The United States'; democratization strategy since World War II demonstrates an estimated success rate of less than 3%. America currently uses a counterinsurgency / line of effort approach in democratization. This approach seeks to shape an environment that protects democratic behavior but fails to address a country's democratic propensities, more specifically the potential of its attitudes and values with respect to democracy. A superior method is the path-dependent approach that seeks to exploit the potential of a country's prevailing attitudes and values by harnessing its democratic propensities. This paper analyzes the American military interventions of Haiti in 1915, 1994, and 2004 from a path-dependent perspective to determine whether it could have enabled better results. The United States used a counterinsurgency / line of effort approach to democratization during its first and second interventions in Haiti; both resulted in a failure to affect Haiti's democratic propensities. The United States used a hybrid path-dependent and counterinsurgency / line of effort approach to democratization during its third intervention of Haiti resulting in a tangible enrichment of Haiti's democratic propensities. The results suggest a path-dependent approach to stability operations has a better probability of success than the current approach used by the United States. This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work. This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.
