|
|
|
There are several brand name groups of voters that command attention: The Latino Vote, the Jewish Vote, the Black Vote, The Cuban Vote, the Conservative Vote and the Caribbean Vote, except the latter is not yet a reality. This essay looks into how the American Caribbean community can muscle its influence to organize itself into a bloc vote that could be branded as the Caribbean Vote, transforming the landscape of the Caribbean islands and the fate of the Caribbean Americans and the blacks in the United States for the better. I remember there was a time when working alongside some well known black American activists; the secret code amongst them was that the Caribbean Americans could seek financial power in the United States but they should be denied by any means, the path to political power. Several Brooklyn politicians have been operating until recently under that modus operandi.  Thank God, Yvette Clarke has broken the barrier,
as the second Caribbean American (after Shirley Chisholm) to
win a seat in the US Congress; she led the way for Mathieu Eugene
to follow suit in being the first Haitian American to win a seat
at the City Council of New York. As the Italian, and the Irish
before, the Caribbean Americans are here to stay; they are contributing
in making a better America for all in particular for the black
Americans, (the Caribbean Americans are in fact 98% black)The critical mass power of the Caribbean American is well exhibited during Carnival time in Brooklyn. A very conservative estimate can place to 1 million registered voters in the North East amongst the 3 million who attend the Festival on Labor Day. This represents an important bloc vote that can turn the balance for or against any final Presidential candidate. Consequently, learned political strategists can construct and deliver the Caribbean Vote in a non-partisan formula favoring the Republican or the Democrats depending on the stand of the candidates on the issues that affect the most, the Caribbean and the Caribbean Americans. The issues: Jobs: The issues affecting the Caribbean and the Caribbean Americans are above all jobs, jobs and jobs. In the age of mondialisation, the jobs have been flocking to China or to India. The Caribbean as well as Africa has been by-passed with the transfer of technology. The banana industry, once a staple for the bread and butter of several families has been destroyed by another lobbyist more powerful than the Caribbean Vote. During the Clinton Administration, The Chiquita Company has been able to muscle the hand of the Administration in bringing the European Community to court to force the cancellation of the preferential quota allotted to the banana industry for export to Europe. That ruling has destroyed thousand of jobs and has bankrupted the economy of several small islands in particular Dominica and St Lucia. By contrast, the Dominican Republic has been able recently to receive a reprieve for this Administration in the tax on tobacco saving some 20,000 jobs for that country. On the other side of the aisle, if the Caribbean area could receive in foreign aid from this Republican administration in the last seven years, one month of the funding allocated to Iraq, the people of the Islands could have seen a whole new vista in infrastructure building and in job retention in the region. In fact, the US foreign aid to the Caribbean has declined considerably through the years. From a peak of 3.2 billion in the 80s, it was lowered to 2 billion in the 90s.The fiscal year 2006, according to the Congressional Report, assesses the total foreign aid subsistence to the Caribbean at 316 million dollars. (One day of expense in Iraq) At home here in America, the Russian immigrant as soon as he sets foot in the country is being taken care by several well funded and well staffed social service agencies. His integration, for jobs, education, housing and social services is assured. The Caribbean American has no such facilities or institutions, as such after several years in the country he is still not an integrated citizen. He is operating in subpar conditions. Immigration Status: While the large bloc of illegal immigrants is mostly from Mexico and the Latin American countries, the Caribbean community has its important share of immigrants who need to regularize their status. The amnesty proposal or any form thereof is of crucial importance so as to prevent the building of a group of underclass that is not part of the shared vision of the future. On the other side of the spectrum, the bleeding of the intellectual force from the Caribbean (the largest in the world) must come to some accommodation profitable to the islands. The United States (including Canada) cannot continue to ignore that hemorrhage and pretend the international labor market will adjust itself naturally. Drugs and Returnees: The utilization of the Caribbean (in particular Haiti, Jamaica and the Dominican Republic) as the transfer point for the drug business from Columbia is choking the economic development of these countries. No sustainable growth can occur within the drug culture. It will eventually poison all the institutions, the police, the justice, the government and the fabric of the society. There is now the will from these three governments to stop the drug traffic. Trinidad has spent the money to cover the sky of the Lower Caribbean with the surveillance necessary for that zone. The United States is needed to provide the radar necessary to control the dropping points all points north of the Caribbean. Returnees: The Caribbean countries, in particular Haiti, Jamaica, Trinidad and Guyana, have been experiencing a recrudescence of criminality, including kidnappings, due to the large number of returnees shipped back to their homeland after they have committed crimes in the United States. Those individuals have very little roots or nexi with their country of origin. They tend to return to the lifestyle of criminality accustomed to in the United States, poisoning the social fabric of the islands. The United States must contract social services in the Caribbean and in America to reorient those individuals before they are allowed to run free, causing damage to their environment. Education and training: A recent bill, the Chisholm Act passed by the US Congress, provides the framework for the collaboration of American Universities to provide technical skills to institutions in the Caribbean dedicated to training the youth. The publicity about this important piece of legislation has been muted and the impact is uncertain. Health: With the deficiency in jobs retention, the Caribbean American constitutes a large bloc of the uninsured population in the US. Like all Americans, they are expecting the new Administration to bring forth and pass a comprehensive health package that includes insurance for all. I have always thought the best way to go about this process is to provide a voucher to the uninsured that he can plug into a nexus (with insurance). That nexus person can be a relative, or any type of affinity group (alumni). That voucher can represent the full cost of the premium for the unemployed to one third or three quarter for the underemployed person. As such the insurance umbrella will cover everybody in the nation. We shall now start working on the lifestyle, the preventive health measures and the monitoring of the institutions and the doctors who routinely gouged the system as a tool of cost cutting of the health bill. On the other side of the pond, some Caribbean islands (Dominica, St Kitts) offer residence to American medical schools. It is fit and appropriate for those institutions to attach a teaching medical hospital for their own benefit and for the benefit of the host country. As such, the Caribbean can develop as in Thailand and in Singapore the medical tourist industry bringing in new revenue to the area. The weak links: Cuba, Haiti and Guyana: The new ruling by the United Nations in favor of Guyana in its sea dispute with Surinam predicts a golden future for Guyana. With a minimum of good governance, the people of Guyana should enjoy the profit from the oil exploration and the drilling offshore. The government of Guyana must, though, extend the concept of the shared vision of the future amongst all the people, in particular the black population and those from the countryside. The Cuban Vote has prevented for the last forty-eight years the lifting of the US embargo against Cuba; this in spite of strong Congressional and business support in the United States. The Caribbean Vote will provide the counterbalance to include Cuba in the family of nations of the Caribbean, with the exchange of goods and services spreading from Havana to Georgetown. The Haitian issue will request more than pious statements and the prolongation of the UN mandate. To start with, Haiti must confront its own demons that have taken the shape of: 1. A culture of inhospitality towards the peasant population which represents the majority of its people. 2. Its culture of impunity Vis a Vis corruption, theft, incitation to social explosion says criminality by its public officials. 3. Its culture of waiting from the government or from international donors to organize civic initiatives that would make life enjoyable for all. Having done so, Haiti needs all the attention of the United States and of the Caribbean community to bring its gallant people into the 21st century. The process: Having defined the issues we must now spell out the process on how to arrive to the Caribbean Vote. The Caribbean community shall deputize its own elected leaders with specific mandate (not general) to negotiate the terms of the guaranteed vote of the Caribbean American voters. The Caribbean American vote will go to the candidates that pledge to fulfill a majority of the issues raised by the community. The elected leaders through house parties and other fundraisings will be insured of the loyalty of their constituents, they will be armed with financial support to become honest brokers to advance the Caribbean cause in the United States and in the motherland. To conclude, the American system is one made of conflicting currents. The Framers have built it that way to insure that no one group usurps all the power for itself. It is up to the Caribbean Americans to organize themselves into the Caribbean Vote and become an effective lobbyist for their own cause and for a better America. They have the numbers and they have the means. Alea iacta est. Editor's Note: Jean H Charles MSW, JD is Executive Director of AINDOH Inc a non profit organization dedicated to build a kinder and gentle Caribbean zone for all. He can be reached at: jeanhcharles@aol.com
"...If Chief Minister Michael Misick fails to move our country forward he will be exposed as a hollow politician who is more interested in posing as a national leader than in assuming the duties and responsibilities of governing a nation." [Now prophetic words from an April 2006 article (linked to below), in which I questioned Hon. Dr Michael Misick's motives for flirting with the prospect of TCI independence.] In the fall of 1973, President Richard Nixon of the United States had every right to feel invincible. After all, he was still reveling in a landslide re-election victory, his political opponents were rendered virtually irrelevant and he was becoming as famous abroad as he was at home. Yet, within a year, he was forced to resign the presidency in utter disgrace. Today, Premier Michael Misick of the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) also has every right to feel invincible. After all, he is still reveling in a landslide re-election victory, his political opponents have been rendered virtually irrelevant and he is becoming as infamous abroad as he is at home. Yet... (What does it say about a national leader who seems more interested in fraternising with B-list celebrities than in networking with international statesmen...?) Regrettably, as farfetched as the comparison above might seem, the parallels between Nixon and Misick do not end there. And anyone with only a passing knowledge of U.S. history will appreciate not only the dire implications this raises, but also the grave consequences it portends for Premier Misick, his enablers and, most important, the TCI. However, this is neither the occasion nor the appropriate forum for a full exposition of the eerie and foreboding similarities in this respect. Instead, I shall suffice to note that many of the allegations in the bill of particulars that led to Nixon's downfall are now being alleged against Premier Misick. And not least among them is the recent charge that he had evidence of one of his crimes erased from a videotape, which, of course, mirrors one of the more damning charges U.S. authorities leveled against Nixon. (What does it say about a national leader who leads by inciting fear and intimidation rather than by providing hope and inspiration...?) Meanwhile, it behooves members of the ruling Progressive National Party (PNP) to heed the grievances of people who have taken to the streets to protest the government's employment policies. Because it's a reflection of how far removed from the concerns of ordinary labourers Premier Misick has become that he has dismissed them -- with indignation -- as unwitting pawns of a vanquished, mischief-making Opposition People's Democratic Movement (PDM). But I suspect there are conscientious and informed PNP ministers who know that these people's grievances are well-founded. And, moreover, ministers who know that the Premier's short-sighted strategy for economic development, which seems predicated on exploiting cheap foreign labour instead of employing local workers, is enough to make all patriotic TCIslanders disillusioned and disaffected with his leadership. (What does it say about government ministers who stand by and watch as a national leader grounds their ship of state...?) Most troubling of all, however, is the growing realisation that Premier Misick's gamble -- of building our economy on beachfront resorts -- now looms like a house of cards. Never mind that he seems blissfully ignorant of the fact that the sub-prime mortgage mess in America is bound to turn the foundation upon which our booming economy was built into quicksand. But there's no greater indication that the Premier is grounding our ship of state than his double-talk about the need to "broaden our tax base." After all, if the government has already "increased revenue collections from $98 million in 2003 to over $215 million this year", it insults our intelligence and assaults our pocketbooks for him to suggest that "gone are the days when there will be no tax" in the TCI.  In fact, instead
of his irresponsible talk about taxation (triggering unwarranted
concerns in the international investment community about our
coveted tax haven status), the Premier should be announcing what
additional government services will redound to our benefit as
a result of the increased revenues he's so fond of boasting about!(What does it say about government ministers who stand by and listen to a national leader proclaim that taxing poor people is necessary for their country to "mature into a jurisdiction of low tax"...?) Although, it would be understandable if the "large investments" the Premier claims his government is making were actually benefiting more than just a select few TCIslanders. But it is plain for all to see that, after years of promising to build a first-rate infrastructure of hospitals, schools, roadspolice force, etc, the Premier's government has only delivered third-rate services for local (as opposed to tourist) consumption. (What does it say about a national leader who declares himself a virtual pauper upon entering office, but is soon living like a king (in his public and private life) and flaunting worldly possessions that would make an ordinary millionaire green with envy...? Because even if married to an American TV actress, his wife would have to be raking in Oprah-like millions to fund their royal lifestyle.) More to the point, however, I cited Nixon's corrupt and failed presidency above as a cautionary and instructive precedent. Because, as it proved to be with Nixon, it is my informed opinion that Misick's invincible pride is but a prelude to a spectacular fall. Therefore, I caution all members of the ruling PNP to consider carefully whether blind loyalty to this Premier is worth risking their careers, if not their freedom, for. After all, just as those who covered up Nixon's crimes were only masking a "cancer that was growing on his Presidency", those who fail to report Misick's (apparent) misdeeds are only masking the terminal state of his premiership. And rest assured that no matter how many kickback schemes or shady land deals any PNPer may have transacted (especially involving the promiscuous granting and selling of irredeemable Crown Lands), doing the right thing now will likely reduce his or her liability to a misdemeanor in the eyes of appreciative TCIslanders and, more importantly, in the calculation of investigators from the Commission of Inquiry into TCI governance now being conducted by the UK's Foreign Affairs Committee (FAC)... (But never mind Nixon, what does it say about a national leader who has a living example in his own Party -- of the legal and political consequences of abusing power to feed greed that knows no bounds -- yet follows that example down the same path to perdition...?) Accordingly, I entreat the honourable members of the PNP to follow the instructive precedent set by the members of Nixon's inner circle - who threw him overboard to save their ship of state. (I just hope our Premier is not like so many TCIslanders who never learnt how to swim...) Of course, I appreciate that PNPers might prefer to wait for the British to hold the Premier to account for his patently-suspect governance, which has people talking about the TCI as if it is being governed by an African kleptomaniac. I fear, however, that a mere cursory FAC audit of our public finances would uncover such egregious abuses and misappropriations that the British would (indeed should) feel compelled to dissolve yet another PNP government, and put our country into receivership... again. But I have no doubt that, despite appearances, there are still PNPers who would rather sacrifice their careers than have the British impose another humiliating suspension of our Constitution "to restore respect for the rule of law and good governance in the Turks and Caicos Islands". Therefore, I urge them to rally around their "Gerald Ford"; i.e., a man (or woman), of unimpeachable integrity and probity, who can assume leadership of the PNP and, by extension, the premiership of our country -- after we bid good riddance to the untenably-flawed Dr Michael Misick. (What does it say about a country where freedom (or integrity) of the press is such that no newspaper owner dares to publish any article critical of the leader out of fear of retaliation: i.e., losing political patronage or jeopardising financial interests...?) NOTE: I have focused exclusively on the Premier's dereliction of duties because I believe that we are, in fact, not only "mature" enough to take responsibility for the mess he's gotten us into, but also intelligent enough to figure out how to clean it up. But it would be tantamount to ignoring the big white elephant in the room if I did not acknowledge the Governor's dereliction of duties that have contributed to our national woes. After all, he has special responsibilities for dealing with the menace of illegal (Haitian) immigration, which has made us liable to charges of human rights abuses and negligent homicides; and for combating the scourge of predatory crimes, which is threatening peace and tranquility in our island paradise. Therefore, I admonish the FAC to reserve a special section in its report to cite and censure the Governor for his appalling failure to perform his constitutional duties... Editor's Note: Anthony L. Hall is a descendant of the Turks & Caicos Islands, international lawyer and political consultant - headquartered in Washington DC - who publishes his own weblog, The iPINIONS Journal, at http://ipjn.com offering commentaries on current events from a Caribbean perspective
Eight days after the 2006 election, international observers almost unanimously validated Préval as president and the elections as free and fair. It was hoped that the unblemished manner in which Préval won-through an entirely monitored democratic process that upheld the Haitian constitution-would establish a mindset for his rule. Whether that democratic process would be the hallmark of Préval's time in office, or just an early and later erasable blip on the screen, would be essential to know in evaluating the effectiveness of his presidency. Now, more than a year and a half following what must have been Haiti's fairest election in decades, it is time to take a look at what has transpired on the island in the intervening period. Was democracy as practiced by Préval to be just a calling card for international respectability, or was it intended as a constant thread of President Préval's time in office? Following the period under Aristide defined by its endemic corruption and the equally rocky interim period under Alexandre when hundreds-if not thousands-of opposition party members were murdered, only a true, stable democracy, it was believed, would be able to start a long and difficult healing process. Past and Present  Six years ago, President
Aristide appeared to have relegated to second place any determination
to rule the country with intense energy, constitutional devotion,
or a tireless commitment to building democratic institutions.
Perhaps due to the attempted coup in late 2001-or, just as likely,
his own insensitivity to inclusive rule-Aristide seemed to manifest
a show of lassitude to the rule of law as well as indifference
to democratic institution building. He encouraged citizens to
use violence when needed to fight the nation's armed opposition,
and civil liberties and political/human rights were in short
supply. For all intents and purposes, there was a constitution
in name only, something which newly elected President Préval,
whom it should be noted was a close friend and political comrade
of Aristide, promised to change.At the time of Préval's inauguration, the situation on the ground did not look entirely different than it did in 2001. But within a few months, some significant steps were taken in order to implement a series of necessary changes geared toward getting closer to the ideal of creating a democratic, law-abiding society and a fair-minded administration. The most important step taken was the first one-the implementation of free and open balloting, whose results no one contested. As much as that might be scoffed at due to Préval's overwhelming popularity-he won with 51% of the vote, while runner-up Leslie Manigat obtained only 12% of the vote-it was an important signature that put Haiti back on track to democracy. Most importantly for average Haitians, this meant the reestablishment of much of the international aid that had been cut off during Aristide's time in office; Préval's government was earmarked to receive an additional $750 million in assistance from donor nations, to be dispensed to Haiti's population, indicating a major vote of confidence in his government by the world community. Baby Steps for Democracy With Préval's decisive victory in the election, many analysts expected his Lespwa (Front of Hope) Party to also carry the day in the two legislative bodies, the Senate and the Chamber of Deputies (or lower house). Lespwa's opponents shocked Préval and his backers, as his  party
was able to win only 13 out of 30 Senate seats and elect 23 out
of 99 representatives in the Chamber of Deputies. Thus, Préval
was thrown a curveball at the outset of his administration. Whereas
the margin of his personal victory in the presidential race might
have been enough to give him a mandate to rule as a strong leader,
the disappointing results of the parliamentary elections were
a stark reminder to him that, even if he wanted to introduce
dramatic reforms, he would face major obstacles and likely would
have to reach a variety of compromises with the Haitian parliamentary
opposition. In addition, while Préval has gone some length
to shape the legislature to cooperate with his agenda, he was
unable to generate a working majority on day-to-day voting.Préval's Powers Are Less Than Monarchic As a result of this early check on Préval's power, few major pieces of legislation have been passed as of yet. In addition, since no other party held more seats than Lespwa, coalition building was, during much of the period following the election, a slow and laborious process, as in each instance Lespwa's elected members tried, with little success, to achieve a working majority coalition. To a large extent, this was another important sign that, although the legislative accomplishments might be slow in coming due to the lack of a working majority, it would, at least, be democratic. In 2000, Aristide's Fanmi Lavalas party had "won" 26 of 27 senate seats and 73 of 83 seats in the Chamber of Deputies, leading to distrust of both the president and his agenda inside and outside the country. On the other hand, in 2006 and early 2007, individual Haitian political thinkers and international observers alike expressed their confidence that Préval, after he was elected, would have no choice but to govern democratically. While political developments and the policies that he wanted to push through the National Assembly have been slow in coming, the respect that he attracted and his acknowledgement of constitutional guarantees, which he freely offered to respect (unlike both authoritarian and professed democratic chief executives) were attributes that had been ignored for decades. A closer look at how the National Assembly has functioned will help shed a little light on the status of democracy in the country. Its first-and, in many ways, most important-function was to approve Préval's cabinet choices. Due to the nature of the competing political factions, this became a somewhat complex process. In the end, however, a cabinet that included members of six political parties was approved in a near unanimous vote; this was considered by both Préval's supporters and opponents alike to be a vote of confidence for Préval's rule. This process protected Haiti from the one-sided rule that had dominated the country for so long, and most importantly, it demonstrated Préval's willingness to strive for consensus and govern in a democratic fashion. Soon after the cabinet was formed, the Assembly began taking a few of the necessary baby steps to effect political changes of its own. Many of the elected officials in both the Senate and Chamber of Deputies have begun to craft pieces of legislation that would help curb corruption in the courts. Although they have been far from entirely successful, the National Assembly is still trying to push legislation through in a democratic manner is an encouraging sign. This is something for which, in a recent visit to Port-au-Prince, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon was moved to praise the National Assembly, as he encouraged lawmakers to adopt legislation reinforcing-if not establishing for the first time-the rule of law in the country. In previous years, the combination of corrupt, strongman presidents and the powerful influence of neighborhood gangs and association of elites, have made doing so all but impossible. However, as the UN secretary general's confidence in the National Assembly suggests, Haiti has a unique opportunity to change course. This is an opportunity that cannot be squandered, a fact which is recognized by both Préval and the opposition members of the legislative branch. When, in 2008, one-third of the Senate seats will be contested, the continued strengthening of the legislative process will likely be at the forefront of many candidates' platforms. Many Problems Remain on the Road to Democracy Although the current state of president-assembly relations might suggest that all is well with democracy in Haiti, there are still significant problems that remain, suggesting that the island's political process has traveled only a few miles on the long road to democracy. With the lack of a standing military force and the systemically problematic Haitian National Police, Haitians who oppose the government, or voice thoroughly popular opinions defaming the police force (which was founded only when the military was disbanded) for being unreliable and corrupt, the law has not always proven to have been there to protect them. Even when the law does come into play, its inefficiencies and unreliability usually don't allow it to do much public good. The court system is weak, outdated, and just like the tainted police and other fouled Haitian organizations, corrupt. Prisons themselves are old and unspeakably bleak. Prisoners live in overcrowded jails with only scraps of food; according to an Amnesty International report, more than 2000 prisoners are being held in Haitian jails without ever having been charged. At least 100 of those detained are said to be political prisoners. Furthermore, because there is a lack of resources to properly train personnel and provide decent conditions for the inmates, a significant turn of events would be necessary to allow for a truly democratic judicial and penal system to emerge. The old-fashioned, poorly managed, and chronically venal judicial system is not the only aspect of Haitian society that suggests that Préval and his legislative associates have a long way to go if they are intent on ensuring the establishment of a long-lasting, genuinely democratic state. Labor conditions in Haiti continue to reflect a disdain for human rights and general democratic principles. For example, Haitian authorities have done little to change the old Haitian tradition of restavec, in which young Haitian children are sent away from their parents to work, for all intents and purposes, as domestic slaves for wealthier families in often far off communities. Although one can very well make the case that cultural traditions and values should be upheld whenever they can, such archaic practices do little to boost Haiti's quest for a genuine democracy or a caring society. Meanwhile, along Haiti's border with the Dominican Republic, little has been done to reinforce border security, with the illegal trafficking of Haitian laborers continuing to be a chronic problem with which the Port-au-Prince government has ineffectively dealt. To date, Haiti has done little to project its demands to implement border reforms with its neighbor, the Dominican Republic. This may prove to be a significant challenge in the next few years, given the troubled history that the Haitians have had with the Dominicans, as well as the array of problems that Haitian refugees have brought upon its neighbors, including fighting for access to the resources that can be found there. In recent years, Haiti's gangs have posed serious problems for the country's political leadership, and Préval, too, has not escaped from this problem. However, instead of choosing to let them dominate various street corners of Port-au-Prince and elsewhere in Haiti, Préval recently decided that he would take the matter into his own hands, something that Aristide (who chose to negotiate with the gang leaders) never did. Due to the lack of an efficient police force, Préval has had to rely on the current contingent of 7500 U.N. troops stationed in Haiti to do his bidding. Although this has brought about some success, the impaired state of the country's judicial system means that many of the gangsters who have been arrested might not ever face justice. This series of recent actions concerning gangs raises a number of important questions that are likely to be resolved only after significant time has elapsed. Certainly, negotiating with the heads of brutal and power-hungry gangs has not advanced a society hoping to be orderly, exemplified by the ineffective results in Arisitde's dealings with the Cite Solei gangs. However, with corruption abounding in the courts, with the gang leaders' pockets running deep, and with the jails already overflowing with citizens who haven't even faced a trial, Préval's does not have a wide range of choices. A Long Road Ahead Faced with the aforementioned gang problems, the acceleration of drug-related issues, and the ongoing practice of media self-censorship, Préval and the National Assembly have much work to do in shaping how the first elected government following Aristide's ouster will ultimately be perceived by the public. However, if the recent is any indication, there is some ground for hope. Certainly, the government has quite a bit on its plate-passing legislation that might lead to an improvement next year of the country's last-place finish in Transparency International's Corruption Perceptions Index, might not be a bad place to start. But at least the Préval government is doing things democratically. In both the executive and legislative branches, the signs are there: there is a growing respect for the law and the democratic process that were first spelled out in the country's nearly 20-year-old constitution but never really honored until now. Democracy is not a word that should ever be toyed with, and we should not expect Haiti to turn into a shining model of democracy overnight. What we can expect, however, is that the country's modernization and humanization will continue and that Préval and the Assembly will be respected as they try to repair the nation. Editor's Note: The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, visit www.coha.org or email coha@coha.org
 eptember
9th 2007: On Saturday last the Political Leader of the PNM
made a number of Delphic utterances. Mr Manning told his audience
that opinion polls had shown some MPs in a bad light, and that
he had a duty to the party to do what was necessary to put things
right. From his elevated political pulpit he told the expectant
crowd that politics was a vocation with a purpose. "Politics,
dear friends, cannot be seen as the pursuit of power and fortune.
Politics, if it is to have any value at all, must have a moral
dimension to it- morality not just in public affairs, but in
policymaking. It must be selfless, my dear friends. We have to
select people who see service before self, and who do not see
politics as a cause and opportunity for personal aggrandisement
or self-advancement." Clearly, Manning was sending a message to somebody or bodies. Who would sustain the collateral damage, the leader, the party or both? There was anguished concern that, having eaten the sardines and the jack sprats, he was going up the food chain to devour the sharks who had allegedly grown fat feeding at the public trough or that he was going after those who had in the past and even in recent times done things that were unforgivable. The weapon that was to be used to effect this house-cleaning was the 240 sample size constituency mini poll. As he explained, "the polls make it quite clear that the PNM, the political leader, is going to have some decisions to make for which he needs the support of the party faithful." Those who might have doubted that he would override the party constitution if necessary were reminded that he was the party's divinely chosen instrument. Waxing charismatically, the leader told the party that the "good book says a child shall lead the people. I am a child of God, and I will continue to lead the people of Trinidad and Tobago." Translated, that meant that his decisions were divinely authorised and thus not appealable. One heard of cuss-outs in and out of Cabinet, flagrant misuse of public institutions for personal political ends, and much else. Some claimed that the real targets were Rowley and Valley who, inter alia, were said to be opposed to some of the architectural changes that the Prime Minister wished to make in the Constitution. Others wagered that Mr Manning would not dare dump Rowley, since in doing so he ran the risk of splitting the party sociologically if not physically. Many expressed fear that wittingly or otherwise, the leader was perched irreversibly on a slippery slope of Grecian proportions and character which could have a knock-on effect on the party. In sum, the concern was that the tipping point had been reached if not yet crossed. Mr Manning however accepted the challenge of his critics, and warned that candidates held their authority not purely on "the basis of their own efforts, but also on the basis of their efforts within the PNM. No one should assume their image is stronger than the party." It is true, of course, that the most popular PNM candidate will not normally contribute more than 500 to 1,000 votes at maximum to the party's total. Just the same, electorates do not like voting for parties that are divided, and it could be risky for Mr Manning to go into the election without Rowley who is the PNM's key striker and Mr Valley who is good in defence. One hopes that he has hesitated on the brink. A critical question which needs to be asked and answered is just what can reasonably be expected of a Member of Parliament in the Westminster system. In the American and French systems, members of the National Assembly and Congress cannot be part of the executive apparatus. The elected person is expected to monitor the activities of the executive branch and generally look after the interests of those who elected him. In the Westminster model, the MP is part of a national government and collectively exercises a trust on behalf of the whole country. He is not only expected to master his own portfolio, but must be familiar with others as well if he is to be useful on inter-ministerial and other committees of parliament. He must also attend surgeries in his constituency to nurse his constituents' concerns. Few MPs can perform the mutually contradictory roles well. Many citizens complain that they never see their Member of Parliament. They feel neglected and thus support calls for recall and referenda. The man in the street is not generally aware of or even concerned about what it takes to run a ministry effectively, especially in a society where so much is being attempted in the building of new things. The man in the street wants his thing fixed. He has been promised a lot. Clearly the answer is to devolve more power and responsibility to local bodies rather than expect MPs to function both as ministers as well as representatives of both central and locally elected bodies. Another issue that needs comment relates to the use of polls to determine whether an MP is performing. Polls have many positive uses. Many are however of the "voodoo" variety and are deliberately meant to mislead. Genuine sampling errors are also possible. Constituency polls necessarily include in their sample persons who are supporters of rival parties and who thus perceive the incumbent as a political opponent who neglects those who do not belong to his party. The same problem would apply in respect of a recall election. If MPs are doing poorly, it may also be due to the fact that the government and its leader are also doing badly. We are dealing here with the tyranny of perception. There is a dialectical relationship among the factors which cannot be precisely disaggregated, especially if the samples are as small as these were
Based on the findings of the poll commissioned by Patrick Manning, the leader of the ruling People's National Movement (PNM) and conducted by Jamaica-based pollster Bill Johnson, several well-known incumbents are now facing the boot. At least three have been identified as scoring low on their performance in their constituencies and now face the axe of not getting the nod for re-election. One of those identified as scoring low is Trade and Industry Minister Ken Valley who has challenged the Bill Johnson poll and has commissioned his own poll which he says, shows that the electorate in his constituency gave him a thumbs up for his performance as their parliamentarian. Many more, for one reason or the other, have opted not to offer themselves for re-election. Three because of corruption and obscene language court cases; another three because of health reasons; three more because of old age and three for personal reasons. In the latter group, the decision by Health Minister John Rahael not to seek re-election has come as a surprise for the country and for some in the PNM, a major upset. Mr. Rahael, incidentally, scored the highest as the MP serving his constituents, even beating out the prime minister in his constituency. All this bacchanal is happening at a time when the country is on an election high, anticipating the announcement of the date of the elections which are due no later than January 2008. Gauging public reaction to the poll and the surprise decision of some of the representatives not to offer themselves up for re-election, there's now a conspiracy theory making the rounds in the public domain that Mr. Manning, the longest-serving parliamentarian in the country and in the Caribbean with 36 years in Parliament, is hell-bent on taking revenge and settling old scores with some political foes. Editorials in several newspapers this past week and callers to radio and television talk shows have alluded to this as well. But the conspiracy theory goes further to suggest that Mr. Manning, now being dubbed the Emperor by some very unkind members of the public, was deliberately getting rid of the strongest people from participating in the elections and replacing them with hand-picked loyalists who would offer up no threat to him, to have his own way, in the party and in the government. If there's an inkling of truth in any of this, Mr. Manning would have set himself on a dangerous course to have total power to do whatever he wants. And that, as we all know, leads down the road to dictatorship and authoritarian rule. A radio caller recently observed the newly constructed US$24 million prime minister's residence and diplomatic centre, being fit for a King, while the President of the country, Max Richards, has moved into living quarters behind the official residence which seems to have been abandoned to ruins as there are no signs of major renovation or repair works. Connect the dot, warned the caller, referring to earlier statements made by Mr. Manning about the country moving to have an executive president.  Political analyst and pollster and well-known
friend of the PNM, Dr. Selwyn Ryan, talked about the current
problems facing the ruling party as going deeper than the poll
and was really based on historical festering "jealousies
and anxieties" among senior party members. He added that no party wants to be reshuffling its front bench on the eve of an election and must be a team that plays together and not a one-man team - as what seems to be emerging in the ruling party. Maybe, Mr. Manning is not worried and not losing any sleep over the debacle unfolding daily in his party, perhaps comfortable in his thought that the two main opposition parties were still snarling at each other's throat. And maybe, he's under the illusion that there's no way his party would come close to losing the general elections. Probably too, he's relying on an infamous remark made by the party's founder and the country's first prime minister, Dr. Eric Williams, that if he put a balisier tie (the party's symbol) on a crapaud (frog) to run in the elections, it would win. Sadly, there is a measure of truth to this. However, Mr. Manning would do well to remember the almost obliteration of the PNM in 1986 when opposition parties formed an accommodation which led to the defeat of the PNM for the first time in over 30 years. Again, in 1995, the PNM lost power when the United National Congress formed the government with the two Tobago election winners. In 2001, the UNC and the PNM ended in a tie, 18-18, and after a hung parliament, fresh elections were held the following year in which the PNM improved on its control for seats. The latest poll (not by Bill Johnson) shows that if general elections are called today, the PNM would win. However, the same poll found that if the two opposition parties are united, it stands a chance of winning the elections. But let's come back a bit to the secret poll which Mr. Manning did on his MPs. It is now being compared to the infamous 'undated letter' in 1976 orchestrated by the PNM's founder and the country's first prime minister Dr. Williams that parliamentarians sign resignation letters to protect the party from defection. Karl Hudson-Phillips, then an MP under the PNM, refused to sign the undated letter, arguing that it was laying the foundation for autocratic rule and fascism. It is also instructive, that earlier this week, the PNM's Vice-Chairman, John Donaldson responded in an acerbic tone that polls were never part of the party's screening process of candidates for general elections. Mr. Donaldson added that he knew nothing "at all, at all, at all" about the poll and there was a standard principle in the party in terms of the selection of candidates to contest general elections. It is a bit astounding that Mr. Manning, given his long years of experience as a politician, is relying so much on a poll conducted by Bill Johnson polling company which not too long ago predicted that Dr. Kenny Anthony's party would have won the St. Lucia elections by a 14-3 margin. It's now history that Dr. Anthony's party took a heavy beating from the United Workers Party, led by octogenarian, Sir John Compton. And yes, Bill Johnson correctly predicted a Jamaica Labour Party win but just about everybody was predicting the same - well except for the defeated People's National Party leader and out-going prime minister, Portia Simpson-Miller and fellow supporters. It would also be wise for Mr. Manning to note carefully that the three general elections fought in the Caribbean recently, namely, St Lucia, Bahamas and now Jamaica, have resulted in defeat for the incumbents and this despite the improved economic showings of the three countries. During his recent presentation of the 2007/2008 US$7 billion national budget, Mr. Manning went to great lengths about the economic achievements under his watch over the last five years. According to Mr. Manning, over the 2002-2006 period, the economy grew at a high rate of GDP of 9.7 percent per year. The rapid rate of growth led to a doubling of the economy from US$9 billion in 2001 to US$18.3 billion in 2006 and an increase in per capita income from US$7,100 in 2002 to US$14,790 in 2006. The Trinidad and Tobago economy has in fact been on the upswing over the last 13 years - but its performance has taken second place in terms of election issues. The major issue has been crime - and the PNM's record on this over the last five years is hardly impressive.
As police were probing threats to Walker's life following announcements of preliminary election results of an original 31-29 for the Jamaica Labour Party--finally to change in official recounts to a six-seat 33-27 majority---Bruce Golding was preparing to take the oath as new Prime Minister on Tuesday afternoon. A 60-year-old eonomist to lead the JLP, for the first time, into a victorious general election, Golding would be Jamaica's eight Prime Minister since Independence in 1962.  He would be heading
a government from Wednesday with the lowest percentage of
popular votes--approximately half of one percent--and the smallest,
though quite workable, parliamentary majority of six in the 60-member
House of Representatives. The incumbent People's National Party (PNP), led by a woman for the first time into a national election--Portia Simpson-Miller--could take comfort from the fact that though defeated it was most certainly not disgraced. Indeed, with variations in declared preliminary and official counts in at least five constituencies and involving below 50 votes, the PNP came near to retaining an unprecedented fifth consecutive term in government. Post-election analyses would reveal that the Jamaican electorate not only voted for a change in government last Monday. They also seemed anxious to remind the country's two traditional handlers of state power (PNP and JLP) to get their acts together for a new political culture in meaningful cooperation--in the national interest. A quick reading of the results of both the 2002 general election and that of Monday's, suggests that this mood for qualitative change in the governance politics of Jamaica may have been evident in the outcome of the last election--but even more strongly expressed with last week's change in favour of the JLP. It would be to the credit of both new Prime Minister Golding, and new Opposition Leader, Simpson-Miller, to demonstrate--by what they DO--their own appreciation of the meaning of the electorate's verdict when the opportunities present themselves for "constructive engagement". Interpretations of the election results for 2002 and 2007 would undoubtedly vary--and not only by the strategists, spin doctors and leading decision-makers of both parties. However, an objective assessment of the verdicts delivered by the electorate at these two elections in five years appears to point the following: A disturbing level of recurring boycotts of the poll by almost forty percent of registered voters; and, secondly, an unmistakable cry for action to deal with the very sharp political divisions that the winner-takes-all Westminster model, located in a first-past-the-post electoral system, cannot effectively address. In 2002 when, under the leadership of P.J. Patterson, the PNP retained state power for an unprecedented fourth term, it did so with an eight-seat majority and a five percent lead, or 37,027 more votes than were cast for the JLP's 26 seats. Total voter turnout then was 56.7 percent or 734,628. For Monday's election, with a significantly revised electoral roll standing at 1.3 million, including some 50,000 new voters, the change in government came with the JLP securing 33 of the 60 constituencies to the PNP's 27--a six-seat majority after the initial nail-biting declaration of a two-seat victory. That's one aspect of the political picture. Another significant factor not to be overlooked is that while under the first-past-the-post system, majority of seats count, and not votes gained, the harsh reality is that less than 3,000 valid ballots separated the victor (JLP) and loser (PNP). The arithmetic of the JLP's victory that frustrated the PNP's bid for a consecutive fifth term, was, therefore, earned with approximately just half of one percent of the 808,240 cast. This less than one percent more popular votes--now translated into the JLP's plurality of six seats in the House of Representatives---resulted from its total of 405,215 ballots (or 50.1 percent), compared with the 402, 275 (or 49.7 percent) secured by the PNP. Conclusion? A timely, relevant reminder of Jamaica as a country politically divided down the middle in this 45th year of  independence. Contrary to earlier claims of one opinion pollster of about a "landslide" or "tsunami" for the JLP, victory against the PNP was snatched by the lowest percentage of popular votes and slimmest of parliamentary majority. In this context must be assessed the position of a disappointed outgoing Prime Minister (Simpson-Miller) in unfortunately choosing to cast her first post-election response in a negative mould when she said she would not "concede anything". It would, instead, have been a good moment to commend the mass of her party's loyal supporters for bringing the PNP--against the odds--quite close to making a realty of her expressed desire to be Jamaica's first woman to secure an electoral mandate of her own to lead a government in Kingston. Failure to call a snap general election within the first six months of her success in winning the presidency of the PNP to succeed Patterson as Prime Minister, as well as an unprecedented six-week long election campaign are being recalled by her detractors as blunders that may have contributed to the defeat suffered on Monday--though coming very close to retaining power. On reflection, the JLP's victory cannot be objectively analysed in isolation of the plenty money that vested interests reportedly had committed themselves to pour into that party's election campaign--and utilised in part to sustain a major media propaganda blitz superior to the PNP's. The moneyed-class had earlier succeeded in helping the JLP to expose the "Trafigura funding scandal" that placed the PNP on the defensive. Having rightly refunded that kind of campaign financing, it seemed to have placed the PNP at a serious disadvantage in obtaining help from local sources. For now, with the election over and Bruce Golding fulfilling his and his father's dream as Jamaica's new Prime Minister--the eight since Independence in 1962--there is need to focus on the message from the electorate. That is how the leadership of both the JLP and PNP respond to the choices made by voters last Monday to underscore the need for political reconciliation and best use of human resources for nation building. Golding has done well in calling for "constructive engagement" with the PNP, after perhaps his own sober assessment of the election results. In opposition, he was clamouring for constitutional reform and changes in the system of governance long before he had succeeded Edward Seaga as JLP leader---after returning to the party following the dismal performances of the National Democratic Movement that he had helped to form. It is felt that the PNP would do well for itself, now and in the longer term, to imaginatively reciprocate with its own concept and programme for meaningful "engagement' with the first-ever Golding-led JLP administration. The new Prime Minister must be taken at his word that he is interested in "constructive engagement".
Therefore, when our Attorney General, Hon. Kurt de Freites, strained credulity to dismiss assault and theft charges against the Premier, it only added legal insult to our political discomfort. I beg you to recall (or refer to) my 20 July article entitled A wannabe gangsta... perhaps, but Premier Misick is no genocidal Mugabe. Because in it, I delineated the issues of national importance that were raised when opposition MP Hon. Arthur Robinson reported to the police that the Premier had assaulted him. Never mind the Premier's attempt to reduce resolution of them to a national farce by reporting to his Party's de facto newspaper of record that he feared Mr Robinson and other members of the Loyal Opposition were conspiring to kill him. But, until this week,
I would have defied any reasonable person to deny the gravity
of this matter or the categorical imperative that it be resolved
consistent with the rule of law. Therefore, I am profoundly disappointed
that Tuesday's press statement, which summarizes Mr de Freites'
decision, made a mockery of the charges against the Premier in
both respects.For starters, he advised the Commissioner of Police, Edward C. Hall, that Mr Robinson's allegation that he was assaulted and the Premier's counterclaim that he fears for his life are, in fact, much ado about nothing: A prosecution is... unwarranted on public interest grounds... Neither of them, it appears, suffered any harm... A prosecution against the Premier... is likely to be blown grossly out of proportion to the alleged offence of common assault and, in addition, such a trial may undermine the justice system. But I am constrained to advise Mr de Freites that if the president of the United States (Bill Clinton) can be prosecuted for allegedly telling a common white lie, then the premier of the TCI should be prosecuted for allegedly assaulting an Honourable Member of Parliament. Moreover, I am concerned about the message his advice will convey -- not only to young men in this country (too many of whom are already inclined to wanton assaults) -- but also to other victims (too many of whom are already disinclined to report such crimes). Indeed, Mr de Freites may have committed gross misfeasance here: Because his suggestion that people should have no fear of being prosecuted for committing assaults -- as long as no one suffers any (physical) harm -- will undoubtedly undermine the justice system (and respect for the rule of law). Mr de Freites then advised the police against filing theft charges by proffering patently specious reasoning that is even more egregious and irresponsible. In fact, in this context, he comes across more like a defense attorney making technical arguments to keep his client out of jail, than as an attorney general vindicating the personal-property rights of an aggrieved citizen: The evidence discloses that at the time the camera was taken, there was no intention by Mills [the Premier's bodyguard] to permanently deprive the owner thereof. A charge of theft of the camera would therefore not be justified in such circumstances. Never mind that no one who knows anything about this case ever suspected that it was the Premier's intention to have his bodyguard steal the video camera. Instead, we suspected that it was his intention to erase all evidence of his alleged crime that was caught on it! But, even assuming Mr de Freites' tortured logic, it hardly furthers "public interest" for an attorney general to suggest that if a young man steals a car, no criminal charges will be filed -- as long as he claims that he had no intention to permanently deprive the owner thereof... Which brings me brings me back to his circular reasoning against filing assault charges: In the absence of any independent or corroborative evidence to assist in the determination of which version may be true, the Chambers did not think it fair, or appropriate to select one version over another as being in order to found a prosecution. Alas, this quote makes it painfully clear not only that Mr de Freites failed to perform his duties as attorney general, but also that he has no clue what his duties are. In fact, his decision reads like the delusional rationalizations of a neo-colonial regent who fancies himself defense attorney, prosecutor, judge and jury! Frankly, I feel obliged to observe the mercy rule at this point. After all, any third-rate lawyer could write a treatise exposing the legal fallacies and untenable public-policy implications inherent in Mr de Freites' advice. But there seems no legal or political merit in doing so. Therefore, I shall dismiss his press statement with the following observations: * Just as Bill Clinton was prosecuted, not so much for getting a blowjob as for committing perjury and obstructing justice; so too should Michael Misick have been prosecuted, not so much for assaulting Mr Robinson or stealing a camera as for abusing his power and perverting the course of justice. * It is an affront to all TCIslanders for Mr de Freites to dismiss this as a "common assault case". Because we all know that it was (and remains) all about our Premier's abuse of his power. * It behooves Dr Misick to appreciate that instead of vindicating his claims, Mr de Freites' decision actually indicts his leadership. (Meanwhile, I hope he and his bodyguards are taking appropriate security measures to foil the alleged conspiracy to assassinate him...) Nevertheless, I hope Mr de Freites fully appreciates the potentially fatal crisis of confidence in the Attorney General's office his handling of this matter has caused amongst TCIslanders. NOTE: I appeal to British Prime Minister Gordon Brown to query why his head of UK Overseas Territories, who is responsible for ensuring good governance, would publicly praise Premier Misick for our "flourishing economy", but fail to admonish him in similar fashion about the lack of transparency in his government. After all, it does not foster much regard amongst us for UK-TCI relations, when Lord Triesman visits to flatter the Premier for wresting constitutional powers from you, but fails to admonish him for abusing those powers in his dealings with us. God help us... Editor's Note: Anthony L. Hall is a descendant of the Turks & Caicos Islands, international lawyer and political consultant - headquartered in Washington DC - who publishes his own weblog, The iPINIONS Journal, at http://ipjn.com offering commentaries on current events from a Caribbean perspective.
And for the one week that the lone-Commissioner sat and took its evidence from selected witnesses that the Commission itself had summoned to attend -- it became even clearer that the whole charade was not intended to achieve justice, but merely to whitewash the whole procedure.|  Some effort was made to bring a semblance
of normalcy to the proceedings, when the Leader of the Opposition
wrote to the Commissioner seeking his approval to be represented
at the inquiry -- as a very interested person under the constitution.The Commissioner invited Tillman Thomas to attend the proceedings and present his case, personally or by counsel, and he did that. After responses by counsel for the commission, Dr Ramsahoye QC, and Mr Ramesh Maharag for the Prime Minister, the Commissioner refused to give the opposition leader leave to appear. The hearings therefore continued, with no lawyer present to test the veracity of those witnesses called by the Commissioner, and at the end of the week the PM's lawyer even attempted to make a no-case submission to complete the farce. After the adjournment, two years or so ago, the opposition leader filed for judicial review of the Commissioner's refusal to grant him audience. The matter was heard by Mr Justice Baptiste, and he held that Tillman Thomas was entitled to be heard as such an interested person, but the level of audience was at the discretion of the Commissioner, so he sent the matter back to him to exercise that discretion. The Governor General and the Commissioner were made aware of the court's ruling but, instead of moving ahead thereafter, the Commissioner filed an appeal and that is where the matter stayed up to-date. We are now told the C/A has to hear argument or give a ruling on the 17th September, 2007. In late June, the Governor General announced that the life of the Commission was extended for a further three months from first July to September 30th 2007 for a final report. Then on Friday 17th August, a news release said that the Commissioner would resume sitting at the Trade Centre on Tuesday 21st August, 2007. No notice was given to the opposition leader, Tillman Thomas, but it is obvious that notice was given to Miss Ann-Marie Coutain and Inspector Francois, and the two ever-present foreign lawyers who are being paid by the state. Having heard the news as everyone else, the opposition leader had Mr Ruggles Ferguson make an appearance on Tuesday morning to check out the happenings and if necessary seek a postponement to have his counsel (Mr Elliott Motley QC of Barbados) make a presentation on his behalf, because that counsel was then in Canada. Mr Ferguson was given a hearing and he sought to have the Commission allow a short adjournment to the following Monday when Mr Motley could be present to make his presentation. Both Ramsahoye QC and Maharay SC objected, the Commissioner adjourned for ten minutes to consider the submissions and he returned and rejected Mr Ferguson's request and proceeded to call the two pre-arranged witnesses, Coutain and Francois. What transpired thereafter was even more farcical -- in the context of what all Grenadians and the region as a whole already know, from the PM himself. Miss Coutain's evidence was to the effect, that she was present with the PM throughout the visit to St Moritz in Switzerland and his meetings with Resteiner, and at no time did she see any money passed between the two men; and certainly no Vuitton briefcase. And this lady was brought all the way from Brussels to Grenada to say that, and to add that Resteiner was also at the airport in Zurich or wherever and he introduced the PM to prospective investors. That evidence was so different from the facts already known by the Commissioner and those two high-powered lawyers present, that in the interest of public relations, if nothing else, it was incumbent on them to try and clear up the mystery and contradictions. But no, all the evidence was in and the Commission will be presenting its report to the Governor General by the 30th September, 2007 and will be reporting that no evidence was presented that implicated the PM in any way, and there was no need to call him. Those three lawyers will collect their huge fees from poor struggling Grenadians, and return to their homelands leaving the sorry mess no cleaner than before. I heard Mr Maharag saying that what transpired here could not happen in Trinidad, and I completely agree with him -- because in T&T they would have arrested the Chief Justice and the ex-PM, suspend the Chief Justice from office, stop criminal cases half-way through, and generally treat public officials at the highest levels as nobody -- all in the process of making a mockery of justice in their republican style, in preparation for replacing the tried and tested and respected democratic Privy Council. He can keep that lot in his T&T, we do not need it here -- although his clients are doing their utmost best to make the change over and move Port-of-Spain to St George's. So the briefcase Inquiry, to all intents and purposes, is now officially over bar the shouting, and we await the lone-Commissioner's report in the next month or so. And to think we may have spent upwards of half a million US dollars on that sham, and those who are responsible for the public purse and are expected to give account for their stewardship will see nothing wrong in that fiasco. But the longest day and darkest night must come to an end some good day. Then in the next month or so, the same responsible lot will be parading dozens and dozens of young folks through the court system on criminal charges for offences that pale into insignificance when compared with what is happening at the top of the ladder. And as per usual, all those supporters who can see nothing wrong with what took place at the Trade Centre last week, they would be singing the same worn out swan song like in Minister Bowen's case, that the PM has been vindicated -- despite the very obvious contradictions that were made public on that last day of shame and disgrace for our so-called justice system of gross inequalities. But then again what does it matter, we seem to be only too ready to sacrifice all the standards and acceptable norms that we once treasured as a people, on the very shaky altar of political excuse and convenience, because it happens to be the in-thing. We pretend to forget that the seeds we sow today will be producing fruits in due course, and we cannot sow one brand and expect to achieve a different kind. Time will tell. While all these legal gymnastics were taking place in Grenada, or elsewhere overseas in courthouses concerning our politicians in control of our public affairs, hurricane Dean chose to stay well clear of Grenada and visit our neighbours to the north. Our care and concern go out to the people in those islands, and we hope they will soon pick up the pieces and start again. In addition, Sir John Compton is having a rough time with his health and will not be able to continue the come-back he made last December, when his party won back the people's confidence. I wish him God speed. And in Jamaica we wait to see the outcome of that Island's pending polls, after "Dean" and the postponed date for the elections. In T&T the waiting game continues, and here at home the guessing exercise is in full swing as the economic situation deteriorates; and with exam results bringing out more and yet more qualified students with no hope of getting a job, and financially unable to enter TAMCC even where they wanted to, the social problems in that area need very urgent attention to keep it in check. I heard a news item that the throne speech in October, and the budget estimates for 2008, will contain some measures towards alleviating the high cost of living and perhaps unemployment, and that sounds fine; but I am afraid that such measures may be too long in taking root and therefore too late. I trust that far more urgent attention will be given to these burning social issues facing our young folks, so that they will find some respite in the last quarter of this year. Editor's Note: Lloyd Noel is a former Attorney General of Grenada, prominent attorney at law and political commentator.
August
19th 2007: Identity (the "I" word) has become one
of the more controversial words in the lexicon of contemporary
political discourse in the Caribbean and elsewhere. Our poets,
priests, politicians and calypsonians talk a great deal about
our respective identities and about where we are likely to find
them, whether here or in Africa, India, China, Europe or the
Middle East. The same, of course, occurs all over the world.
For many years, identity politics was kept in check by the application of imperial force. The collapse of the British, French and Portuguese empires following World War II triggered wars of political succession in many parts of the once-colonised world, the most dramatic and murderous of which took place in India, the Middle East, Africa and the Balkans. The ending of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union served to aggravate the problem. What was once a subordinate regional issue has now became the central issue. Millions are murdered or mutilated in the name of religious or tribal identity. Some have argued that with the collapse of the Soviet Empire and the emergence of the United States as the world's only superpower, "History" had come to an end, at least philosophically, and that we were finally witnessing the appearance on the world stage of the "secular messiah" for which the war weary had longed. This construction of History was widely challenged, no more so than in the work of Samuel Huntington in his provocative book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of the World Order. Huntington argued that in the post-modern world, civilisational clashes would replace the clash of classes and of the great isms as the primary cause of war. Flags and other symbols of cultural and religious identity, including crosses, crescents, and head coverings, would come to constitute what was most meaningful to people. What we seem to be witnessing, however, is a clash of fundamentalist identities rather than a clash of homogeneous civilisations. Huntington's thesis has been fiercely challenged, most recently by Nobel laureate, Amartya Sen, in his newly published book, Identity and Violence. Sen takes issue with the view that we all have a single true overarching identity which is assigned to us choicelessly at birth. This identity indelibly defines "who" we are and "what" we do or not do if we want to be a "true" this or that, rather than the counterfeit commodity. Failure to conform to this branding could lead to accusations that we have betrayed sacred ancestral icons or kin, offences that in some societies are punishable by ostracism, mutilation, social or even physical death. Some societies have addressed the problem by branding themselves as being multicultural, diversified or secularised. For the most part, however none have achieved the level of benign neutrality or cultural accommodation of which their propagandists brag. They have at most become federations of boxed cultures in which the voices of cultural entrepreneurs are amplified because of the recognition and the resources which are given them by the state or the community. Some have become more militantly Talibanised, insisting that the main cause of the discontent and social decay that prevails in society is the westernisation and secularisation that has overtaken it. What one thus needs is a fundamental resacralisation and remoralising of society and the recreation of primordial identities. Such efforts, however, often generate religious and cultural bigotry or secular irredentism. Ironically, the dialectics of these struggles sometimes lead to bizarre outcomes. The culturally conservative Jihadist who sits in a Baghdad café is often wearing western jeans and shoes, and smoking western cigarettes, caught inexorably and squirmingly between the grinding stones or tradition and modernity. His confusion and sense of humiliation heightens his anguish. Cultural determinists often underestimate the extent to which heterogeneity obtains within what is taken to be one culture or one "civilisation", Caribbean "civilisation" included. What is true of the Caribbean is even more true of Africa which is in many ways naught but a geographical expression. We need to be more aware that all identities are consciously or unconsciously constructed and mythologised for reasons which are "lost" or forgotten. Even those which assert that they have always been "out there," and which lay claim to being "primordial" turn out to be fictional inventions created by political and economic entrepreneurs for various self-interested ends. The value of identities however change as situations determine. As Kwame Appiah, the distinguished Ghanaian Harvard-based sociologist observes, identities which are helpful in facilitating the achievement of certain goals often "disable" us in other contexts. This observation is as true of African identity as it is of Caribbean identity because, as Appiah notes, "it proposes as a basis for common action the illusion that black people are fundamentally allied by nature. It thus leaves us unprepared to handle "intra-racial" conflicts that arise from the very different situations of black (and white and yellow) people in different parts of the economy and of the world". Appiah's basic point, and ours as well, is that the value of our many identities is relative and situational. We must assert and argue for and against them, case by case. Appiah believes that given the current situation in Africa, "a racialised nationalism is not what is called for. The desired project is a true continental fraternity Even so, it is important to emphasise that one is not talking about a single African state. One cannot ignore the complexity of Africa and its many languages and cultures. And yet again, one must also seek to build productive alliances and eschew identities which disable us. African solidarity can surely be a vital and enabling cry: but in this world of genders, ethnicities, classes, families, religions, and nations, it is a well to remember that there are times when Africa is not the banner we need". This view might upset some of our Africentric ultras. That does not however make it any less true. (First published in the Trinidad & Tobago express newspaper) |