Kenya’s bid for intercontinental military power, purportedly for OAS membership, faces heavy suspicion of corruption amid its distance from Haiti and a history of corruption. UN Resolution 2699 is challenged for concealing facts, using flawed legal reasoning, and facing an altered Haitian reality post-February 7th, 2024, with concerns over foreign troop deployment and distraction tactics. Additionally, Ariel Henry is no longer a legitimate leader. Would the UN aid a coup leader in consolidating power over his people?
As pressure continues to mount, granting intercontinental military power to Kenya solely to justify its application to the OAS under a financial deal, amid heavy suspicion of illegal activities as confirmed by the High Court of Nairobi, serves as a clear warning against corruption.
Furthermore, Kenya’s geographical distance of 12,000 km from the shores of Haiti and its ranking of 143 out of 180 on the Transparency International Corruption Index in 2017 hardly justifies this intercontinental « rush » for financial rewards.
Given these circumstances, any recommendation favoring Kenya’s accession to the OAS would undoubtedly amount to an encouragement of corruption.
Considering Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield’s profound understanding of the Kenyan political landscape and its actors, acquired during her extended tenure as a U.S. diplomat in Nairobi.
Conclusion:
In light of the aforementioned evidence, there is no need for the Secretary-General of the United Nations to deliberate on the obvious obsolescence of UN Resolution 2699, because:
- Resolution 2699 is rendered null and void, with material facts being concealed by Mr. Ruto (Kenya) and Mr. Henry (Haiti), as confirmed by the High Court of Nairobi on January 26, 2024, when they collaborated to mislead the UN Security Council and its Secretary-General.
- Resolution 2699 was based on flawed legal reasoning, in an evident attempt to circumvent the Haitian Constitution and Kenya’s National Police Act, thereby knowingly deceiving the Secretary-General and the UN Security Council.
- Even if Resolution 2699 were valid, it could not be applicable to the current situation in Haiti, given the absence of a legitimate Haitian government to engage with the country.
- The disproportionate fixation of the United States on Kenya raises significant concerns, making it difficult to dissociate the U.S. diplomats involved from the failures of Mr. Henry (Haiti) and Mr. Ruto (Kenya).
- Suspicious last-minute trips to the United States undertaken by Mr. Frantz Elbé and Mrs. Emmelie Prophète Milcé, amidst juggling between the case of Jovenel Moise’s assassination and the purported « Brazilian acceleration » of Kenya’s deployment, appear as a distraction ploy.
- The attempted prison break orchestrated on February 13, 2024, raises legitimate concerns about a hidden agenda to utilize foreign troops (under the control of the suspects) to protect the president’s assassins, which is an indecent proposal for Kenya.
Additionally, Kenya’s geographical distance of 12,000 km from the Haitian shores and its ranking of 143 out of 180 on the Transparency International Corruption Index in 2017 hardly justify this intercontinental « rush » for financial rewards.
As pressure continues to grow, intercontinental military power cannot be granted to Kenya solely to justify its application to the OAS under a financial deal, especially amid heavy suspicion of illegal activities as confirmed by the High Court of Nairobi, which serves as a clear warning against corruption.
The scope of this poorly conceived mission, as presented to the Secretary-General by the architects of the Kenyan proposal, no longer aligns with Haiti’s reality post-February 7th, 2024. As the G-20’s fanfare persists in undermining the roles officially designated to CARICOM and BINUH in UN Resolution 2699, it now confronts the ground realities articulated by Emond Muller.
CREDITS: In consulation with Dr Berg P. Hyacinthe, Ph.D., National Defense & Security Advisor, NEHRO
(www.interstellium.space)
