Oil spill could affect Bimini, Cay Sal Bank for many years
By MEGAN REYNOLDS
Tribune Staff Reporter
mreynolds@tribunemedia.net:
OIL from the Gulf of Mexico spill could impact the pristine islands of Cay Sal Bank and Bimini for years to come, prompting long-term plans for ongoing environmental monitoring of the region.
With the National Oil Spill Contingency Team scheduled to meet today to discuss the requirements of future expeditions and work out how much they will cost, Bahamas National Trust (BNT) director Eric Carey said he wants British Petroleum (BP) to foot the bill in advance.
Thousands of gallons of oil have spilled from BP's Deepwater Horizon rig 5,000ft below the ocean surface since an explosion on April 20 and continue to gush from the rig as repeated attempts to plug the leak have failed.
Deepwater Horizon is expected to continue spewing oil into the Gulf until the drilling of a relief well has been completed next month.
But even if the leak is stopped, Mr Carey said we will have to watch out for the thousands of gallons of weathered oil which could reach the shorelines of the Cay Sal Bank and Bimini cays in the form of oil slicks and tar balls for years to come.
A report released by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) last Friday estimates Cay Sal Bank and the Bimini Cays are 41 to 60 per cent likely to have shoreline impact from the spill, while the northwest coast of Grand Bahama is 20 per cent likely to be impacted, and Andros is less than one per cent likely to be impacted.
Although marine life is not thought to be at risk, Mr Carey said this has yet to be tested in the Bahamas.
He said: "We are fortunate, we believe we won't have what we see in the Gulf - all of that oil slushing onto beaches - but these dispersants, and the damage it could do to our ecosystem, is unknown.
"NOAA has concluded they don't really harm marine life, but I don't know if they have tested our corals and determined how sensitive they are.
"A lot of these things have to be done. This is a long- range project. Even when people think there is no more oil coming out, there is still going to be tonnes of oil still in the Gulf, and thousands and thousands of gallons of dispersants, so we are going to have to continue to monitor this thing for years to come, and we are going to have to cost that out and get that funding for continued monitoring and expeditions."
The uninhabited cays of Cay Sal Bank are home to thriving sea bird nesting sites, sea turtles and various marine species valuable to the fishing industry.
However, the scientific data documenting natural resources in the area is extremely limited.
The expeditions allow scientists to collect sediment samples from land and document the diversity and abundance of commercial fish and other marine species underwater as well as monitor impact from the spill by monitoring birds and terrestrial life.
There have been two expeditions to Cay Sal Bank and one to Bimini since last month.
Findings from the latest mission to Cay Sal Bank, which returned on June 25, found no evidence of oil from BP's Deepwater Horizon.
The next expedition should set sail in around two weeks and Mr Carey said it will be better organised than previous trips and he hopes BP will cover the costs.
Meanwhile the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is investigating avenues for making legal claims against BP.
Mr Carey said: "The National Trust still believes we should be going to BP and we will continue to advocate for that because by the time we reach the litigation stage BP may have already filed for bankruptcy and be off-limits for any normal litigation process.
"We believe it is important to come up with a number, which we can do when we work out how much it will cost."
July 06, 2010
tribune242
An International Caribbean Online Log about the news and opinions in the Americas and World. This Caribbean Blog of global reach and appeal is maintained by Bahamian Blogger - Dennis Dames with all readers and subscribers in mind.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
Bahamas: The probability of Andros Island's shorelines being impacted by the Deepwater Horizon/ BP oil spill is less than one per cent
Projections say Andros unlikely to suffer oil spill effects
By NOELLE NICOLLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
nnicolls@tribunemedia.net:
THE probability of Andros' shorelines being impacted by the gulf oil spill is less than one per cent, according to the latest projections of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States.
According to a technical report released Friday by NOAA, the Cay Sal Bank and the Bimini Cays are the most vulnerable territories in the Bahamas for shoreline impact from the Deepwater Horizon/ BP oil spill. They are grouped in the 41 to 60 per cent range. The northwest coast of Grand Bahama has a one to 20 per cent chance of experiencing shoreline impact.
"I received an email indicating that NOAA advised the Bahamas and Cuba that based on their modeling in the next 120 days the oil would be substantially in loop current and the places likely to be affected are Bahamas and Cuba," said Earl Deveaux, Minister of Environment.
"Our response is going to be heightened surveillance. We will continue to update our monitoring, so we know with a high degree of certainty when any sightings occur if they occur in Cay Sal," he said.
The NOAA models assume a 90-day oil flow rate of 33,000 barrels per day. It accounts for the "daily estimated amount being skimmed, burned, and/or collected by the Top Hat mechanism".
The model also accounts for the "natural process of oil 'weathering' or breaking down, and considers oil a threat to the shoreline if there is enough to cause a dull sheen within 20 miles of the coast", states the NOAA.
The Bahamas lies just south of a high risk area with South Florida rated i61 to 80 per cent. Due to the influence of the Loop Current, the Florida Keys, Miami, and Fort Lauderdale are areas of high risk for shoreline impact.
The NOAA issued an advisory on what to Expect in South Florida that stated: "If oil were to reach South Florida, the freshest oil will have spent at least 10 days to 14 days on the water surface. It could arrive in Florida in the form of pancakes of brown oil, streamers of pudding-like emulsified oil, or very thin sheen. As oil on the water surface ages, winds and waves tear it into smaller and smaller pieces, and evaporation and dissolution of its lighter constituents makes it denser and more tar-like.
"Ultimately, floating oil becomes small tar-like balls. If the oil reaches South Florida, responders in South Florida may see a mixture of forms of oil, however, they are most likely to see tar balls," the advisory stated.
There has been no recommendation to station officials in the Cay Sal area to provide surveillance of the Bahamian waters at risk. Cay Sal is a very remote area and has no amenities.
Mr Deveaux said the Royal Bahamas Defence Force in their routine patrol of the Western Bahamas "would be in a position to tell us if they observe any tar balls". He said fishermen who regularly work in the area of the Cay Sal Bank were also providing surveillance for the area.
Based on the "long standing relationship" between the Bahamian government and the University of Miami, Mr Deveaux said the Oil Spill Contingency Team would also be alerted by its partners if oil was spotted in the Florida Cays.
"We get a lot of reports from people flying over; people boating.
"It is commendable the sense of alertness the Bahamian public have," said Mr Deveaux.
July 05, 2010
tribune242
By NOELLE NICOLLS
Tribune Staff Reporter
nnicolls@tribunemedia.net:
THE probability of Andros' shorelines being impacted by the gulf oil spill is less than one per cent, according to the latest projections of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in the United States.
According to a technical report released Friday by NOAA, the Cay Sal Bank and the Bimini Cays are the most vulnerable territories in the Bahamas for shoreline impact from the Deepwater Horizon/ BP oil spill. They are grouped in the 41 to 60 per cent range. The northwest coast of Grand Bahama has a one to 20 per cent chance of experiencing shoreline impact.
"I received an email indicating that NOAA advised the Bahamas and Cuba that based on their modeling in the next 120 days the oil would be substantially in loop current and the places likely to be affected are Bahamas and Cuba," said Earl Deveaux, Minister of Environment.
"Our response is going to be heightened surveillance. We will continue to update our monitoring, so we know with a high degree of certainty when any sightings occur if they occur in Cay Sal," he said.
The NOAA models assume a 90-day oil flow rate of 33,000 barrels per day. It accounts for the "daily estimated amount being skimmed, burned, and/or collected by the Top Hat mechanism".
The model also accounts for the "natural process of oil 'weathering' or breaking down, and considers oil a threat to the shoreline if there is enough to cause a dull sheen within 20 miles of the coast", states the NOAA.
The Bahamas lies just south of a high risk area with South Florida rated i61 to 80 per cent. Due to the influence of the Loop Current, the Florida Keys, Miami, and Fort Lauderdale are areas of high risk for shoreline impact.
The NOAA issued an advisory on what to Expect in South Florida that stated: "If oil were to reach South Florida, the freshest oil will have spent at least 10 days to 14 days on the water surface. It could arrive in Florida in the form of pancakes of brown oil, streamers of pudding-like emulsified oil, or very thin sheen. As oil on the water surface ages, winds and waves tear it into smaller and smaller pieces, and evaporation and dissolution of its lighter constituents makes it denser and more tar-like.
"Ultimately, floating oil becomes small tar-like balls. If the oil reaches South Florida, responders in South Florida may see a mixture of forms of oil, however, they are most likely to see tar balls," the advisory stated.
There has been no recommendation to station officials in the Cay Sal area to provide surveillance of the Bahamian waters at risk. Cay Sal is a very remote area and has no amenities.
Mr Deveaux said the Royal Bahamas Defence Force in their routine patrol of the Western Bahamas "would be in a position to tell us if they observe any tar balls". He said fishermen who regularly work in the area of the Cay Sal Bank were also providing surveillance for the area.
Based on the "long standing relationship" between the Bahamian government and the University of Miami, Mr Deveaux said the Oil Spill Contingency Team would also be alerted by its partners if oil was spotted in the Florida Cays.
"We get a lot of reports from people flying over; people boating.
"It is commendable the sense of alertness the Bahamian public have," said Mr Deveaux.
July 05, 2010
tribune242
Monday, July 5, 2010
Gleaner newspaper suggests disbanding CARICOM
by Oscar Ramjeet:
Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders are now meeting in Montego Bay in Jamaica, and the Gleaner, the leading and most widely read newspaper in the region, has come out in a blistering attack against the regional group.
The editorial was published only days after former Secretary General of the Commonwealth Secretariat, Sir Shridath Ramphal, who is a well known advocate for regional integration, spoke of the non-performance of the Georgetown-based CARICOM Secretariat.
And St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister, Ralph Gonsalves, also voiced his disapproval when he said that CARICOM lacks leadership.
The Gleaner said that the leaders at their Montego Bay meeting should be honest with themselves and declare their inability to provide "serious leadership" to the integration process.
The editorial added, "Should they so decide, the next step is obvious: disband the community and allow its 15 members to find their own way in the world. Or, if they desire, form alliances with alternative trade and economic organisation."
It added, "This is not a position that this newspaper has arrived at lightly, like the conceptualisers of CARICOM, and the millions of people who have invested much hope in the institution understand the logic of integration. But the logic is one thing, its application is another. It is on the latter front, for nearly four decades we have failed.
“As a concept and treaty, CARICOM was and remains an excellent idea -- as a single market, to be transported into a seamless economy and as a functional cooperation and economic grouping. It has had some successes, mainly on the political front."
It also stated that, in 36 years, CARICOM has failed to plan, contrive, or achieve an economic breakthrough and "In those countries that have enjoyed relative success, it has had little to do with their membership of CARICOM.”
I recall Sir Shridath, in a passionate presentation, told a graduating class at the University of the West Indies at St Augustine in 1977, 33 years ago, the importance of regional integration and questioned that this region with a population of five million has the most prime ministers and overseas missions with ambassadors and high commissioners than any other country in the planet.
I have time and time again criticised the slow pace of the regional movement and one time referred to it as CARIGONE instead of CARICOM.
The Gleaner stated that if the heads of government who are gathered in Montego Bay are serious about CARICOM and wish the region's support, they must provide bankable assurances that they will mend their ways.
It also referred to Trinidad and Tobago being unfair in denying national treatment to its partners with regard to energy supplies, thus giving its own manufacturers an unfair advantage in this seamless market
It also called for leaders to finally agree on a system that gives executive authority to a supranational body to ensure implementation of decisions taken by heads. It also suggested that there should be an accommodation of shared sovereignty.
It is felt that the organisation has no effective implementation mechanism, nor are they penalties for reneging on undertakings. So, leaders attend summits, talk a lot, arrive at decisions and give undertakings which, for the most part, are never fulfilled.
This in my view should be corrected as soon as possible and I sincerely hope that the Montego Bay summit will iron out the differences of the various leaders and they work together towards a unified movement -- they should remember unity is strength.
July 5, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders are now meeting in Montego Bay in Jamaica, and the Gleaner, the leading and most widely read newspaper in the region, has come out in a blistering attack against the regional group.
The editorial was published only days after former Secretary General of the Commonwealth Secretariat, Sir Shridath Ramphal, who is a well known advocate for regional integration, spoke of the non-performance of the Georgetown-based CARICOM Secretariat. And St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister, Ralph Gonsalves, also voiced his disapproval when he said that CARICOM lacks leadership.
The Gleaner said that the leaders at their Montego Bay meeting should be honest with themselves and declare their inability to provide "serious leadership" to the integration process.
The editorial added, "Should they so decide, the next step is obvious: disband the community and allow its 15 members to find their own way in the world. Or, if they desire, form alliances with alternative trade and economic organisation."
It added, "This is not a position that this newspaper has arrived at lightly, like the conceptualisers of CARICOM, and the millions of people who have invested much hope in the institution understand the logic of integration. But the logic is one thing, its application is another. It is on the latter front, for nearly four decades we have failed.
“As a concept and treaty, CARICOM was and remains an excellent idea -- as a single market, to be transported into a seamless economy and as a functional cooperation and economic grouping. It has had some successes, mainly on the political front."
It also stated that, in 36 years, CARICOM has failed to plan, contrive, or achieve an economic breakthrough and "In those countries that have enjoyed relative success, it has had little to do with their membership of CARICOM.”
I recall Sir Shridath, in a passionate presentation, told a graduating class at the University of the West Indies at St Augustine in 1977, 33 years ago, the importance of regional integration and questioned that this region with a population of five million has the most prime ministers and overseas missions with ambassadors and high commissioners than any other country in the planet.
I have time and time again criticised the slow pace of the regional movement and one time referred to it as CARIGONE instead of CARICOM.
The Gleaner stated that if the heads of government who are gathered in Montego Bay are serious about CARICOM and wish the region's support, they must provide bankable assurances that they will mend their ways.
It also referred to Trinidad and Tobago being unfair in denying national treatment to its partners with regard to energy supplies, thus giving its own manufacturers an unfair advantage in this seamless market
It also called for leaders to finally agree on a system that gives executive authority to a supranational body to ensure implementation of decisions taken by heads. It also suggested that there should be an accommodation of shared sovereignty.
It is felt that the organisation has no effective implementation mechanism, nor are they penalties for reneging on undertakings. So, leaders attend summits, talk a lot, arrive at decisions and give undertakings which, for the most part, are never fulfilled.
This in my view should be corrected as soon as possible and I sincerely hope that the Montego Bay summit will iron out the differences of the various leaders and they work together towards a unified movement -- they should remember unity is strength.
July 5, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Sunday, July 4, 2010
War and Peace in Venezuela
By Luis Britto Garcia:
WAR
I don’t get tired of quoting Clausewitz, who says that war is a continuation of politics by other means. The United States has failed so completely and successively in its policies that it always has the temptation of war.
PEACE
Venezuela doesn’t represent the slightest risk to the safety of anyone, it hasn’t assaulted anyone nor perpetuated a hostile act against any country, it has a smaller than average army with conventional weapons that don’t threaten its neighbours.
WAR
Venezuela is besieged by seven U.S bases in Colombia, two in Curazao and Aruba, four more in Panama, one in Honduras, and by the IV Float that patrols the Caribbean after military occupying defenceless Haiti.
PEACE
Because of its population of fifty million habitants, because of its agricultural and industrial production, because of the expansion of its capital, Colombia can easily obtain immense benefits from peaceful commercial relations with its neighbours, and enjoy a subregional hegemony without firing a single shot or scattering blood in an ocean or playing its destiny and that of its leaders in the casino of war.
WAR
But with the Plan Puebla-Panama, that consists of a strategic corridor through Central America up to the Sister Republic, and Plan Colombia, that aims to convert [Colombia] into the Hawk Country of the Hired Killer Country, the United States is planning to drive a wedge into the heart of Brazil, its true competitor in Latin America, and carry out Project New American Century.
PEACE
According to Dilip Hiro, the foreign policy of Obama combines overbearing threat with withdrawal in the face of firmness (TomDispatch.com). Obama rejects the Honduras coup as a “terrible precedent”, the coup leaders racially insulted him and he ended up supporting them. After threatening to remove Hamid Karzai in Afghanistan, he backed him when he offered to go over the Taliban and declared Iran “our friend, our ally”. After pressuring China to revalue its yuan, threatening it with reports from the treasury department and approving the sale of 6.4 billion dollars in arms to Taiwan, Obama accepted Hu Jintao’s measures against companies who sold said arms and held back the announced reports.
WAR
The 700 billion dollars of Plan Paulson and the 750 billlion euros of financial relief in Europe have sunk into the bottomless well of the crisis. Workers refuse to pay with higher taxes, decreased workers’ rights and pensions. Bankers clash with the social rebellion in Greece and Portugal, Spain confronts 25% unemployment and the United States gives in to the temptation to activate its economy with military spending, with a military budget announced for 2011 of over 726 billion dollars.
PEACE
Brazil is clear about the United States’ intentions and is also clearing the way for independent agreements with Iran and Turkey, countries that are moving further and further away from the United States’ orbit.
Venezuela, apart from its integration in Mercosur and its close relations with Argentina, Cuba, Ecuador, Bolivia, Nicharagua, Uruguay and the Caribbean countries, has began multi-polar relations with Russia, China, Iran, North Korea, African countries, the Third World. United States dominance will find it difficult to directly confront a bloc with noticeable multi-polar links and that covers almost two thirds of South America.
WAR
The incoming president in Colombia will be subject to the devastating pressure of almost a decade of United States intervention and a military occupation that guarantees the invaders immunity and impunity from the law and local tribunals. His predecessor sent Colombians to fight the U.S war in Afghanistan. The new president will have little hesitation to sacrifice them as canon fodder in any conflict in the interest of the Empire.
PEACE
In 2007 Colombia had 459,687 civil servants working in security and defence and in that year spent 6.5% of its GDP on internal conflict, some $22 billion annually. Statistics from the Stockholm International Peace Institute (SIPRI) fix the number at 3.7% of the GDP in 2009 ($10.06 billion), which places Colombia as the Latin American country which spends most on arms.
El Espectador on 25 November 2009 announced that Colombia has established a war tax that expects to raise 3.3 billion pesos annually (according to the Real Academia Espanola, a billion is a million million, and one dollar is worth almost two thousand pesos). Such burdens go strongly against its economy and the precarious conditions of life of its people, of which seven million have been forced to emigrate and 4.3 million have been displaced from their land due to military operations.
Despite this, the Colombian government hasn’t been able to eradicate an insurgency that consists of some ten thousand rebels. Before involving itself in other countries, it would be better that Colombia sort out its own backyard. It wouldn’t be wise to invade other countries to confront the rebellion of thirty million Venezuelans and two hundred million Brazilians.
WAR
The possible future president [Translator’s note: since the original publication of this article, that possible president, Juan Santos, has since won the presidential elections] of Colombia has threatened with kidnapping the Venezuelan mayor Di Martino; has supported the invasion against Ecuador, has explicitly stated that his government would assault any country in order to exterminate the insurgency that it can’t even control within its own borders. As vicepresident he supported the military occupation of his country by the United States and tried to unite his electorate using a war against Venezuela discourse at every opportunity.
PEACE
Venezuela faces the possibility of this declared war with an alarming lack of preparation. Severe deficiencies in education on history, geography and civics make it hard to deepen the national consciousness.
Some 4.3 million Colombians live in Venezuela and almost no Venezuelans live in Colombia. A fifth column of paramilitaries occupies us without any resistance and legalises capital with bingos, casinos, and gambling dens. Part of the opposition and its media call out loudly for Venezuela to be invasive. There’s no norms in Venezuela to exclude people with loyalty, obedience and military defence towards other countries from strategic responsibilities.
Venezuela barely spends 1.5% of its GDP on defence these days, a reduction of 25% compared to previous years ($3.254 billion dollars).
WAR
Noriega collaborated with the United States and it overthrew him and kidnapped him. Fujimori carried out genocide in the interest of the northerners [U.S] and ended up in jail. Carlos Andres massacred in defence of the IMF and paid with his imprisonment. Saddam Hussein fought against Iran supported by the Yankees and was executed by them. The Taliban, trained, financed, and armed by the Gringos [U.S] today are being reduced to ashes by bombs Made in the USA. He who initiates conflict in the name of the empire ends up unhappy. Whoever serves the United States commits suicide.
PS: The third edition of my book ‘Peace with Colombia” is in circulation and can be downloaded [in Spanish] from www.minci.gob.ve
Translated by Tamara Pearson for Venezuelanalysis.com
July 3rd 2010
Saturday, July 3, 2010
Apocalypse and oil
Franklin Johnston
Earth is the Lord's but a deep well opens Pandora's box!
April 20, 2010 is a date mankind may not forget. The day earth fought back! We had abused her; ravished forests, polluted waters, darkened her skies and on this day we pierced her mantle and oil gushed! She cried, "This is my blood, all the oil you desire!" BP replied, "No problem", but as it gushed even more, no man could staunch the flow and panic set it!
The earth confounded men of Congress, of business and science. But the men of oil had a solution - garbage! Let's plug the well with garbage! Garbage? "Yes, when in doubt try garbage!" This was Big Oil's best solution! And garbage it proved! The US was angry, the UK was miffed and said Obama should not blame them as BP was not British; shareholders bawled at lost dividends and we watched aghast as the world's wise men scurried about like headless cocks. We trusted them to dig a proper well; they did not! But, as this will not be the last deep well, can we trust them with the next one? God only knows!
The Macondo well is not the beginning of the end, but it may be the beginning of wisdom. Deepwater Horizon, a semi-submersible drill rig leased by BP Plc (a UK-registered company with offices in London) until 2013, at some US$500k a day, bored a hole six miles into the earth's crust - almost to the mantle, to find oil to feed our lust and their greed. The wreck now lies a mile down on the ocean floor. The insurance claim was settled, owners are happy, but three million gallons of crude oil still gush into the ocean each day and they can't stop it. Mother Earth is taking revenge! What will deeper wells bring?
For millennia man lived in harmony with earth and respected it as the sustainer of life. Jewish stories in the Bible say, "Be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth..." The result? There are now seven billion mouths to feed! We multiply but we do not replenish, replant or restore; we harvest, but do not rest or restock the species and now we drill this bleeding wound in the Gulf of Mexico! When did we lose respect for Mother Earth?
In the last three centuries man has been an arrogant know-it-all! We know a bit about earth, gravity, our body; split the atom, went to the moon and mapped the human genome. We now have a cocky certainty about things where the ancients were cautious and respectful; we will soon programme our Sat Nav to locate God! Will Armageddon come from the sea? Not by demons, evil men, nuclear bombs, global warming, Bin Laden or poverty, but by simple businessmen. BP opened Pandora's box and a haemorrhage of oil can end life as we know it! Scary! It is so like God to confound prophets and priests. What if hell is our own earth saturated with oil and ignited by the spontaneous combustion of the sun? "No more water - the fire next time?" And why not? Who knows God's mind? God is God, consults no one, gives or destroys life at will! Those "not chosen" are also His and He used them to destroy His son, Jerusalem His city, and enslave His "chosen people". God makes rules and is not bound by them! You pray and expect God's help. Guess what? God answered your prayer, but not as you wished it; you are not in the picture or even part of the solution - tough! Do we limit God's end time to a Jewish story about beasts with four heads? Can the issue of oil be His Armageddon? Only God knows God's mind; this is why God is God! As humans, we must care for the earth and get on with living!
Some time ago, a small Australian undersea well gushed for two months and polluted waters as far as East Timor, so when the massive Macondo well blew I encouraged Jamaica to get involved. Why? We are all joined at the hip! Consider this scenario:
*The oceans are one body of water, given various names by Europe's explorers; if you urinate at Whitehouse beach it eventually reaches Europe, Africa and Asia thanks to the Gulf Stream, Benguela, Agulhas and Humboldt currents.
*Mankind is one, and Europe's proto scientists labelled people by phenotype (mainly colour) as so-called races, after characters (Ham, Shem) in Bible stories. Conclusion? One people breathe one air, live on one earth, beside one sea. If Apocalypse by oil continues, progressive pollution of the Caribbean, Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans means marine life will die. Pollution from the coast inland means as crops and potable water fail we all die! Extreme and not pretty, but species have died out before! So what are the less atavistic implications of Macondo and other deep wells to come?
* If oil gushes to year end the damage may be US$1t and life as we know it will not return to some areas. Who heard the last dinosaur scream? The full is hard to bear!
*The impact on land and marine ecosystems may mean loss of use, plant, animal, sealife, birds and micro-organisms we know so little about - all priceless!
* First, the economy, quality of life, tourism, etc, of Gulf states will be hard hit. In stage 2, Central, South America and the Caribbean will suffer, and stage 3 will kick in when the ocean currents circulate the crude oil globally - possible global disaster! The earth lived with Krakatoa, tsunami, earthquake, storm, Eyjafjoll, all natural disasters and it recovered. Bhopal was man-made, and thousands were killed and maimed with little global impact. BP's incision in the earth's mantle is different. It may affect all on earth!
But we are not yet at worst case; so what can we learn from Macondo?
*We do not know as much as we think we do; so we should respect earth and be cautious.
*God - however you conceive Him - may intervene in the world, but we can't predict the outcome for man as our agenda is not His and we may not be part of His solution.
*The environment must be our priority. We must apply pressure on ourselves, business and government to do right by our earth. We came, it was here and it's all we have!
*Truly "no man is an island". If the US and China pollute the air it is our air; if men dynamite fish and cut down our forests to burn coal, if Caricom accepts "payola" and votes to destroy whales, they threaten our earth! Let's oppose them all! The Gulf gusher may not be the Apocalypse, but "take sleep and mark death", my friend.
Dr Franklin Johnston is an international project manager with Teape-Johnston Consultants, currently on assignment in the UK.
franklinjohnston@hotmail.com
July 02, 2010
jamaicaobserver
Earth is the Lord's but a deep well opens Pandora's box!
April 20, 2010 is a date mankind may not forget. The day earth fought back! We had abused her; ravished forests, polluted waters, darkened her skies and on this day we pierced her mantle and oil gushed! She cried, "This is my blood, all the oil you desire!" BP replied, "No problem", but as it gushed even more, no man could staunch the flow and panic set it!
The earth confounded men of Congress, of business and science. But the men of oil had a solution - garbage! Let's plug the well with garbage! Garbage? "Yes, when in doubt try garbage!" This was Big Oil's best solution! And garbage it proved! The US was angry, the UK was miffed and said Obama should not blame them as BP was not British; shareholders bawled at lost dividends and we watched aghast as the world's wise men scurried about like headless cocks. We trusted them to dig a proper well; they did not! But, as this will not be the last deep well, can we trust them with the next one? God only knows!
The Macondo well is not the beginning of the end, but it may be the beginning of wisdom. Deepwater Horizon, a semi-submersible drill rig leased by BP Plc (a UK-registered company with offices in London) until 2013, at some US$500k a day, bored a hole six miles into the earth's crust - almost to the mantle, to find oil to feed our lust and their greed. The wreck now lies a mile down on the ocean floor. The insurance claim was settled, owners are happy, but three million gallons of crude oil still gush into the ocean each day and they can't stop it. Mother Earth is taking revenge! What will deeper wells bring?
For millennia man lived in harmony with earth and respected it as the sustainer of life. Jewish stories in the Bible say, "Be fruitful, multiply, replenish the earth..." The result? There are now seven billion mouths to feed! We multiply but we do not replenish, replant or restore; we harvest, but do not rest or restock the species and now we drill this bleeding wound in the Gulf of Mexico! When did we lose respect for Mother Earth?
In the last three centuries man has been an arrogant know-it-all! We know a bit about earth, gravity, our body; split the atom, went to the moon and mapped the human genome. We now have a cocky certainty about things where the ancients were cautious and respectful; we will soon programme our Sat Nav to locate God! Will Armageddon come from the sea? Not by demons, evil men, nuclear bombs, global warming, Bin Laden or poverty, but by simple businessmen. BP opened Pandora's box and a haemorrhage of oil can end life as we know it! Scary! It is so like God to confound prophets and priests. What if hell is our own earth saturated with oil and ignited by the spontaneous combustion of the sun? "No more water - the fire next time?" And why not? Who knows God's mind? God is God, consults no one, gives or destroys life at will! Those "not chosen" are also His and He used them to destroy His son, Jerusalem His city, and enslave His "chosen people". God makes rules and is not bound by them! You pray and expect God's help. Guess what? God answered your prayer, but not as you wished it; you are not in the picture or even part of the solution - tough! Do we limit God's end time to a Jewish story about beasts with four heads? Can the issue of oil be His Armageddon? Only God knows God's mind; this is why God is God! As humans, we must care for the earth and get on with living!
Some time ago, a small Australian undersea well gushed for two months and polluted waters as far as East Timor, so when the massive Macondo well blew I encouraged Jamaica to get involved. Why? We are all joined at the hip! Consider this scenario:
*The oceans are one body of water, given various names by Europe's explorers; if you urinate at Whitehouse beach it eventually reaches Europe, Africa and Asia thanks to the Gulf Stream, Benguela, Agulhas and Humboldt currents.
*Mankind is one, and Europe's proto scientists labelled people by phenotype (mainly colour) as so-called races, after characters (Ham, Shem) in Bible stories. Conclusion? One people breathe one air, live on one earth, beside one sea. If Apocalypse by oil continues, progressive pollution of the Caribbean, Atlantic, Indian and Pacific oceans means marine life will die. Pollution from the coast inland means as crops and potable water fail we all die! Extreme and not pretty, but species have died out before! So what are the less atavistic implications of Macondo and other deep wells to come?
* If oil gushes to year end the damage may be US$1t and life as we know it will not return to some areas. Who heard the last dinosaur scream? The full is hard to bear!
*The impact on land and marine ecosystems may mean loss of use, plant, animal, sealife, birds and micro-organisms we know so little about - all priceless!
* First, the economy, quality of life, tourism, etc, of Gulf states will be hard hit. In stage 2, Central, South America and the Caribbean will suffer, and stage 3 will kick in when the ocean currents circulate the crude oil globally - possible global disaster! The earth lived with Krakatoa, tsunami, earthquake, storm, Eyjafjoll, all natural disasters and it recovered. Bhopal was man-made, and thousands were killed and maimed with little global impact. BP's incision in the earth's mantle is different. It may affect all on earth!
But we are not yet at worst case; so what can we learn from Macondo?
*We do not know as much as we think we do; so we should respect earth and be cautious.
*God - however you conceive Him - may intervene in the world, but we can't predict the outcome for man as our agenda is not His and we may not be part of His solution.
*The environment must be our priority. We must apply pressure on ourselves, business and government to do right by our earth. We came, it was here and it's all we have!
*Truly "no man is an island". If the US and China pollute the air it is our air; if men dynamite fish and cut down our forests to burn coal, if Caricom accepts "payola" and votes to destroy whales, they threaten our earth! Let's oppose them all! The Gulf gusher may not be the Apocalypse, but "take sleep and mark death", my friend.
Dr Franklin Johnston is an international project manager with Teape-Johnston Consultants, currently on assignment in the UK.
franklinjohnston@hotmail.com
July 02, 2010
jamaicaobserver
Friday, July 2, 2010
Owen Arthur - the Caribbean Commissioner the region should have
By Sir Ronald Sanders:
Owen Arthur, the former Prime Minister of Barbados, is probably one of the best Commissioners of a Caribbean Commission that the region does not have but ought to have.
Indeed, had Caribbean Community and Common market (CARICOM) governments implemented the recommendation of the 1992 West Indian Commission to establish a Caribbean Commission, we may today have as its President, PJ Patterson the former Prime Minister of Jamaica, Owen Arthur as one of its Commissioners and someone from the OECS of the regional calibre of say, Ralph Gonsalves the present Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, or Vaughan Lewis former Prime Minister of St Lucia, as the third Commissioner.
Had such a Commission been in place and operating, CARICOM countries may have been dealing with their current financial and economic crises in a collective and cohesive fashion, and much better than they are currently.
As it is, each country has struggled to deal on an individual basis with the walloping effects not only of the global financial crisis, but also of the consequences of the collapse of CLICO and British American.
While it is true that in mid-June, the governments of the seven small members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) signed a Treaty to establish an Economic Union among themselves, that treaty is not yet operational and while, once it is operational, it will represent progress, it remains insufficient. It is the wider CARICOM region that has to deepen its integration arrangements and especially its machinery for joint decision-making and implementation.
Regrettably, Owen Arthur is not looking for a job as a Commissioner or even Head of a Caribbean Commission. Indeed, one interpretation of a comment he made recently in the Bahamas suggests that he may be interested in being Prime Minister of Barbados once again.
In a very important speech to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of the Caribbean at its annual meeting in the Bahamas on June 25, Arthur said: “You should allow me to begin by stating how very pleased I am to be able to share the same platform once again with Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who until recently, like I do now, carried the title of Former Prime Minister. His presence fortifies my belief in the concept of the second coming”.
Whatever Arthur meant by that comment, the rest of his statement was a telling analysis of the present financial and economic condition of the Caribbean Community, and a blistering revelation of the lack of support from the International Financial Institutions (IFI’s).
It has to be said, however, that while the IFI’s have not been as responsive to the Caribbean as they could have been, and the IMF in particular has applied the usual prescriptions for providing Stand-By arrangements to Jamaica and Antigua and Barbuda, CARICOM countries failed to provide the IFI’s and major world economies with a clearly defined plan of what they need, for what, and how they plan to repay it.
It should be recalled that when the global financial crisis erupted, the world, and the Caribbean Region within it, faced an economic crisis of unprecedented proportions. Globalisation threatened to overwhelm the Caribbean with a world-wide recession, and indeed it did. Growth in every country except Guyana (according to the IMF) declined in 2008 and 2009. In some cases, there was negative growth. The ratio of debt to GDP escalated everywhere even in normally cautious Barbados. Tourism, on which the entire region (except Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago) now relies, declined everywhere if not in numbers, certainly in spending.
No State, no Government, no society within the region was immune from the economic consequences of the global financial crisis and the effects of the collapse of CLICO and British American. In that context, CARICOM societies expected their governments to come together to explore measures they could take in concert to enlarge the capacity of the region. Indeed, several regional commentators urged such action in very specific terms. As it turned out, CARICOM governments set up two separate task forces and both reported, but no joint plan was put to the IFI’s and none to the major world economies.
Owen Arthur reminded his audience in the Bahamas that “in April 2009, the G20 countries pledged provision of an additional $1.1 trillion to the IMF and the Multilateral Development Banks to enable them to carry out a programme to restore credit, growth and jobs to the world economy”, and he observed that “we have witnessed the carrying out of a rescue and recovery programme for the world’s developed economies, involving an unprecedented commitment of financial resources and the incurring of fiscal deficits on a scale that has hitherto been unimaginable”.
But, while the developed countries were bailing themselves out, they failed to deliver on the pledge “to make available an additional $850 billion of resources through the IMF and the multilateral development banks to support growth in emerging market and developing countries by helping to finance counter-cyclical spending, bank recapitalization, infrastructure, trade finance, balance of payments support, debt rollover and social support”.
Arthur pointed out that the IMF introduced a new Flexible Credit Line through which the bulk of additional IMF financing was to be channelled. As he said: “It was also especially intended to herald a fundamental change in the procedures for accessing IMF funds and meeting IMF programming tests”.
However, it could not be used by Caribbean countries and the facility into which $500 billion was pledged to support recovery in the developing world was used by countries in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia.
In the Caribbean, the IMF has agreed to two Stand-by Arrangements, one for $1.3 billion with Jamaica, and the other for almost $120 million with Antigua and Barbuda for which all the traditional IMF conditionalities apply.
As Arthur concludes: “It however cannot fairly be said that IMF response has or will assist in any major material way in achieving the grand overarching objectives stated on April 2nd, 2009 of fostering counter-cyclical stimulation, spurring employment creation nor attending to the needs of structural diversification in Caribbean economies”.
The space allowed in this commentary does not permit discussion of Arthur’s analysis of the lack of adequate response by other IFI’s to the Caribbean. But, his statement should be compulsory reading for all.
His conclusion is also extremely important. He said: “Where there is common threat, we must devise and pursue a common response. Should this global crisis engender such a common response to the common threats faced by the societies of the region, it will have served to usher in a better way of doing things in the Caribbean and will help to ensure that our best days are still ahead of us”.
In simple terms, Owen Arthur has made the case for a Caribbean Commission. If it were in existence, and if someone of his calibre – if not he himself – was Commissioner for the Community’s finance and trade negotiations, the region as whole might have got from the IFI’s a reasonable share of the resources it has been denied – largely because it failed to produce a clearly defined plan that could be effectively argued.
July 2, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Owen Arthur, the former Prime Minister of Barbados, is probably one of the best Commissioners of a Caribbean Commission that the region does not have but ought to have.
Indeed, had Caribbean Community and Common market (CARICOM) governments implemented the recommendation of the 1992 West Indian Commission to establish a Caribbean Commission, we may today have as its President, PJ Patterson the former Prime Minister of Jamaica, Owen Arthur as one of its Commissioners and someone from the OECS of the regional calibre of say, Ralph Gonsalves the present Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, or Vaughan Lewis former Prime Minister of St Lucia, as the third Commissioner.
Had such a Commission been in place and operating, CARICOM countries may have been dealing with their current financial and economic crises in a collective and cohesive fashion, and much better than they are currently. As it is, each country has struggled to deal on an individual basis with the walloping effects not only of the global financial crisis, but also of the consequences of the collapse of CLICO and British American.
While it is true that in mid-June, the governments of the seven small members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) signed a Treaty to establish an Economic Union among themselves, that treaty is not yet operational and while, once it is operational, it will represent progress, it remains insufficient. It is the wider CARICOM region that has to deepen its integration arrangements and especially its machinery for joint decision-making and implementation.
Regrettably, Owen Arthur is not looking for a job as a Commissioner or even Head of a Caribbean Commission. Indeed, one interpretation of a comment he made recently in the Bahamas suggests that he may be interested in being Prime Minister of Barbados once again.
In a very important speech to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of the Caribbean at its annual meeting in the Bahamas on June 25, Arthur said: “You should allow me to begin by stating how very pleased I am to be able to share the same platform once again with Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who until recently, like I do now, carried the title of Former Prime Minister. His presence fortifies my belief in the concept of the second coming”.
Whatever Arthur meant by that comment, the rest of his statement was a telling analysis of the present financial and economic condition of the Caribbean Community, and a blistering revelation of the lack of support from the International Financial Institutions (IFI’s).
It has to be said, however, that while the IFI’s have not been as responsive to the Caribbean as they could have been, and the IMF in particular has applied the usual prescriptions for providing Stand-By arrangements to Jamaica and Antigua and Barbuda, CARICOM countries failed to provide the IFI’s and major world economies with a clearly defined plan of what they need, for what, and how they plan to repay it.
It should be recalled that when the global financial crisis erupted, the world, and the Caribbean Region within it, faced an economic crisis of unprecedented proportions. Globalisation threatened to overwhelm the Caribbean with a world-wide recession, and indeed it did. Growth in every country except Guyana (according to the IMF) declined in 2008 and 2009. In some cases, there was negative growth. The ratio of debt to GDP escalated everywhere even in normally cautious Barbados. Tourism, on which the entire region (except Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago) now relies, declined everywhere if not in numbers, certainly in spending.
No State, no Government, no society within the region was immune from the economic consequences of the global financial crisis and the effects of the collapse of CLICO and British American. In that context, CARICOM societies expected their governments to come together to explore measures they could take in concert to enlarge the capacity of the region. Indeed, several regional commentators urged such action in very specific terms. As it turned out, CARICOM governments set up two separate task forces and both reported, but no joint plan was put to the IFI’s and none to the major world economies.
Owen Arthur reminded his audience in the Bahamas that “in April 2009, the G20 countries pledged provision of an additional $1.1 trillion to the IMF and the Multilateral Development Banks to enable them to carry out a programme to restore credit, growth and jobs to the world economy”, and he observed that “we have witnessed the carrying out of a rescue and recovery programme for the world’s developed economies, involving an unprecedented commitment of financial resources and the incurring of fiscal deficits on a scale that has hitherto been unimaginable”.
But, while the developed countries were bailing themselves out, they failed to deliver on the pledge “to make available an additional $850 billion of resources through the IMF and the multilateral development banks to support growth in emerging market and developing countries by helping to finance counter-cyclical spending, bank recapitalization, infrastructure, trade finance, balance of payments support, debt rollover and social support”.
Arthur pointed out that the IMF introduced a new Flexible Credit Line through which the bulk of additional IMF financing was to be channelled. As he said: “It was also especially intended to herald a fundamental change in the procedures for accessing IMF funds and meeting IMF programming tests”.
However, it could not be used by Caribbean countries and the facility into which $500 billion was pledged to support recovery in the developing world was used by countries in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia.
In the Caribbean, the IMF has agreed to two Stand-by Arrangements, one for $1.3 billion with Jamaica, and the other for almost $120 million with Antigua and Barbuda for which all the traditional IMF conditionalities apply.
As Arthur concludes: “It however cannot fairly be said that IMF response has or will assist in any major material way in achieving the grand overarching objectives stated on April 2nd, 2009 of fostering counter-cyclical stimulation, spurring employment creation nor attending to the needs of structural diversification in Caribbean economies”.
The space allowed in this commentary does not permit discussion of Arthur’s analysis of the lack of adequate response by other IFI’s to the Caribbean. But, his statement should be compulsory reading for all.
His conclusion is also extremely important. He said: “Where there is common threat, we must devise and pursue a common response. Should this global crisis engender such a common response to the common threats faced by the societies of the region, it will have served to usher in a better way of doing things in the Caribbean and will help to ensure that our best days are still ahead of us”.
In simple terms, Owen Arthur has made the case for a Caribbean Commission. If it were in existence, and if someone of his calibre – if not he himself – was Commissioner for the Community’s finance and trade negotiations, the region as whole might have got from the IFI’s a reasonable share of the resources it has been denied – largely because it failed to produce a clearly defined plan that could be effectively argued.
July 2, 2010
caribbeannetnews
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Bolivarian Venezuela at the Crossroads, Part 1: Nationalization and Workers’ Control
By Eric Toussaint - CADTM:
The economic, social and political situation in Venezuela has changed a lot since the failure of the constitutional reform in December 2007, which acted as a warning to the Chávez government.[1] This failure had the effect, however, of reviving the debate on the need to have a socialist perspective. The debate revolves around several key questions: further nationalization, workers’ control, the place of the PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela), and people’s participation.
On Sunday 15 February 2009, 54.36% of the country’s citizens voted ‘yes’ to the amendment to the Constitution that allows political representatives to stand for successive mandates without any time limit.[2] Up to then the Constitution had only allowed two successive mandates; there had to be a break before the candidate could apply again.[3] In 2013, at the end of his second mandate, Hugo Chávez will have the possibility to run again for president. If he is re-elected, his mandate will end in January 2019. This is why some Chavist activists are now concerned about what changes may occur by then that could consolidate the progress achieved since Chávez’s accession to power.
Nationalization and workers’ control: achievements and limitations
In April 2008, after 15,000 workers at the SIDOR steel plant, part of the Argentine group Techint, had been on strike for nearly two months, Hugo Chávez announced that the company was being nationalized. The workers’ main demand was for 9,000 temporary contracts to be converted into unlimited duration contracts. Given the employer’s refusal, nationalization was the best way for the government to guarantee that the workers’ demand was met — a decision workers perceived as a great victory.
SIDOR was founded as a State-owned company during the 1950s and then privatized and sold to foreign capital in 1997 under Rafael Caldera’s presidency. The April 2008 re-nationalization takes on particular significance since this modern and efficient company is a production tool that Argentinian capital, and Techint in particular, wished to hold on to.
It should be noted that the Chavista government of the state in which SIDOR is located had ordered the police to repress the strike as soon as it started. In addition, the minister of labour had done nothing to support workers’ demands. As a consequence Hugo Chávez’ decision to nationalize the company and to remove the minister was perceived as a shift in the workers’ favour. All the more so as, at about the same time, he announced an increase in interprofessional minimum wages and public sector salaries as well as the nationalization of the cement industry, which so far had been in the hands of three transnational corporaions (TNC) (Lafarge – France, Holcim – Switzerland, and Cemex – Mexico).
In the following months and during 2009 the government made further nationalizations in the food industry [4] (which affected both national capital – Lacteos Los Andes – and the grain TNC Cargill). The government justified these nationalizations as being essential for improving the population’s food supply. Finally the Bank of Venezuela, one of the largest private banks in the Santander group (one of the two leading banking groups in Spain) was also taken over by the State.
All these nationalizations, as well as those that had occurred earlier (in the electricity sector, telecommunications, the Orinoco oil fields, etc.), led to generous compensations for the former owners. Venezuela uses part of its oil revenue to regain control of certain strategic sectors of the economy. The main objective of such compensation is to avoid legal penalties for not abiding by bilateral treaties on investments signed by Venezuela. International law makes it possible for States to nationalize companies provided they give reasonable compensation to owners. Venezuela could proceed in a more radical way if it withdrew its signature from bilateral treaties on investments, left the ICSID (International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, the World Bank’s tribunal on investment issues), and secured its liquidities and other assets abroad so as to avoid seizure. This of course would further increase the hostility of the establishment in industrialized countries and of the TNCs within the country (all the major transnational oil companies are present in Venezuela as well as General Motors, Mitsubishi, Daimler-Chrysler, etc.).
The rather cautious way chosen by the government did not prevent a company like ExxonMobil from trying to have 12 billion dollars belonging to PDVSA (Petróleos de Venezuela Sociedad Anónima) seized by Dutch and British courts in 2008. This is one good reason for Venezuela to enter into an alliance with other countries of the South so as to repudiate bilateral treaties on investments that include clauses that could be detrimental to the nation’s interests, to withdraw from the ICSID and WTO, and to set up a multilateral body in the South to settle disputes – in other words, an ICSID that would be a Southern alternative to the World Bank’s ICSID, which serves the interests of large private TNCs.
In 2009, further nationalizations again raised the issue of workers’ control. Left-wing trade unions and workers’ collectives are in fact demanding the implementation of control mechanisms through which workers can control the boards of nationalized companies. They want in this way to ensure that the original objectives of such nationalizations will be adhered to; they also want to prevent bad management, waste, embezzlement, corruption, and misuse of company assets by insisting on the opening of ledgers, transparent commercial and industrial strategies, and the periodic submission of balance sheets and accounts. They rightly voice their distrust of many of the private executives who stayed on after nationalization, but also of some new executives who look after their personal interests rather than seek what is good for the community. Achieving and indeed demanding control increases workers’ self-confidence and their capacity to collectively contribute to a socialistic kind of management and labour relations on the one hand, and, on the other, create a counter-weight within companies in the hands of private capital.
We see instances of workers occupying private companies and demanding their nationalization. Inevitably the issue of workers’ control will have to be raised again in the oil industry. It first flared up during the oil lockout (December 2002 - January 2003), when workers, who wanted to resume production, had called an oil conference. Later Hugo Chávez rejected the idea of workers’ control in this key industry because of its strategic importance, whereas of course it would be a good reason to go for it. The same applies to the production and distribution of electricity, which were also nationalized. Workers in this sector started demanding control in September 2009. Electricity supply in Venezuela is critical since over 50% of its production [5] is ‘lost’ or diverted (meaning stolen) during distribution. Losses are mainly due to the use of old equipment because before they were nationalized by the Chávez government, certain companies like Electricidad de Caracas (owned by AES, a U.S.-owned TNC) were almost systematically deprived of the necessary investments to buy new machines. On the other hand, large private industrial companies steal and squander large quantities of energy. There are also unauthorized electric hook-ups in residential areas but in the case of working class households, which are not big consumers, such piracy is limited. Workers in the electricity sector are in the best position to solve the issue of supply and to fight squandering and bad management by senior executives – and thus avoid power cuts. These are the arguments being developed by trade union leaders to demand workers’ control. Ángel Navas, president of the Electricity Sector Workers’ Federation (FETRAELEC), told the media during a demonstration by some 3,000 workers in Caracas on 25 September 2009: “We the workers are in touch with users in the neighbourhoods. We know how we can solve the crisis... We have to change the bureaucratic structures and the structures of capitalist management into structures with a socialist vision. We must change production relations and do away with all this bureaucracy which is killing the company.” [6]
During the first half of 2009 Hugo Chávez stated at a public meeting with worker managers that he was favourable to a law on the election of managers of nationalized companies [7], but nothing has happened since then to put this commitment into practice.
This struggle for workers’ control of company management is essential. Its outcome is decisive for the ongoing process in Venezuela. [8]
Notes
[1] On 2 December 2007 51% of voters said ‘No’ to Chávez’ constitutional referendum as against 49% voting ‘Yes’. This is Chávez’ only electoral setback between 1998 and 2009. See Éric Toussaint, “The failure of 2 December 2007 can be a powerful lever for improving the process currently unfolding in Hugo Chávez’ Venezuela”, December 2007, http://www.cadtm.org/The-failure-of...
[2] It should be remembered that article 72 provides for the possibility of citizens recalling the President of the Republic and all other elected officials half-way through the term of office.
[3] The campaign depicting Hugo Chávez as a “despot for life” played on the scandalous nature of unlimited re-election. Yet several European democracies work in the same way. This is the case in Spain, Italy and the United Kingdom for the post of Prime Minister, and in Germany for the post of Chancellor (in all 4 countries, it is the head of government who really holds the reins of power). In France, up to the adoption in July 2008 of the constitutional law on the modernization of institutions, there was no limit on the number of consecutive mandates. Since then, the number of consecutive mandates is limited to two.
[4] http://voixdusud.blogspot.com/2009/
[5] We should also note, however, a very positive structural feature in Venezuela: electricity is very largely produced from dams and rivers. Fossil fuels are only rarely used and there are no nuclear power plants.
[6] See a very interesting video of the demonstration with interviews of several TU leaders on the Marea Socialista website: http://mareasocialista.com/
[7] This was the case on 21 May 2009 during a meeting between Hugo Chávez and 400 delegates from the steel and aluminium industries held in the State of Guayana. A meeting to consolidate other commitments made during this important assembly took place on 21 August 2009 in the context of the “Plan Guayana socialista”. See Marea socialista, no.22, p. 3.
[8] To know more about initiatives or position statements on workers’ control in Venezuela, read issues 19, 20, 21 and 22 of the magazine Marea Socialista, July-August 2009, which discuss the situation at SIDOR, CorpoElec, Cadafe, cement works, Cafeaca, Alcasa, Carbonorca…See http://mareasocialista.com/
Translated by Christine Pagnoulle and Judith Harris, in collaboration with Francesca Denley and Stephanie Jacquemont. Next part: Debate and contradiction in the PSUV (United Socialist Party of Venezuela) (Part 2).
Eric Toussaint, Doctor in Political Science (University of Liege and University of Paris VIII), is president of CADTM Belgium (Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt, www.cadtm.org). He is the author of A diagnosis of emerging global crisis and alternatives, VAK, Mumbai, India, 2009, 139p; Bank of the South. An Alternative to the IMF-World Bank, VAK, Mumbai, India, 2007; The World Bank, A Critical Primer, Pluto Press, Between The Lines, David Philip, London-Toronto-Cape Town 2008; Your Money or Your Life, The Tyranny of Global Finance, Haymarket, Chicago, 2005.
Source: Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt
Bolivarian Venezuela at a Crossroads, Part 2: Debate and Contradiction in the PSUV
June 30th 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)