The situation in Haiti represents a burgeoning humanitarian and geopolitical crisis, demanding immediate and sustained international attention. The escalating violence perpetrated by transnational gangs, coupled with a rapidly deteriorating state infrastructure and a collapsing governance system, poses a significant threat not just to the Haitian people, but to regional stability and potentially, broader U.S. interests. The core challenge revolves around the limited capacity of the existing Multinational Security Support Mission (MSS) to effectively combat the pervasive and rapidly expanding influence of these criminal organizations. This situation underscores a fundamental failure in the multilateral approach to addressing complex crises and highlights the urgency of a revamped, significantly larger, and more empowered security force, spearheaded by a revised UN mandate.
Historically, interventions in Haiti have been characterized by short-term, reactive deployments often lacking a comprehensive strategy. The post-2010 earthquake response, while crucial in immediate disaster relief, failed to address the underlying issues of corruption, weak institutions, and the rise of illicit armed groups. The MSS, established in 2017, followed a similar pattern – a relatively small force attempting to neutralize a deeply entrenched criminal network operating with near impunity. As of late 2025, the MSS, comprised primarily of Kenyan, Colombian, and Uruguayan personnel, had achieved limited success, primarily focused on securing Port-au-Prince’s waterfront and key government buildings. According to a recent report by the International Crisis Group, “the MSS’s limited reach and operational constraints, coupled with gang adaptations and the proliferation of smaller, more agile criminal groups, have rendered it increasingly ineffective.”
Key stakeholders in this situation are multifaceted. Kenya, motivated by its longstanding partnership with Haiti and a perceived responsibility within the Francophone Caribbean, has provided the bulk of the MSS personnel and logistical support. The Organization of American States (OAS) has issued a strong statement of support, reflecting the widespread concern among nations across the Americas. However, resistance to a more robust intervention has been largely centered within the Permanent Five (P5) of the UN Security Council – China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. China’s reluctance appears rooted in a prioritization of Haiti’s sovereignty and a wariness of further entanglement in protracted conflicts. France, historically a major player in Haitian affairs, has expressed reservations regarding the potential for a prolonged mission and the cost implications. Russia’s position remains opaque, but analysts suggest a pragmatic desire to maintain access to Haiti’s strategic port facilities. “The Security Council’s paralysis reflects a broader inability to effectively grapple with state failure,” remarked Dr. Sarah Phillips, a specialist in Caribbean security at Columbia University’s SIPA program, in a recent interview. “The Haiti situation is a stark reminder that simply deploying military forces is not a solution; it requires a systemic approach addressing the root causes of instability.”
Recent developments over the past six months have intensified the crisis. Gangs, emboldened by the MSS’s limitations, have escalated attacks on critical infrastructure, including the Port-au-Prince airport, disrupting humanitarian aid deliveries and further isolating the country. There has been a sharp increase in kidnappings for ransom, often targeting journalists and aid workers. Additionally, the Haitian government, weakened and plagued by internal divisions, struggles to maintain control or effectively coordinate security efforts. The proposed UN Security Council resolution, as articulated by Deputy Secretary of State Christopher Landau in September 2025, outlines the creation of a significantly expanded gang suppression force – projected to exceed 5,500 personnel – operating under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, granting it broad authority to proactively target gangs and restore security. This resolution necessitates not only increased personnel but also robust logistical and operational support, including a dedicated UN Support Office, to facilitate the force’s effectiveness. “The scale of the challenge demands a commensurate response,” noted Ambassador David Miller, Head of the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs, at a recent press briefing. “We are not advocating for a permanent occupation; we are advocating for a strategically deployed and appropriately resourced intervention to stabilize Haiti and allow for a sustainable transition.”
Looking ahead, the next six months likely will see continued escalation of gang violence, a worsening humanitarian crisis, and further deterioration of Haiti’s governance. Without a substantial shift in the international community’s approach, the risk of a complete state collapse is very high. Long-term, the situation could lead to a protracted humanitarian disaster, potentially creating a regional refugee crisis and exacerbating existing transnational security threats. Within the next five to ten years, the possibility of a protracted civil conflict, potentially involving regional actors, remains a significant concern. Furthermore, the failure to address Haiti’s underlying issues – including endemic corruption, weak rule of law, and economic inequality – will continue to fuel instability and create a breeding ground for illicit activities. The long-term success of any intervention hinges on a comprehensive strategy that includes not only security measures but also sustained efforts to promote good governance, economic development, and social justice. The challenge is not merely to contain the violence, but to build a viable and resilient Haiti.
The situation in Haiti compels a broader reflection on the effectiveness of multilateral interventions and the importance of addressing the root causes of instability. It’s a crisis that demands not just a response, but a fundamental rethinking of our approach to fragile states. It is time for a global dialogue on how to effectively support nations facing existential threats, prioritizing sustainable solutions and genuine partnership, rather than short-term tactical deployments.