(Français)
After Feb. 7, 2026, Haiti can no longer afford another charade.
Yes, the Transitional Presidential Council (CPT) has failed. Yes, this failure is fueled by greed, irresponsibility, and the state’s capture by private interests. There is no room for controversy or debate on this point. But the real lie begins when we talk about the CPT’s “end of mandate,” as if the problem were merely chronological.
The CPT doesn’t hold together because of its legitimacy but because no one has been willing to bear the cost of a genuine break with the past. Not the economic elites, who thrive in the armed informal economy. Not the political class, which survives in institutional limbo. Not a segment of civil society, which has become a professional mediator of chaos. Not the U.S. and its allies (i.e. the misnomered “international community”) which prefers controllable disorder to unpredictable sovereignty. In this context, appealing to the CPT’s moral compass is tantamount to addressing a structure, not individual consciences.
The CPT has not failed morally. It has succeeded structurally. It has fulfilled its true function, which is to block any popular sovereignty, maintain political uncertainty, protect criminal economic networks, and offer an acceptable façade of “transition” to the outside world.
I categorically reject the idea that technocratic governance is a way out of the crisis. In Haiti, technocracy is never neutral. It is a language without a people, an administration without a mandate, a power without real political responsibility. It manages. It does not liberate. It stabilizes. It does not transform. It shifts the debate from politics to competence to avoid the central question: who really decides, and in whose name?
All technocratic experiments have served to freeze the real conflict, reassure donors, neutralize popular anger, and perpetuate the same networks under supposedly neutral guises. They prepare elections like a stage set, not like a social contract being rebuilt.
A country colonized by emergency cannot be saved by expertise alone. Organizing elections without disarming the criminal economy, without breaking the structure of international dependency, without clarifying where real power lies, amounts to organizing a rotation of faces, not a regime change.
Haiti is not failing in its administrative engineering. Haiti is in political captivity.
Before any governance, reality must be named: the existence of an internal war economy must be acknowledged, the “international community”’s passive or active complicity must be admitted, and the fiction of a “neutral transition” must be abandoned. Without this clarification, any administration is merely a prolonged interim.
Patriotism is not a belated emotion but a position of early rupture. A patriotism that does not dare to break with predatory networks, confront foreign interests, and accept a period of transitional instability in order to rebuild is not patriotism. It is civic nostalgia.
Let me be clear: The CPT is not an accident. Technocracy is not a solution. Elections without structural change are a disguised continuation of the status quo.
I propose neither a messiah nor a classic technocratic government. I am proposing an organized political break, structured in four non-negotiable acts.
Act I. Declaration of Political Truth
An official, public, and documented declaration acknowledging the systemic failure of transitions, the state’s capture by armed and economic interests, and the bankruptcy of the tutelage-driven electoral model.
Without this clarification, no governance is legitimate. Everything else is merely a prolonged interim.
Act II. Authority for Unclogging
A temporary political structure, independent of the CPT and political parties, with a strict and limited mandate: to dismantle criminal financial networks, to regain real control of ports, borders, and economic flows, and to neutralize the deliberate blurring of the lines between security, gangs, and politics. Not to govern indefinitely, but to restore to society the capacity to choose.
Act III. Civic Rearmament
Before any election: rehabilitation of local citizenship, reclaiming of public debate, and exposure of economic, social, and intellectual responsibilities.
A politically mute people produces only mute elections.
Act IV. Electoral Refounding
Elections come last. Like the culmination of a process of political reconquest, not like a bandage on an open wound.
For me, elections are not a cure. They are an indicator.
Calling for elections in the midst of chaos is a form of intellectual abdication. Not because voting is pointless, but because voters are under economic and security constraints, political parties are empty shells or conduits for vested interests, and violence is a political actor in its own right. Under these conditions, suffrage is not free. It is administered. And an administered vote produces exactly what is expected of it: the perpetuation of the order that established it.
The CPT is not an accident. Technocracy is not a solution. Elections without structural change are a disguised continuation of the status quo.
When a country can secure its choices without interference, finance its state without ransom, and speak politically without fear, then elections become possible. Before that, they are merely decorative.
Haiti’s problem is not a lack of competence but a lack of political courage to break with those who profit from the chaos. As long as this break is not embraced, every “solution” will only prolong the agony under a different name.
True courage today lies not in proposing a new formula for governance, but in recognizing that the framework itself is flawed.
Haiti doesn’t need a better disaster manager. It needs a radical break that makes disaster politically impossible. It doesn’t call for a transition, but for a detoxification of power.
I propose that we publicly acknowledge that institutional normalcy is suspended, and that the priority is not to mechanically return to it but to rebuild what deserves to be normal. This requires political discourse that doesn’t promise immediate stability, the acceptance of temporary discomfort, and the end of the “short transition” narrative.
It also implies explicit accountability from the elites, public exposure of fortunes built on chaos, of tacit alliances with violence, of intellectuals who have traded thought for access. Not through witch hunts, but also without orchestrated amnesia. This implies that some will lose their positions, some “responsible” rhetoric will become obsolete, and some careers built on the crisis will end. And that is precisely why this path is being fought.
In conclusion, the real scandal is not the CPT’s failure but the tacit consensus surrounding the idea that a CPT was necessary. A transition was fabricated not to save Haiti, but to prevent Haiti from choosing itself. And I refuse to continue talking about the Haitian crisis without clearly naming the foreign powers responsible. There can be no autonomous Haitian transition as long as the red lines are drawn elsewhere.
A country cannot be saved gently when it has been systematically destroyed. It is saved by accepting the break, even if this break frightens those who live in a state of temporary stability.
