Jamaica: Aftermath of the Dudus extradition

Mark Wignall



A week or so after the extradition, downtown Kingston, effectively void of its 'protector', has become one vast no-man's land. The outburst of violence began at the moment his extradition was announced.

Police personnel in full battle gear and soldiers from the JDF are out in their numbers, day and night, but for all the good that their presence has done to ensure a full or even partial return of commercial activity, they could have instead remained at their homes or at their assigned stations.

The spate of shootings in two weeks has left 20 dead, comprising three members of the security forces, eight vendors, three shoppers, one storeowner and five young men described by the CCN as "gunmen who had brazenly opened fire on the security forces using high-powered automatic weaponry".

The 20 dead are, however, just those confined to the immediate environs of downtown Kingston. From Flanker in St James all the way to Yallahs in the east, the violent flare-ups have been very unpredictable, but the biggest problem facing the security forces is the seeming ability of the roving bands of gunmen to strike and then blend seamlessly into the various communities. So far the death toll related to these sporadic outbursts of violence outside of the Kingston Metropolitan Area (KMA) has been 15, including two additional members of the security forces, eight members of the public and five gunmen.

Two days ago, a statement made by the prime minister explaining his reasons for accepting the resignation of Security Minister Dwight Nelson, by my own gleanings at street level, has been received by the public with much scepticism. "Nelson neva did a gwaan good anyway. But fi fire di man now is only trying to mek it look like seh him a du sup'm. Dat cyaan fool wi. A him fi resign."

In his statement, the prime minister made it clear that the security forces would have the matter under control "in a matter of days". When pressed by Cliff Hughes to give the nation an indication as to when a new security minister would be appointed, a visibly peeved Golding stared down Hughes and shot back, "The priority now is stemming the tide of violence that has gripped this nation for the last two weeks. That has to be the nation's priority! Next question."

Over the last two days, most businessplaces in the KMA, Spanish Town, May Pen, and to a lesser extent in key sections on the outskirts of the second city, have remained closed as fear becomes the only commodity in the marketplace. Three days ago when I drove along sections of Red Hills Road, lower Constant Spring Road, Hope Road and upper Maxfield Avenue, I saw little activity except vehicles carrying soldiers and police. Thoroughfares such as Grants Pen Road, Waltham Park Road, Olympic Way and Spanish Town Road are not places I would advise readers of this column to pass through.

The sense I had was that the security forces were confounded by the sporadic outburst of gunfire. With a dusk-to-dawn curfew in most parish capitals, some main towns and key sections of both cities, the country seems ready to roll over and go to bed for a long spell.

As it appears, there is some evidence that gunmen with notional attachments to the PNP have been teaming up with those in the forefront; various spokespersons in the PNP have been calling for an islandwide state of emergency. Meanwhile, the information minister has dismissed the idea that the prime minister has formally requested the Americans to send in the Marines.

What happens if Dudus stays


OK, before you start to conclude that I am a purveyor of fear and that I am selling it in support of the JLP administration's refusal to sign the extradition order for Mr Christopher 'Dudus' Coke, boss of all bosses in West Kingston, let me simply state that I was merely attempting to give you my best version of likely happenings based on how the grand game of politics, in the last 50 years, has meshed with the street elements in order to ensure that the JLP and PNP tribes can remain in their parasitic relationship with the people of this country.

A well-known, highly successful businessman who is a friend, wrote recently, "What if I said that the feeling I get, outside of the partisan biases, is that the greatest fear among the citizenry has to do with a feeling that Dudus brings a sense of stability and that this would change to anarchy were he removed... A fear of the perceived awesome firepower in the hands of men incapable of reason and seeking only individual power, in the many islandwide communities that are under the sphere of influence of Tivoli -- The Mother of all Garrisons, according to former Commissioner Hardley Lewin -- bearing in mind the alleged superior firepower and the many in the police force who were schooled and placed there deliberately by dons."

The PNP when it was in power never failed to provoke Tivoli Gardens into violent outbursts when it suited them to do so. I am not saying that the gunmen in Tivoli Gardens were armed by the politicians because I have no evidence of this. Indeed, at this juncture of our sordid history where politicians have been neutered and the street elements attached to them no longer call them boss, the typical gunman in an inner-city community would probably balk at the idea that a politician gave him a gun.

Created by Eddie Seaga, Tivoli Gardens and the wider West Kingston constituency became the template for the PNP's response to fighting fire with fire. As the PNP's South St Andrew constituency became the first line of defence in hitting back at armed young men from Tivoli in the 1970s, the JLP ensured that Rema was well placed as a stub extending from its border with Denham Town a few blocks into South St Andrew.

Rema gunmen were the front-line warriors, ostensibly keeping the PNP horde from raiding further south and pushing Tivoli into the sea. When Rema behaved badly, its gunmen were always seen to be expendable. Just ask those old enough to recount the massacre carried out by Tivoli on Rema in 1984.

My friend added, for contextual support that, "This may very well be the opportunity to clean slate... but for this to be successful... superior, disciplined and coordinated intelligence and force would have to be applied from day one of any such initiative. The old truism 'one can't be half pregnant' is appropriate here."

He then asks a question which focuses on the ability of the state to summon the will to rescue its soul.

"Is Jamaica capable of this, when the target is a friend of those who must summon the political will, mobilise and coordinate this intelligence and force - having ostracised the most likely source of needed assistance? Some things are more easily said than done, and never lose sight of the fact that in Jamaica, the hierarchy is: Self, Party, then Country. This statesman thing is a mere chapter of our history not likely to be repeated."

Question: Who is the 'most likely source of the needed assistance'? No points for a correct answer.

From day one I had suggested that based on how the US extradition request had described the activities of Dudus, automatically his closest political allies would become his most feared enemies. But based on the information coming out of the JLP government, the US authorities must now go back and find some other grounds on which to make a new request.

Is the JLP government saying to the US government that it (the US) has breached that treaty? Let us appreciate that the JLP Cabinet has many members who are quick to give 'respect' to Dudus, therefore, as we know 'fear' follows 'respect'.

To say to the US authorities, "Hell no, he won't go" is to accept that if Mr Coke is as bad and influential as they say he is, then we in Jamaica ought to have known about it and done something about it. Essentially the Americans are saying, "Jamaica, you are incapable of running a viable country. You have accepted our money, our kindness. Now shut the @!/! up and abide by our treaty."

The power of the Americans to cripple our tourist industry by issuing travel advisories is probably the worst action that could be taken, but seeing that we will need every cent of tourism earnings in order to pay back the IMF, it is my view that the Americans will not be doing this any time soon.

If the Americans suspect that the Dudus they have investigated has surrogates with American visas, revoking those visas could be a start. Don't get me wrong, I am not in any way linking the revoking of Wayne Chen's visa with the Dudus extradition request.

The fact is, if Jamaica fails to exercise what most Jamaicans see as the sensible option, the US authorities can bring into play many surreptitious options that only a CIA operative could conjure up.

It is my personal belief that any decision to extradite Dudus lies squarely in Tivoli Gardens. But it could be that the Government is playing two hands in the one game.

On one hand, it opens up publicly and defends the 'sovereign rights of our citizens' and earns the wrath of the citizenry. On the other hand, the possibility is that it could be holding covert meetings with the US authorities simply because it knows that whatever the US wants, the US gets.

One online commentator summed it up as follows, "The only party that holds any cards, aside from Dudus, is the USA. Bruce Golding is simply a noisy spectator. This situation has made it clear that the coup d'état took place many years ago. Dudus is the King of Jamaica!"

March 07, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Cases of 'bullying' US politics

Analysis by Rickey Singh



IT would be a pity if the rest of our Caribbean Community governments do not see it necessary to acquaint themselves with the circumstances of the current sharp dispute between Jamaica and the United States over Washington's demand for the extradition of Jamaican Christopher 'Dudus' Coke.

Prime Minister Bruce Golding should consider briefing his Caricom counterparts, if he has not already done so, as well as have a candid discussion with the parliamentary Opposition.

For what is at stake seems to be much more than the individual human rights of Coke, regardless of the fact that he is the strongman in the Tivoli Gardens community -- a known political stronghold of the prime minister's governing Jamaica Labour Party.

The very sovereignty of Jamaica seems to be at stake in its Government's defence of its constitutional right, within the framework of an existing bilateral extradition treaty it has with the USA, which would require extending that right for a ruling by the courts in Jamaica BEFORE Coke could be handed over to US authorities, or that such a process be denied.

Given the commitment to the rule of law in our Caribbean civilisation, it is good to have an independent judicial system as final arbiter in the current dispute over the extradition of a Jamaican wanted by American authorities for alleged narco-trafficking and related crimes.

In a sense, the explosion of the bitter extradition row resulting from Jamaica's refusal to extradite Coke is a classic case of déjà vu in terms of relations between Washington and Kingston under different administrations.

As it was under previous governments of the now Opposition People's National Party (PNP), and the administrations of both presidents Bill Clinton and George W Bush, Jamaica remains a favourite "punching bag" in America's diversion to cover up its own woeful failures to effectively deal with its immense problem as the world's biggest consumer of illegal drugs as well as its involvement in gun-running linked to narco-trafficking.

This observation should not be misconstrued as support for Coke, or any other Jamaican or Caricom national whose alleged criminal activities can threaten national security as well as undermine good bilateral relations with the USA and other traditional external allies.

The 'Coke extradition case' reminds us of other instances of the USA wielding the 'big stick' to force small and poor states in this and other regions to genuflect to the assumed legal demands of Washington.

'Silver Dollar' and 'Shiprider'

A typical example of the USA's 'big stick' approach would be the threatened financial sanctions against Jamaica by the then Bill Clinton administration over a then PNP government, led by PJ Patterson, amid a raging bitter dispute involving alleged violations under of a then prevailing Maritime Counter-Narcotics Co-operation Agreement (the 1996 case of the fishing boat Silver Dollar).

A shining example of Caricom solidarity was demonstrated at an extraordinary summit in Barbados hosted by then Prime Minister Owen Arthur.

It was to frustrate Washington, which had threatened sanctions with the emergence of major changes to controversial provisions in the "Maritime Counter-Narcotics (Shiprider) Agreement" which, for its part, Trinidad and Tobago had earlier hastily signed in its original format.

Jamaica's signing with the USA of the revised protocol to the 1997 'Shiprider' pact had ended a chilling episode of political tension, and new cordial relations were flowering in Kingston (then under PNP rule) and other Caricom capitals with the USA when President Clinton showed up in Barbados in May 1997 for the historic summit that resulted in a far-reaching "Partnership for Sovereignty and Security".

Subsequently, however, under the administration of President George W Bush, there was to be another example of bullying tactics by a Washington administration against small and vulnerable economies.

In this case it was related to Caribbean countries that signed and ratified the Rome Treaty of the International Criminal Court (ICC), to concur with a demand from Washington to exonerate from extradition US citizens wanted by the ICC for specific crimes.

Failure to agree, they were made to understand, would mean losing whatever military assistance they normally received from dear "Uncle Sam".

Such is Washington's concept of "democracy" and "sovereignty' when dealing with small and poor states like ours in the Caribbean -- something for which it is occasionally applauded by sections of the region's media.

Among the countries that had both signed and ratified the Rome Treaty were Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, and St Vincent and the Grenadines. Antigua and Barbuda genuflected; Barbados and St Vincent and the Grenadines refused.

Jamaica, Guyana and St Lucia had signed but not ratified the treaty and, consequently, there was no need to pressure them into concurring with Washington's demand. These are just two examples of Uncle Sam's arrogance to push small and poor states into a corner.

Golding's Stand

In the current political episode involving Coke, Prime Minister Golding has made it clear that it is NOT a case of his Government's refusal to co-operate with Washington.

Jamaica's objection relates to the manner in which the USA was muscling its way to secure Coke's extradition, even to the extent of obtaining information illegally by violating key provisions of the Extradition Treaty between the two countries.

According to an irate Golding, who has vowed to pay, if necessary, "the political price" for his handling of the extradition request of August 25 last year, the evidence submitted is based on a violation of Jamaica's Interception of Communications Act.

He went on to state that "constitutional rights do not begin at Liguanea" (location of the United States Embassy in Kingston).

Given the nature of competitive party politics for state power, the Opposition PNP may have its own reason for an earlier press statement that accused the Golding administration of not "expeditiously" responding to the US request for the extradition of Coke.

Yet the PNP can hardly forget its own very unpleasant experiences while in government in dealing with differences with Washington on matters of narco-trafficking.

An example would be the impasse over the so-called Silver Dollar Affair that had led then Foreign Minister Seymour Mullings to accuse Washington of breaching Jamaica's sovereignty.

Cubana Tragedy

The Caribbean Community would be quite aware of Washington's unflattering record in honouring requests for the extradition of those in the USA wanted for outrageous criminal acts in other nations.

Foremost in the minds of Caribbean people would be two Cuban émigrés currently being sheltered in the USA from prosecution for their involvement in the 1976 bombing of the Cubana aircraft off Barbados in which all 73 people on board perished.

One of the terrorists in that Cubana tragedy, Orlando Bosch, a medical doctor, was given a presidential pardon by the senior George Bush, following his illegal entry into the USA after fleeing Venezuela, from where his partner in crime, Luis Posada Carriles, was to later escape. Carriles, after a 'protected' stay in Panama, also illegally entered the USA.

Washington continues to ignore Caricom's request for him to face a court trial for the biggest ever act of terrorism in a Caribbean jurisdiction.

March 07, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Chile and Haiti: A tale of two quakes

By David Roberts



Following the latest two big earthquakes to hit the region, the one in Haiti on January 12 and the one in central-southern Chile on February 27, many people have been comparing the catastrophes and questioning why so many people died in the Haiti event - up to 300,000, while the capital Port-au-Prince was pretty much flattened - and relatively few in Chile, at around 800, according to the latest count.

The earthquake in Chile, measuring 8.8 on the Richter scale, was supposedly 700 times more powerful than the one in Haiti, which measured 7.0. According to the scientists, one additional decimal point on the Richter scale means 10 times more energy is released, and while that may be difficult to believe in terms of how an earth tremor feels (a 4.1 certainly doesn't feel 10 times more powerful than a 4.0, for instance), the Chilean event was certainly much more powerful than the one in Haiti.

There are of course obvious reasons why the Chilean earthquake led to considerably less destruction and loss of life than the Haiti one. Building standards are very different, and that's a lesson that Chile has learnt from massive earthquakes in the past that caused the deaths of tens of thousands of people, such as Chillán in 1939 and Valdivia in 1960 (at 9.5 on the Richter scale the most powerful one ever registered), after which much stricter building codes were introduced. Many buildings in Port-au-Prince collapsed because they were not constructed using steel rebars to reinforce the concrete, while poverty and poor living conditions in general led to many more deaths than would otherwise have been the case, not to mention those many fatalities and injuries that resulted from inadequate rescue equipment and services, nor the illnesses that followed because of poor water supplies.

Another factor partly explaining the relatively modest damage - "relatively" is the key word here, as damage is initially estimated at up to US$30bn - and numbers of victims in Chilean earthquakes in recent decades is that they tend to be deeper in the ground than in many other parts of the world.

Indeed, on occasions some Chileans appear to be proud of the fact that their country seems to largely resist such powerful quakes, at least compared to other nations like Haiti, China or Iran, for example. There is, however, no room for complacency, and standards must be improved further. The February 27 event caused major destruction, even to modern infrastructure facilities that should have emerged unscathed, such as Santiago's so-called earthquake-proof airport (fortunately there were relatively few passengers in the terminal at the time), recently built highways and even an overpass on Santiago's beltway collapsed, and all that despite the quake in the capital measuring "only" 8.0. Several apartment blocks built just a few years ago came down or were severely damaged. To make matters worse, and this too demonstrates how far Chile still has to go in terms of development, many of the homes destroyed have no proper insurance coverage.

Then mistakes were made in the response by the authorities to the quake, most notably the navy ruling out a tsunami, which hit the coast of central-southern Chile a few minutes later, killing hundreds (including some in Juan Fernández archipelago).

In the event of a massive earthquake it is perhaps inevitable, wherever it occurs, that certain damage will ensue, and the authorities cannot take all the blame. Look at the telephone networks for instance, so vital in terms of a major disaster. One can expect the landlines to go down, but it seems mighty strange that just one of three mobile companies appeared to manage to keep its network operating.

Fortunately, Chilean authorities appear to be well aware of the shortcomings, so the onus now will be on the new government led by Sebastián Piñera to take up the reins and further improve standards.


bnamericas

Bahamas Blog International

Disasters need more than prayers - CARICOM

By Sir Ronald Sanders:

The massive earthquakes in Haiti and Chile within six weeks of each other, on January12 and February 27 respectively, revealed the limited capacity of Caribbean Community (CARICOM) countries to respond to disasters on this scale.

To date, CARICOM countries have not been able to mobilize support for Chile and have virtually left the problem to be tackled by the Chilean government, the United States of America, better-off Latin American nations and the international institutions. CARICOM countries simply do not have the resources in any form to cope with massive disasters within their own member states, let alone to provide help to other countries.

In this regard, CARICOM countries need to thank God that the 7.0 earthquake that buckled Haiti did not extend into Jamaica.

Nonetheless, high praise should be given to CARICOM countries for their efforts, at both the level of governments and the public, to help Haiti. In proportion to their capacity, many of them have been very generous.

Barbados has now emerged as the country which, on a per capita basis, has pledged the most to Haiti’s relief and reconstruction. Prime Minister David Thompson has revealed that the Barbados government is donating US$1 million to Haiti, the same figure as the governments of the two countries at either end of CARICOM’s economic scale - oil-rich Trinidad and Tobago, and Guyana, the poorest country, in per capita income terms, after Haiti in the region.

While Guyana’s contribution was exemplary, the donation of Barbados is outstanding for not only has the government pledged US$1 million, but it has been shouldering the costs for the operations of the Regional Security System (RSS) that has provided much needed security and other services to Haiti. Barbados shares the RSS with six island-territories of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) but Thompson revealed that “no other contributions have been forthcoming” from other states.

CARICOM countries gave as much as they could. They did so directly and through the Caribbean Disaster Emergency Management Agency (CDEMA). But, at the end of the day, large though the contribution was in relation to the means of these countries, it was a drop in the Ocean measured against the scale of Haiti’s needs. Haiti required the large scale assistance of countries such as the United States, Canada, France, Brazil and the international institutions like the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).

In early March at a meeting of CARICOM finance ministers, Secretary-General, Edwin Carrington, declared that the region “cannot fail to take cognizance of the near similar situation (to Haiti) which has befallen Chile.” He urged assistance ‘to the best of our ability at this time”.

The number of dead and injured in Chile was not as great as in Haiti even though the 8.8 tremor was much stronger than the earthquake that bowed Haiti. Nonetheless, as this commentary is being written, the United Nations Office for the coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, reports that 723 people were killed and 2 million (about 10 per cent of the population) have been made homeless and are walking the streets. Six regions were declared as zones of catastrophe.

But CARICOM countries are already over-stretched in Haiti. It is doubtful that any of them, except perhaps for Trinidad and Tobago, could make anything more than a token gesture of assistance to Chile.

Fortunately, there are governments that can provide immediate relief assistance and Chile has the financial capacity to undertake the reconstruction that has been estimate, so far, at US$30 billion - 15 per cent of Chile's annual economic output. The country is the best managed in Latin America with a public debt of only 6 per cent of its GDP. By comparison, the majority of CARICOM countries have a debt to GDP ratio of one hundred per cent and more.

Further, over the last decade Chile saved much of the profits from sales of copper by state-owned mines and taxes on private miners. Its sovereign wealth funds now hold about US$15 billion. With this kind of record and assets, Chile will easily be able to access capital markets at low interest rates for rebuilding.

How to establish machinery for avoiding huge human and infrastructural catastrophes as a result of natural disasters is something that should now be actively exercising the minds of Caribbean leaders.

St Kitts-Nevis Prime Minister Denzil Douglas recently observed that “there is a wave of volcanic activity that is taking place in this region” and he called on his country’s National Emergency Management Agency “to review the country’s capacity to deal with an earthquake”. He would know that to do so the Agency would require greater resources from the government than it now has.

Among the factors that all governments should take into account is the legislation and enforcement of far better building standards than now exists. Equally, they should all subscribe to the Caribbean Catastrophe Facility Risk Insurance Facility which paid out very quickly to Haiti and gave the government some resources to help rebuild the broken country.

The underlying point about all this is that CARICOM countries could not cope with two disasters simultaneously among its own membership, and while they have been valiant in Haiti in relation to their means, their financial contribution to Haiti was miniscule. Nonetheless, disaster threatens them in the form of hurricanes and earthquakes and they are ill-prepared to cope – a fact that international financial institutions and large countries should take into account by ceasing to graduate them from concessionary lending; urgently addressing their burdensome commercial debt problems; and stopping the demand in the World Trade Organisation and in trade agreements that they give reciprocal treatment to countries and regions much larger than they are.

Of course, the principal lesson to be learned from the experience of Haiti and Chile is that the countries that will recover faster and reconstruct quicker from disasters are the ones with the prudently run economies that benefit from greater resources. In this connection, CARICOM countries could make their economies stronger by accelerating the completion of the Caribbean Single Market and Economy with an effective governance structure.

Praying that disaster does not kick down the doors of two or more CARICOM countries at the same time won’t be enough.

caribbeannetnews

The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) goes beyond cooperation, says Mexican economist

HAVANA, Cuba (ACN) -- The Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA) is an institution that goes beyond cooperation among its member countries as it includes monetary and financial integration, said Mexican economy expert.

Jaime Estay, with the Autonomous University of Puebla spoke about the topic on the third day of sessions of the 12th International Meeting on Globalization and Development Problems underway in Havana.

The academician said ALBA has found solutions to deal with the current world financial crisis generated by a global monetary disorder resulting from the weakness of the US dollar and by policies implemented by the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

Estay pointed out that Latin America is leading national and multilateral actions at regional level to mitigate the negative effects of the crisis on local economies.

The Mexican expert described as inadmissible that Group 20, constituted by industrialized and emerging nations, were entrusted with the responsibility of adopting the measures to overcome the world economic crisis.

G-20 undertook the roll without paying attention to the fact that the UN General Assembly, made up by 192 member countries, was summoned for a meeting to analyze the world situation deal and ended with plans of actions set up.

Estay said G-20 has not touched structural features of the global economy and mentioned as an example of such behavior the fact that the IMF has paradoxically grown stronger lately instead of having disappeared for being one of the leading originators of serious monetary and financial problems.

Likewise, attending Havana’s meeting, Manfred Brenefeld, with the University of Ottawa, Canada, warned that the crisis has driven the world to follow the path to social democracy or fascism in certain countries, politically speaking.

According to the Canadian expert, the most effective and plausible way would be social democracy, but as a prelude to new true socialism, which he said should be credible and possible for the peoples.

Our mission is to make that Socialism understandable, Brenefeld said.

With some 1,000 Cuban and foreign participants, the 12th Int’l Meeting on Globalization and Development Problems will run until next Friday, March 5 in Havana.

Thursday, March 4, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Disappearing reefs threaten marine life

tribune242/editorial:



WE WANT to thank our loyal readers who from time to time send us news item they think might interest us, but which we might have missed.

In the past week we have received information picked up on the BBC about the lack of needed knowledge in the Caribbean about the warning signs of an approaching tsunami, and information from London's Mail Online about disappearing coral reefs.

The Mail article by David Derbyshire in San Diego reports scientists as predicting that the rising acid levels in the "seas and the warmer ocean temperatures are wiping out the spectacular reefs enjoyed by millions of divers, tourists and wildlife lovers.

"The destruction would also be a disaster for tropical fish and marine life which use coral reefs as nurseries and feeding grounds," Mr Derbyshire wrote.

Dr Jacob Silverman from the Carnegie Institution in Washington, was quoted as saying that rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere were making seas more acidic.

And so, although scientists are disputing whether global man-caused greenhouse gas in the atmosphere is warming the climate, there now is evidence that it is certainly warming our seas, creating more acid, which in turn is breaking up subterranean coral.

Dr Silverman's studies have led him to believe that reefs stop growing and start breaking up when the amount of greenhouse gas reaches twice its pre-industrial level.

He predicted that if present trends continue this could happen by the end of the century.

"These ecosystems, which harbour the highest diversity of marine life in the oceans, may be severely reduced within less than 100 years," he said.

Dr Silverman told the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science in San Diego that reef-building corals are highly sensitive to the acidity and temperature of the seawater in which they grow.

To illustrate the article a dramatic photograph was shown of a mass of dead coral, bleached white. The photo was taken at Australia's Great Barrier Reef, known for its abundant marine life. Scientists believe that rising levels of acid in the sea will kill these reefs within a century.

If man does nothing to reverse this trend, and if it continues at the present rate, another source of man's food will disappear. Recently, there was the bee scare. Scientists were alarmed at the rapidly decreasing colony of bees. Without them there would be no pollination, and without pollination man's food chain would collapse.

Recently, we saw a scientist showing a Bahamian farmer how to care for tomato plants. He told him that every day he should stop at each plant and gently agitate the branch with a flick of the finger. We asked why. "Pollination," he replied, "we have to do the work of the bees, when there are no bees."

And so man's fish supply is being threatened, his meat supply is threatened -- no feed for the animals -- and his plant supply is threatened, while man still debates whether it's necessary to reduce industrial carbon-dioxide emissions. So whichever way we approach the problem, man is digging his own grave. And don't forget, the homes of Bahamians sit atop coral reefs.

And now for the lack of knowledge in the Caribbean to recognise an approaching tsunami.

Dr Hermann Fritz, a civil engineering professor from the Georgia Institute of Technology, and four Haitian colleagues travelled around the coast of Haiti gathering information about a tsunami that was triggered by the 7.0 Port-au-Prince earthquake.

"This was a relatively small event," Dr Fritz told BBC News. "Most of the fatalities were due to the earthquake, but at least three victims we know of survived the earthquake and were hit by the wave."

These three victims were a father and his two young sons. They were standing close to the shore in Petit Paradis, watching the wave instead of heading for higher ground.

"And on the border [with the Dominican Republic], fishermen were taking photos and videos of the draw-down of the sea," he said.

This ominous draw-back in the water level is a classic sign that a big wave is approaching.

"It demonstrated a lack of [tsunami] education," Dr Fritz said. "It was pure luck that the misinformation did not kill more people in this case."

And on Saturday before the all-clear was called on the tsunami watch in Hawaii -- the result of the Chile earthquake -- a CNN announcer reporting from high ground drew viewers attention to a lone figure on the beach below watching as the ocean sucked the sea from the beach. He was obviously a tourist unaware that this was the first sign of an approaching tsunami.

Instead of fleeing for high ground, he stood and watched.


March 01, 2010


tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

To OAS or not to OAS: that is the question

Ronald Sanders





At a meeting of leaders of Latin America and the Caribbean on February 23, Caribbean Community (Caricom) governments supported a joint "Declaration on (the) Falklands Islands Issue".

The Declaration "confirmed their support of Argentina's legitimate rights in the sovereignty dispute with the United Kingdom over the Falkland Islands Issue", and recalled "regional interest in having the governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom resume negotiations to find a fair, peaceful and definitive solution to the dispute over the sovereignty" of the Falklands/Malvinas islands. They went further to call on the European Union (EU) countries to amend their charter to remove the Falkland Islands from the list of overseas territories associated with the EU.

The support of Latin American countries for Argentina in this matter is quite understandable. They have links of language, culture, history and proximity that go back centuries.

But the support of Caricom countries for Argentina's "legitimate rights" is puzzling. Both the UK and Argentina have claimed the Falklands/Malvinas for almost 200 years. So what now makes Argentina's rights more "legitimate" than Britain's? And why call for "negotiations" between Argentina and Britain to find "a fair, peaceful and definitive solution" to the dispute if it has already been decided that Argentina's rights are "legitimate"?

Unless there is something they have not made public, this position by Caribbean governments appears on the surface to run counter to their own national interests.

The Caribbean has always strongly supported a people's right to self-determination. It is in fulfilment of their own right to self-determination that Caribbean Community (Caricom) countries are independent states. In this regard, since the people of the Falklands/Malvinas have consistently and overwhelmingly chosen to be British, Caribbean governments would certainly not argue that the manifest wish of the people of the Falklands/Malvinas should be ignored, particularly since Britain has exercised de facto sovereignty over the islands continuously since 1833.

The national interests of 12 of the 14 independent Caricom countries are much more bound up with Britain than they are with Argentina. Caricom's trade with Britain far exceeds trade with Argentina; investment in Caricom countries from Britain is much greater than any investment from Argentina; official development assistance from Britain to Caricom countries directly and indirectly (through the European Union and the Commonwealth for instance) is much larger than any assistance from Argentina; the number of tourists from Britain to Caricom countries is considerably greater than from Argentina; and far more Caricom nationals live, work and study in Britain than in Argentina.

What appears to have triggered this discussion at the 33-nation Cancun meeting is the fact that a British oil exploration company, Desire Petroleum Plc, announced that it had started drilling for oil 60 miles (100 kilometres) north of the Falklands/Malvinas. Argentina objects to this development.

In giving support to Argentina, Caricom countries run the risk of compromising their own interest. For instance, where would they stand if Venezuela objected to oil exploration off part of Guyana, despite long-standing international arbitrations and agreements confirming Guyana's title? Also, where would these countries stand if Venezuela objected to oil explorations that might be granted by some of them near Aves Island/Bird Rock to which Venezuela lays claim? In the case of Belize where Guatemala claims the entire country, the same argument applies.

Then we come to the matter of the creation of a grouping of these 33 countries that excludes Canada and the United States. Some of the Latin American leaders - in particular those with a strong anti-American position - proclaimed to the media that this new grouping should replace the Organisation of American States (OAS).

Well, replacing the OAS is simply in no country's interest - not even those with the most rabid anti-American governments. There has to be a forum in the Hemisphere where all its countries are represented and where discussions can take place at all levels of government and on all issues. And that organisation is clearly the already well-established OAS. In this regard, Cuba should return to the OAS and the exclusion of the present elected government of Honduras should cease.

In any event, I suspect that only a very few governments touted the idea of an "alternative" organisation to the OAS and even fewer would have supported it. Certainly for Caricom countries, there is no other organisation in which they can engage the US government on a regular and sustained basis at all levels. That alone makes the OAS worthwhile for them.

Further, Caricom governments greatly value their relations with Canada, which has been an ally and partner for generations in the Hemisphere and in the Commonwealth. They would want deeper, not distant relations with Canada.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Latin American and Caribbean countries establishing a grouping that is not an alternative to the OAS, but is additional to it.

However, no one should believe that it will be anything more than an opportunity for dialogue at the leadership level. It will have no secretariat and therefore little means of implementing decisions; decisions will have to be made by consensus, therefore no binding decisions will be made. In truth, the grouping is so amorphous and is made up of countries at such different levels of development and with such differing interests and ambitions, that its meetings will largely be obligatory and its decisions only declaratory.

The Summit "Declaration of Cancun" does have as one of its objectives "the co-ordination of regional positions ahead of meetings and conferences of global reach... to project the region and increase its influence". This is to be welcomed provided that the view of smaller Caribbean islands are seriously considered and reflected by the larger Latin American states.

This brings us to the OAS itself. The US government should regard this move by Latin American and Caribbean countries to set up a Hemispheric grouping, which deliberately excludes it, as a firm warning that its neglect of Latin America and the Caribbean's development needs and issues, and its oftentimes casual dismissal of their positions is not in the interest of the United States. The authorities in Washington need to engage Latin American and Caribbean countries as genuine partners and neighbours, and a strengthened and revitalised OAS is the place to do so.

In this connection, Caricom countries should indicate their support for the re-election on March 23 of the incumbent Secretary General José Miguel Insulza. His task over the last five years in a fractious organisation, which also relies on consensus for decision-making, has not been easy. But he has tried to introduce reforms and he has been the most forceful secretary general the OAS has seen for a long time. Additionally, he has been very mindful of his obligations to his Caribbean member states.

He has also taken on Hugo Chavez over violations of media freedom in Venezuela and he has not been afraid to point out shortcomings by the US government. To have offended both these adversaries, he must have done something right for the rest.

Over the next five and final years as secretary general, Insulza can be bold in giving the OAS real direction in reforming its mandate and establishing it as a meaningful forum for settling hemispheric issues and advancing democracy, development and human rights.

Responses and previous commentaries at: www.sirronaldsanders.com


Sir Ronald Sanders is a consultant and former Caribbean diplomat.


February 28, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International