one personal relationship for the world

> From Emmanuelle Gilles .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

I am trying to understand why the UN Mission is viewed by a group of Haitians
as an occupation when it is a peacekeeping mission.  I have tried to clarify in other fora that the UN mission has a specific mandate which is more of a
technical support nature to the government in specific areas but it is
difficult to convince even the most educated ones.  Certainly the UN mission
did not come out of the blue, there were reasons that led to their presence..  While the country is still struggling to establish peace and stability and
efforts thus far are so very fragile, the future is still uncertain -  No one knows who are the potential replacements of Preval - there is still a group of  people who are shouting that the UN Mission should leave because it is an occupation of their country.  I do not feel this way and I am trying to
undersand if the UN leave, will the situation get better security or political wise.  One thing I know, in other countries
where the UN peacekeeping mission is present, people do not feel that it is an occupation and most favours the UN mission in their country e.g. East Timor,
Congo, Cyprus, etc...   I would be interested to hear other views besides Richard Morse of course.  Obviously, the mission which is clearly defined on
the UN Peacekeeping website is nothing like an occupation in its true meaning since the government has to approve it.  Furthermore, the Government can decide not to renew the mission at the end of its mandate.  I think that we are better off with this presence than the absence of it and its departure would pretty
much depend on the ability of the Haitians authorities to put their act
together and the willingness of the population to elect the right people into power.

Let me have your views please.