Creole speaking Haitians were supposed to be
unable to trill the r in the word. Those
who failed the test were executed on the spot, along with family members found
with them. Afro-Dominicans who passed
the test were allegedly let go. This
tale, while popularized in the Anglo press, is largely mythical. And in fact many Afro-Dominicans as well as Haitians
were swept up in the blood bath.
Dominicans
and Haitians have two different names for the five days of killing that
followed. Dominicans call it el
corte—the cutting. Haitians call
it kouto-a—the
knife.
Because
many of the attackers were in civilian garb, surprised Haitians—many of them longtime
residents and citizens—at first expected the Army to rescue them. Instead they were shot, hacked to death by machetes, and bludgeoned with clubs and
baseball bats. Whole villages were surrounded and wiped
out. Those attempting to escape by
fleeing across the Artibonite River to
Haiti were intercepted on its banks and killed or drowned trying to reach
safety on the other side.
In
the five day killing spree, somewhere between 20,000 and 30,000 suspected
Haitians were killed. Murders continued
on a more subdued level across the region for years.
The
government of Haiti naturally protested the massacre. But the black ruled nation was largely a pariah
to neighboring Spanish speaking Caribbean and Latin American nations. The U.S.
State Department conducted an investigation and determined that, despite Trujillo’s
claims that the killings were the work of outraged Dominicans and not the state,
that the killing were indisputably the policy of the government and carried out
by its forces.
The
Roosevelt administration toyed with
the idea of another intervention to save the Haitians, but was effectively
blocked by powerful Southern Democrats in
the U.S. House and Senate who saw nothing wrong in killing
Blacks. Some were also the recipients of
Trujillo’s gifts and largess.
Despite
a moment or two of international embarrassment, Trujillo easily rode out the
controversy. He would subsequently kill
an additional 30,000 suspected opponents of his regime in his long tenure.
In
the end, the State Department accommodated him as the country’s economy prospered
and so did the profits of American investors.
But
by the ‘50’s Trujillo’s heavy handed meddling in the affairs of its neighbors including
Haiti and Cuba began to concern
American authorities. After he tried to assassinate
his biggest Latin American critic, Venezuelan
President Rómulo Betancourt an aerial bombing attack on his car, the U.S.
had enough and the CIA began its intrigues with the potential Dominican junta.
After
ten years of chaos and the intervention of the Marines, the CIA finally turned
to a Truillo protégée, Joaquín Balaguer returning
one of the late dictator’s puppet presidents to power as a bulwark against a
Cuban style revolution.
For
their part Haitians on both sides of the border remained mired in poverty,
repression, and hopelessness.
Patrick, thanks for calling our attention again to the tangled roots of this horrible legacy. Apparently another root of Haitian poverty was that after their revolution against France, the former master country exacted reparations for the value of 'enslaved property." I was horrified to read that these were paid off only in the late 20th century, although the revolution had been in 1819 (if memory serves).
ReplyDeleteIt's early morning, and I'm not checking footnotes on this one, but my memory suggests I got this from one of Paul Farmer's books about doing medical work there with the Clinton Foundation.
So if you steal something from someone and they reclaim it, why do you get to be reimbursed for "the value of what you've lost"? Why don't you just go to jail?