By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Doctors Without Borders announced the permanent closure of its emergency care center in Port-au-Prince due to escalating violence, which has left the city 90% controlled by gangs. The center, which treated over 100,000 patients since 2021, had been repeatedly targeted, including an attack in March 2025 that led to its temporary closure. This closure, along with the shuttering of over 60% of the capital’s health facilities, exacerbates the humanitarian crisis where gang violence has caused a surge in deaths, injuries, and displacement of over 1.4 million people.
Read the original article here
Doctors Without Borders permanently closes its emergency center in Haiti’s capital, a decision that speaks volumes about the deteriorating conditions within the country. It’s a somber reality check, a clear indication of how dire the situation has become when an organization renowned for operating in the most dangerous and challenging environments feels compelled to withdraw. This is not a decision taken lightly. These are the medical professionals who have been on the front lines, offering aid and care amidst chaos, and for them to pull out suggests the situation has surpassed a critical threshold.
It’s disheartening, and the sentiment is one of deep sadness. The commitment required to operate in such a place, the risks these doctors and staff willingly take, is extraordinary. To have to cease operations reflects the overwhelming challenges they face. It’s hard to imagine the circumstances under which such a decision is made, but it underscores the degree of instability and violence.
One has to consider the core of the problem. Haiti’s internal instability appears to be a vicious cycle, fueled by desperation and a lack of alternatives. People are drawn to gangs for protection and a sense of belonging, creating a situation where those outside gang structures become vulnerable. It’s a tragic dynamic that exacerbates the existing crisis.
The first principle of operating in a mass-casualty scenario is not to become a casualty oneself. The safety of the medical personnel must be prioritized, and when that safety cannot be assured, withdrawing is the only responsible course of action. This means the situation has reached a point where the risks outweigh the possibility of providing effective aid.
Reports of private military contractors like Erik Prince moving into Haiti are surfacing. It naturally leads one to question the motives behind such involvement. Will it provide a stabilizing presence, or is it another layer of complication? The potential for exploitation and the protection of specific interests, rather than the well-being of the broader population, is a genuine concern.
The suggestion of a substantial international force occupying Haiti for a prolonged period, possibly spanning several decades, might offer a path towards stability. This idea acknowledges the necessity of sustained effort to allow a new generation of Haitians to grow up in a safe environment. However, the political realities and the difficulties of long-term interventions make such a solution unlikely.
It’s fair to wonder if the international community has lived up to its promises. The perceived failures of organizations, like the Clinton Foundation, to rebuild Haiti as originally promised contribute to a sense of disappointment. It fuels a perception that Haiti’s struggles are compounded by external factors and broken commitments.
The “Crabs in a Bucket” scenario, as it’s been described, is a painful analogy. It highlights how the internal divisions and lack of cooperation among the people of Haiti, coupled with external influences, perpetuate the cycle of instability. It’s a reminder of the complex obstacles Haiti faces in trying to find its path.
Doctors Without Borders, and their courageous personnel, are seen as heroes in this environment. They’re recognized for their commitment to providing aid without bias, in the most dangerous corners of the world. It’s a sobering indication of the state of affairs when their presence is no longer viable. Even groups like the Taliban, who are known for their extreme views, have recognized the sanctity of their work.
The potential for a lack of genuine support for the entire population is troubling. What would be the true objectives behind such an undertaking? Will it be about stability and humanitarian concerns, or will other interests take precedence? It’s a concern that’s hard to ignore.
In the meantime, the UN has voted to send a force to Haiti. There’s hope that this intervention can fill the humanitarian gap, though past interventions have yielded mixed results. It’s recognized that the UN is not a perfect organization. It can provide humanitarian support and peacekeeping functions, however, its capabilities in war are limited.
There are past examples where UN intervention has yielded results, and some where it hasn’t. It’s a complex picture, and one must consider that even where it cannot solve everything, the UN can still offer humanitarian support, which is better than nothing at all.
There are always questions. What will it take to truly stabilize Haiti? What’s the appropriate response to the gangs? What can the world do to assist in a truly meaningful manner? The withdrawal of Doctors Without Borders throws those questions into stark relief, a reminder that the world must remain deeply concerned about the future of Haiti.