In the case of France and Haiti, who really owes what to whom, and why?

Abstract

In 1825, Haiti agreed to pay an indemnity to France in exchange for international recognition of its sovereignty as a nation after winning its freedom from slavery and independence from colonial rule via the Haitian Revolution. Over the past few years, there has been much public debate around whether France should repay the initial indemnity imposed on Haiti. This thesis analyzes the social, political, religious, and economic dynamics that went into France’s decision to initially impose the indemnity, and Haiti ultimately agreeing to pay it to answer the question, “Who really owes what to whom, and why?” This thesis mainly employs the use of qualitative research methods that include the examination of primary and secondary sources, though there is use of quantitative analysis regarding various socioeconomic factors. The analysis of all data shows that while Haiti has a strong legal and moral argument for repayment of the indemnity initially paid to France, Haiti too owes a debt to its own people. The thesis’ analysis also explores the extent to which pervasive and prevailing Euro-centric ideology around classism and racism may have played a role in Haiti’s acceptance of France’s indemnity decree, and subsequent debt dependency at the expense of its own development. I conclude that the debt to Haiti is owed by both external entities, and Haiti itself, and Haiti will continue to be in decline should it go unpaid.