Regarding the current debate about Haiti (here, here, and here), I would like to add a few comments.
Almost all the current “solutions” to the problem in Haiti result in (1) the long-term occupation of the country, (2) a Camp of the Saints mass immigration of Haitians into the U.S., or most often (3) both 1 and 2. These “solutions,” however, largely address the symptoms, not the cause, of the problem.
From every report I’ve read, most of the problems in contemporary Haiti revolve around the fact that Haiti is overpopulated. There are too many people and too few resources. In a state of nature, this imbalance would quickly correct itself. But years of foreign aid to Haiti have allowed this imbalance to grow. Haitians continue to have children but possess not the resources to care for them. (And now they are asking us to adopt the children for whom they are unable to provide?) If we continue to give aid, this situation will only worsen.
What to do? As I see it, there are only two realistic options that actually address the cause of the problem:
(1) Do nothing for Haiti (no aid, no occupation, nothing), allow Haitians to fend for themselves, and allow nature to take its course. To protect ourselves, we should patrol the coasts of Florida so that Haitians are unable to invade the U.S.
(2) Give the Haitians some aid but have strings attached to it. Charity is optional, and it often comes with stipulations. They need not take it, nor must we give it. But if they are to accept foreign aid, make it a condition that the practice of birth control (Depo Provera, IUDs, vasectomies, etc.) becomes widespread and mandatory across the country. Clearly, they are unable to care for the children they already have. Also stipulated by the aid, Haitians should be prohibited from immigrating to the U.S., and those here should return to Haiti.
Although some religious conservatives may find objections to option #2, I ask, do they prefer option #1? Or what better solution do they offer?