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

Jamaican minister laments low tourism dollar retention in region

KINGSTON, Jamaica (JIS) -- Jamaica's Tourism Minister, Edmund Bartlett, has said Caribbean destinations must forge a collaborative unit in order to keep tourism earnings within the region.

Speaking on Tuesday at the Rotary Club's District 7020 annual conference in New Kingston, the Minister said most Caribbean nations were solely or significantly dependent on tourism for their economic survival.

He said, as a result, it was essential for those nations to work together to find ways to minimise the "leak" of the tourism dollar, and to ensure that the earnings from the market stay in their countries.

Bartlett noted that one in every four jobs in the Caribbean is generated by tourism, some 60 per cent of foreign direct investment in the region is related to tourism investment and, perhaps, 40 per cent of general foreign exchange is driven by tourism.

However, he said that, in the Caribbean, the tourism dollar does not stay in the destination, but "goes back to where it came from." He stated that many Caribbean destinations are retaining as low as seven cents of every dollar they gain from the tourist.

"Nobody in the Caribbean is saying that we are getting 60 cents or 80 cents of the dollar remaining. The failing is that we have not been able, in the region, to tap fully into the supply chain and to be able to ensure that every cent from the dollar stays in the destination," he lamented.

Caribbean destinations have not been able to accomplish this, because they have not invested in the "supply side" of the industry, he said.

"We have invested mainly in the demand side and, in order to generate that demand, we have to spend overseas because our marketing is overseas," he argued.

He said research has shown that currently only about three per cent of the produce from the agricultural sector goes into tourism, while other industries supply between 15 and 35 per cent.

"We quarrel about export issues and trade issues and competition in the global market for our commodities and agricultural produce, and we're sitting right here with an export industry that has the capability to absorb every kilo of our supplies, every unit, and we ignore it."

He said local farmers have the opportunity to tap into the tourism market, but must first work on a number of key points. He suggested that to deal with the supply side of the market, there must be volume, consistency, quality and a price point.

"Because it has to compete with the rest of the world and that is what we must be serious about," he said.

He argued that while the Jamaican farmer might not be able to do it alone, this was an ideal point in which farmers in the region can collaborate and link with others in the industry.

"If we supply those demands for the tourism industry, the Caribbean can become self-sufficient in many regards. But, it requires some innovation, some new thinking and this is where we are going," Bartlett stated.

May 6, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Careless with CARICOM - Part 2

Sir Shridath Ramphal:


At the end of Part 1, I suggested that we are losing our way abroad as we are at home. It was not always so; and progress on each journey helped us forward on the other.

Have we forgotten the days when as West Indians we were the first to daringly bring the ‘Non-Aligned Movement’ to the Western Hemisphere, when we pioneered rejection of the ‘two China’ policy and recognized the People’s Republic; when, together, we broke the western diplomatic embargo of Cuba; when we forced withdrawal of the Kissinger plan for a ‘Community of the Western Hemisphere’; when we were in the front rank (both intellectual and diplomatic) of the effort for a New International Economic Order; when from this region, bending iron wills, we gave leadership in the struggle against ‘apartheid’ in Southern Africa; when we inspired the creation of the ACP and kept ‘reciprocity’ at bay for 25 years; when we forced recognition of the vulnerability of ‘small states’?

In all this, and more, for all our size we stood tall; we commanded respect, if not always endearment.

And beyond respect from others, was self-esteem; because in all these actions, and others, we were guided by principles: principles rooted in our regional values; principles we were not afraid to articulate and by which we stood, mindful of, but not deterred by, objections to positions we once took boldly on the global stage - not recklessly, but in unity, with honor and circumspection.

For what do we stand today, united and respected?

Some of us weaken the region’s standing in the international community when we are seen as clients of Japan’s pursuit of whaling. We eviscerate any common foreign policy in CARICOM when some of us cohabit with Taiwan. Deserting our African and Pacific partners, we yield to Europe - and take pride in being first to submit.

What do these aberrations do for our honor and standing in the world? How do they square with our earlier record of small states standing for principles that commanded respect and buttressed self-esteem? The answers are all negative. And, inevitably, what they do in due measure is require us to disown each other and display our discordance to the world. This is where ‘local control’ has led us in the 21st Century. We call it now ‘sovereignty’.

It is easy, perhaps natural, for us as Caribbean people to shift blame to our Governments; and Governments, of course, are not blameless. But, in our democracies, Governments do what we allow them to do: they say: ‘we do what our people want us to do’. And who can deny that that is so, while we accept their excesses with equanimity, certainly in silence – and not infrequently renew their political mandate.

No! The fault is with us. We have each been touched with the glow of ‘local control’; each moved by the siren song of ‘sovereignty’; have each allowed the stigma of otherness, even foreignness, to degrade our Caribbean kinship. The fault lies not in our political stars but in ourselves that we are what and where we are; and what and where we will be in a global society that demands of us the very best we can be.

When are we at our best? Surely, when we are as one; with one identity; acting with the strength and courage that oneness gives us. Does anyone doubt that whatever we undertake, we do it better when we do it together?

Thirty-five years ago, in 1975, on the shores of Montego Bay as I took leave of Caribbean leaders before assuming new roles at the Commonwealth, my parting message was a plea TO CARE FOR CARICOM. Among the things I said then was this:

Each generation of West Indians has an obligation to advance the process of regional development and the evolution of an ethos of unity. Ours is endeavoring to do so; but we shall fail utterly if we ignore these fundamental attributes of our West Indian condition and, assuming without warrant the inevitability of our oneness, become casual, neglectful, indifferent or undisciplined in sustaining that process and that evolution.

The burden of my message is that we have become ‘casual, neglectful, indifferent and undisciplined’ in sustaining and advancing Caribbean integration: that we have become careless with CARICOM – and in the process are falling into to a state of disunity which by now we should have made preternatural. It will be a slow and gradual descent; but ineluctably it will be an ending.

In Derek Walcott’s recently published collection of poems, White Egrets, there are some lines which conjure up that image of slow passing:

With the leisure of a leaf falling in the forest,
Pale yellow spinning against green – my ending.

This must not be a regional epitaph.

If CARICOM is not to end like a leaf falling in the forest, prevailing apathy and unconcern must cease; reversal from unity must end. The old cult of ‘local control’ must not extinguish hope of regional rescue through collective effort; must not allow a narcissist insularity to deny us larger vision and ennobling roles. We must escape the mental prison of narrow domestic walls and build the new Caribbean with room for all to flourish. We must cherish our local identities; but they must enrich the mosaic of regionalism, not withhold from it their separate splendors.

Today that mosaic is most evident in Caribbean diasporas who have heightened their self-esteem and secured an identity for themselves by holding fast to that image of Caribbean oneness which is slipping away from us at home. No one has told them this is the reality at home; in fact, self-deception, even denial, in the Caribbean has kept them united in a quite poignant way. Could it be that we are more true to ourselves in London or New York or Toronto, than we are within the region itself? What an irony that would be?

In some ways, it must be said, that identity slippage is less evident among the smallest of us. The OECS islands are developing a model of economic unity among themselves which would be worthy of all, if it could subsist for all. But, it is early days, and it remains to be seen at the level of action whether, even for them, the ‘agony’ lingers still.

Whatever ails us now, we must recover our resolve to survive as one people, one region. Imbued by such resolve, yet only so resolved, there is a future for this region that can be better than the best we have ever been. Make no mistake, however; neither complacency nor resignation will suffice. What the Caribbean needs is rescue – by ourselves, from ourselves and for ourselves. We cannot be careless with our oneness, which is our lifeline. We must not be CARELESS with CARICOM.

(Sir Shridath has held the positions of Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Chairman of the West Indian Commission and Chief Negotiator in the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery)

May 5, 2010

Careless with CARICOM - Part 1

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Careless with CARICOM - Part 1

Sir Shridath Ramphal:


As ‘West Indians’, as ‘Caribbean people’, we face a basic contradiction of oneness and otherness, a basic paradox of kinship and alienation. Much of our history is the interplay of these contrarieties. But they are not of equal weight. The very notion of being West Indian speaks of identity, of oneness. That identity is the product of centuries of living together and is itself a triumph over the divisive geography of an archipelago which speaks to otherness. Today, CARICOM and all it connotes, is the hallmark of that triumph, and it is well to remember the processes which forged it – lest we forget, and lose it.

Throughout history our geo-political region has known that it is a kinship in and around an enclosing Sea. But, through most of that time it suited local elites – from white planters, through successor merchant groups, to establishment colonials - to keep the Sea as a convenient boundary against encroachment on their ‘local control’. Political aspirants in our region jostled for their Governor’s ear, not each other’s arm.

Times changed in the nineteen twenties and thirties – between the ‘world wars’. The external economic and political environments changed; and the internal environments changed – social, political and most of all demographic. Local control began to pass to the hands of local creoles, mainly professionals, later trade unionists, and for a while the new political class saw value in a strategy of regional unity. Maryshaw’s slogan ‘the West Indies must be West Indian’ carried at the masthead of his crusading newspaper was evocative. For two generations, West Indian ‘unity’ was a progressive political credo.

It was a strategy that was to reach its apogee in the Federation of The West Indies: due to become Independent in mid-1962. It is often forgotten that the ‘the’ in the name of the new nation was consciously spelt with a capital ‘T’ – The West Indies - an insistence on the oneness of the federated region. But, by then, that was verbal insistence against a contrary reality, already re-emerging. The new political elites for whom ‘unity’ offered a pathway to political power through ‘independence’ had found by the 1960s that that pathway was opening up regardless.

Regional unity was no longer a pre-condition to ‘local control’. Hence, the referendum in Jamaica; and Trinidad’s arithmetic that ‘1’ from ‘10’ left ‘0’; even ‘the agony of the eight’. The century old impulse for ‘local control’ had prevailed, and the separatist instincts of a dividing sea had resumed ascendancy.

But, as in the nineteen twenties and thirties, so in the sixties and seventies – the environment changed against separatism. Independence on a separate basis had secured ‘local control’; but the old nemesis of colonialism was replaced by the new suzerainty of globalization. Independence, particularly for Caribbean micro states, was not enough to deliver Elysium. ‘Unity’ no sooner discarded was back in vogue; but less a matter of the heart than of the head.

In an interdependent world which in the name of liberalization made no distinctions between rich and poor, big and small, regional unity was compulsive. Caribbean states needed each other for survival; ‘unity’ was the only protective kit they could afford. Only three years after the rending ‘referendum’ came the first tentative steps to ‘unity’ in 1965 with CARIFTA; ‘tentative’, because the old obsession with ‘local control’ continued to trump oneness – certainly in Cabinet Rooms; but in drawing rooms too; though less so at street corners.

Despite the new external compulsions the pursuit of even economic unity, which publics largely accepted, has been a passage of attrition. It has taken us from 1965 to 2010 - 45 years – to crawl through CARIFTA and CARICOM, through the fractured promises of Chaguaramas and Grand Anse, and through innumerable Declarations and Affirmations and Commitments Not surprisingly, we have reached a moment of widespread public disbelief that our professed goal of a ‘Single Market and Economy’ will ever be attained.

In the acknowledged quest for survival, the old urge for ‘local control’ has not matured to provide real space for the ‘unity’ we say we need. Like 19th century colonists we still struggle to keep our rocks in our pockets – despite the enhanced logic of pooling our resources and the enlarged danger of ‘state capture’ by unelected groups and external forces if we do not.

In the 21st century, despite all we know in our minds of the brutality of the global environment and the need for collective action to survive it, the isolationist claims of ‘local control’ still smother the demands of unity of purpose and action. It is puzzling that it should be so; for we have assuredly made large gains in what ‘unity’ most demands – ‘identity’.

There may be exceptions; but does not every citizen of every CARICOM country regard himself or herself as a Caribbean person – not first and foremost, of course, but after his or her national ’ identity - a member of the society we call ‘West Indian’. There may be grouses, even anger, at not being treated ‘properly’ – especially at immigration counters – but that is because as ‘West Indians’ we expect to be treated better. Our anger hinges not on the absence of identity but on its assumed reality; on the conviction that our common identity is not a garb we wear outside but shed when we come home.

Just recently, we lost one of the Caribbean’s most illustrious sons – an ‘incandescent eagle’ I called him. The whole Caribbean mourned him. And West Indian diasporas – not just Jamaican – mourned Rex Nettleford as a Caribbean person. We groan together when West Indian cricket grovels; and jump together when it triumphs. What is all this but identity?

It is not an identity crisis that we face. We know we are a family. But our family values are less sturdy than they should be – those values that should move regional unity from rhetoric to reality; should make integration an intuitive process and the CSME a natural bonding. Until we live by these values so that all the family prospers, we degrade that identity.

We are also failing to fulfill the promise we once held out of being a light in the darkness of the developing world. Our regionalism inspired many in the South who also aspired to strength through unity. We have all but withdrawn from these roles, and in some areas like the EPA with Europe we have forsaken our brothers in the South.

Recently, the former President of Tanzania, Ben Mkapa, who was our brother in arms in the North-South arena, was warning Africa against the same EPA of which we have made Europe such a gift. We have lost solidarity not only with ourselves, but collectively with our brothers in the developing world.

And, perhaps, therein lies the ‘rub’. Were we making a reality of our own regional unity we would not be false to ourselves and to others who look to us for a vision of the future. Instead, we are losing our way both at home and abroad.

(Part 2 to follow)

(Sir Shridath has held the positions of Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Chairman of the West Indian Commission and Chief Negotiator in the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery)

May 4, 2010

Careless with CARICOM - Part 2

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

Haiti island unscathed by quake, but tourists stay away

by Clement Sabourin:

ILE A VACHE, Haiti (AFP) -- There are no blue-helmeted UN troops patrolling the streets of Ile a Vache, and schools on this picturesque island did not close after the massive earthquake that devastated much of the rest of the country.

Even as the rest of Haiti struggled to clear away debris and dispose of their dead, life after the quake has gone on as much as it did before for the 15,000 inhabitants of this unspoiled paradise.

The tiny island, off the southwest peninsula of Haiti a half-hour by boat from the town of Les Cayes, boasts among its many pleasures a vista of rolling hills and crystalline waters lapping its white-sand beaches.

But despite being spared the physical ravages of the quake, the island and its growing tourist industry also have been hit hard by the disaster.

"No tourists have come since the quake," said Didier Boulard, a Frenchman who says that not one stone fell out of place as a result of the temblor that leveled entire city blocks in the Haitian capital of Port-au-Prince.

Nevertheless the quake has brought financial disaster to Ile a Vache, he said.

"I've lost 47,000 dollars," said Boulard, who had high hopes for a 20-room hotel he opened nine years ago with a view over a small bay that served as a harbor for pirates during the 16th and 17th centuries.

With some 50 associates, Boulard invested 2.8 million dollars to open the first prime tourism establishment here -- today one of two hotels on this patch of land measuring only eight miles (13 kilometers) long and two miles (3.2 kilometers) wide -- and dared to celebrate last year when he "managed to turn a small profit".

The January 12 earthquake ended all that, killing as many as 300,000 people nationwide, leaving 1.3 million homeless and relegating Haiti to near the bottom of any vacation list.

At Haiti's big tourist destination of Jacmel, almost 500 people out of a population of 40,000 perished and a quarter of the tourist town's 700 hotel rooms were destroyed.

And though Ile a Vache emerged unscathed, even the thousands of UN and non-governmental organization expats sent in after the quake were banned, for security reasons, from taking breaks inside Haiti itself, so spent rest periods instead in the Dominican Republic right next door or on other islands like Guadeloupe or Martinique.

The fallout forced Boulard to trim his usual 40-member staff down to 25.

On a recent weekend, he had eight guests, including UN officials, humanitarian workers and journalists. Another recent visitor -- a rare bona fide "tourist" -- confessed that she came to Ile a Vache despite dire warnings from friends and relatives to stay away.

"Mine is the tourism of solidarity," said Canadian national Francine Leclerc.

"I've come here to spend my money in a country that needs it."

Over the years, however, travelers have been reluctant to flock to Haiti, with its periodic coups d'etat and natural disasters.

It is also the poorest country of the Americas -- generally not seen as a selling point for visitors who have dozens of tropical paradise destinations to choose from in the sun-drenched Caribbean.

Tourists were scared away two years ago by a succession of hurricanes that leveled a large swath of the island of Hispaniola, which Haiti shares with the Dominican Republic.

The tourism industry -- which could inject desperately needed revenue into Haiti's economy -- has also been hampered by a lack of infrastructure. For Ile a Vache, for example, the nearest air facility across the bay in Les Cayes is too small to welcome international flights.

Yet this island has a seductively languorous feel, making it unlike other Caribbean destinations. Its residents, descendents of African slaves and freed US blacks who immigrated in the 19th century after America's Civil War, still live to the rhythm of tropical sunsets, screeching cock fights and gurgling mynah birds.

This gives locals like Boulard hope that the unspoiled location might one day fulfill its destiny as tourist haven.

"The potential of tourism in Haiti is colossal." he said. "Neighboring countries welcome 10 million visitors each year," said the ever-hopeful Boulard.

May 3, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

The Bahamian economy and living standards shrunk at a rate of 0.3 per cent per annum between 2002-2009 "as a result of its narrow" base

Living standards fell 0.3% per year, 02-09
By NEIL HARTNELL
Tribune Business Editor:



The Bahamian economy and living standards shrunk at a rate of 0.3 per cent per annum between 2002-2009 "as a result of its narrow" base, a Wall Street credit rating agency has concluded, while surprisingly questioning whether the Bahamas Telecommunications Company's (BTC) privatisation process had been "postponed" yet again.

Standard & Poor's (S&P), in its full country report on the Bahamas' sovereign credit rating that was released this week and obtained by Tribune Business, raised questions about whether the 2002-2007 period - described as 'years of plenty' by the then-governing Christie administration - actually delivered the major increase in salaries/living standards for most Bahamians that it was supposed to have done.

Placing the Bahamas' short-term sovereign credit rating at 'BBB+', down from the previous 'A-2', S&P said: "The Bahamian economy contracted by an average of 0.3 per cent per year on a capita basis from 2002-2009 as a result of its narrow economy and close economic ties to the US.

"This lags the growth rates of most peers, and is less than the 'BBB' median average of 3.7 per cent growth. The weaker performance results from several factors. These include the adverse weather conditions that the Bahamas, like other Caribbean islands, is susceptible to; a lacklustre tourism arrival performance over the past few years; greater competition in the tourism industry; and the global recession in 2008-2009. Medium terms prospects remain subdued."

Data released by S&P reveals that the Bahamas' GDP per capita, or income per person, has been impacted heavily by the global recession, having not increased much during the Christie administration.

While GDP per capita rose from $22,223 in 2006 to $22,577 in 2007, the onset of the global financial crisis saw it fall back to $22,465 in 2008, followed by a further contraction to $21,449 in 2009. Bahamian GDP per capita is predicted to 'bottom out' this year at $21,433, before rising to $22,099 in 2011 and $22,559 in 2012.

Meanwhile, S&P's analysis raised questions as to whether it knew something the rest of the Bahamas did not on the status of the BTC privatisation process.

The Wall Street credit rating agency said: "The Government hoped to receive $200-$300 million in proceeds from the sale of a 51 per cent stake in BTC in the first half of 2010 to alleviate financing needs.

"However, the Government has once again postponed the privatisation following seeming disappointment with the bids and prices offered at the end of 2009. Plans have existed to sell BTC since the first Ingraham government, and when it took office again in 2007, it cancelled the sale of BTC to Bluewater Communications, which the previous administration had arranged."

BTC's "postponed" statement is at odds with the Government-appointed privatisation committee's recent assertion that 'due diligence' on the prospective bidders was continuing.

Zhivargo Laing, minister of state for finance, who heads the advisory committee overseeing the process, could not be reached for comment before press deadline. And nor could T. B. Donaldson, chair of the privatisation committee, or Julian Francis, BTC's chairman, despite messages being left.

It appears likely that S&P may have got it slightly wrong, and that privatisation is not 'postponed'. It may, though, have been delayed, as the protracted seven-month 'due diligence' period indicates that the Government may indeed have not received the quality of offers and prices it was hoping for, and has possibly engaged in talks with one or more bidders.

Those invited through to the due diligence round included J. P. Morgan/Vodafone; Atlantic Tele-Network/CFAL; Trilogy International Partners; and Digicel. Tribune Business last week heard whispers that both Digicel and J. P. Morgan/Vodafone were no longer interested, which would be a surprise in the latter's case, given that it was a frontrunner.

Those rumours have not been confirmed, though, and nor has speculation of a $130 million purchase price for 51 per cent of BTC.

Elsewhere, S&P reported that foreign direct investment, so crucial to the Bahamian economy and its foreign currency earnings/reserves, was likely to decline even further in 2010 compared to last year.

"Traditionally, foreign direct investment has financed a large part of the current account deficit," S&P said. "From 2005-2008, foreign direct investment financed almost two-thirds of the current account deficit.

"In the first three quarters of 2009, foreign direct investment inflows were greater than the current account deficit. However, we believe that in 2010 and over the following years, foreign direct investment will not fully finance the deficit.

"Foreign direct investment totalled $600 million during the first nine months of 2009, compared with $1 billion in full-year 2008. We expect foreign direct investment to slow further in 2010 as tourism projects progress slowly."

And while international reserves grew to $825 million in 2009 compared to $563 million at year-end 2008, they received a "particular boost" in the 2009 second half from the Government's $300 million foreign currency bond, coupled with $178.7 million in 'special drawing rights' from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

In addition, S&P said analysis of the Bahamas' current account deficit financing was complicated by the "presence of persistently large positive errors and omissions", which were 24 per cent and 85 per cent of the current account deficit in 2007 and 2004 respectively.

April 30, 2010

tribune242

Bahamas Blog International

The Black Dilemma!

By Jean H Charles:


The black American population according to the latest census is shrinking, whether in Washington DC, Los Angeles or Harlem New York, the Mecca of Black Renaissance; is losing its majority to an increasing white populace. The same phenomenon is visible also in the Caribbean, where, whether in Roseau Dominica or in Port au Prince, Haiti, beautiful homes are closed, and their absentee owners are in New York, London or Toronto. The black dilemma pictures a canvas whereby new Caribbean or African blood is not welcomed with open arms by the indigenous black American population to increase and renew the black stock of America.

The Euro-American by contrast, coming from Lithuania or Malta, is quickly mixed and integrated into the bloodstream of the white population, thereby energizing America and its white composite. The black dilemma is made more troublesome due to the fact that in the Caribbean those who left their homelands to establish themselves in Europe or in America must endure the ignominy of a one way ticket. They are not welcomed to bring back their intellectual and their financial resources in the building of their motherlands. From Belize to Cuba, in passing through Trinidad or Jamaica, the Caribbean Diaspora does not enjoy the political right to vote and cannot contribute to the policy-making of their country so as to render their homeland hospitable to all.

This attitude can be compared with the situation facing European immigrants, where new legislation is being drafted to offer citizenship to the offspring of the third generation of immigrants whose parents left Europe for the United States some fifty years ago. These new French, Polish or Italian citizens with double nationality will pollinate both side of the Atlantic with new inventions, new business and new offspring that will make both their ancestor-lands and their new home-lands fertile and prosperous.

This essay is looking into what deliberate steps should be taken in a diligence mode to increase the black stock of America, create a renaissance in the Caribbean and in Africa with the exchange of resources and of people on both sides of the Caribbean and of the Atlantic sea.

The cold shoulders existing between brethren of the same continent has its origin in the dark ages of Africa's history. For example, Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr., in a recent article in the New York Times, quoted John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University, who in their research have found out that 90% of the black slaves brought into the Western Hemisphere were captured by and sold to European traders by African elites and kings, who took them as hostages through tribal warfare. This attitude and its ongoing deluge of inhospitality has extended itself at all levels and in most places since.

Starting with my hometown of Grand River Haiti, it has produced through the years not only liberators and luminaries such as Jean Jacques Dessalines and Jean Price Mars, it has also produced more recent individuals such as Jacqueline Charles of the Miami Herald, and, as well, Marie St Fleur, the first Haitian-American State Representative in Massachusetts. Despite these contributions, the elite of Cape Haitian, the closest large city, has always found repulsive those outsiders—moune en dehors—who migrate into the city. Some of the former have also left for Port au Prince, the capital, where they have themselves also endured the disdain they had earlier bestowed on their comrades.

Migrating into America, those who came barefoot as well as those who came wet foot have endured similar hostility, not only from the authorities but also from black natives who were supposed to be a natural ally in the acculturation process. By comparison, the Jewish Diaspora from Russia has a well oiled agency that picks up the new migrants at the airport, with a scholarship to City College, a voucher for lodging and another for food stamps. Henry Kissinger, as a young lad, for example, could not get into Harvard but was schooled at City College through that route before moving to higher ground.

I am watching with desperation the young men and women from Senegal or Mali on 125th Street in Harlem selling counterfeit merchandise, or luring the ladies in for a hairdo while they represent excellent material for a one way ticket to City College up the hill. No concerted effort is being made by officials or the non-profit organizations to help this new crop of migrants to become fully integrated into the fabric of America, and thereby renewing the black stock for a continuous process of nation building.

Recently, some 30 Haitians people landed in Jamaica after the earthquake in search of a solace in a more peaceful land. They were unfortunately returned by the Jamaican government under the pretext that Jamaica could not afford to absorb them. The contradiction in brotherly solidarity occurred at this peak of Haiti’s national disaster. Such lack of solidarity in such extreme conditions can only spell, in the long-term, the demise of all of us. I have also seen in Roseau, Dominica, how the culture of stupidity has facilitated the extinction of the Creole language as a lingua franca of the citizens of Roseau as compared to the rest of the country, where speaking Creole is routine and ordinary.

The black dilemma, as Abraham Lincoln and Frederic Douglass have seen, could not be solved in a piecemeal manner, State by State, as Senator Frazier Douglas then preferred it to happen. Today, sorting out and solving the black issue, starting from the United States with its sizable black population and a black president, it must be seen in its entirety and its universality. Barack Obama can help but using a Lincolnesque analogy, he must be forced to do so.

There is no other solution but using the term of Frederic Douglass, who, while speaking to Lincoln, said, “Power concedes nothing without a demand, it never did and never will. Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them, and these will continue until they are resisted with either words or blows or both.”

Yet when the black dilemma is solved it will be only a partial one if it does not include the white population. As with the women’s liberation movement that failed to include the men in the process, the white populace must also be included into that solution. Making the world hospitable to all is not a black or white issue; others like the Abolitionists, the Quakers and the British did understand that humanity is indivisible.

In closing, maybe we should hear from the man from Harlem, Langston Hughes, to find our direction and purpose:

I am the poor white fooled and pushed apart
I am the Negro bearing slavery scars
I am the red man driven from the land
I am the immigrant clutching the hope I seek
And finding only the same old stupid plan
Of dog eat dog, of mighty crush the weak

Yet I am the one who dreamt our basic dream
In the old world white still a serf of kings
Who dream so strong, so brave so true?
That even yet its might daring sings
In every brick and stone, in every furrow turned
That made America the land it has become
O; I am the man who sailed those earlier seas
In search of what to be my home
For I am the one who left Ireland’s shore
And Poland plain land and England grassy ilea

And torn from Black Africa strand I came
To build a homeland of the free

O’ let America be America again.

May 1, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International