Cuba's economic model - significantly free from IMF's restrictions, exhibits a model where freedom propels progression

The Cuban Revolution Prioritizes Education

Cuba: A Beacon of Optimism from the Caribbean Region

By Dr Kevin Turnquest-Alcena

Nassau, The Bahamas

Living in English-speaking Caribbean, they typically experience democracy, often, by a fall back method creating a widespread matter called political clientelism.

Governments of this system including, borrowing from Peter to fulfill Paul with no clear sustainable plan for settlement. As a result, people often bear high taxes for these loans. If the debt cycle isn't checked, there could be a very real threat of these countries finding themselves in a financial crisis! Resembling Argentina's saga described by high taxation and skyrocketed inflation leading to severe economic lack.

On top of it, countries, like Trinidad, face exchange control problems, where strict currency policies further entangle economic stability and growth, making it another layer of difficulty in handling national finances.

Cuba, on the other hand is free from these problems. By developing its own exclusive political and economic systems - it operates out of the borrowing and dependency loop, thus skipping high taxation and possibly financial crises troubling other Caribbean countries due to political clientelism.

In an age where genuine democracy often seems more of a dream than a reality, and global economies are firmly controlled by bodies, like the IMF. Anyway, Cuba positions itself as a beacon of flexibility and ingenuity. The island nation skillfully navigated the difficulties of a prolonged economic ban and international isolation, offering a model of self-reliance and innovation stirring its Caribbean surroundings and far beyond.

Economic Independence and Women Empowerment

Cuba's economic model, significantly free from IMF's restrictions, exhibits a model where freedom propels progression. This liberation is highly noticeable in the spread of stellar, micro-businesses, led often by women.

These ventures are more than simple economic activities, they're acts of empowerment - showcasing the crucial role women execute in Cuban society.

Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen's thoughts on small business are very relevant here, "Small enterprises are a reservoir of creativity and innovation, and they are crucial in the development of economies aiming for high growth and more equity." In Cuba, these micro-businesses notable contribute to societal flexibility and economic diversification, allowing the country to alleviate some of the impacts of international sanctions.

Healthcare and Education Advances

Cuba's dedication to healthcare and teaching stands as a primary part of its national identification. The nation's medical innovations, such as leading the fight against yellow fever and creating COVID-19 vaccines, highlight its resilience and capability against any odds. These contributions have not only improved Cubans' life quality, but also extended assistance to countries in the Caribbean, Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

The island’s educational feats are just as impressive. The Cuban Revolution greatly influenced these, which prioritized education. The establishment of the esteemed University of Havana in 1728, followed by the continued emphasis on education throughout the island reflects a deeply rooted belief in the transformative power of knowledge, whatever that knowledge may be - corn-growing or salsa-dancing.

Cultural Resilience and Worldwide Solidarity

Despite a severe economic US embargo estimated to have caused $600 billion damage over 65 years, Cuba, developed a wildly diverse cultural landscape! More or less 3,000 institutions devoted to the arts, music, and culture underline the nation's persistence in preserving its cultural wealth and personality! Fidel Castro's belief that, "The risk of being ridiculous is taken by the true revolutionary with great love," reverberates throughout Cuba’s efforts to keep its revolutionary spirit alive despite facing noteworthy hardships.

Further, Cuba's globally humanitarian contributions - mainly in healthcare, mirror Nobel Prize victor Toni Morrison's endorsement, "I have seen the doctors from Cuba; they go places where nobody else will go." Such comments highlight Cuba’s international health diplomacy role and its commitment to giving its medical expertise with the world.

Endurance Despite Adversity

Much like the zealous pineapple thriving on the beach, Cuba's experience under the US embargo echoes historical narratives of endurance and faith, such as those of Job, Daniel, Joseph, and the Israelites under Egyptian slavery. Much like all these characters, Cuba stands determined despite severe trials.

The End

Cuba's unyielding spirit presents itself as an inspiration cornerstone. Not only for its countrymen, but for its Caribbean vicinity and other emerging countries. With global problems like climate change becoming more urgent, Cuba's methods to sustainable development and social empowerments offer valuable resilience and innovation lessons. The people's unyielding determination assures us that, "this too shall pass," strengthening the island’s potential for a brighter, more prosperous future. United and working collectively, we can utilize Cuba’s resilience to achieve our community's prosperity and wellness aims.

Source

Stop deporting Haitians to Haiti - says UN

The UN independent human rights experts requested States parties in the Americas to investigate all allegations of excessive use of force, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, and racial profiling against Haitians

The experts also called for measures to prevent and combat xenophobic and racist violence and incitement to racial hatred against people of Haitian origin, and to publicly condemn racist hate speech, including those uttered by public figures and politicians

The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) sounded the alarm after 36,000 people of Haitian origin were deported during the first three months of the year, according to figures from the International Organization for Migration (IOM).  Some 90 per cent were deported from the Dominican Republic.

Violations and abuses against Haitians

The experts expressed concern over collective expulsions which did not take into consideration individual circumstances and needs.

They also highlighted alleged human rights violations and abuses against Haitians on the move along migration routes, at borders and in detention centres in the Americas region, “as a result of strict migration control, the militarization of borders, systematic immigration detention policies and the obstacles to international protection” in some countries.

Such obstacles exposed these vulnerable migrants to “killings, disappearances, acts of sexual and gender-based violence, and trafficking by criminal networks”, the Committee warned.

Demanding protection for Haitian refugees

Caribbean countries, such as the Bahamas as well as the Turks and Caicos Islands, have announced measures against undocumented Haitian migrants.  The United States in January also made public new border policies to permit fast-tracked expulsions to Mexico of Haitian migrants and others, crossing the southern border of the US without documentation.

Considering the desperate situation in Haiti, which does not currently allow for the safe and dignified return of Haitians to the country, as pointed out by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, the Committee called for an end to the collective expulsions of Haitians on the move.

It also said assessments of each individual case needed to be carried out, to identify protection needs in accordance with international refugee and human rights law, with particular attention to the most vulnerable groups.

Combatting racism and xenophobia

The independent human rights experts requested States parties in the Americas to investigate all allegations of excessive use of force, cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment, and racial profiling against Haitians.

They also demanded protection of refugees against other allegations of human rights violations and abuses committed by both State and non-state actors; including at borders, migrant detention centres and along migration routes, to punish those responsible and to provide rehabilitation and reparations to victims or their families.

The experts also called for measures to prevent and combat xenophobic and racist violence and incitement to racial hatred against people of Haitian origin, and to publicly condemn racist hate speech, including those uttered by public figures and politicians.

Independent human rights experts are appointed by the UN Human Rights Council, in Geneva.  They are mandated to monitor and report on specific thematic issues or country situations.  They are not UN staff and do not receive a salary for their work.

Source

‘Significant’ Rise In Syphilis Cases in The Bahamas ...and other Caribbean countries

‘Significant’ Rise In Syphilis Cases

By KHRISNA VIRGIL

Tribune Staff Reporter

kvirgil@tribunemedia.net

Nassau, The Bahamas

 

THE number of syphilis cases among other reported instances of Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STDs) is on the rise in the Bahamas, said Ministry of Health officials yesterday.

According to Larry Ferguson, Coordinator of Sexually Transmitted Infections (STIs) at the Ministry, the incidence of persons who contracted syphilis since 2010 is concerning, especially among younger people.

Prior to 2010 the older population, in some cases those up to 80 or 90-years-old, were the front runners in statistical data, Ms Ferguson said. However, as more young people contract syphilis, healthcare professionals believe there is substantial mixing in sexual activity between both age categories. 

Ms Ferguson was not able to give the specific numbers of increase in syphilis cases since 2010 but she insisted that there was no doubt that the rise was significant. She said the same has been found in other Caribbean countries.

She noted that the groups most at risk in recent times were men who have sex with men (MSM’s) along with the unemployed and underemployed.

“We know that for the longest time,” Ms Ferguson said, “we have been seeing chlamydia more than any other infection. But even though we are seeing a large number of chlamydia more than any other infection chlamydia cases are going down.

“However we are seeing an increase in syphilis. That is the one thing that we are concerned about. What we find for syphilis, not specifically 15 to 24 age range even though they are included, is prior to this time we always saw syphilis in our older population. Just now we are having syphilis in that population which is a concern and tells us that there is a mixing of the two.

“Unemployed persons who engage in transactional sex, they don’t call themselves commercial sex workers, they just have sex for things. That group is at high risk because quite often if you are going to have transactional sex the other person might not want to use a condom. ‘You want the money, I want the sex so you have to go on my terms’ and that’s one of the reasons why they are at high risk.

“Men who have sex with men, in many cases you have a group and they stay amongst themselves. So if one has syphilis and is intermingling it is more likely that it will spread. But with this group there are persons in the group who take the initiative to ensure that other group members get care and come for testing and necessary treatment.”

Ms Ferguson was speaking to reporters during the Ministry of Health’s first STD Awareness Symposium where scores of health professionals gathered under the theme “Talk, Test, Treat”.

With the rise in cases, the Ministry of Health runs ongoing awareness programmes to sensitise the public of the risk factors involved with unprotected sexual activity.

April 25, 2014

Tribune 242

The Caribbean and whaling... Shameful!

Shameful - The Caribbean and whaling

caribbeannewsnow editorial



It was a shameful sight -- three Caribbean countries walking in obedience behind Japan, discarding even the appearance of independence.

Joji Morishitain, the Japanese representative to a meeting last week in Jersey of the International Whaling Commission (IWC), announced he was walking out of the meeting, and the delegates of the three Caribbean countries – St Kitts-Nevis, Grenada and St Lucia – dutifully joined him.

What was the walk out about? Latin American nations, led by Brazil and Argentina, had proposed the creation of a sanctuary for whales in the South Atlantic. Currently there are two such whale havens, one in the Southern Ocean around Antarctica and the other in the Indian Ocean. When it was obvious that a majority of countries supported the Latin American proposal, the Japanese staged the walk out so as undermine a consensus decision.

There was no legitimate reason for the Caribbean countries to join Japan. Not one of them is a whale-hunting nation. Nor do any of them derive any economic or dietary benefit from whale-killing. Further, by joining Japan, the Caribbean countries ruptured their relations with their Latin American neighbours, with whom they are associated in the Latin American and Caribbean Group in the United Nations system.

In the creation of the South Atlantic sanctuary, the Latin American countries would have viewed Caribbean countries as their natural allies, particularly as they place considerable importance in its establishment. Undoubtedly, there will be a price to pay for this sabotage by Caribbean countries of Latin American interests, however stonily silent the Latin Americans have been so far.

Brazil and Argentina – two of the biggest nations in Latin America and the Caribbean – may have forgiven the Caribbean countries for not supporting them if there was a direct Caribbean interest in rejecting the whale sanctuary proposal. But, there is no direct Caribbean interest in saying “no” to the sanctuary. Many Caribbean countries, including the Bahamas, the Dominican Republic, St Vincent and the Grenadines, St Lucia, Dominica, Guadeloupe and Martinique operate healthy whale-watching businesses that have helped to diversify their tourism product, earn millions of dollars in foreign exchange and provide employment. A whale sanctuary is in their interest.

The blind walk-out by the three Caribbean countries, holding on to a Japanese kimono, reconfirmed an expose by the British Sunday Times newspaper last year that revealed Japan paying the accommodation and “expenses” of several delegates of Caribbean countries to the 2010 IWC meeting in Morocco.

Last week, a feisty Antiguan government minister employed evangelical zeal in opposing a resolution from European Union countries to stop some delegations (those that vote with Japan) from paying cash for their countries’ subscription to the IWC. The resolution was adopted despite the machinations of the Antigua minister, who played a supporting role to the representative of St Kitts-Nevis.

From now on, the IWC will only accept bank transfers directly from government accounts. This may well have the effect of stopping a few of these countries from attending the IWC meetings, unless Japan pays the money to the governments directly, proving what has been alleged all along.

Had the Antigua minister been present at the IWC meeting on the day the Japanese-led walk out was staged, undoubtedly there would have been a fourth Caribbean country in the procession.

The Caribbean delegates have returned to the Caribbean and given no account of why they opposed – albeit unsuccessfully – a resolution for transparency and accountability in paying the subscriptions of governments, and why they voted against their Latin American neighbours that wanted a South Atlantic whale sanctuary.

In the past, the Caribbean representatives to the IWC meetings have slavishly followed the Japanese line that whales devour fish stocks once they get to Caribbean waters, depriving Caribbean people of food. This claim has long been debunked as a falsehood, even though, as recently as last month, ministers from Antigua and St Lucia were repeating it parrot-fashion after a Japanese-organised meeting in St Lucia to prepare the participating Caribbean countries for last week’s IWC meeting in Jersey.

It is noteworthy that the government of Dominica, which was once part of the Japanese-kimono group, has held fast to a decision of its prime minister, Roosevelt Skerrit, to divorce his country from voting with Japan. Dominica sent no delegation to the IWC, maintaining its position that as the “nature isle of the Caribbean” it has a responsibility to its own reputation to sustain the marine life of its environment. The Skerrit government has won the respect and support of environmental and conservation organizations world-wide, whereas the other IWC-Caribbean countries are earning the odium of environmentalist organizations and the distrust of major governments, including those in Latin America.

The problem is that the world views the Caribbean as one area, and the actions of these four Caribbean countries, with a yen for Japan’s “kill-whale” position, are sullying the standing of other Caribbean countries that conduct their international business in their own interests.

We urge the governments of the majority of Caribbean nations to call the governments of these four countries to book on this issue in the interest of the region’s standing.

July 20, 2011

caribbeannewsnow editorial

Bahamian Politics Blog

Political parties: Gangs in disguise?

By Oliver Mills




Over the years, political parties in the Caribbean have been much criticised for lack of focus and action on the pressing issues of society, for not being sensitive to the wider needs of the most vulnerable in Caribbean society, not taking bold and aggressive measures to deal with the inequalities in Caribbean society, and for not seriously attempting to transform the structure and function of the various institutions of government to enable them to deliver on the many promises they make.

Furthermore, political parties in the Caribbean have been seen as elite organisations, which continuously co-opt aspiring and promising individuals into their ranks, exposing them to the benefits of office, and the opportunities connected with it, and so perpetuate the status quo.

In a recent article published in one of the leading Caribbean papers, the writer gives a new twist to the description of political parties, categorising them as gangs, in reference to the way these parties conduct politics in his country. He speaks of the exploitation of his country by the two major political parties for their own benefit, and says that most of the 40,000 or so fatalities since 1970 were because of the criminality attached to, and fomented by these parties. The writer further describes these political parties as having a gangster character.

The question is, are political parties really gangs in disguise? But what really is a gang? A gang usually comprises a leader, and committed followers, with a goal or mission. Their activities are usually geared to meeting their own needs at the expense of the wider society. Gangs prey on the wider society, and compete with each other for turf. Many of them also have symbols which identify their members.

Gangs also have a code of conduct, and if there are any infractions, severe punishment could be meted out to the guilty. They also seek to recruit others to their cause, particularly among the young, and disaffected, looking for an identity, and to be associated with something bigger than themselves. Members of gangs often say that the reason they join is because they feel appreciated and wanted, as well as protected. In many instances as well, before a person becomes a gang member, he or she has to undertake certain acts, testifying to their commitment.

But do political parties fit into this paradigm, or scenario? Indeed, political parties have a leader with committed followers, who are often fanatical to the point of seeing anyone who does not share their political views as the enemy, and assaults, sometimes fatal, are perpetrated against opponents, which is also what a gang does. Parties also have goals and a mission just as gangs do, and their activities are directed at meeting their own needs and, as they often state, those of the country as well. Gangs have no consideration for the needs of the wider society. But many people say that the personal needs of the political party are often disguised as the needs of the country. However, it is often said that gangs also have a constituency, which they look after economically.

Like gangs, political parties also compete for turf and, in some Caribbean countries, one section of a village, or even a street is controlled by one or the other party, and neither party’s supporters can cross this line. Some political parties, like gangs have also set up garrisons, in which their staunch supporters live, and the supporters of the opposite party dare not enter the zone controlled by one or the other party.

Like gangs, political parties also have symbols that represent their particular stances or beliefs. In one Caribbean country, the symbol for one party is the bell, which for them suggests freedom, while the other party has the shell, which represents the most important industry, or element of the economy. The shell also portrays strength and endurance. Other parties in other Caribbean countries use a particular colour, while in a particular country, the three fingers on the left hand, going left from the middle finger, are its symbol. So both political parties and gangs have the same kind of representative icons, which depict who, and what they are.

Political parties, like gangs, also have a code of conduct that governs membership, and the conduct of its members and supporters. We have seen party members, and even ministers of government being expelled for conduct unbecoming of the party, but they are often shuffled off to another post that is not conspicuous, only to reappear in politics later. Gangs could be somewhat more ruthless though. This is why we have gang warfare in cases where one, or some members of a particular gang are suspected of having alliances with the other, or even more extreme, some gang members become fatalities, particularly if they are suspected of being police agents.

In a wider perspective, can it be said that political parties are gangs in disguise? I have just pointed out their similarities. But in a formal sense are gangs and political parties the same? One Caribbean scholar recently described his country and its political system as a gangster state. However, if we look at the origins, philosophy, and reasons why political parties have been formed, we will see that their objectives were noble. They aimed at organising the people into a cohesive force to promote progress, mobilising public opinion around the issues, seeking to create growth and development in the country, and organising the resources of the country, so that the majority receives some benefit.

Political parties also help to maintain a balance of power, and prevent dictatorship in government. If we do not like the policies of a government, they can be changed through the use of the ballot. Despite this, though, political trickery, gerrymandering and deception are often employed to maintain a particular party in office over long periods in some countries. Gang leaders are often eliminated either through internal rivalry, in street battles with other gangs, or by the forces of the state.

It could be said in one sense, then, that the activities of some political parties resemble those of a gang, while others stick to the noble purpose and philosophy from which they originated, and continue to sustain themselves.

April 16, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Third political parties are not doomed to failure in the Caribbean

Are third parties in the Caribbean doomed?
By Oliver Mills


The commonly accepted wisdom in the Caribbean has been, and still is, that third political parties are doomed, and that any attempt to establish them will be met with failure. This belief is based on the fact that, in almost all Caribbean countries where a third political party has attempted to challenge the political process, it has met with failure, and in many instances some, or even all its members have lost their deposits. The electorate therefore seems to have lost trust and confidence that a third party will meet with any significant success, and have come to see them as a waste of time.

In his commentary in Caribbean News Now on February 12, 2011, on the failure of third parties, Wellington Ramos states that this failure is due to poor planning, no grassroots campaign, and the time of launching of these political parties, which is just before elections. He also states that after they lose, they disappear. In stating these reasons for third party failure, Ramos does not explain further what the phrases he uses such as poor planning, no grassroots campaign, and the time of launching these parties mean.

For example, what is meant by poor planning on the part of third parties? Does it mean planning to some extent, but with some inadequacy involved, or does it mean engaging in the process of planning without a clear direction or purpose attached to the various efforts? Does poor planning mean planning, but with little insight as to the purpose and point of the efforts made? Or does poor planning mean inefficient planning, not taking into account critical factors concerning the wider political process? How do we know when planning is poor? This is only judged after the results of some action, not before. Also, does poor planning mean being erratic, unfocused, tentative, and not following through with different ideas as to what the party needs and how it will achieve its goals? The writer needs to elaborate on this phrase.

No grassroots campaign is the other reason Ramos cites as a failure by third parties. Although he mentions with respect to Belize about not campaigning island wide and not establishing structures, this is not enough. Grassroots campaigning further means going into the various sectors of the society and spreading the philosophy of the party on a consistent basis. It means having public and town hall meetings, and meeting people where they usually hang out. But this is not only for grassroots people. It is for all potential voters. It also means constant political education, advertisements, and appearing on various media houses to spread the message.

From my experience, there is no such thing as no grassroots campaign, since the grassroots is where the majority of persons are. Third parties do approach them and try to win them over. But in many instances, they are so indoctrinated into the ways of the established parties, that they often give the rebuff to any new effort by a third party. The party’s officials therefore have to exercise patience, be sensitive to the ways of this constituency, win their trust, have a clear philosophy, and try to move them incrementally.

Change is difficult, and people at the grassroots level have to believe they are backing a winner before they commit themselves. Furthermore, labelling a particular constituency as grassroots, belittles them, places them in a category where they might feel devalued, and so there is the risk of losing support particularly if party officials adopt a condescending attitude. The third party therefore needs to see each type of constituency equally, and treat it as such. The class and sector approach to politics will not work.

The time of launching the third party is the final reason Ramos gives for their failure. How do we know precisely and accurately when it is the time to do anything? We can only suspect that a set of conditions exist, and that we should therefore capitalise on them. Suppose Obama had served out his Senate years, would he ever have become president? The point is to take prudent, measurable risks. We can never know exactly when to make a move. We just have to engage with the situation, alert ourselves to its dynamics, and seek the most opportune and rational moment in which to take the plunge. To say that the time of launching the third party contributes to its failure is therefore a misnomer. It is pure speculation based on an analytical fallacy.

Ramos states vaguely that they are launched just before an election. What does this phrase mean? Two weeks or months before, or two years? The phrase is vague to the point of being almost meaningless. The fact is that, if a sufficiently large percentage of the populace is fed up, they will show this in a protest vote. Although it might not be sufficient to win initially because of the psychological grip of the two traditional parties, if the third party persists, it could surprise itself.

For example, third parties now exist in several countries including the UK, Israel, the USA, and France. As is seen in the UK, a third party could become a part of the government based on the distribution of seats after an election. Even in the Caribbean, some third party candidates have won seats, and they later joined on an individual basis with the governing party, particularly if they make a difference in who forms the government. In Israel, third parties have always helped to constitute various governments. This is also the case in Italy.

However, I agree with Ramos, that often, in the Caribbean, third parties dissolve after an election. They seem to lose hope, and the will to persist. But third parties are formed as a result of a crisis in the status quo parties. Their members feel that the electorate is so fed up that they desire fundamental change. The case of the National Democratic Movement in Jamaica is an example, as is the Turks and Caicos Islands with the formation of the National Democratic Alliance party. The NDA did dissolve after a particular election, but the NDM in Jamaica continues mostly as a pressure group. Its initial leader returned to his original party, and is now the prime minister.

So are third parties doomed to failure? It is certainly not wise to give a quick answer. In a theoretical sense, nothing is doomed to failure. The context and circumstances of an issue require serious deliberation. This will determine the success of the effort, or its need to change course. Nothing should be condemned outright. If third party officials have a clear philosophy and ideology which connect with the aspirations of the people, and they win the people’s trust, the groundwork is laid for serious, constant, and persistent work. If party officials are committed to the political work required to enlist the faith of the people in the party’s objectives, then support will be forthcoming over time. Remember, the third party is in the political business of changing mindsets, and re-socialising people into a new way of thinking and being. It will be challenging at first, but consistency and constancy on the part of party officials are necessary.

Third parties are therefore not doomed to failure. They attract new blood and talent into the political process, bring new ideas, challenge old, established ways of operating, and could bring hope to those who want serious change in the infrastructure of Caribbean politics. Third parties can also bring ideas about different, more workable political structures and processes into the political system, and introduce a more ethical and moral politics into political systems weighed down by traditions that have not worked to the benefit of significant numbers of people. They are therefore not doomed to failure. In fact they do not fail. It is those who have been instrumental in their establishment that have failed to consistently operationalise the beliefs and philosophy they advocate on a sustained basis.

Persons forming third parties also need to convince potential followers that they are not in the political business for personal gain. They must prove that principles guide their efforts, and that the goal is a new and transformed society, and political order. Leaders of third parties also have to refute the idea by others that they have everything they need, but want more at the people’s expense. These leaders will also have to show that they have a different kind of political psychology that the third party is not third in any numbering system, but is a movement with no other goal than the political expression of the general will of the people. And that indeed, the third party is the people in action, since the new political institutions the party establishes, will convey and manifest the aspirations and objectives of the people.

Selflessness, a noble sense of purpose, and the urgency to do the will of the people become the philosophical frame of reference for the third party. With this in mind, the third party will enjoy the confidence and goodwill of the people, and will therefore gain respect and credibility. It could then become a potent force for good in the politics of the Caribbean.

February 23, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Caribbean credibility at stake in International Whaling Commission (IWC) vote

Caribbean credibility at stake in IWC vote
By Sir Ronald Sanders:


When people around the world think of whale-hunting nations, the Caribbean is the last place that crosses their minds. Yet, the governments of Suriname and the six independent members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) are in a pivotal position to end or continue a moratorium on commercial whaling that has been in place for 24 years.

There is no benefit for these Caribbean countries if commercial whaling is resumed since none of them are commercial whalers. But they are members of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) which is likely to face a vote on whether or not to abandon the ban on commercial whaling when its 88 members meet in Morocco from June 21.

Several authoritative reports suggest that Japan’s pays the membership fees of Suriname and OECS governments to the IWC and also pays the costs of their delegates’ attendance at IWC meetings directing how they vote. In return, these countries get Fisheries Complexes from Japan.

A United Nations Environmental Programme publication, “Caribbean Currents” put the issue in stark terms, saying: “It currently appears that not only are whales in danger, but so are the autonomy and self-determination of Caribbean nations”.

If, at the June meeting of the IWC, the seven Caribbean countries side with Japan, Norway and Iceland – the only three remaining nations that favour commercial whaling – they could help to open the armoury on whales and resume a slaughter that the world has resisted for almost three decades. In the process, they could damage their tourism image in the world as an eco-friendly area.

Since 1992, all the Caribbean members of the IWC have consistently voted in favour of repealing the moratorium until 2008 when Dominica’s Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerritt declared that his government would no longer be doing so. In 2009, he repeated that his government “will not renege on that commitment of staying clear of voting for whaling”. However, Suriname and the other OECS members of the IWC - St Vincent and the Grenadines, St Lucia, Grenada, Antigua and Barbuda, and St. Kitts and Nevis – have continued to vote with Japan, the most aggressive of the three remaining countries that favour commercial whaling.

All eyes are on the Dominica government to see whether it sticks to its commitment despite the facts that Japanese officials have been active in OECS countries in the past few weeks.

This renewed Japanese activity has caused Caribbean business people and Caribbean environmentalists to argue publicly that it is not in the interest of the OECS countries to continue to support Japan’s whaling position.

Caribwhale, an organization of Caribbean tourism business people and their employees, has recently urged the governments of Suriname and the OECS not to vote for a resumption of commercial whaling since the region has a thriving whale watching industry as part of its tourism product. “Dead whales”, they said, “are no good to the Caribbean; live ones bring revenues and employment from the whale watching industry”.

This call was followed by an appeal by the Eastern Caribbean Coalition for Environmental Awareness (ECCEA), a grouping of Caribbean environmentalists, who wrote to the OECS representatives to the IWC and their heads of government, saying: “Commercial and ‘scientific’ whaling do not serve a Caribbean purpose”.

Suriname and the members of the OECS owe Japan nothing particularly as the balance of trade between them is entirely in Japan’s favour year after year. Japan’s aid for Fisheries Complexes is far less than the millions of dollars spent every year by the Caribbean countries on imports of Japanese motor vehicles, computers, printers, cameras, outboard motors, and agricultural equipment.

What’s more Japan has shown little concern for the Caribbean, repeatedly ignoring protests from Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Heads of Government over the shipment of Japanese nuclear waste through the Caribbean Sea. One accident, however, small would destroy the fragile ecology of the Caribbean Sea and destroy Caribbean economies.

As far as the whale watching industry in the OECS countries is concerned, Dominica, St Lucia, St Vincent and Grenada are already earning millions of dollars from it. The potential exists for an equally thriving business in St Kitts-Nevis and Antigua and Barbuda. But if Suriname and members of the OECS support any form of commercial whaling at the upcoming IWC meeting, they will harpoon this possibility.

Proponents of the proposition at the IWC to legitimise whale catches by Japan and others, argue that it will reduce the number of whales that are killed. However, leading world environmentalists refute this claim, saying the proposition as worded will open the floodgates to unrestrained commercial whaling.

Among these respected environmentalists is Dr Justin Cooke, who represents the International Union for the Conservation of Nature on the IWC Scientific Committee. In testimony to the US House Committee on Foreign Affairs, he described the proposed deal as a “scam”. He testified that “the true nature of the scam only dawned on me after reading the text several times. And even then only with the benefit of many years of experience with IWC procedures, that enables me to relate such a text to how it would actually be implemented in practice. Those without the benefit of such experience will find it even harder to discern what the text really implies and to spot the scam”.

Several IWC Latin American members, known as the Buenos Aires Group and comprising Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Panama, Peru, Dominican Republic and Uruguay, also strongly oppose the proposition before the IWC. Joined by non-IWC members Colombia, El Salvador, Honduras and Venezuela, the Group stated that they will propose at the IWC meeting that "over a period of 10 years... there must be a significant and increasing reduction of quotas (catch limits)... until lethal research is completely eliminated.”

Just as the Latin American nations have done, there is every reason why, in making their decision on how to vote at the IWC, the governments of Suriname and the OECS should listen to a range of voices beyond the Japanese. Such voices should include environmental experts and their own business people and workers who make a living and earn sustainable revenues for their countries from whale watching.

Caribbean economies are small and in need of help, but such help should be genuine and concerned with sustainable development. Large industrialized nations, such as Japan, should not be taking advantage of the vulnerabilities of small countries to advance their own agenda. And, when they do, Caribbean countries should reject it in their own interests, or they will never assert their independence and command respect as sovereign nations.

For Suriname and the OECS governments, the IWC vote will be about more than the fate of whales; it will also be about their international reputation.

June 4, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Jamaica's business is the Caribbean's business

By Sir Ronald Sanders:


The widely publicised bloody clashes over the last few days between law enforcement agencies and armed gangs in Jamaica are as bad for the economic and social well-being of the people of Caribbean countries as they are for Jamaicans.

While the members of the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM) see themselves as a “Community of Independent Sovereign States”, most of the rest of the world regard them as one area. Only the most knowledgeable make a distinction between them. So, events in Jamaica impact all other CARICOM countries whether they like it or not.

In meaningful terms, therefore, Jamaica’s business is CARICOM’s business. Neither CARICOM governments nor the people of CARICOM can sit back and pretend that events in Jamaica in which criminals defy the authority of the State are not relevant to them. CARICOM countries are tied together and none can deny cross-border relationships in trade, investment and people.

Jamaica is the biggest of the CARICOM countries in population terms and it impresses and influences the world far more than other CARICOM countries. Of course, the impression and influence have been both beneficial and inimical to Jamaica and the wider region.

On the positive side, the vibrant music of Jamaica and its musicians, led by the iconic Bob Marley, have clearly given Jamaica global recognition. So too have its holiday resorts which are playgrounds for tourists from all over Europe and North America. Jamaican agricultural products, such as its Blue Mountain Coffee, and many of its manufactured goods have been able to penetrate foreign markets more deeply than those from other regional countries.

And, CARICOM’s negotiations with large countries and groups of countries would be much weaker and far less effective without the participation of Jamaica. Its relatively large population of close to three million people makes Jamaica a more attractive market than the majority of CARICOM countries which, with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago, each number less than a million people. Because of the size of its population, even with the limitations of educational opportunities, Jamaica also has more qualified technical people for bargaining internationally than its partner countries in CARICOM. Therefore, the participation of Jamaican negotiators in CARICOM teams is extremely valuable.

Jamaicans also constitute the largest number of the West Indian Diaspora in the United Kingdom, the United States and Canada. To the extent that the West Indian Diaspora is a group whose votes are wooed by political parties in these countries, much is owed to Jamaicans for the attention paid to Caribbean concerns.

On the negative side, Jamaica’s internal crime, and organised crime that its gangs have exported to Britain, Canada and the United States have created an unwholesome image for the country and severely damaged it economically. In the process, CARICOM has been weakened economically as well, for an economically weak Jamaica is unable to serve as a dynamo for economic activity and growth throughout the area.

Jamaica’s high crime level has been bad for business and bad for its economy. A 2003 study found that the total costs of crime came to J$12.4 billion which was 3.7% of GDP, and a 2007 UN report projected that if Jamaica could reduce violent crime to Costa Rica’s low level, the economy would grow by 5.4%. In a World Bank survey, 39% of Jamaica’s business managers said they were less likely to expand their businesses because of crime, and 37% reported that crime discourages investment that would have encouraged greater productivity.

Apart from scaring away investment, high crime in Jamaica has also caused many of its professionals and middle-class families to flee the country seeking safer environments abroad. More than 80 per cent of Jamaica’s tertiary educated people have migrated to the world’s industrialized nations.

It doesn’t take much imagination to work out how much more socially and economically developed Jamaica would have been today had it not been plagued by over 30 years of escalating crime and its debilitating consequences.

From time to time, outbursts of violent crime have affected the country’s tourism which contributes about 10 per cent of the country’s GDP. It is only because of expensive and extensive advertising and public relations campaigns in the main tourist markets that Jamaica has managed to keep its tourism arrivals by air fairly stable.

This latest, globally-publicized, bloody confrontation between security forces and criminal gangs protecting a Drugs Don, Christopher “Dudus” Coke, from being served with an order for extradition to the United States and arrested, will damage the tourism industry harshly, and, again, once it is over, Jamaica will be forced to spend large sums repairing its image and assuring tourists of its safety.

Other CARICOM countries will not be immune from the Jamaica disturbances. On the basis that tourists see the Caribbean as one place, other Caribbean destinations will also have to spend more on promoting themselves.

The fact that “Dudus” could be protected by well-armed, criminal gangs who have neither respect for, nor fear of, Jamaica’s security forces or the authority of the State, is a direct consequence of governance gone badly wrong. From the mid-1970s the two main political parties in Jamaica, the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) and the Peoples National Party (PNP) have formed alliances with gangs that have been well-armed and in many cases are involved in the drugs trade. Having taken that step that renders politicians beholden to criminals, the political hierarchy began an inexorable downward spiral to disaster.

In effect, part of the State has been captured by leaders of criminal gangs to whom political parties are obligated. Nothing else but this sense of obligation to “Dudus” Coke can explain why Jamaica’s Prime Minister Bruce Golding, as Leader of the JLP, would have intervened at party level to influence a law enforcement matter between his government and the government of the US.

The Jamaican government now has to assert the authority of the State over “Dudus” and his gang, and it must be done if Jamaica is to be freed from the captivity of criminal gangs.

And, when this particular confrontation is over, Jamaica must start the gruelling process of openly and transparently dismantling all party political connections with gangs, reasserting the supremacy of the State, and weeding out gangs that are the scourge of the society. Any alternative scenario is too terrifying to contemplate but it does include Jamaica being plunged into the status of a failed State.

This is why it behoves the current party political leaders to set to the task of recovering the State from the influence of criminals and establishing broad based institutions empowered by law to oversee public services and political practices. Jamaica will be economically stronger, socially better and politically more stable than it has been for decades and, as a consequence, CARICOM will benefit.

May 28, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Timid Leadership setting back Caribbean in the world

By Sir Ronald Sanders:


Several commentators have lamented in recent years the seeming timidity of Caribbean leaders in not more aggressively defending and advancing the economic interests of Caribbean countries in the global community.

This apparent timidity has been evident in a number of areas including the surrender to bullying by the European Union (EU) when Caribbean governments signed up to an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) which went beyond the requirements of World Trade Organization (WTO) rules, and in the submission to the dictation of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) over the operations of the financial services sector.

These capitulations will hurt the Caribbean now and haunt the region’s economic future for some time to come. Essentially, the space for making and implementing decisions in the Caribbean’s interest is either being severely restricted or lost altogether.

This malaise is weakening the once vibrant Caribbean Community which was led by courageous men and women who were not averse to standing up to the most powerful countries and agencies in defense of matters of importance to their nations and to the region.

While they sought strategic alliances with other nations and groups of countries, such as the pact with African and Pacific countries in the original negotiations with the EU, the motivation was the furtherance of their domestic and regional interest. They recognized that each of them was stronger for the support of the others, and they made unity not only a virtue but a tool, gathering together their best brains from government, the private sector and academia to map out their strategies and to implement them.

Somewhere along the path in recent years, the region has lost its way. The resolve to act collectively in the common interest of all appears to have been pushed to one side, as governments seek individual salvation. Collective action, long a strength of CARICOM, is paid only lip service. Worse yet, the collective use of the Caribbean’s best brains in government, business, and academia has disappeared.

So, the OECS countries join Japan to vote for commercial whaling even though there is a thriving tourism whale watching industry in the region; some countries have joined the Venezuelan-initiated ALBA – often taking positions within that group before discussing it in CARICOM; and the region remains divided on the issue of diplomatic recognition of China or Taiwan.

But, above all, bold leadership has diminished in the region, and it has reduced among Caribbean people the ambition to reach for the stars; to push the envelope so as to stride out of the shadows and into the global sunlight. The region is weaker for it. And, it will become weaker still unless the leadership of the region returns to the fundamentals of collective thinking and collective action, and asserts the Caribbean’s interest boldly; not surrendering to imposed rules in which they have not had a say; refusing to be bullied; and not allowing their governments to be captured by the inducements of others.

In this connection, a statement made to me by the Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves, is warmly welcomed. The Prime Minister told me on the record that “Venezuela had nothing to do with St Vincent’s decision to offer itself for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council for the 2011-2012 term”.

Our discussion followed my commentary: “Serve the Caribbean’s interest, not some other country’s”.

Dr Gonsalves placed his government’s decision in the context of the need for small Caribbean states to be bold in order to reverse the idea that they are “little nothings”, and he was adamant that, should St Vincent and the Grenadines – one of the smallest of the Caribbean nations - succeed in this quest, its seat on the Security Council will be a CARICOM seat dedicated to advancing the region’s interest even as it deliberates, and helps to arbitrate on, global hot-spot issues.

Gonsalves looked forward to St Vincent’s UN mission being strengthened by personnel from other CARICOM countries and benefitting from advice and consultations with experienced present and former diplomats from the region. While he expected support from the ALBA countries, he declared: “We are not an ALBA candidate”. In this, the Prime Minister was prudently distancing his country from the controversial relations between Venezuela and Colombia, since it is Colombia against whom St Vincent will be competing for the single seat available to the Latin American and Caribbean group.

If, indeed, the St Vincent government is pursuing the Security Council non-permanent seat in a spirit of boldness and to assert the right of small countries to be represented and heard at the highest levels of global decision-making, then all Caribbean people should support it. When Guyana ran for - and got – the seat in 1975 as the first CARICOM state to do so, it was because the government at the time also felt that the domination by the larger Latin American states should end and the capacity of small states to contribute to thinking and solutions at the global level should be demonstrated.

None of this ignores the costs that the St Vincent government will face, and in this connection, every CARICOM government should pitch-in with money and qualified people. The quest must be a Caribbean one, for Caribbean purposes, financed by the Caribbean to assert the region’s independence.

And, as part of this resurgence of Caribbean boldness, regional governments should reject the recent offer made by the European Union to pay for Caribbean delegates to attend a Meeting of the CARIFORUM-EU EPA Joint Council, at ministerial level, on 17 May 2010 in Madrid.

This meeting was hastily proposed by the Commission of the European Union to be held on the day of the scheduled CARIFORUM-EU Summit in order “to adopt the two sets of Rules of Procedures” for the Joint Council.

But, CARICOM countries have not collectively addressed these rules. Worse yet, the European Commission (EC) has scheduled only one and a half hours to consider these complex legal rules whose application will have far reaching implications for the work of the Joint Council.

It is obvious that the EC expects the Caribbean to do nothing but rubber stamp the rules. And, it is time that regional governments call a halt to being railroaded.

They should reject the proposal for a hurried meeting of the Joint Council for which they are not prepared, and they should use the Summit to boldly tell the EU leadership of their dissatisfaction with the treatment the Caribbean has received for sugar, bananas and rum.

It is time again for collective and informed Caribbean boldness.

May 14, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Serving CARICOM's interest; not some other country's

By Sir Ronald Sanders:


A row has broken out in St Vincent and the Grenadines over the possible candidature of that small Caribbean country for a non-permanent seat on the UN Security Council for the period 2011-2012 in opposition to Colombia.

The St Vincent Opposition Leader, Arnhim Eustace, is claiming that, in seeking to be elected to the Security Council as a representative of the 33-member Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) group, the Ralph Gonsalves government is carrying out the wishes of Venezuela’s populist President, Hugo Chavez, simply to deprive Colombia of the seat.

Chavez and the Colombian government have been openly hostile to each other in an increasingly worsening situation (about which more later).

This row in St Vincent could be replicated throughout the LAC group, and may spread to the general assembly of all UN member countries if the group does not decide on a single candidate for the one seat allocated to it.

Historically, the LAC group has been able to reach consensus on one candidate. There have only been five contested elections over the years, and since 1966 when CARICOM countries began the process of becoming independent states, three Caribbean countries have been selected by the LAC group for the Security Council five times. Guyana was selected for the periods 1975-76 and 1982-83; Jamaica for the periods 1979-80 and 2000-2001; and Trinidad and Tobago for the period 1985-86.

Eustace claims that the St Vincent government is contesting selection in the LAC group because the country’s Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves is tied to Chavez though membership of ALBA, a grouping of eight countries formed at Chavez’s initiative and in which, it is said, Chavez exercises influence over the others by virtue of the Venezuelan government’s financial contribution to their political survival.

It is widely felt that Chavez does not want Colombia on the Security Council because he regards that country’s government as a proxy for the United States administration. Chavez has criticised a US-Colombia military pact under which the US has access to military bases in Colombia. According to Chavez, the military bases would be used for espionage purposes and would allow US troops there to launch a military offensive against Venezuela.

For its part, the Colombia government has accused Chavez of collaboration with the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), a rebel military group that is seeking to topple the government.

The last time a bitter contest in the LAC group for a Security Council seat occurred was 2006 when Guatemala clashed with Venezuela and neither country could muster sufficient support to be endorsed as the undisputed candidate.

The battle then proceeded to the UN general assembly but not before Chávez had invested millions of dollars in a year-long campaign to get Venezuela elected to one of 10 non-permanent seats. After 48 ballots and two weeks of voting, neither country secured the two-thirds majority to clinch the contest and, eventually, the LAC group became actively involved in finding a compromise candidate in Panama but the process left much bad feeling all round.

In response to the Arnhim Eustace’s claims, Prime Minister Gonsalves released a document used to brief Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders during a meeting in Brazil in April regarding his government’s position on the non-permanent Security Council seat.

A Caribbean Media Corporation report says that the document “acknowledged that the island’s proposed candidacy ‘would likely necessitate a campaign against Columbia (sic)’, which is currently a declared candidate for the sole vacancy allocated to the Group of Latin American and Caribbean (GRULAC) in the October 2010 elections”.

However, the document is also reported as saying that St Vincent’s “proposed candidacy is less a challenge to Columbia (sic) than it is an advancement of a principled position on the representation of CARICOM, SIDS (Small Island Developing States) and small states at the upper echelons of multilateral diplomacy”.

No one can question the right of the St Vincent government to offer itself within the LAC group as a candidate for the Security Council seat. But the timing of the decision is curious because in 2009 the group had settled that Colombia would be the candidate for the 2011-2012 term. This tacit decision was made when Colombia wanted to be selected for the 2010-2011 term but conceded to Brazil.

It would have served both St Vincent and the LAC group better if the government had declared its decision to run for the 2011-12 term before Colombia had secured the nod of the group especially Brazil, and before relations deteriorated to its present sore point between Colombia and Venezuela.

The St Vincent document suggested that CARICOM countries should endorse the country’s candidature but that, if it did not prevail, another CARICOM country should step in as a “compromise candidate”. This suggests that the government is not confident of its capacity to knock Colombia out of the contest and that the issue would have to go to the full UN body where a two-thirds majority would be required for success.

If CARICOM member states vote as a bloc in the LAC group they would command 14 of the 33 votes, but the dispute would continue once Colombia held out. Nonetheless, CARICOM countries, acting together, could certainly block Colombia’s selection if it were their intention to ensure that one of their members should be the candidate.

There is a case for a CARICOM country to be the candidate for the 2011-2012 term. Since the Caribbean joined the LAC group, Colombia has served four terms and the larger countries – Argentina, Brazil and Mexico in particular – have dominated. But, being on the Security Council is not a cheap affair particularly if election is preceded by a contest with a richer country.

A small Caribbean country would have to invest heavily in the election campaign travelling around the world to drum up support. Then, it would have to strengthen its mission with qualified people, meeting the significantly increased costs for two-years. If it does not beef up its mission, it will do nothing more than warm the Council seat some of the time. That would do no good for the work of the Security Council and would convince the international community that small states have no place there. All of CARICOM would have to pitch in financially and with qualified people.

The situation would be worse if a non-CARICOM country paid the bill. The international community would see this as “he who pays the piper, calling the tune”, and CARICOM’s standing would be diminished to its detriment. This is not far-fetched; it happens now in the International Whaling Commission where Japan finances the participation of some small states and directs their votes.

If CARICOM countries decide to support St Vincent or another one of their small members against Colombia for as important an organ as the UN Security Council where all eyes will be focussed on them, they must be prepared to meet the costs, and they should ensure that the candidature is in their own interests and not to promote the policies of any other country.

May 7, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Save the Caribbean's standing: Sink the yen for whales

By Sir Ronald Sanders:


“…. He that filches from me my good name
Robs me of that which not enriches him,
And makes me poor indeed”: Shakespeare, Othello

Several Caribbean countries could be stigmatized globally if they support a proposition to topple the global ban on commercial whaling and legitimize the heinous slaughter of these intelligent mammals.

This proposition is being advanced by the Chair and Vice Chair of the 88-nation International Whaling Commission (IWC), a body whose governing Convention provides for the proper conservation of whale stocks and the complete protection of certain species as well as designating specified areas as whale sanctuaries.

Most of what constitutes the proposition was developed by 12 governments in a small working group, and it is being touted by the Chair and Vice Chair as a basis for additional negotiations between now and an IWC meeting to be held in Morocco in June.
No member government of the IWC has endorsed the proposition to date but some governments have forcefully stated their objection to it – among them: Mexico, Australia, New Zealand and Britain. It is expected that India, South Africa and Brazil will also oppose the proposition.
Caribbean countries that are members of the IWC – the six independent members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) and Suriname – could be very instrumental in either quashing it or validating it.

If the proposition is endorsed, it would: overturn the global ban on commercial whaling and allow hunting in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary around Antarctica; approve the killing of whales for commercial purposes by Japan around Antarctica and in the North Pacific; and allow continuing whaling by Iceland and Norway in violation of long-agreed scientific procedures and the global whaling ban.

The Caribbean nations have absolutely nothing politically, or in orthodox material terms, to gain by helping to support the proposition; they have much more to lose.

Apart from Bequia, one of the tiny islands of St Vincent and the Grenadines (about which, more later), Caribbean people do not eat whale meat, but many of the islands have a vibrant whale-watching industry from which they derive revenue and jobs. More importantly, the Caribbean sells itself to the global tourism market as environmentally friendly and protective of natural wildlife – an assault on this latter reputation by tourism groups, who are increasingly demanding higher environmental standards, could damage the region’s already fragile tourism industry.

It has to be recalled that it is only inside the Caribbean that a differentiation is made between the countries that reside in it; to the North American and European tourists, the Caribbean is one place. The perception of the area overall can affect countries individually.

It is claimed that Japan pays the IWC membership fees for several of the Caribbean countries, and also finances the participation of their delegations who have become the most vocal supporters of Japan’s drive for commercial whaling.

In April 2002, the then Accountant General of Grenada wrote in a letter (later made public):”contributions from the government of Japan to the government of Grenada were not received for the International Whaling Commission and as such was not reflected in the said accounts for the years 1998 and 1999. However, our internal audit revealed that contributions were received for all other years prior to and following 1998 and 1999. Moreover the Japanese have confirmed that it made contributions to the government of Grenada for the specified periods.”

Japan has taken advantage of the economic vulnerability of these small and needy countries to capture their votes. In return for support at the IWC, Japan has provided fish refrigeration facilities in all the independent OECS countries which, while opened with great fanfare and flourish as a boon to local fishermen, are now mostly disused or used for other purposes. In some countries, they have become known as the local “ice house”.

But, when the economics of the relationship with Japan is analyzed, these Caribbean countries come out worse. Japan has a massive annual balance of trade surplus with each of them – they are ready markets for Japan’s motor-vehicles, television sets, radios, computers, printers, cameras, agricultural equipment and a host of other goods. In turn, Japan’s purchases from these countries, where such purchases exist, are negligible.

To say that the latest proposition from the IWC Chairs to overturn the ban on commercial whaling has caused outrage around the world would be to put the matter mildly.

Governments, non-governmental organizations, environmental groups and ordinary people have written letters, signed petitions, organized demonstrations, created blogs on the Internet and generally agitated against what they rightly regard as an activity that is not only unnecessary, but is cruel and barbaric.

The human population of the world does not depend on whale meat to live; in fact, including a small number of aboriginal peoples – and an elite group in Japan – whale meat is eaten by only a tiny fraction of the global population.

The three remaining countries in the world that flout the spirit of the IWC rules and decisions in respect of commercial whaling are Iceland, Japan and Norway.

In the Caribbean, apart from Bequia, any ancient hunting of whales has long since been abandoned, and there is certainly no tradition of eating whale meat in the region. The primitive process of hunting whales off Bequia is cruel verging on the barbaric and does nothing to promote the island’s reputation as a premier residential tourism destination. It has to be assumed that this activity will soon be regulated by the Minister who has power to do so under the law.

The Caribbean governments involved in this matter should join progressive governments around the world by formally declaring their opposition to the proposition long before the IWC meeting in June, and, if they do attend, by vigorously opposing it then.

Better still, given the difficult financial circumstances confronting each of them, Caribbean countries can validly stay away from this meeting which would be costly to attend in distant Morocco, and which has no benefit for them. In that way, they could save their own standing with the vast majority of public opinion while sinking the yen for whales.

Othello’s exclamation above began:

“Good name in man and woman, dear my lord,
Is the immediate jewel of their souls”.

In this matter of the slaughter of the world’s whales, the people of the OECS countries and Suriname would not want the jewel of their souls tarnished with ‘thirty pieces’ of yen. But it could happen to their detriment unless Governments remove their countries from the fray.

April 30, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

After a year of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with Europe: What benefits for the Caribbean?

After a year of the EPA with Europe: What benefits for the Caribbean?
By Sir Ronald Sanders:


The European Commission (EC) will be holding a symposium on April 22 and 23 on the year-old Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) between the European Union (EU) collectively and 15 Caribbean countries individually.

There is, as yet, no indication that Caribbean governments or the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) Secretariat will be holding a similar exercise.

It has to be assumed that each of the governments that signed the EPA has long established units both to implement its terms and to monitor its effects on individual economies.

Therefore, relevant authorities in each of the Caribbean states as well as the Secretariat of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) should be able to provide a list of the benefits that have been secured from the EU under the EPA. Our publics had been told that we would benefit not only from the exports of new goods and commodities to the EU but also from the provision of a wide range of services. Additionally, Caribbean companies would have the right of establishment in the EU.

Against this background, it should be fairly easy for the competent authority in each country to provide information related to just a few matters such as: what preparations and actions have been taken by exporters of goods and especially services to access the EU market; what are the investment plans by companies to establish in the EU market; and how easy or difficult are their plans looking for access to Europe.

There is a very important clause in the EPA which allows for a review of it within 5 years of its coming into force. That clause was hard fought for, and came about only because Guyana’s President Bharat Jagdeo had the courage to insist upon it even after other Caribbean governments had agreed to sign the EPA without such a review mechanism.

In defence of several Caribbean heads of government, it should be noted that they were reluctant to sign and many did so only after their crucial exports of bananas and sugar and some manufactured goods (from Trinidad and Tobago for instance) were threatened by the EC with a higher tariff in the EU market.

But, if the EPA is to be properly reviewed – and it should be subject to such a review on an annual basis – it is essential to monitor its implementation and to gather information that will inform an examination

However, informed sources in the region say that some governments have done very little about implementation and others have done nothing at all.

What is known for certain is that even though Caribbean countries and the EU are supposed to be ‘partners’ under the EPA, the EC has denounced the Sugar Protocol causing Caribbean countries to lose their preferential price for sugar; the EC has agreed a new trade regime for bananas with exports from non African, Caribbean and Pacific countries that will decimate what is left of the banana industry in the Caribbean; and come June 20, the EC will renege on an undertaking to the Caribbean rum industry to help finance restructuring and marketing while at the same time reducing tariffs on competing rum from several Latin American countries.

Not surprisingly several Caribbean businesses have lamented the benefits to them of the EPA so far. For example, Ramesh Dookooh, President of the Guyana Manufacturing and Services Association, observes that “Guyana earns much of its revenue on traditional exports, including rice and sugar, both of which are not covered by the EPA’s duty- and quota-free. Thus, the private sector in our country has its reservations about the economic opportunities available under the EPA”. Nonetheless, he is hopeful. He says: “Wider consultation with stakeholders and a stronger focus on the developmental dimension of the agreements could make the EPAs even more effective.”

Unfortunately, there has not been much evidence of consultation. The experience of sugar, rum and bananas indicate that the EC now takes the Caribbean for granted. After all, they do already have a signed full EPA from the region, so why concern themselves overly about the Caribbean.

The EC also controls the purse strings. They have knotted those strings on the purse of the 8th European Development Fund (ED) from which money for restructuring and marketing the rum industry should have come, and its daunting bureaucratic procedures halt many Caribbean countries in their tracks from getting money to implement the EPA under the 10th EDF.

An EU fund, managed by the Caribbean Development Bank (CDB), is reported to be exhausted with no sign of being replenished.

Undoubtedly, the global financial crisis – as well as the failures of regional financial institutions – has battered Caribbean governments. All CARICOM countries have been preoccupied with saving their economies from shocks including worsening terms of trade especially with the EU – even Guyana though it had 3.3 per cent growth in 2009.

But, Caribbean governments cannot afford to let attention to the EPA with the EU slip. The European Commissioner for Trade, Karel De Gucht, recently told German business people: “The economic crisis has temporarily halted the process of globalisation. But let there be no mistake: this process is very likely to pick up again with renewed vigour. The EU must put in place the conditions to benefit from it to the full”. He is looking to a “successful conclusion” of the global negotiations at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) “to boost Europe's GDP by around 45 billion Euros”.

Commissioner De Gucht will measure a “successful conclusion” very differently from the Caribbean, but the region should have its own collective plan of action and its own definition of success on which it should collaborate with like-minded countries.

The implementation of the EPA and the procuring of benefits from it have not been evident so far, and the EC has not been helpful to the Caribbean in the process.

When Caribbean leaders meet their EU counterparts for a Conference on May 17th in Spain, they should be fully briefed and prepared to tell European leaders of their dissatisfaction and propose means of making the EPA deliver on the ‘partnership’ it promised.

April 16, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Bahamas: Nurse shortage could hamper nation's development

By Krystel Rolle ~ Guardian Staff Reporter ~ krystel@nasguard.com:


A severe shortage of nurses could cripple the nation's development, according to a World Bank report, which named The Bahamas among a group of Caribbean countries that suffers from the deficiency.

The report, which was released last week, noted that nursing shortages across the English-speaking Caribbean limit access to and the quality of health services and affect the region's competitiveness.

The report revealed, "According to (the study) 'The Nurse Labor and Education Markets in the English-speaking CARICOM - Issues and Options for Reform,' the region is facing a rapidly growing shortage of nurses as demand for quality health care increases due to an aging population, and high numbers of nurses emigrate, drawn by higher paying jobs in Canada, the UK and the USA."

Pointing to the severity of The Bahamas' shortage on Thursday, Minister of Health Dr. Hubert Minnis said The Bahamas has 26 nurses to every 10,000 people, while countries like the United States have 100 nurses per 10,000 people.

"And they are short," Dr. Minnis said, referring to the United States.

"The World Bank estimates that there are 7,800 nurses working in the English-speaking Caribbean (CARICOM), or 1.25 nurses per 1,000 people, roughly one-tenth the concentration in some OECD countries. In addition, demand for nurses exceeds their supply throughout the region: 3,300 or 30 percent of all positions in the sector were vacant at the time of the study."

The World Bank said such shortages can hinder the Caribbean.

"These shortages have tangible impacts that may compromise the ability of English-speaking CARICOM countries to meet their key health care service needs, especially in the areas of disease prevention and care. In addition, the shortage of highly-trained nurses reduces the capacity of countries to offer quality health care at a time when Caribbean countries aim to attract businesses and retirees as an important pillar of growth."

The World Bank said in the coming years, demand for nurses in the English-speaking Caribbean will increase due to the health needs of the aging population.

"Under current education and labor market conditions, however, supply will slightly decrease. The World Bank expects that unmet demand for nurses will more than triple during the next 15 years — from 3,300 nurses in 2006 to 10,700 nurses in 2025."

A study undertaken by an international research group and recently highlighted by Health Minister Dr. Minnis has determined that The Bahamas has an aging population.

An aging population is usually characterized by an increase in a population's mean and median ages, a decline in the proportion comprised of children and young adults, and a rise in the proportion that is elderly.

Minnis said over the next 20 years the number of young persons in the population will diminish.

"We will find that the numbers of individuals between the ages of zero to 20 will decrease, whereas the number of individuals between the ages of 45-65 and older will increase," Dr. Minnis said last week.

Meantime, the World Bank said data suggests that the number of English-speaking CARICOM trained nurses working in Canada, the UK and the US is about 21,500, which is about three times higher than the workforce in the English-speaking CARICOM.

"The new World Bank report also points to high demand for nurse education but low completion rates (55 percent) as a challenge and an opportunity in tackling nurse shortages," the report said. "Having more nurse tutors available, maximizing completion rates and accepting more students into programs would significantly bolster the number of new nurses entering the health system."

To meet the demand for nurses in the English-speaking Caribbean, the report suggests Caribbean countries increase training capacity; manage migration; strengthen data quality and availability; and adopt a regional approach.

"Given the size and the linkages of local nurse labor markets, no country in the region is in a position to efficiently tackle the challenges ahead on its own," the report said. "Therefore, countries should ideally join forces and adopt a regional approach to increasing training capacity, managing migration and strengthening the evidence-base, if possible, with technical and financial support from countries where a large part of their nurse workforce will tend to migrate to Canada, the UK and the US."

Dr. Minnis said The Ministry of Health is already working to alleviate the problem. According to him there are currently 127 high school students participating in his ministry's nursing program. He added that the ministry is looking to launch a program for junior high school students.

He said the government has provided 53 scholarships for students studying nursing. Additionally, he said there are 155 nursing students in The College of The Bahamas.

The English-speaking Caribbean includes Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, Grenada, Guyana, Jamaica, Montserrat, St. Kitts and Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and Trinidad and Tobago.

March 08, 2010

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International