Operation Uphold Democracy was a multinational military intervention designed to remove the military regime led and installed by Raoul Cédras after the 1991 Haitian coup d'état overthrew the elected President Jean-Bertrand Aristide. The operation was effectively authorized by the 31 July 1994 United Nations Security Council Resolution 940. Following the September 1991 Haitian coup d'état, which led to the de facto leadership of military officer Raoul Cédras, the Organization of American States (OAS) began economic sanctions against Haiti. [1] Following this, the Haitian refugee crisis began, with 14,000 Haitian boat people being gathered from the Caribbean Sea by the United States by January 1992 and President George H. W. Bush forcing Haitian refugees not eligible for asylum to return the following month. [1] The National Assembly of Haiti, Aristide and OAS nations draft the "Washington Protocol" in February 1992, establishing a timeline for restoring democracy in Haiti, though the Haitian Supreme Court declares the protocol null and void in April 1992, leading to increased sanctions from OAS nations. [1] The following month, President Bush signed an executive order banning Haitian asylum and requiring forced repatriation, a policy that was continued by President Bill Clinton. [1] By the end of 1992, 38,000 Haitians were intercepted according to the OAS. [2] After Raoul Cédras rejected a plan for Aristide's return proposed by Dante Caputo, a representative of the OAS and United Nations, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) voted for an oil and weapons embargo on Haiti in June 1993. [1] A month later, Cedras and Aristide signed the Governors Island Accord, outlining a process for Aristide's return to power by 30 October 1993. [1] In August 1993, Robert Malval was named interim prime minister by Aristide. [1] On 8 October 1993 as the USS Harlan County approached the Port international de Port-au-Prince to participate in training exercises with Haitian authorities, the Haitian Army prevented the ship from landing and Cedras announced that he will not comply with the previously signed accord. [1] On 14 October, Prime Minister Maval's cabinet went into hiding after the Minister of Justice, Guy Malary, was shot and killed. [1] The military mission changed from a combat operation to a peacekeeping and nation-building operation with the deployment of the US-led multinational force in Haiti. This force was made up primarily of members of the 3rd Special Forces Group, but also included members of the 16th Military Police Brigade, 118th Military Police Company (Fort Bragg, NC), the 101st Military Police Company, the 988th Military Police Company (Fort Benning, Georgia)and 101st Aviation Brigade (Ft. Campbell, Kentucky), 3/2 ACR from Ft. Polk, Louisiana and Marine Forces Caribbean. Teams were deployed throughout the country to establish order and humanitarian services. Regular Army forces consisting of units from the 10th Mountain Division occupied, 593rd Signal Company Fort Huachuca Ariz. Port-au-Prince with 3rd Bn (Airborne) 73rd Armor Regiment (82nd Airborne Division). Elements from the U.S. Army Materiel Command and Defense Logistics Agency relieved the Army's 1st Corps Support Command to provide logistical support in the form of the Joint Logistics Support Command (JLSC). [13] The command, later renamed to Combined Joint Logistics Support Command in recognition of its multi-national nature, provided oversight and direct control over all Multinational Force and U.S. deployed logistics units. This included the Joint Material Management Center, JMMC and the follow-on civilian contractor LOGCAP including a senior Defense Support Agency CELL. Later, 3 Corps deployed the Corps support CMMC, 46th Support Group.

On September 30, 1991, a military coup under the leadership of Lieutenant General Raoul Cedras overthrew the government of Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the first popularly elected president in Haitian history. President George H.W. Bush called for the restoration of democracy, and worked with the Organization of American States (OAS) to impose a trade embargo on all goods except medicine and food. During his 1992 presidential candidacy, Bill Clinton criticized the Bush administration for its policy on refugee return and promised to increase pressure on the military junta by tightening economic sanctions. USS America enroute to Haiti in September 1994, with a unique complement of U.S. Army Special Forces and the 160th Army Special Aviation Regiment embarked. Unburdened by the Cold War international framework that structured U.S. foreign policy for nearly fifty years, the Clinton administration sought to outline new objectives for U.S. foreign policy, including novel uses for military power. Ambassador to the United Nations Madeleine Albright outlined a U.S. policy of “assertive multilateralism,” with an increased role for the United Nations. National Security Advisor Anthony Lake emphasized the role of economic power in the new world order, and argued for a U.S. role in the “enlargement” of the community of free nations. The new administration, however, faced multiple challenges in the former Yugoslavia, Somalia, North Korea, and Haiti that complicated their attempts to implement the broad strategies and objectives defined by the administration’s leaders. The invasion force numbered nearly 25,000 military personnel from all services, backed by two aircraft carriers and extensive air support. Although the United States provided the vast majority of the forces, a multinational contingent from Caribbean nations agreed to serve in an operation conducted under U.N. mandate. The addition of these multinational forces shifted the operation from a U.S. military intervention to U.N.-sanctioned multinational action. The operation was scheduled for September 19. With military action clearly imminent, former President Jimmy Carter led a delegation to Haiti in search of a negotiated settlement. Carter, Senator Sam Nunn, and General Colin Powell flew to Haiti on September 17, well aware that they had little time to reach agreement. President Clinton approved Carter’s mission, but insisted that the military operation would proceed as scheduled. The invasion forces launched with the negotiations in progress, without any certainty whether they would make an opposed or a peaceful entry on to Haitian soil. The Haitian leadership capitulated in time to avoid bloodshed. Having launched the operation with the expectation of a forced-entry assault, the forces conducting the operation displayed remarkable discipline and flexibility in adjusting to this new and uncertain environment. General Hugh Shelton, commander of the invasion force, was transformed enroute to Haiti from commander to diplomat, charged with working out a peaceful transition of power. Shelton and Cedras met on September 20, 1994, to begin the process, and Aristide returned to Haiti on October 15. The operation ended with the transfer to UNMIH command on March 31, 1995, and a peaceful election and transferal of power occurred on February 7, 1996. The operation yielded important lessons about the complexities involved in managing complex contingency operations, which were captured in PDD/NSC 56, “Managing Complex Contingency Operations,” issued in May 1997.

This timeline of United States military operations, based in part on reports by the Congressional Research Service, shows the years and places in which United States Armed Forces units participated in armed conflicts or occupation of foreign territories. Items in bold are wars most often considered to be major conflicts by historians and the general public. Note that instances where the U.S. government gave aid alone, with no military personnel involvement, are excluded, as are Central Intelligence Agency operations. In domestic peacetime disputes such as riots and labor issues, only operations undertaken by active duty personnel (also called "federal troops" or "U.S. military") are depicted in this article; state defense forces and the National Guard are not included, as they are not fully integrated into the U.S. Armed Forces even if they are federalized for duty within the United States itself. Throughout its history, the United States has engaged in numerous military conflicts. The country has officially declared war on foreign nations on five occasions. Additionally, the United States Congress and the United Nations Security Council have authorized and funded various military engagements. In the military, specific names are assigned to operations and phases of wars. For example, during the Gulf War, operations were designated as Desert Shield, Desert Storm, and Desert Sabre. Furthermore, each operation may encompass distinct phases, each with its own unique name. [1] For over 250 years, conflicts between European settlers and Native Americans in America revolved around disputes over land, resources, and trade. These clashes, collectively referred to as the American Indian Wars, involved various Indigenous tribes, as well as the English, French, Spanish, and U.S. Army. As a consequence of these wars, Native American lives were tragically lost, and tribal lands were significantly diminished, ultimately resulting in the forced relocation of survivors to reservations. Outlined below is a chronological account of significant battles and massacres that occurred during these conflicts: During the Powhatan Wars, Powhatan Chief Opechancanough orchestrated an attack that claimed the lives of nearly 350 out of the 1,200 colonists. In response, the English launched counterattacks on Native American villages, causing destruction to crops and displacing Indigenous peoples from their ancestral lands. Competition for control over the fur and wampum trade in Colonial Connecticut led to escalating tensions and conflicts. In a notable incident on May 26, 1637, English militia, accompanied by members of the Narragansett and Mohegan tribes, launched an assault on the Pequot at Mystic. This resulted in the deaths of hundreds of Pequot individuals, including women and children. Subsequently, many Pequots abandoned their territory, ultimately leading to the dissolution of the Pequot nation through the Treaty of Hartford. [2][3][4] The American Revolutionary War occurred between 1765 to 1783, during which 13 British North American colonies rebelled against imperial rule. The protests initially arose due to taxes imposed by the British monarchy and Parliament without colonial representation. These disputes escalated into a series of defiant actions and repressive laws, ultimately leading to open rebellion. With the support of France, the American colonies successfully overcame the British forces, gained independence, and established the United States of America.

An American and Haitian soldier unload ammunition together from a supply truck in 1994. Peter Turnley—Corbis/VCG via Getty Images A s U.S. troops landed in Haiti on Sept. 19, 1994, they were welcomed by a large enthusiastic crowd at the port of Port-au-Prince, Haiti’s capital. It was a moment of euphoria for Haitians who hoped for change after three years of instability at the hands of a military junta. “There’s a whole sea of Haitians looking into their [the American soldiers] eyes, just glad that they’re here,” a source told TIME in 1994. The intervention, known as “ Operation Uphold Democracy,” was billed as a success by Clinton Administration officials and made headlines in 1994. Twenty-five years later, it has been all but forgotten by many Americans — but scholars say that this moment in history still holds an important lesson. The winter of 1990 marked a historic moment for Haiti, as Jean-Bertrand Aristide was elected president with an overwhelming majority in the nation’s first-ever democratic presidential election. Aristide promised change and challenged the elites. However, the hope he and his government represented was cut short by a military coup, led by Raoul Cédras in 1991. The coup, which started after Haiti’s civilian and military elite rejected the new policies, forced Aristide into exile just seven months after the presidential elections. The military junta led what U.S. President Bill Clinton called a reign of terror, raping civilians and killing around 5,000 Aristide supporters over the next three years. Then, in April 1994, paramilitaries in a group led in part by Louis-Jodel Chamblain murdered at least 15 supporters of Aristide. Many of the victims were “tortured and made to lay in open sewers before being shot,” TIME later reported. Back in the U.S., the Congressional Black Caucus had been pushing President Bill Clinton to intervene, but he was wary of doing so. Less than a year earlier, in October 1993, 18 U.S. soldiers were killed in the Black Hawk Down battle in Somalia during a peacekeeping mission, and humanitarian crises were also ongoing in Bosnia and Rwanda.

The United States found itself embroiled in several interventions in the 1990s that focused on uphold ing basic human rights standards and encouraging democratic regimes to flourish, from Somalia to the Balkans to America’s own backyard in the Caribbean. Despite Haiti being the second nation in the Western Hemisphere to proclaim independence, it has suffered from the beginning to establish an orderly and legitimate system of governance. In 1991, anarchy ensued once again when the Haitian military, led by Commander-in-chief Raoul Cedras, overthrew Jean-Baptiste Aristide, a controversial yet nevertheless democratically elected President of the nation. The coup represented a decisive step backward from the overall positive trend towards democratization in the region and led many in the U.S. to call for an intervention to restore human rights and democracy. In October 1993, the Clinton administration dispatched the USS Harlan County to prepare for the return of Aristide, but it was met at the pier in Port-au-Prince by a mob of Haitians, appearing to threaten violence. With the street battle in Mogadishu only a week past, the administration proved unwilling to risk casualties in Port-au-Prince. The ship pulled away. Four days later, the United Nations Security Council imposed a naval blockade on Haiti. Over the next several months the administration prepared for a full-scale invasion while pressuring the coup leaders to step down. After intense diplomatic maneuvering, in July 1994 Washington was able to secure United Nations Security Council Resolution 940 authorizing the removal of the Haitian military regime, the first resolution authorizing the use of force to restore democracy for a member nation. As the U.S. prepared for the invasion, scheduled for September 19, the Haitian leadership capitulated in time to avoid bloodshed. Aristide returned to Haiti on October 15. Sarah Horsey-Barr, the Deputy Chief of Mission to the Organization of American States (OAS), and Harriet C. Babbitt, the U.S. Ambassador to the OAS, discussed how OAS members felt about yet another American intervention in the region. Likewise, James Dobbins, who served as the State Department’s Deputy Special Advisor to Haiti, recounts the hands-on experience he had in both planning and implementing the operation. Each of these individuals was interviewed by Charles Stuart Kennedy in August 2000, November 2002, and July 2003, respectively. Read about the disagreements many at Embassy Port-au-Prince had with U.S. policy in the late 1990s. Go here to learn about Baby Doc Duvalier’s move into exile. Learn about the U.S. intervention in Panama. “The world and this hemisphere were tired of Haiti” Sarah Horsey-Barr, Deputy Chief of Mission, OAS, Washington, D.C., 1992-1995 HORSEY-BARR: There was a coup in 1991 in Haiti.

In 1991, a Haitian military regime overthrew the elected President, Jean-Bertrand Arisitide. The US military intended to forcibly remove this regime in 1994 via Operation Uphold Democracy. As US armed forces prepared to engage in this Operation in September 1994, a diplomatic mission led by President Carter convinced the Haitian military regime to allow President Aristide to return to power. The diplomatic mission consisted of President Carter, Senator Sam Nunn, and General Colin Powell. Operation Uphold Democracy then switched missions from a combat to a peace-keeping and nation-building mission. The new mission of Operation Uphold Democracy lasted from September 19, 1994 to March 31, 1995. The Operation consisted of U.S. troops and the UN organized Multinational Force (MNF). This collection consists of bulletins, cables, correspondence, email, memoranda, news clippings, press releases, reports, and talking points related to the 1994 U.S. intervention in Haiti associated with Operation Uphold Democracy. Clinton Presidential Records: White House Office of Records Management Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files Clinton Presidential Records: Automated Records Management System Clinton Presidential Records: Tape Restoration Project William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum 135 folders in 14 boxes For. [Foreign] Affs. [Affairs] - Haiti

Background: The United States military has had an important role in peacekeeping operations throughout the country's history. One example that provides two case studies as the effects of the military in peacekeeping operations in Haiti. The U. S. military first conducted peacekeeping operations in Haiti from 1915 to 1934 to secure the American national security interest at the time. These interests consisted of protected some American business interests and providing humanitarian relief. During this period, the military conducted a massive nation building effort that provided infrastructure to Haiti, re-established the economy and supported the Haitian government. Again in 1994, the U. S. military conducted peacekeeping operations in Haiti to promote democracy and provide humanitarian relief. Both of these case studies demonstrate the importance of the military to the national security strategy when conducting peacekeeping operations. Recommendations: The United States government should continue to use the military as an enabling force during peacekeeping operations to ensure that the national strategic objectives are achieved. Military Peacekeeping Operations in Haiti In October 1994, the United States prepared to invade the island country of Haiti. This assault was evident by the fact that aircraft were inbound with U. S. Army paratroopers, Marines were on station for an amphibious assault, and special forces were in place to assist the ground forces. The United States averted this invasion by diplomatic means at the last minute. This diplomatic solution caused the military to shift plans and to prepare for immediate peacekeeping and nation building responsibilities. As two years have passed since this military endeavor, a major question arises: Should the United States military have a role in peacekeeping operations in support of the national security strategy? The first area of focus will be the 1915-1934 military occupation of Haiti, and how the military performed their duties as peacekeepers. The next area will be the 1994 Operation UPHOLD DEMOCRACY, and how this intervention was of strategic importance based on the U. S. National Strategy of Engagement and Enlargement. Haiti was of strategic importance from the 1800s due to its geographic location. In addition to its location in the Caribbean, there were several American business interests in Haiti in the early 1900s. These business interests lead to the 1915 through 1934 military intervention in Haiti. The United States first occupied Haiti in August 1915 as a result of a directive by President Woodrow Wilson. The official reason for invading Haiti was to prevent the Germans from building submarine bases on the island, which would have been a threat to the national security of the United States. Another reason was the alleged threat of foreign intervention by France. There was no proof of either of these threats.[1] The United States fabricated these threats to downplay the true reasons which were American business interests and the implementation of Wilsonian foreign policy. Regardless of the true reason for deploying forces to Haiti, the President deployed the Marine forces based on his foreign policy beliefs. This deployment of the U. S. Marines secured the financial assets of U. S. businesses abroad which were a strategic interest during this period. The United States' view was that an attack on a U. S. business by a foreign government was an attack on the United States in general and would not be tolerated.

Center for Law and Military Operations (U.S.), issuing body. Charlottesville, Virginia : Center for Law and Military Operations, The Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army, 1995. - "11 December 1995." - Includes bibliographical references. - Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (LLMC Digital, viewed October 13, 2004). The Library of Congress is not aware of any copyright restrictions in the Military Legal Resources collection. Absent such restrictions, these materials are free to use and reuse. Researchers should watch for modern documents (for example, foreign works and works published in the United States less than 95 years ago, or unpublished if the author died less than 70 years ago) that may be copyrighted. The determination of the status of an item ultimately rests with the person desiring to reproduce or use the item. The Library of Congress provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes and makes no warranty with regard to their use for other purposes. More about Copyright and other Restrictions Credit line: Law Library of Congress, Military Legal Resources Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate. Center For Law And Military Operations, U.S., Issuing Body. Law and military operations in Haiti, -95: lessons learned for judge advocates. Charlottesville, Virginia: Center for Law and Military Operations, The Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army, 1995. Pdf. https://www.loc.gov/item/2021692602/. Center For Law And Military Operations, U. S. (1995) Law and military operations in Haiti, -95: lessons learned for judge advocates. Charlottesville, Virginia: Center for Law and Military Operations, The Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army. [Pdf] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/2021692602/. Center For Law And Military Operations, U.S., Issuing Body. Law and military operations in Haiti, -95: lessons learned for judge advocates. Charlottesville, Virginia: Center for Law and Military Operations, The Judge Advocate General's School, United States Army, 1995. Pdf. Retrieved from the Library of Congress, <www.loc.gov/item/2021692602/>. "11 December 1995." Includes bibliographical references. Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page (LLMC Digital, viewed October 13, 2004). batch4of4

The U.S. military is sending additional equipment to Haiti to help the security operation in the Caribbean nation. A U.S. Air Force C-17 cargo plane began delivering shipments of 24 additional Mine Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) MaxxPro vehicles on Friday, according to a U.S. Southern Command news release. They will be added to the existing fleet of 10 U.S.-provided MRAPs, sent in July. The shipments will be delivered and transferred to Kenyan personnel as part of the Multinational Security Support (MSS) mission. The mission was first requested by Haiti’s previous government in 2022, and of the handful of countries that have together pledged over 2,500 troops, the Kenyan contingent remains the only group to have arrived, according to Reuters. The C-17 transport missions also will deliver 34 Overhead Gunner Protection Kits, commonly called “turrets.” Department of Defense-funded contractors will install the turrets on the armored vehicles to enhance the tactical field of view and protection of MSS personnel utilizing MRAPs during joint security operations led by the Haitian National Police. The delivery of the MRAPs follows President Joe Biden’s signing of a Presidential Drawdown Authority in April, clearing the way for the transfer of U.S. federal resources to nations contributing personnel to the MSS mission to bolster their support of Haitian led security efforts. Under the drawdown, the Department of Defense (DOD) and other interagency partners are providing equipment, supplies, parts, and services needed to support MSS mission sustainment and operations, including vehicle fleet repairs and maintenance. In addition to the articles and services provided to the MSS mission under Presidential Drawdown Authority, the United States has provided more than $300 million to support the mission’s effort, the Pentagon said. Just 99c a week! Subscribe

The planned deploym ent accorded with the sense o f Congress, satisfied the requirements o f the W ar Powers Resolution, and was not a “w ar” within the meaning o f the Constitution. write in response to your letter of September 15, 1994, in which you requested a copy or summary of any legal opinion that may have been rendered, orally or in writing, by this Office concerning the lawfulness of the President’s planned de ployment of United States military forces into Haiti. After giving substantial thought to these abiding issues of Presidential and congressional authority, we con cluded that the President possessed the legal authority to order that deployment. In this case, a combination of three factors provided legal justification for the planned deployment. First, the planned deployment accorded with the sense of Congress, as expressed in section 8147 of the Department of Defense Appropria tions Act, 1994, Pub. L. No. 103-139, 107 Stat. 1418, 1474 (1993) (“Defense Ap propriations Act”). That resolution expressed Congress’s sense that the President would not require express prior statutory authorization for deploying troops into Haiti provided that he first made certain findings and reported them to Congress. The President did make the required findings and reported them. We concluded that the resolution “evince[d] legislative intent to accord the President broad dis cretion” and l“ invite[d]’ ‘measures on independent presidential responsibility.’” Dames & Moore v. First, the Haitian deployment accorded with the sense of Congress, as expressed in section 8147 of the Defense Appropriations Act.1 That provision was sponsored by, among others, Senators Dole, Simpson and Thurmond. See 139 Cong. Rec. S14,021-22 (daily ed. Oct. 20, 1993). Section 8147(b), 107 Stat. at 1474, of the Act states the sense of Congress that “funds appropriated by this Act should not be obligated or expended for United States military operations in Haiti” unless certain conditions (including, in the al ternative, prior Congressional authorization) were met. Section 8147(c), 107 Stat. at 1475, however, added that In speaking of the deployment, we should be understood to include, not only the actual deployment begun on September 19, but also the military operation that was planned, and in pan initiated, before an agreement with the Haitian military leadership was negotiated on September 18 by former President Jimmy Carter, Senator Sam Nunn and General Cohn Powell (the "September 18 agreement"). As the President noted in his televised address of September 18, that agreement “was signed after Haiti received evidence that paratroopers from our 82nd Airborne Division, based at Fort Bragg, North Carolina, had begun to load up to begin the invasion which I had ordered to start this evening " Text of Clinton’s Address, The Washington Post, Sept will be undertaken only after the financial costs of the deployment are estimated. In short, it was the sense of Congress that the President need not seek prior authorization for the deployment in Haiti provided that he made certain specific findings and reported them to Congress in advance of the deployment. 10 Allhough the President found lhai the deployment would not be without risk, he and his senior advisers had also determined that the United States would introduce a force of sufficient size to deter armed resis tance by the Haitian military and thus to hold both United States and Haitian casualties to a minimum The fact that the United States planned to deploy up to 20,000 troops is not in uself dispositive on the question whether ihe operation was a "war" in the constitutional sense, since the very size of the force was designed to reduce or eliminate the likelihood of armed resistance.