Puerto Rico colonized

Borikén, a thorn in the side for the U.S.

 

• On April 11, 1899, the United States exchanged ratification documents with Spain to seal the Treaty of Paris signed the year before • Among the countries ceded under the Treaty was Puerto Rico, which remains a colony of the U.S. empire today

 

By Lídice Valenzuela García

Borikén, the indigenous name of the archipelago including the main island of Puerto Rico, lives enslaved in the 21st century by a Treaty signed in 1898 by Spain and the United States, a status rejected in important international forums, thanks to the resistance of Puerto Rican nationalist movements which have been fighting for decades to achieve national sovereignty.

 

A map of U.S. military bases in Puerto Rico. The U.S. took control of the
island by military force at the end of the 19th century, taking advantage of
the decline of the Spanish Empire. 

Washington refuses to relinquish sovereignty to Puerto Rico – in foreign hands since the arrival of Christopher Columbus in 1493 – keeping its citizens in a kind of legal limbo. The U.S. does not recognize Puerto Rico as a state, but neither has it been returned to its rightful owners, given the imperial power’s many interests on the island, among them military. Thus the idea which best served Washington’s purposes was to arrogantly declare the country a Free Associated State.

 

On April 11, 1899, the U.S. government and Spain exchanged documents ratifying the Treaty of Paris - signed the year before in the French capital by both nations, a stroke of luck resulting from U.S. interference in the Cuban War of Independence. The treaty gave U.S. authority over territories important to the new geopolitics it had envisioned for the Caribbean in the 20th century.

 

With this sham diplomatic act, U.S authorities also gained control of Spain’s remaining possessions in the Caribbean and Pacific - consisting of Puerto Rico, Cuba, Guam and the Philippines.

In regards to Cuba, strategists at the time planned to occupy the country and later grant independence, which had already been won from the Spanish on the battlefield. The supposed U.S. salvation arrived on imperial ships and marked the history of the county. Cuba was subjugated to Washington’s political and economic interests, until 1959.

 

The signing of the Treaty brought an end to the Cuban War of Independence. The imperialist regime took advantage of its entry into Cuba to broaden its expansion after almost 100 years of appropriations justified under different doctrines, a realization of the so-called Manifest Destiny attributed to the country. By 1989 the U.S. had annexed Louisiana, Oregon, California, Texas and New Mexico, among other territories, but its ambitions took it further, to the Caribbean, protected by a fleet which clearly demonstrated its military power.

 

A THORN IN THE SIDE

 
Since the day President William McKinley signed the Paris Treaty, Puerto Rico has been a thorn in the side of the United States, even when the majority of the population has voted in opposition to independence in a number of referendums, reflecting the country’s economic dependence and saturation of U.S. culture over generations.

 

Pro-independence protest march in San Juan, capital of Puerto Rico. The independence movement grows stronger in the heart of the Puerto Rican people. 

Puerto Rican nationalists have, however, been waging an uphill battle to regain the island’s freedom, and in order to do so, have employed different forms of resistance, from the streets to discussions in the United Nations about this archaic case of colonialism in the 21st century.

 

The new democratic governments of Latin America and the Caribbean have joined forces with those who desire Puerto Rico’s full independence. There have been important demonstrations of solidarity with Puerto Rico, for example, the UN Decolonization Committee’s vote in favor of Puerto Rican sovereignty and support received in other international forums, such as the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC), the most significant unifying, integrationist force currently existing in the region.

 

Last year, The UN Decolonization Committee reevaluated Puerto Rico’s status, on the request of Cuba - historically and geographically linked to Puerto Rico - with the support of other Latin American nations, in a diplomatic exercise first carried out more than 30 years ago, which Washington has ignored.

Before delegates from 193 UN member countries, Cuba’s representative, Oscar León, presented a resolution, supported by Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia and Ecuador, asserting Puerto Rico’s inalienable right to self-determination and independence.

 

This was not a novel event. Puerto Rico’s right to self-determination has been recognized in 31 resolutions and decisions since 1972.

 

León stated however, “Little progress has been made, in all these years, in the search for a definitive solution to the current colonial status, which will allow Puerto Ricans to freely determine their political condition and realize, without foreign interference, their political, economic, social and cultural dreams.”

 

The proposed resolution also called on U.S. President Barack Obama to release political prisoners Oscar López Rivera, imprisoned 32 years ago, and Norberto González Claudio, both serving unjust sentences for their pro-independence efforts.

 

The inclusion of the issue of Puerto Rican independence in the Second CELAC Summit, held in Havana, gave support to the efforts of Puerto Rican patriots. Representatives of Puerto Rican political movements favoring national sovereignty traveled to Havana as invited guests to participate in the great event’s ancillary activities. 

 

“We reiterate the Latin American and Caribbean character of Puerto Rico, and taking note of the resolutions regarding Puerto Rico adopted by the United Nations Special Decolonization Committee, we reiterate that this is an issue of importance to CELAC,” indicated the Final Declaration of the Summit, approved by 29 heads of state and government convened in Havana.
 

The fight for Puerto Rican independence is long and difficult. The U.S. is a powerful enemy who will not give up this Caribbean jewel, which it governs from afar, but nor can it evade the desire of a good part of the four million people who live on the island, demonstrating in protests, in the streets, in public forums, in their continual political struggle, that at some point Puerto Rico will be included among the free nations of the Caribbean. (Cubahora)

 September 09, 2014

Granma.cu

The need for a properly-structured Value-Added Tax (VAT) education programme in The Bahamas

'Confusion' Between Vat Law, Guidance Must Be Eliminated

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Nassau, The Bahamas


A Tax Coalition co-chair has called for apparent differences between the Value-Added Tax (VAT) legislation and ‘guidance notes’ to be “resolved”, agreeing that there was “confusion between the two”.

Robert Myers told Tribune Business there were numerous “loose ends” remaining in relation to VAT, and that he had called for another meeting of the joint government-private sector advisory committee to tackle concerns that had been “batted back and forth”.

Agreeing that implementation was unlikely to be seamless because the Government was trying to “fast track” the process, Mr Myers said his call for the Christie administration to stop throwing VAT “information hand grenades” had been validated by last week’s events.

John Rolle, the Ministry of Finance’s financial secretary, caused temporary turmoil in Freeport’s business community when he inadvertently suggested 7.5 per cent VAT would be levied on the city’s ‘bonded goods’ regime - a mistake later retracted and corrected.

Mr Myers, though, said this proved the need for a properly-structured VAT education programme, otherwise the risk remained that mistakes and misunderstandings might cause “widespread panic”.

One area that needs to be tightened is ensuring the Ministry of Finance’s VAT ‘guidance notes’ conform with what is in the legislation and regulations.

The Government has already had to issue one clarification here in relation to pre-existing contracts, confirming that the VAT Act requires that the service/goods recipient at all times will pay the tax - not the provider/vendor.

Yet the VAT ‘guidance notes’ appeared to take the opposite position on pre-existing business and commercial rental contracts, stating that if no agreement could be reached with the recipient/tenant to pay the tax post-January 1, the vendor/landlord would have to ‘eat’ it as the Government would assume the tax is contained in the contract sum.

“That’s an area we’re going to have to go through,” Mr Myers told Tribune Business of potential discrepancies between the VAT legislation/regulations and ‘guidance notes’.

“There clearly is a gap. There clearly is some confusion between the two. We need to get that resolved. There’s a lot of loose ends.”

The Coalition for Responsible Taxation co-chairman, meanwhile, said last week’s mistakes in Freeport had “validated” his call for a structured VAT education process.

“It only strengthens what I said, which is that we’ve got to get a process for doing this, and get these training modules out so people are clear,” he told Tribune Business.

“You can see there’s a definite need to calm the process when high ranking officials don’t get it right, and get something that’s digestible for the public and private sector. We don’t want to create widespread panic. It’s got to be a calm process.

“If that means slowing it down to get it right, let’s do so. Let’s make sure what we do is done in a calm, responsible and deliberate way. We need to do it in a responsible, deliberate and calm fashion. It’s important that everyone understands, is comfortable and no one is panicked.”

Mr Myers said he was now pushing the Government to hold a second meeting of the joint private-public sector VAT advisory committee, adding: “I’m hoping to pull that off, because we need to hit them [the Government] with a list and get some answers on stuff that’s kind of been batted back and forth.”

He conceded, though, that VAT implementation on January 1 was likely to be far from smooth given the haste with which the Government was seeking to move on tax reform.

Mr Myers said New Zealand, whose experience the Bahamas’ has drawn on a great deal, used a 14-18 month gap between their VAT legislation’s public release and implementation to iron out any problems.

The Bahamas, by contrast, was attempting to do the same in less than six months, though the Government would argue that the initial draft’s November 2013 release has given everyone 13-14 months to prepare.

“It’s going to be a bit of a mess because we’re trying to fast track the process,” Mr Myers told Tribune Business. “We’re trying to do it in how many months? You can’t expect to have a seamless process when you’re trying to fast track something like this.

“There’s going to be issues. The more we can get ahead of it and cut off confusion by vetting documents, and only then get them out to the private sector, you will have a lot less noise.”

He added: “Clearly there’s a lot of confusion at this point, and it’s not going to stop as long as we don’t follow the process. We’ve got to be responsible in the way we do that.

“First vet the legislation, regulations and guidance notes, clear as much of the confusion up as possible, then get thye education platform launched and get support teams out there, hitting each of the sectors.

Mr Myers suggested that the education process start with the Bahamas’ largest businesses, who were expected to be the biggest VAT collectors, “and then work down from there”.

He conceded that the VAT education process was “still very erratic” and “a bit disjointed in my humble opinion. I expect that to clear up; I hope it clears up significantly over the next couple of weeks or months”.

He warned that the Bahamas, both the Government and private sector, “can’t afford” for VAT education to fail because it would automatically mean reduced compliance. And less compliance will result in an increased VAT rate, and new and increased taxes elsewhere.

September 15, 2014

Tribune242

Yuan Guisen, Chinese Ambassador to The Bahamas on China-Bahamas relations

Onward together to a better future for China-Bahamas relations

By YUAN GUISEN

“Bosom friends make distance disappear,” said Chinese President Xi Jinping to the president of Trinidad and Tobago during his visit to Latin America and the Caribbean last year. In July, President Xi concluded a successful visit to Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela and Cuba with fruitful results for further ties, a gesture of China’s sincerity and the high value China places on its relations with Latin America and the Caribbean.

During his visit, President Xi attended a China-Latin America and the Caribbean Summit and delivered a keynote speech titled Striving to build a hand-in-hand community of common destiny. His address announced China's proposals and measures for promoting China-Latin America cooperation. It proposed to build a Five-in-One new pattern of China-Latin America and the Caribbean relations: sincerely trust each other in politics; cooperate with each other for a win-win outcome in terms of economy and trade; learn from each other in people-to-people and cultural exchanges; closely cooperate with each other in international affairs; and promote each other in overall cooperation and bilateral relations, so as to forge a hand-in-hand community of common destiny.

China firmly believes that the world tide flows in its mighty power. The cooperation between China and Latin American countries and the Caribbean states serves the practical and long-term interests of both sides. China proposes to jointly build a new "1 + 3 + 6" cooperation framework:

• "1" means "one plan", referring to the establishment of the China-Latin American Countries and Caribbean States Cooperation Plan (2015-2019) with the aim of achieving inclusive growth and sustainable development.

• "3" means "three engines", referring to promoting the comprehensive development of China-Latin America practical cooperation with trade, investment and financial cooperation as the impetus, striving to promote China-Latin America trade to scale up to US$500 billion and the investment stock in Latin America up to $250 billion within 10 years and promote the expansion of local currency settlement and currency swap in bilateral trade.

• "6" means "six fields", referring to boosting China-Latin America industry connections with energy and resources, infrastructure construction, agriculture, manufacturing, scientific and technological innovation, and information technologies as cooperation priorities.

State-to-state relations thrive when there is friendship between the peoples. And such friendship grows out of close interactions between the peoples.

Over the next five years, China will provide Latin American and Caribbean countries with 6,000 government scholarships, 6,000 training opportunities in China and 400 positions of in-house studying for master’s degrees.

China will also invite 1,000 political party leaders from Latin American and Caribbean countries to visit China and launch the Future Bridge training program for 1,000 Chinese and Latin American youth leaders in 2015. China proposes to set the year 2016 as China-Latin America Cultural Exchange Year.

Since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1997,

China-Bahamas bilateral relations have remained on a track of steady development, with deepening cooperation in all fields. Chinese President Xi Jinping and Prime Minister Perry Christie reached an important consensus on furthering our ties during the meeting in Trinidad and Tobago last year. A mutual visa exemption agreement in effect since this February has vastly facilitated exchange between our two peoples. In early May, a Chinese medical team visited The Bahamas and performed free cataract surgeries on 101 Bahamian patients, whose sight was improved or recovered.

This year, three-dozen Bahamian officials have been invited to China for short-term training programs sponsored by the Chinese Ministry of Commerce. Nine excellent Bahamian students were granted Chinese government scholarships to study in China in the coming years.

There is an old saying in China, a journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step. What our bilateral relations have achieved up to today is the sum of numerous single steps made by our two governments and peoples.

Through the new measures and initiatives for developing relations between China and Latin America and the Caribbean proposed by Chinese President Xi Jinping, our bilateral relations will be injected with new momentum that will usher in a new era.

Six decades ago, leaders of China, India and Myanmar initiated the Five Principles, including mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence.

Sixty years on, China firmly observed and will observe the five principles of peaceful coexistence. China will firmly pursue peaceful development and a win-win strategy of opening-up, which will create new opportunities and space for the development around the world.

In spite of the differences in geographical location, territorial area, per capital GDP and culture between our two nations, we have enormous potential for cooperation. The Bahamas has become an important partner of China in Caribbean region.

Since my assumption of office over a half year ago, I have experienced the friendship between our two peoples and the enthusiasm of Bahamians to develop relations with China.

The Chinese government would like to make every effort to enhance our ties in various spheres based on the Five Principles. We will seek to expand our common interests and ensure our two peoples benefit from the strengthening of our bilateral relations. We firmly believe that it’s a good time now for us to work together onward to a better future of our relations.

• Yuan Guisen, Chinese Ambassador to The Bahamas

September 13, 2014

thenassauguardian

Call for the enactment of Campaign Finance Legislation in The Bahamas

Governments for Sale? (Campaign Finance Reform)

Last week the Democratic National Alliance (DNA) and scores of other citizens and residents of this country watched with dismay, as the government pressed forward with its plans to legitimize the long illegal web shop industry in the Bahamas. This action comes following the resounding public no vote in the January 2013 “referendum” and further upholds years of gaming discrimination against Bahamians. In addition to inviting the potential for new levels of government corruption, the recently tabled gaming legislation seems to be an effort by this Christie led administration to reward web shop bosses who have for years operated in contravention of the law; giving the owners of these illegal establishments what equates to a mere slap on the wrist for years of illegal operation with only minimal fines, fees and penalties imposed.

Clearly, the government’s gaming legislation was designed, not with the interests of the wider Bahamian population in mind, but was instead formulated to meet the needs and desires of web shop owners. The question though, is why? Why would a government which claims to be acting in the best interest of ALL BAHAMIANS table legislation which clearly caters to the whims of a select group? Could it perhaps be payback for the millions of dollars reportedly pumped into the Progressive Liberal Party’s (PLP) 2012 election campaign?

The tabling of the new gaming legislation once again thrusts the important issue of Campaign Finance Reform back into the spotlight. The DNA Calls on the government to implement clear guidelines which will govern future election campaign donations. Such guidelines should require ALL POLITICAL ORGNAIZATIONS to make full disclosure of its financial statements. Under the new regulations, all political parties would be bound by law to publicly disclose the amounts of all campaign finance donations and make known how those funds were raised. In addition, campaign finance reform would also place limits on how much one individual or organization is allowed to donate to a political party.

Doing so will limit the potential influence of special interest groups on government policy and create governments which will execute the will of the people with improved levels of transparency and accountability.

No one individual, group of individuals or organization should be able to – in essence – buy a government; the level of influence which has been exerted on this government by special interests groups during this term in office is a clear indication that our system of governance has been compromised.

The influence of money on our past elections has made and will continue to make the causes which are most crucial for our people and the development of our nation, second, to the will of special interest groups. Since taking office, this administration has paid only lip service to the idea of increased transparency in governance while failing at every turn to enact legislation which would eliminate the opacity which currently exists.

The DNA calls for the enactment of Campaign Finance Legislation but true to form, this PLP government will not introduce such legislation because they are guilty of what the legislation will stand for. This legislation will only be introduced under a DNA government.

Branville McCartney
DNA Leader

Should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church Part-1

Should homosexuals influence Caribbean society more than the church community? Part 1

By Dr Lazarus Castang:


Some commentaries on Caribbean News Now have consistently engaged in a common logical leap from universal human rights to men having sex with men. Homosex is often more implicitly than explicitly subsumed under the canopy of universal human rights. The need for sex or sexual satisfaction is universal, human, and a natural right. So, if this is the case, then no government, society, religion, culture, law, or morality should stigmatise or discriminate against adult males having private, consensual sex if it does not harm anyone. So the argument goes, but is the case really as simple and straightforward as this?

Caribbean society includes the homosexual community as well as the church community. From an objective, noncommittal perspective, for homosexuals to influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church or vice-versa constitutes an obvious bias in either direction. To try to divide and conquer by insisting that the church have sex however they want, and homosexuals have sex however they please, solves the problem on the individual level, but not on the collective/societal level.

Some active homosexuals want to be welcomed and affirmed in and by the church, and be celebrated when they come out in society. Some want to be married and hold position in church. Furthermore, they oppose any moral or legal discrimination against their homosexual behaviour by society or the church. In some countries they have or seek laws that criminalise public and Christian moral opposition to homosex, while they decriminalise homosex. They want homosexual behaviour to be upheld in school curriculum as a normal variant of human sexuality and insist on legislation to protect their right to homosex that is assumed to be universal and right.

Homosexuals have private homosex, but seek public recognition and acceptance of their relationships through several avenues like public parades and protests. Privacy is not what they seek, since they have it already. Publicity of their “privacy” that can psychosocially normalize homosex and break down public resistance is the goal. Homosexuals are trying to influence societal norms just like the church. So, to talk of the church as a homophobic or bigoted obstacle to sexual freedom is to try to exclude and mute the influence of the church as an important public moral voice in Caribbean society.

Furthermore, the concept of universal human rights, as some have related it to homosex, does not address how to resolve public conflict of rights in society and in what way homosex is universal and right. In any public conflict of rights, say right to conscience versus sexual orientation right, one right will be made fundamental and the other less than fundamental. Merely using accusatory terms like “disadvantaged groups,” “abuse of minority,” “exclusionary approach” and “tyranny” in context of homosexual cause and the Caribbean church and society only fly on broken wings of emotionalism and appeals to sympathy without good reason.

In certain parts of the US and Canada, opponents of homosex have been fined or imprisoned for publicly opposing homosex, but homosexuals are not fined or imprisoned for publicly berating the church. They call the church bigoted for disapproving and not accommodating homosex, while they reverse bigotry by disapproving and not accommodating opposition to homosex.

In the Caribbean, homosexuals have been physically threatened, or attacked, or killed because of their orientation and behavioural expression or public display or promotion of it. The church community, however, disapproves of both homosex and violence against homosexuals. But it is argued by some gay rights activists that opposition to homosex is a source of social homophobia. The case for such argument has not been made and even if it were true, then, attackers can also use any other reason to attack homosexuals, such as the way they walk, talk, dress, the places they go, or the company they keep, or coming out. With such questionable or farfetched reasoning not only opposition to homosex needs changing. The way some homosexuals walk, talk, dress, the places they go, or the company they keep, or coming out, all these would be sources of homophobia to be changed.

So, should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church? After all, homosexuals’ bodies, butts, behaviours, brains, buggery, and bugs are theirs, not the church’s, even though some of them may belong to a church. The church should not talk for or over homosexuals, and homosexuals cannot control the church. Therefore, should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church?

If homosex is exclusively a private matter, should it be publicly promoted in any form or fashion, or legally protected, or religiously accepted? Does the church have a right to tell homosexuals not to have homosex? Are laws or sermons against homosex codes for or reinforcements of violent attacks against homosexuals in the Caribbean? As analogies, do laws against incest, pedophilia, bestiality, polygamy, and drug trafficking mean attack the violators?

There is no link between believing homosex is wrong and acting to wrong homosexuals physically. Physical attackers of homosexuals can use any reason in an effort to justify their nefarious acts, while accusers of the church bypass them to wrongly assign blame to the church. There are unbalanced and uncompassionate people in the church community as well as the homosexual community. So, should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex, if there is a right to sex, more than the Caribbean church?

If there is a right to sexual satisfaction, how far do we extend this right to sex and on what basis? A non-discriminatory claim for the recognition of a variety of sexual orientations would have to include orientations toward multiple sex partners (polysexuality), children (pedophilia), blood relatives (incest), animals (bestiality), sadomasochism, voyeurism, necrophilia and so on. Sexual libertinism would be the order of the day in the name of freedom, social inclusion, tolerance, equality and acceptance.

The separation of church and state does not eliminate the influence of the church on the society or the society on the church. The Caribbean church exists under the jurisdiction of the Caribbean state and in society. Religious and secular people, gay or straight, influence state decisions as members of political parties, government agencies, business enterprises and media corporations and as individual citizens. Efforts to remove church or homosexual influence from the Caribbean state/society are virtually impractical at the corporate level and the individual level. Therefore, one cannot legitimately talk of freedom and at the same time seek to totally erode dialogue, rivalry of influence, and jostling for legal advantage between the church and the homosexual community on the question of the right to sexual satisfaction in the Caribbean.

In a society with a multiplicity of sexual orientations, sexual laws cannot forbid any behavioural expression of sexual orientation and be non-discriminatory at the same time. However, Caribbean diverse society must draw the line somewhere, even when the line may only be drawn in the sand of social shifts and turns. Again, should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church?

September 09, 2014

Caribbeannewsnow

- Should homosexuals influence Caribbean society on the right to sex more than the Caribbean church Part-2 
 

Geothermal energy in the Caribbean: Energy security or political play?

By Rebecca Theodore:


At a time when the world is experiencing an energy crisis, the process of rising heat from the earth as a stimulant to economic growth becomes very beneficial to many Caribbean nations. However, while many contemplate that geothermal energy is an ambitious opportunity to utilize wealth and recognition among member states and international markets, the financial challenges associated with it are many and varied, and now beckons the need for international ‘tenders’ to promote the sound development of the project.

Whereas detractors continue to charge that the harnessing of geothermal energy in the Caribbean could have a negative impact on the carbon footprint through deforestation, the release of hydrogen sulfide and the disposal of toxic geothermal fluids into the atmosphere; evidence also point to the fact that geothermal is the best type of renewable energy in terms of cost, efficiency, and safety.

Scientific evidence further illustrate that geothermal energy is a major factor in combating the adverse effects of climate change in the Caribbean. Geothermal energy doesn’t produce any type of greenhouse effect, and does not consume any energy since it’s renewable energy and there is no consumption of any type of fossil fuels.

In all truism, geothermal energy in the Caribbean have the prospective to address economic development, climate change mitigation, and stipulation of affordable energy and should be listed on the United Nations Millennium Development Goals (MDG) as an alternative to poverty reduction and to energy security.

Yet, unethical clouds smudge the dust for action and solutions.

So what if anything should Caribbean government’s make of the financial challenges facing geothermal energy? For one, Caribbean islands are now locked in long term contracts that have no incentive for power producers to develop more economic methods in order to maximize benefits.

Market research reports that “electrical supply across much of the Caribbean is generated by expensive and polluting oil- or diesel-fired generators and millions of dollars are spent on fossil fuel imports.”

Economic analysts further state that “it is the high cost of energy that presently paints the un-competitive business portrait for the Caribbean on the international market. Dependency on imports of foreign fossil fuel affect the balance of payment and contribute toward micro and macroeconomic challenges, such as inflation, increased cost (and loss of competitiveness) of local industry, depreciation pressures, and further external indebtedness.”

In essence, “the future of geothermal energy in the Caribbean “is very bright,” but Caribbean governments cannot undertake the project solely admits Sturla Birkisson, senior vice president at Iceland Drilling Company. In this light, government money and international funds are needed to mitigate the financial risk and cover the initial costs in the form of soft loans in case exploratory projects prove unsuccessful.”

Energy Sector Management Assistance Program (ESMAP) of the World Bank published report further states that “the main challenges associated with the development of geothermal energy generation in the Caribbean includes the financial resources needed to confirm the resource potential of specific sites, financing of exploration, production and injection wells, and power plant development. The legal and regulatory framework, the lack of a comprehensive inventory of geothermal resources with high quality data, environmental and social impacts, and power sector planning are also other adversary factors.”

As a result, if financial measures are to be met in the cultivation of geothermal energy, then Caribbean governments will “need to develop resources themselves, or negotiate a fair price with a responsible developer that puts some value to the community and supports the growth of it and stimulates its development.”

Given these circumstances, the most dramatic illustration of the financial challenges of geothermal energy now shines light on the Caribbean island of Dominica. With the highest percentage of renewable energy in its energy mix among Caribbean nations, it would take an exceptional scale of energy tone deafness not to mention the Skerrit administration energy policies.

Even for a government that now boast that it has spent more than $US12 million in developing the geothermal industry on the island, and has sought the advice of the Clinton Climate Initiative, and presented the project as one of its theme at the sixty-seventh session of the United Nations General Assembly; it still fails to show the political will and leadership to enlarge and diversify the ‘portfolio of options’ that geothermal energy entails.

Subsequently, the project lies crippled in cronyism and unprofessional conduct.

Perhaps proponents may want to evidence leaked diplomatic cable released by Wikileaks that allege the United States embassy in Barbados is unfavorable to the government of Dominica’s plan on moving forward in developing the island’s geothermal potential, but if as the Dominica prime minister asserts that “one of the weaknesses of Renewable Energy (RE) initiatives and Efficient Energy initiatives (EE) in the Caribbean is the lack of projects to demonstrate the benefits,” then, the harnessing of geothermal energy cannot continue to be cloaked in secrecy and locked in a partisan political play.

In order to maximize the benefits of geothermal energy in the Caribbean, it is clear, that bi-partisan efforts and inputs from environmentalists and consultants are needed to help government negotiate a fair price with international developers.

Progressively, the long-term needs of energy security in the region is now of high importance and at this point, Caribbean governments should seek to develop an “integrated project management solution” and a systematic review and re-examination of geothermal resources for energy production. It would not only help in meeting the ongoing energy crisis in the world at large and boost the national security of many Caribbean nations, but it will also become a valuable alternative energy source for future generations.

Thus, it is now evident that the answer to wealth and recognition for many Caribbean nations lie beneath.

September 04, 2014

Caribbean News Now 

Wetlands cover nine percent of Cuba

By Granma Internacional:

Wetlands in Cuba cover an area of approximately 10,410 square kilometers, equal to 9.3% of the islands total surface and include swampy areas along the coastline and in the interior. 

These ecosystems are known for their fragility and vulnerability, although they provide ecological and economic benefits, among them habitat protection and the reduction of costal erosion.

They also play a vital part in the capture of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, purification of effluents, limiting the impact of extreme weather on infrastructure and supplying water for consumption and economic activities.

Furthermore, they contribute to replenishing subterranean water supplies and collecting rain in urban and rural zones; in addition to controlling floods and stabilizing the coastline; as well as forming barriers between land and sea phenomenon.

Ciénaga de Zapata is home to crocodiles and numerous species of Cuban flora and fauna.

According to information from the Environment Agency on the entity’s website, Cuban wetlands are an inseparable part of the country’s biological wealth and diversity, adding that they include vast landscapes featuring estuaries, open coasts, marshes, floodplains, scrublands and forests, lakes, canals and rivers.

Artificially created wetlands can function in either a positive or negative way, in accordance with the nature of the biological assets affected. 

Among the most prominent in Cuba are the Ciénaga de Zapata, Birama (including the River Cauto delta), Lanier, Cunagua, Pinar del Río’s southeastern lakeside system and the Colorados islets; Sabana Camagüey; Jardines de la Reina; and the Canarreos.

The wetlands of Ciénaga de Zapata, in Matanzas, are the largest and most exceptional in Cuba and the Caribbean, meriting their inclusion in the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance especially noted on the Waterfowl Habitat List.

Ramsar is the name of the city in Iran where this Convention was signed on February 2, 1971. Provisions went into effect December 21, 1975. (AIN)

September 01, 2014

Granma.cu