Of course.
A second observation is that Haitian civil society has too often been ignored, with very significant consequences in terms of the understanding of issues and the appropriateness of interventions. One of the well-known examples is the effort to combat sexual violence after the earthquake. The analyses and guidance on how to respond to sexual violence were done at the time by the international community without consulting Haitian feminists and women's organizations whose efforts keep the fight against gender-based violence in the country going. The effect of that was to produce erroneous observations that did not take the decades of struggle into account.
As a result, the massive influx of international aid into Haiti over the last decade has often had negative consequences for local structures that were already underfunded and for development initiatives in the long term. This suggests that we should think in these terms: rather than asking whether we should intervene in Haiti, we have to ask ourselves how to be allies for the Haitian people, who are experiencing some extremely hard times.
That brings me to the second part of my testimony: Canada's role.
Given the crisis facing Haiti today, Canada has at least three possible avenues for supporting Haiti: the military avenue, because it is being talked about these days, the political avenue, and the humanitarian avenue. I am going to conclude my presentation by offering some thoughts on each of these avenues.
The option of undertaking a military intervention, as a number of witnesses have said, is rejected by one part of Haitian civil society. It is not the solution, according to the Quebec member organizations of the Association québécoise des organismes de coopération internationale, AQOCI, that work in Haiti, and their Haitian partners.
It must be admitted that the UN's international missions in recent years, and the efforts to reform the security sector, in which Canada has been particularly invested, have not succeeded in lifting the country out of insecurity and averting the present crisis. On the contrary, the foreign military presence and the impunity granted to soldiers in sexual abuse cases or in the introduction of cholera merely fanned the distrust and anger. That does not mean that Canada does not have a role to play, however, but that role must take the more political or humanitarian route.
Regarding the political route, as Mr. Boisrond has said, there is rising dissatisfaction with the foreign governments in the Core Group, to which Canada belongs, which supports the government of Ariel Henry, the government that Haitian civil society is openly opposing. A starting point would be to listen to Haitian civil society and recognize the Montana accord for installing a transitional government.
Canada's support must also include combating impunity, since the gangs are acting in an environment where impunity reigns. As the Concertation pour Haiti group suggests in its recommendations, Canada could, for example, support an international commission to investigate the assassination of Jovenel Moïse and, more broadly, support the Haitian justice system in combating impunity.
Last, with respect to humanitarian aid and international solidarity, there is a long history of solidarity between organizations in Canada, particularly in Quebec, and Haitian civil society. Those organizations work in tandem, recognizing Haitian expertise and the sovereignty of its institutions in fields that include sustainable agriculture, strengthening the justice system, education, and the rights of women and LGBTQ+ people. This support for civil society is essential, particularly during the current crisis, which is exacerbating other primary needs...