The Gang Crisis In Haiti: Why Washington Is Urging A Latin American Military Response

Haiti stands on the brink of total state collapse. Armed gangs control large swaths of the capital, the police force is fractured, and the central government’s authority has all but vanished. Amid the spiraling crisis, Washington is quietly rallying support for a Latin American-led military intervention — one designed to stabilise the country without putting US troops directly on the ground.

This emerging strategy reflects a convergence of humanitarian concern, regional security priorities, and the complex legacy of past US involvement in Haiti.

Haiti’s Unraveling: The Scope of the Gang Crisis

The security breakdown in Haiti is no longer gradual—it’s systemic. In Port-au-Prince, gangs now control over 80% of the territory, according to UN estimates. These groups are heavily armed, operate with impunity, and have established parallel power structures that challenge what remains of the state.

Public institutions, including police precincts and courts, have been overrun. Civilians face daily risks of kidnapping, extortion, and indiscriminate violence. Hospitals and schools are shuttered. A humanitarian disaster is unfolding, with thousands internally displaced and aid delivery impeded by armed blockades.

Prime Minister Ariel Henry, ruling without an elected mandate, has little political legitimacy or operational capacity. Repeated calls for assistance, including from Haitian civil society groups, underscore that the crisis has moved beyond domestic resolution.

US Stakes in the Haitian Crisis

While the US has not committed troops, it cannot ignore the crisis. Geography alone makes Haiti’s fate a direct concern. A resurgence in maritime migration, particularly to Florida, is already underway. The possibility of a mass exodus due to violence or famine is a key driver behind US urgency.

There are also broader regional concerns. Haiti’s descent threatens Caribbean security, providing fertile ground for transnational crime and drug trafficking. Washington views unchecked gang control as a potential corridor for narcotics and arms smuggling throughout the hemisphere.

At the geopolitical level, inaction could open space for extra-hemispheric actors—particularly China or Russia—to offer assistance and gain influence in the Caribbean basin.

Why a Latin American Mission, Not a US-Led Force?

The Trump administration is acutely aware of the political risks involved in direct military intervention. The legacy of US occupations in Haiti—particularly the controversial 1915–1934 period—remains a source of deep resentment among Haitians. A US-led deployment risks further undermining legitimacy and inflaming nationalist backlash.

Instead, Washington is advancing a strategy that promotes regional ownership. A force composed of Latin American troops, ideally under the banner of the Organization of American States (OAS), is seen as more palatable to Haitian public opinion and more sustainable diplomatically.

Such a mission would allow the US to provide critical support—intelligence, logistics, airlift capability, and financing—without bearing the political costs of direct involvement.

Diplomatic Talks and the Role of the OAS

Efforts to operationalize this vision are underway. Washington has opened diplomatic channels with regional heavyweights, including Brazil, Colombia, Chile, and Mexico, to gauge their willingness to participate. These countries have prior peacekeeping experience, notably during the UN’s MINUSTAH mission in Haiti (2004–2017), although that effort was itself marred by controversy, including cholera outbreaks and allegations of abuse.

The OAS is seen as a logical coordinating platform, providing multilateral legitimacy and operational structure. However, significant challenges remain: troop readiness, funding shortfalls, command and control, and legal authorizations all require resolution.

Some states are wary of the political fallout from contributing to a mission that could easily become protracted, unpopular, or both.

Haitian Perspectives: Caution and Urgency

Among the Haitian population, the appetite for foreign military intervention is mixed. There is broad public frustration with the ineffectiveness of the current government and support among business groups for some form of external stabilization. But memories of past missions are fresh, and skepticism over foreign motives persists.

Many Haitian civil society leaders argue that any intervention must be tightly focused, short-term, and firmly coordinated with local stakeholders. Without this grounding, even well-intentioned efforts risk deepening the crisis.

The stakes are particularly high given the lack of a political transition roadmap. Military intervention, if not paired with a credible plan for governance reform, could merely freeze the current dysfunction in place.

Risks and Scenarios Going Forward

The deployment of a Latin American force carries both promise and risk. At best, it could restore basic order, allow humanitarian operations to resume, and create space for political negotiations and institutional rebuilding. At worst, it could entrench factions, provoke retaliatory violence, or become ensnared in mission creep.

The US has an opportunity to steer the mission toward success by ensuring robust support systems—clear rules of engagement, exit timelines, and strong civilian oversight. But this depends heavily on regional cooperation and Haitian buy-in.

Long-term stabilization will require more than a military solution. Rule of law, economic opportunity, and political legitimacy must all be rebuilt—none of which can be achieved through force alone.

Conclusion: A Regional Test with Global Implications

The US is betting that regional leadership, bolstered by American support, can achieve what direct intervention cannot: stabilizing Haiti without igniting further backlash. Whether this approach will work depends not only on military capacity, but also on the ability to forge consensus across fractured regional and Haitian actors.

What’s unfolding in Haiti is not just a Caribbean security crisis—it’s a test of whether the Western Hemisphere can manage its own affairs in an era of growing geopolitical competition and internal fragility.

For now, Washington waits, quietly urging its neighbors to act before the window of recovery closes entirely.

Author: Gerardine Lucero