Haiti - The Caribbean's hot spot for drug traffickers

By Rebecca Theodore



If drug control is fundamental in maintaining a healthy society and in preventing the suffering and harm caused to individuals and society by drug abuse and drug trafficking, then its threat to the security and stability of Haiti presents a frightening picture.

While the International Narcotics Control Board continues to uphold its mandate of strengthening international action against drug production, trafficking and drug related crime and providing information, analysis and expertise on drug issues; critics on the other hand point to its failure in effectively policing both licit and illicit drugs in Haiti.

Cannabis and cocaine and the likes thereof are not the only substances classified as drugs. The availability of analgesics for the treatment of pain on unregulated markets in Haiti is now suffering an adverse backlash where illicitly manufactured pharmaceutical products that contain narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances are readily available.

Thus, the drug situation in Haiti again proves that understanding drug-control measures are not only dependent on a society’s culture, but that drug abuse and trafficking will always be in conflict with the respect of the rights and freedom of others and in meeting the requirements of health, public order and the general well-being of a democratic society.

The exceptional prospect to build a drug-free world by the International Narcotics Control Board fades in the face of mounting concerns in Haiti. The transshipment of cocaine, cannabis and medical and scientific drugs continue to pose a noteworthy menace because, in a country where more than three-quarters of the population live in wretched poverty, compressed with the inability of the state to uphold the rule of law, the temptation to earn easy money from the drug trade is always going to be a threat to stability.

Moreover, natural disasters always pose new challenges to drug prevention efforts in the Caribbean. The magnitude of the destruction that occurred on January 12, 2010, favours Haiti for illicit financial transactions and pervasive corruption, as it is the practice of criminals to exploit regions weakened by war or torn by conflict and natural disasters. It is this dislodgment effect that now leads to the rise in demand for both licit and illicit drugs in Haiti and an increase in drug-related crime.

This is also where the question of a supply of powerful medicines used in medical care comes into effect and positions a serious public problem, because drugs for medical and scientific purposes are now available without a prescription in Haiti. The scale of this abuse and trafficking is staggering and it is now a very destructive problem because dangerous drugs used for medical and scientific purposes are counterfeited in the hands of amateurs and find their way on the internet, proving that licit drugs used for illicit purposes can be manufactured anywhere.

It must be remembered that we live in a society where pharmacological explanations are sought and endorsed for problems ranging from overweight to excessive gambling, enhanced sexual and athletic performance and behavioral and emotional challenges. Drugs are a quick fix to complex physical, emotional, and even social problems and the new challenges that are emerging in Haiti has dangerous consequences for the world at large, as a problem in one part of the system has a disturbing and far reaching effect on the other because there are no codes of conduct and ethical guidelines on the correct handling of these deadly drugs.

It follows that if the goal of the United Nations International Drug Control Program is to eliminate the illegal drug trade worldwide, then its approach to the drug problem in Haiti yields disappointing results because development needs security to succeed. Responses to criminal justice and security reform, the strengthening of state mechanisms in dealing with criminal networks, must be taken into account as these are the factors that aid in eliminating the destructive mission of drug abuse and trafficking.

If the International Narcotics Board is concerned with the health and safety of humankind then special attention must be paid to the many actors of civil society and providers of humanitarian assistance in addressing the drug problem in Haiti, because it is not only cannabis and cocaine, but fentanyl, morphine and oxycodone compounded with pervasive corruption, poverty and high unemployment that now registers Haiti as the Caribbean’s hot spot for drug abuse and trafficking.

It is imperative that the International Narcotics Board implement measures of a broader social policy approach to reduce the demand for both licit and illicit drugs in Haiti. Such measures should be wide-ranging, multifaceted, synchronized and cohesive with the social, political and economic well-being of the Haitian people.

March 14, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

The niggling issue of good governance in the Caribbean Community

The issue of good governance in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)

By Ellsworth John


The issue of good governance in the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) has generated much discussion, as its citizens become increasingly frustrated by what they perceive as a lack of progress with the community’s agenda. As early as July 1989, as reflected in the Grand Anse Declaration, there was acknowledgement that there was need for a people centered governance structure. The declaration speaks of “the special roles of ...…people of all walks and conditions of life in moving CARICOM forward.

Since then many studies have been commissioned to look at the issue of governance and the prevailing idea has been for a Commission of three prominent persons with executive powers to ensure implementation of decision. In 1992, through the Time for Action, a seminal product of the West Indian Commission, it was proposed that a CARICOM Commission should be established with its membership drawn from within the region’s public and political ranks with a president, two other commissioners and the secretary general as an ex-officio member. Since then a number of task forces have been established and until last year when the council of ambassadors was proposed as an implementation vehicle, the recommendations have all been basically a tinkering of the original concept of a commission of three.

The Technical Working Group on Governance, established in 2005 and chaired by Professor Vaughan Lewis, did a comprehensive overview of the issues related to decision making and their implementation and made some pertinent observations about the problem. Yet the solution offered still had its genesis in the recommendations of the West Indian Commission Report, which almost twenty years later, the heads of government are no closer to implementing.

The elitist, top down construct of the Commission proposed over the years flies in the face of effective implementation when there is a general acceptance that citizen participation is vital to moving the integration process forward. To quote directly from the Lewis Report “in the discussions with the Heads of Government, Leaders of Opposition and other persons, the TWG has been impressed by their persistent emphasis on the importance of citizen participation in the decision-making process and in the legitimisation of decisions taken in regard to the nature and pace of the integration process.”

We flirt with the concept of citizen participation without designing at the national level, an effective uniformed model to ensure more effective consultation among the citizens. No wonder there is an implementation deficit. The solution to the problem must of necessity be grounded in pragmatism.

The effects of the global financial crisis, the collapse of CLICO and British American, the uprisings in the Middle East and Northern Africa and the expected negative impact on oil prices and food security are issues that are confronting our various cabinets and their electorates whose needs are always pressing and have the urgency of now. There is no denying that all of our governments understand that there is need for collective action to confront these national issues, but there is need for an individual to be identified in each country whose primary responsibility is regional integration.

This person should be named as Ambassador to CARICOM and be given a staff. He/she should be located in the Office of the Prime Minister to give him/her the requisite power and authority to fulfil the mandate given to the office of Ambassador. I refuse to believe that in each of our countries, we cannot find a person of sufficient political heft and acumen to fill that role. To do so might be to make a tacit admission that only in certain countries are there persons of that stature, one of the fundamental, nationalistic reasons why the concept of a Commission of three, while noble, has had no traction.

At the national level, three bodies are necessary: A cabinet Committee on Regional Integration, an Inter-ministerial Committee on Regional Integration and a forum that allows the views of the civil society, NGOs and political opposition parties to be expressed. The latter two committees should be chaired by the ambassador who would then report to the Cabinet Committee on Regional Integration. This is a pragmatic method for dealing with the issue of implementation. This, however, does not entirely deal with the issue of decision making.

This requires change in the way the issues are generated and decisions are made. First, it is necessary to accept the construct for governance that when the heads meet twice per year it is to look at the broad policy framework for the community and to assess the results of implementation of those broad policies. It requires change in the way the Secretariat conducts its work to incorporate participation by the ambassador in the conceptualization of the agenda for heads. Their participation is essential so as to avoid an agenda driven solely by a bureaucratic viewpoint, but also with a political outlook.

In essence, what I have just described is how the Permanent Committee of Ambassadors should work and why I support its establishment. The original proposal submitted by the Prime Minister of Jamaica called for the Permanent Committee of Ambassadors to be based in Guyana; however, that eliminates the vital national role that the ambassadors must play in the implementation of decisions.

Let’s be practical in our approach to the issue of governance.

March 12, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Rene Preval, the Haitian president, an evaluation, five years later

By Jean H Charles

Five years ago, as President Rene Preval was being inaugurated for a second, non-consecutive term, my sister Maggie, who went to school with the president (albeit her junior) at the George Marc Institute, commented around the kitchen table that it will be a disaster for the country of Haiti in the next five years. I argued instead that she should wait at least for six months to pass such a judgment. Five years later, using the lowest standard of evaluation, Rene Preval is one of the most inept and callous heads of government that Haiti has ever had in the modern, post democracy era!

I will hasten to say that the positive side of this characterization is that I dare to write this column, having its publication in Haiti, the Caribbean and in the rest of the world without the fear of being persecuted or thrown into jail.

I will hasten to say also that his ineptness is shared by most if not all the members of his government. If the president is himself indecisive, no one is on the way of his minister of tourism of being an active minister instead of one with only a draft master plan still at the stage of a draft, five years later.

The prime minister, who doubles his portfolio with one of minister of planning, one year after the earthquake has not understood that a junior minister of coordination for the activities of the NGOs (his director at the ministry of planning would be an excellent choice) is crucial and fundamental for a minimum effectiveness in the delivery of services by the international organizations.

Rene Preval offered no plan in his campaign. He ran his government on an ad hoc basis, pulling a solution out of his sleeve, with no follow up and no evaluation. He had, though, his lion’s share of disaster that befell the country during his term: inundation and flood in Gonaives and in Mapou, earthquake in Port au Prince, Jacmel and Petit Goave and cholera epidemic brought into the Artibonite region by the United Nations.

He has also received an avalanche of support from all corners of the world. This support is completely wasted, bringing no impact or, rather, a negative impact to the people of Haiti because the president and his government did not use positive leadership to channel and synergize the assistance.

I have in a previous column shone a light into the leadership capacity or the lack thereof of the president. In addressing an evaluation de fin de régime, it is proper to revisit Rene Preval in his inner workings.

A student of the Belgium state university, President Preval is surrounded by classmates or friends of his time in Belgium: Paul Denis (his minister of Justice), Dr Alex Larsen (his minister of health and population), amongst others.

The Belgium cultural legacy in the former colonies is one of divisiveness. The colonial empire it amassed through the centuries, especially in Africa, has turned into a legacy of failed nations (Congo Brazzaville), filled with hatred and racism that produced genocide in Rwanda, famine and fragmentation in Burundi. The country of Belgium, albeit the seat of the European Community, is a land divided amongst itself, where the concept of nation is a hollow one.

Rene Preval has brought into Haiti from Belgium the culture of a political animal, where politics is used as an instrument or scientific tool to reward friends and remain in power on the front or on the backside as long as possible. Nihilism is elevated to the standard of excellence.

Rene Preval is also the embodiment of the Haitian ethos well encapsulated in the story of Bouqui and ti malice. Bouqui is the naïve brother who puts all his faith in the cunning and malicious ti malice. He uses all the artifices such as lies, deception, disguised affection to get the lion’s share of the family legacy, leaving his brother (Bouqui) in extreme misery.

The international community has found a fertile incubator in this government to create a land of make believe in Haiti. Amidst massive outpouring of assistance, the individual or the collective repercussion is minimal at best, negative at worst.

Item: the car rental business is one of the fastest growing enterprises in the country because of the need of each international worker to have his own car with his own driver. Uncontrolled drug money recycled into the rental car sector has killed the mom and pop storefront.

Reviewing all the sectors of the economy, Rene Preval has registered an F or a failure rate. An agronomist by training, the environment has not indicated any incremental stop in its degradation. With the exception of the north and the extreme south of Haiti, the remaining forest land (2 percent) is in an accelerated slide towards desertification.

In the area of agriculture and agro-business, the Dominican Republic has become the food basket of the Republic of Haiti. Eggs (1 million units per day), plantain, even coconut water are imported for resale in Haiti. One hundred large trailers filled with cement are brought into Haiti every day from the Dominican Republic.

The security segment has exhibited a significant improvement from its low point of poor morale, recurring kidnapping and lack of policing. Yet the large majority of the hinterland operates without a police presence. There is no discussion or timetable in terms of building Haiti’s own military force for the protection of its border, enhancing its environment and securing its population against disaster and drug contraband.

Creating a culture of the rule of law was Preval’s leitmotiv in assuming power. Five years later, he failed (allegedly for lack of time) in naming a chief of the Supreme Court. At election time, the government deployed with strength the power of the state, as a bandit use his arsenal of resources and munitions for his own candidates. To his credit, the president as a man and his government in general is unobtrusive. Social peace, although tenuous, is maintained, even favoured.

In health and public hygiene, a cholera epidemic brought into the country by a UN contingent has tested the strength of the health apparatus. The collection of garbage is still a subject of contention between the mayors of the large cities (including the capital), deprived of the means to do so, and a callous centralized government more inclined to do politics with the resources instead of caring for the welfare of its citizens.

The best characterization of Rene Preval and its governance is one of a Teflon president turning the country into a Teflon nation.

Item: to keep the men off his back, he promoted during the World Cup the soccer mania in the country. All day, Barcelona vs. Real Madrid and nonstop commentary about Leo Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo is now the rule in Haiti. Industrial and administrative production is at a low point -- a soccer game between Real Madrid and Barcelona takes precedence over the business of the state.

Item: road building has been the government panacea. The result five years later is unfinished roads to nowhere and a woman pre-eminently promoted on the tractor as the way to the future. Yet the crowded streets of the Port au Prince need repairs that could unclog the daily giant traffic bottleneck, leaving adults and children under stress more customary in the western capitals.

Item: the Preval government has created a new class of well endowed citizens. They are the public employees at the policy level. They have at their disposal the national and the international resources, used with arrogance for their own benefit not for the benefit of the ordinary citizen.

The international community, in particular the MINUSTAH, with the resources of the whole world in their hands, taking its cue from the government, has perfected the Teflon culture to its limit. I am still awaiting one nation from the pack that would become a conscientious objector in helping the world shed a light into the big scam of the mission of stabilization. OXFAM, from my empirical observation one of the best NGOs in Haiti, is leaving this summer. Is it a signal that the Teflon culture and corruption is choking the best and the brightest?

On March 20, 2011, the people of Haiti will go back to the polls to elect a new president and a new government. Will it be a break from the past or will the Preval culture of squalor and ti malice over hospitality for all continue to haunt Haiti for another twenty years?

March 12, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

NATO, war, lies and business

Reflections of Fidel

(Taken from CubaDebate)

AS some people know, in September of 1969, Muammar al-Gaddafi, a Bedouin Arab soldier of unusual character and inspired by the ideas of the Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser, promoted within the heart of the Armed Forces a movement which overthrew King Idris I of Libya, almost a desert country in its totality, with a sparse population, located to the north of Africa between Tunisia and Egypt.

Libya’s significant and valuable energy resources were progressively being discovered.

Born into the heart of a Bedouin community, nomadic desert shepherds in the region of Tripoli, Gaddafi was profoundly anti-colonialist. It is known that a paternal grandfather died fighting against the Italian invaders when Libya was invaded by the latter in 1911. The colonial regime and fascism changed everyone’s lives. It is likewise said that his father was imprisoned before earning his daily bread as an industrial worker.

Even Gaddafi’s adversaries confirm that he stood out for his intelligence as a student; he was expelled from high school for his anti-monarchical activities. He managed to enroll in another school and later to graduate in law at the University of Benghazi, aged 21. He then entered the Benghazi Military College, where he created the Union of Free Officers Movement, subsequently completing his studies in a British military academy.

These antecedents explain the notable influence that he later exercised in Libya and over other political leaders, whether or not they are now for or against Gaddafi.

He initiated his political life with unquestionably revolutionary acts.

In March 1970, in the wake of mass nationalist protests, he achieved the evacuation of British soldiers from the country and, in June, the United States vacated the large airbase close to Tripoli, which was handed over to military instructors from Egypt, a country allied with Libya.

In 1970, a number of Western oil companies and banking societies with the participation of foreign capital were affected by the Revolution. At the end of 1971, the same fate befell the famous British Petroleum. In the agricultural sector all Italian assets were confiscated, and the colonialists and their descendants were expelled from Libya.

State intervention was directed toward the control of the large companies. Production in that country grew to become one of the highest in the Arab world. Gambling was prohibited, as was alcohol consumption. The legal status of women, traditionally limited, was elevated.

The Libyan leader became immersed in extremist theories as much opposed to communism as to capitalism. It was a stage in which Gaddafi devoted himself to theorizing, which would be meaningless to include in this analysis, except to note that the first article of the Constitutional Proclamation of 1969, established the "Socialist" nature of the Libyan Arab Jamahiriya.

What I wish to emphasize is that the United States and its NATO allies were never interested in human rights.

The pandemonium that occurred in the Security Council, in the meeting of the Human Rights Council based in Geneva, and in the UN General Assembly in New York, was pure theater.

I can perfectly comprehend the reactions of political leaders embroiled in so many contradictions and sterile debates, given the intrigue of interests and problems which they have to address.

All of us are well aware that status as a permanent member, veto power, the possession of nuclear weapons and more than a few institutions, are sources of privilege and self-interest imposed on humanity by force. One can be in agreement with many of them or not, but never accept them as just or ethical measures.

The empire is now attempting to turn events around to what Gaddafi has done or not done, because it needs to militarily intervene in Libya and deliver a blow to the revolutionary wave unleashed in the Arab world. Through now not a word was said, silence was maintained and business was conducted.

Whether a latent Libyan rebellion was promoted by yankee intelligence agencies or by the errors of Gaddafi himself, it is important that the peoples do not let themselves be deceived, given that, very soon, world opinion will have enough elements to know what to believe.

In my opinion, and as I have expressed since the outset, the plans of the bellicose NATO had to be condemned.

Libya, like many Third World countries, is a member of the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77 and other international organizations, via which relations are established independently of economic and social system.

Briefly: the Revolution in Cuba, inspired by Marxist-Leninist and Martí principles, had triumphed in 1959 at 90 miles from the United States, which imposed the Platt Amendment on us and was the proprietor of our country’s economy.

Almost immediately, the empire promoted against our people dirty warfare, counterrevolutionary gangs, the criminal economic blockade and the mercenary invasion of the Bay of Pigs, guarded by an aircraft carrier and its marines ready to disembark if the mercenary force secured certain objectives.

Barely a year and a half later, it threatened us with the power of its nuclear arsenal. A war of that nature was about to break out.

All the Latin American countries, with the exception of Mexico, took part in the criminal blockade which is still in place, without our country ever surrendering. It is important to recall that for those lacking historical memory.

In January 1986, putting forward the idea that Libya was behind so-called revolutionary terrorism, Reagan ordered the severing of economic and commercial relations with that country.

In March, an aircraft carrier force in the Gulf of Sirte, within what Libya considered its national waters, unleashed attacks which destroyed a number of naval units equipped with rocket launchers and coastal radar systems which that country had acquired in the USSR.

On April 5, a discotheque in West Berlin frequented by U.S. soldiers was the target of a plastic explosives attack, in which three people died, two of them U.S. soldiers, and many people were injured.

Reagan accused Gaddafi and ordered the Air Force to respond. Three squadrons took off from 6th Fleet aircraft carriers and bases in the United Kingdom, and attacked with missiles and bombs seven military targets in Tripoli and Benghazi. Some 40 people died, 15 of them civilians. Warned in advance of the bombardments, Gaddafi gathered together his family and was leaving his residence located in the Bab Al Aziziya military complex south of the capital. The evacuation had not been completed when a missile directly hit the residence, his daughter Hanna died and another two of his children were wounded. That act was widely rejected; the UN General Assembly passed a resolution of condemnation given what was a violation of the UN Charter and international law. The Non-Aligned Movement, the Arab League and the OAU did likewise in energetic terms.

On December 21, 1988, a Pan Am Boeing 747 flying from London to New York disintegrated in full flight when a bomb exploded aboard, the wreckage fell on the locality of Lockerbie and the tragedy cost the lives of 270 people of 21 nationalities.

Initially, the United States suspected Iran, in reprisal for the death of 290 people when an Airbus belonging to its state line was brought down. According to the yankees, investigations implicated two Libyan intelligence agents. Similar accusations against Libya were made in the case of the French airline on the Brazzaville-N’Djamena-Paris route, implicating Libyan officials whom Gaddafi refused to extradite for acts that he categorically denied.

A sinister legend was fabricated against him, with the participation of Reagan and Bush Senior.

From 1975 to the final stage of the Regan administration, Cuba dedicated itself to its internationalist duties in Angola and other African nations. We were aware of the conflicts developing in Libya or around her via readings and testimonies from people closely linked to that country and the Arab world, as well as impressions we retained from many figures in different countries with whom we had contact during those years.

Many known African leaders with whom Gaddafi maintained close relations made efforts to find a solution to the tense relations between Libya and the United Kingdom.

The Security Council had imposed sanctions on Libya which began to be overcome when Gaddafi agreed to the trial, under specific conditions, of the two men accused of the plane sabotage over Scotland.

Libyan delegations began to be invited to inter-European meetings. In July 1999 London initiated the reestablishment of full diplomatic relations with Libya after some additional concessions.

In September of that year, European Union ministers agreed to revoke the restrictive trade measures imposed in 1992.

On December 2, Massimo D’Alema, the Italian prime minister, made the first visit to Libya by a European head of government.

With the disappearance of the USSR and the European socialist bloc, Gaddafi decided to accept the demands of the United States and NATO.

When I visited Libya in May 2001, he showed me the ruins left by the treacherous attack during which Reagan murdered his daughter and almost exterminated his entire family.

In early 2002, the State Department announced that diplomatic talks between the United States and Libya were underway.

In May, Libya was once again included on the list of states sponsoring terrorism although, in January, President George W. Bush had not mentioned the African country in his famous speech on members of the "axis of evil."

At the beginning of 2003, in accordance with the economic agreement on compensation reached between Libya and the plaintiffs, the United Kingdom and France, the UN Security Council lifted its 1992 sanctions against Libya.

Before the end of 2003, Bush and Tony Blair reported an agreement with Libya, which had submitted documentation to British and U.S. intelligence experts about conventional weapons programs and ballistic missiles with a range of more than 300 kilometers. Officials from both countries had already visited a number of installations. It was the result of many months of conversation between Tripoli and Washington, as Bush himself revealed.

Gaddafi kept his disarmament promises. Within five months Libya handed over the five units of Scud-C missiles with a range of 800 km and hundreds of Scud-B which have a range exceeding the 300 kilometers of defensive short-range missiles.

As of October, 2002, a marathon of visits to Tripoli began: Berlusconi, in October 2002; José María Aznar, in September 2003; Berlusconi again in February, August and October of 2004; Blair, in March of 2004; the German Schröeder, in October of that year; Jacques Chirac, November 2004. Everybody happy. Money talks.

Gaddafi toured Europe triumphantly. He was received in Brussels in April of 2004 by Romano Prodi, president of the European Commission; in August of that year the Libyan leader invited Bush to visit his country; Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Texaco and Conoco Philips established renewed oil extraction operations through joint ventures.

In May of 2006, the United States announced the removal of Libya from its list of nations harboring terrorists and established full diplomatic relations.

In 2006 and 2007, France and the U.S. signed accords for cooperation in nuclear development for peaceful ends; in May, 2007, Blair returned to visit Gaddafi in Sirte. British Petroleum signed a contract it described as "enormously important," for the exploration of gas fields.

In December of 2007, Gaddafi made two trips to France to sign military and civilian equipment contracts for 10 billion euros, and to Spain where he met with President José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero. Contracts worth millions were signed with important NATO countries.

What has now brought on the precipitous withdrawal of U.S. and other NATO members' embassies?

It all seems extremely strange.

George W. Bush, father of the stupid anti-terrorist war, said on September 20, 2011 to west Point cadets, "Our security will require … the military you will lead, a military that must be ready to strike at a moment's notice in any dark corner of the world. … to be ready for preemptive action when necessary to defend our liberty and to defend our lives.

"We must root out terrorist cells in 60 countries or more … with our friends and allies, we have to stop their proliferation and confront regimes which harbor or support terrorism, as is required in each case."

What might Obama think of that speech?

What sanctions will the Security Council impose on those who have killed more than a million civilians in Iraq and those who everyday are murdering men, women and children in Afghanistan, where just recently the angry population took to the streets to protest the massacre of innocent children?

An AFP dispatch from Kabul, dated today, March 9, reveals, "Last year was the most lethal for civilians in the nine-year war between the Taliban and international forces in Afghanistan, with almost 2,800 deaths, 15% more than in 2009, a United Nations report indicated on Wednesday, underlining the human cost of the conflict for the population.

"… The Taliban insurrection has intensified and gained ground in these last few years, with guerrilla actions beyond its traditional bastions in the South and East.

"At exactly 2,777, the number of civilian deaths in 2010 increased by 15% as compared to 2009," the UN Assistance Mission in Afghanistan annual report indicated.

"On March 3, President Barack Obama expressed his profound condolences to the Afghan people for the nine children killed, as did U.S. General David Petraeus, commander in chief of the ISAF and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

"… The UNAMA report emphasizes that the number of civilian deaths is four times greater than the number of international forces soldiers killed in combat during the same year.

"So far, 2010 has been the most deadly for foreign soldiers in the nine years of war, with 711 dead, confirming that the Taliban's guerilla war has intensified despite the deployment of 30,000 U.S. reinforcements last year."

Over the course of 10 days, in Geneva and in the United Nations, more than 150 speeches were delivered about violations of human rights, which were repeated million of times on television, radio, Internet and in the written press.

Cuba's Foreign Minister Bruno Rodríguez, in his remarks March 1, 2011 before Foreign Relations ministers in Geneva, said:

"Humanity's conscience is repulsed by the deaths of innocent people under any circumstances, anyplace. Cuba fully shares the worldwide concern for the loss of civilian lives in Libya and hopes that its people are able to reach a peaceful and sovereign solution to the civil war occurring there, with no foreign interference, and guarantee the integrity of that nation."

Some of the final paragraphs of his speech were scathing.

"If the essential human right is the right to life, will the Council be ready to suspend the membership of states that unleash war?

"Will it suspend states which finance and supply military aid utilized by recipient states for mass, flagrant and systematic violations of human rights and attacks on the civilian population, like those taking place in Palestine?

"Will it apply measures to powerful countries which are perpetuating extra-judicial executions in the territory of other states with the use of high technology, such as smart bombs and drone aircraft?

"What will happen with states which accept secret illegal prisons in their territories, facilitate the transit of secret flights with kidnapped persons aboard, or participate in acts of torture?

We fully share the valiant position of the Bolivarian leader Hugo Chávez and the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of Our America (ALBA).

We are against the internal war in Libya, in favor of immediate peace and respect for the lives and rights of all citizens, without foreign intervention, which would only serve to prolong the conflict and NATO interests.

Fidel Castro Ruz

March 9, 2011

9:35 p.m.

Translated by Granma International

granma.cu

The Pharaoh factor in Caribbean politics

By Oliver Mills



Politics in the Caribbean is in a state of volatility and controversy. The fundamental question is, when has this never been the case?

In one country, accusations are being made over the receipt of aid money from Libya, to help in the rebuilding of the country after the damage done by Hurricane Tomas.

In another, an interim government is in place directing the affairs of the country through an Advisory Council and a Consultative Forum.

In yet another country, its president’s performance has been described as fifth rate, and doing nothing for his country.

Again in another, the political directorate has been accused of having a minimal impact on nation building, and failing to provide intellectual and moral direction towards putting the country on the right track.

What is really going on in the politics of the Caribbean? Why is it that, particularly in four countries, which are indeed representative of the others, there are these contentions against the political directorates? These are tame in comparison to what is happening in other Caribbean countries. And there is no difference whether these countries are independent or not.

We would have thought that with so many years of political maturity, with technology and communications being so highly developed, that some level of sanity would have emerged in the politics of our region. But it has not. Is what is happening a reflection of a lively democracy, or is the critical reason what I have decided to describe, as the Pharaoh factor in Caribbean politics?

The idea of a lively democracy, on the surface would seem to imply unrestricted debate and dialogue over the pertinent issues of the day, elections held within a certain period of time, the presence of opposition forces, and a ‘free’ press. But this seems to be what a political leader in Israel has called, a process, rather than the values that go along with it.

Is democracy therefore more than a process, or a set of procedures, but most importantly a values based practice? When we examine what has just been given as happening in the four Caribbean territories, is it merely processes and procedures, rather than evidence of certain cardinal values which govern, and are integral to the practice of real democracy?

At one level, if one sovereign country decides to negotiate an aid package from another, irrespective of the politics of the lender country, is this not a democratic right to choose and deal with any country one chooses, or is it that either insufficient discussions were held with other political forces, or they were not consulted at all? In the latter sense, is it evidence of Pharaoh politics, rather than the politics of deliberation involving all significant actors?

In the Turks & Caicos, is the formation of an Advisory Council, and a Consultative Forum to assist in the process of governance, after certain alleged behaviours by politicians, a form of democratic intervention, since locals were appointed as members of these bodies, and therefore make decisions on behalf of the country, even though they are not formally elected?

And, are critical comments concerning the performance of the political directorates not evidence of democracy in action? Or, is it because of the practice of Pharaoh politics in the Caribbean by its leaders, which generated this response from other political forces?

Is reaction to policies by political directorates based on the fact that they appear ill-conceived, and in total disregard for the involvement of other interests, a form of democracy in action, or is it a response to political inertia, lack of concern, and self-righteousness of Caribbean political leaders?

Is this not the politics of Pharaoh where the political leader does as he or she wishes, or does not do anything of substance, and does not care irrespective of what others may think?

But what is real and genuine democracy? It involves serious deliberation with others about policies and issues, using rational and reasonable arguments in order to agree on a position satisfactory to all. Here, the general interest is considered, without partiality. Agreement is arrived at through dialogue, and not by the threat of force, psychological or otherwise.

Pharaoh politics on the other hand has to do with some Caribbean leaders being highly autocratic in their actions, running roughshod over competing parties, and of the Pharaoh character feeling that his opinions and actions are above criticism or debate, and all others who challenge this position are unpatriotic, or disrespectful to the office of the Pharaoh.

We have seen Pharaoh politics in action in a most blatant form in Grenada under Gairy, in Haiti under Papa Doc and his son, and in many of the actions of earlier Caribbean leaders on assuming power. Some of these felt that because they were the first to form political parties or trade unions, that there was a certain entitlement they had, and therefore it was rude and disrespectful to challenge them.

Unfortunately, this type of political mentality has seeped down to many of our political operatives. We saw this in a remark by one political leader that it is either his way, or the highway. And again, by the same leader who when challenged to give up leadership after a number of years in opposition said that no other person in the party was qualified to succeed him. This is the politics of Pharaoh in action.

Pharaoh politics is also seen where political supporters break up political meetings, or other gatherings that oppose the existing regimes, or use other intimidating tactics, to discourage opposition activity. It is also seen in the gerrymandering of constituencies giving favour to one political party over the other. It is further seen where after an election, irrespective of the competencies of people, many are removed from their jobs, and replaced by the supporters of the Pharaoh.

Again the politics of Pharaoh shows itself in awarding contracts to the chosen, without even any bidding process being put in place. It is further seen in using the institutions and resources of the state for self enrichment, and the enrichment of Pharaoh’s colleagues at the expense of the people and the sustainability of the state.

It is also observed in the behaviour of the Pharaoh, after accumulating enormous resources for himself. The many homes built, the construction of what could be regarded as palaces, the encouraging of political spies who carry news on others, truthful or simply made up, and the resulting political victimisation of these persons.

Pharaoh politics therefore results in the accumulation of resources through rather innovative means, seeing the populace as us and them, the idea that if you are not with me, you are against me, granting extraordinary favours without using the correct channels, or influencing these channels to do so, and creating psychological fear in others, and the use of reprisals on those who are of a different persuasion.

But what are the origins of Pharaoh politics? It has its beginnings in the parliamentary system of government, surprisingly, since this is the model that is supposed to promote and represent real democracy. This system encourages a maximum leader with enormous powers and authority. This leader can apportion political responsibilities, has the resources to attract support, can dominate politics, and can hire or fire ministers.

The parliamentary system therefore produces autocratic leaders disguised as democratic figures. The maximum leader can also ignore the advice of public officials and his ministers, and appoint his or her own core of advisers. This is the origin of the Pharaoh factor.

From this emerged a situation where two cousins headed two opposing political parties. Two brothers are ministers of government in different parties, and because of the politics, a president hands over office to his wife. And again, a situation where the father was head of government, and was later followed by his son. This is the story of Pharaoh politics in the Caribbean.

And what kind of politics does the Caribbean need to free itself from the grip of Pharaoh politics? It is first of all a politics of values. This means that there are certain values that are adhered to in the practice of political discourse. These include having a moral approach to the issues.

This involves making decisions on their merit, establishing political parties with a moral purpose of what is right and good, and making choices which benefit the entire populace, and not a segment of the country. It also means choosing to run for office, people with ethical backgrounds, and who have a character history of making choices and decisions that are noble and just.

It also means that Caribbean politics needs to be standards based, using prescribed benchmarks which can be measured to determine behaviour that is acceptable. The abolition of Pharaoh politics also means having compassion and care for people and their problems, being sensitive to the needs of others, and having the capacity to put ourselves in the shoes of others. Pharaoh politics lacks compassion and identification with the needs of those who do not share Pharaoh’s vision.

Caribbean politics further needs to have institutions that are honourable and trustworthy, can be depended on to deliver, and that are run by people who show mercy and a sense of deep humanity. Most importantly, the Caribbean intelligentsia needs to educate the public on the real meaning of a changed and relevant politics that is kind, gentle, and reasonable.

We further need to rid ourselves of the politics of hate, divisiveness, and which forms cleavages and factions. The latter needs to be replaced by a politics that is all inclusive, respectful of the individual and his or her contribution, and which puts the interests and welfare of the country, over that of political constructions formed within it.

All of these constitute the ingredients of an antidote to the Pharaoh factor in Caribbean politics.

March 10, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

The Bahamas Human Resources Development Association (BHRDA) is concern about the appointment of a foreign HR consultant by the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA)

HR experts weigh in on URCA controversy

By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com


The Bahamas Human Resources Development Association (BHRDA) yesterday raised concerns about the appointment of a foreign HR consultant by the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA) as controversy heightened over the matter.

As has been widely reported by The Nassau Guardian, the questions being raised surround URCA’s engagement of Marsha Lewis, who heads LCI Inc. in Barbados, which she formed not long before landing the contract. Lewis is a former executive of Cable and Wireless Communications’ Caribbean operations, as is URCA’s current CEO Usman Saadat who introduced his former colleague to URCA in 2009 when he was the regulatory body’s director of policy and regulation.

URCA Chairman Wayne Aranha has admitted that the agency did not advertise the position locally. On Saturday, the prime minister said URCA broke the rules in failing to do so.

Last year, Saadat forwarded his resume to Lewis for vetting when he applied for the CEO position, Aranha acknowledged. All candidates were required to send their resumes to her.

The association said yesterday it noted with interest that URCA did not release any information about the scope of works for the consultancy job.

“It would be useful to know whether the use of Mrs. Lewis’s firm required specialized HR knowledge and expertise that Bahamian HR professionals may not have had,” BHRDA said in a press release.

“We are advised that comments made by URCA indicated satisfaction with LCI Inc.’s work which included writing job descriptions and formulating a performance appraisal tool. It should be noted therefore that local HR professionals possess expertise in all major functional and operational areas of human resources and business, the least of which is creating job descriptions and performance appraisal tools.

“What is also disturbing to the association is the fact that Mrs. Lewis’ LinkedIn site states that LCI Inc. contracted another HR professional to perform quite a number of the duties that her company was engaged to do. BHRDA’s position is that an experienced Bahamian HR professional could just have easily performed the core HR functions to standards of excellence and similarly outsource some functions if technical telecommunications expertise was lacking in a particular area.”

The association posed several questions to Saadat: While the post was not advertised, did URCA explore the availability of local/Bahamian HR consultants before hiring one externally? Did URCA contact any member/executive of the BHRDA or other representative HR bodies to assist with locating an experienced HR consultant? Was a RFP (request for proposal) published/provided at the time of LCI’s engagement?

The association asked several other questions: Since public attention was drawn to this matter, does URCA still have a contract with Lewis? Will the scope of work now be made public and does URCA have an HR manager presently?

BHRDA said it has formally addressed this issue with Immigration and Labour Department officials and those discussions appear to confirm that there are opportunities to better manage and monitor the process of issuing work permits as well as better monitoring— and more importantly—leveraging expatriate labor in The Bahamas.

“BHRDA sees this as an opportunity to advise the Bahamian public that there are many experienced HR professionals in The Bahamas, many of whom have worked in Fortune 500 and other companies in the U.S. and the U.K. Many of these professionals have also studied abroad and achieved international qualifications and designations which set them apart from others in the profession,” the association said.

The firestorm over Lewis’ engagement has emerged as URCA considers a bid by Cable and Wireless Communications to purchase 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company. Lewis’ husband, Philip Lewis, is currently CWC’s vice president of business development as has been pointed out by The Nassau Guardian on several occasions.

The association said it takes no position on either the issue of privatization or the role of Cable and Wireless or URCA’s ability to perform its regulatory functions to the highest standards.

“The association does question the process used to employ the foreign HR consultancy firm hired by URCA,” the press statement said.

“We are pleased by the prime minister’s comments on the matter in yesterday’s Guardian where he stated that ‘all positions should be advertised locally.’ The association believes this is an opportunity for policymakers to ensure that Bahamian laws set out clear guidelines under which fair competition will prevail, as well as enforcement of these laws. It is BHRDA’s hope that the public debate and BHRDA’s questions on this matter cause organizations like ours to be consulted in changing and creating policy in The Bahamas.”

The press release pointed out that BHRDA is a national, non-profit organization and an affiliate of the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). BHRDA’s main objective is to provide a forum for human resources and other business professionals to enhance their technical knowledge and skills and advance the cause of workers generally.

The association is headed by Annette Cash and has several vice presidents: Cheryl Bain, Marisa Mason-Smith, Rachel Rolle and Villiemae Black. Its secretary is Chrislyn Benjamin.

Aranha, the URCA chairman, said last week that Lewis’ time with URCA is coming to an end because she has completed the tasks she was hired to carry out. He indicated that it has nothing to do with the controversy, and said URCA plans to engage a local HR professional to complete some work.

3/8/2011

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Bahamas: Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) and the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA)... What's The Connection? (Part-2)

CWC and the URCA connection Pt 2
By CANDIA DAMES
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com



Stunning admissions



Chairman of the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority Wayne Aranha made several stunning admissions a few days ago: URCA never advertised locally for the human resources consultancy position now being filled by a foreigner.

That foreigner, Marsha Lewis, happens to be a former colleague of URCA’s CEO Usman Saadat, who introduced her to the regulatory body in 2009 when he was director of policy and regulation.

Another stunning admission made by Aranha was that Saadat, when he applied for the CEO position last year, had to forward his resume and application for vetting to Lewis, the very woman he introduced to URCA a year earlier.

Lewis left Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) in Barbados months before she became URCA’s consultant. She landed the consultancy position not long after she formed her company, LCI Inc.

According to URCA’s Three-Year Strategy and Annual Plan for 2011, it is spending $131,000 on HR consultancy, although it is unclear from reading that report how much of that money is being spent with LCI.

For the past two years, Lewis has collected from URCA for her services — services that Bahamian HR professionals may be capable of providing and may be available to provide.

Lewis had something though that they did not have, something that proved of inestimable worth in her landing her URCA contract: A connection to Usman Saadat.

Because the position was never advertised locally, the Bahamian professionals never got a chance.

The Department of Immigration requires positions be advertised locally before foreigners are approved for jobs.

It is also government policy to advertise locally for positions that need to be filled, noted Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham in an interview with The Nassau Guardian over the weekend.

Ingraham said bluntly that URCA broke the rules and he intends to address the matter.

“We certainly do not support that kind of thing,” the prime minister said.

“It’s a standard policy of the Government of the Bahamas that positions are advertised locally and it’s very annoying.” But he said it has to be done.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Immigration Brent Symonette also told The Nassau Guardian he intends to look into the matter of how URCA was able to bring on a foreign HR consultant without advertising the position.

AN APPEARANCE OF CONFLICT

To be clear, Aranha was not yet chairman when Lewis landed the contract in August 2009. He was appointed weeks later.

But Aranha recognized that as the current chairman it is his responsibility to protect the integrity of URCA.

After National Review dug into this issue last week, Saadat had agreed to appear on the Star 106.5 FM show “Jeffrey” with Jeff Lloyd and from what we understand on the “Sawyer Report” on ZNS with Jerome Sawyer.

But somewhere along the way he and URCA’s board had a change of heart.

Instead, Aranha and URCA’s Director of Policy and Regulation Kathleen Smith made the rounds.

Aranha said there had been personal attacks on Saadat and the decision was made for him not to appear on the shows.

While on Lloyd’s show, the URCA officials acknowledged that there is an appearance of conflict given Saadat’s and Lewis’ former affiliation with CWC.

But they stressed repeatedly that there is no actual conflict.

“I think it’s important for our public to appreciate that conflicts exist all the time,” Aranha said.

“Real conflicts exist all the time, not with URCA but as a general proposition. But they are properly managed to avoid a conflict from resulting in something being crooked or improper…You deal with it by either saying you can’t do certain things or you deal with it by not attending or participating in an issue that arises.”

Aranha said when he first met Lewis in the fall of 2009 when he became chairman “she was known to be a Cable and Wireless past employee.”

“In my mind though, it was never addressed as an issue,” he said.

“But he (Saadat) did make the introduction; it’s agreed and I can understand it now that we’re looking back and assessing it and tearing it upside down.

“Clearly, the organization (URCA), bear in mind, was given a mandate: Go and run effectively, run efficiently. You have the sector policy; you have an act. We want you to report value for money and there was an immediate commencement of activities to assess the gaps in staff if there are any, to look at ways of improving the efficiency, to look at what needs to be done.”

The issue of CWC’s connection to URCA is being raised as URCA reviews the agreement between the Government of The Bahamas and CWC, which is seeking to purchase 51 percent of the Bahamas Telecommunications Company (BTC).

Both Aranha and Smith stressed that in 2009 when Saadat introduced his former CWC colleague to URCA, CWC was not a bidder in the privatization process.

But it was at least in the picture to some extent, as pointed out on several occasions by The Nassau Guardian, and confirmed in privatization documents.

CWC was eyeing the BTC opportunity, which it ended up turning down in 2009. In 2010, it was back in the picture in a major way, emerging as the long sought strategic partner for BTC.

URCA’s DEFENSE

The usually quiet URCA has had to put up a defense on these issues over the last couple weeks, led by its chairman.

The controversy even led Aranha to question whether I as the writer of these articles had an agenda and whether I had ever even spoken to the government ministers who appeared confused last week over which of them is responsible for URCA.

It was pointed out to the chairman that there are many people who have questions about all the connections to CWC, and about how Lewis was able to secure the HR contract.

As we noted in last week’s article on this issue, Lewis is married to Philip Lewis, CWC’s VP for Business Development.

Aranha said he spoke to Mrs. Lewis on a casual basis and recalled her mentioning her husband.

“But that to me was never significant…what was significant to me was on the board’s agenda early was a paper on ‘this is what we plan to do with HR in respect of training Bahamians, in respect of introducing a program to measure performance, to evaluate performance against objectives that are set for staff members so that they would be remunerated in accordance with performance and advancement would be consistent with performance,” Aranha said.

Last week, the chairman and the director of policy and regulation did not appear concerned that the HR position had not been advertised in The Bahamas.

Asked by Lloyd whether it was necessary for URCA to have a foreign HR consultant, Smith said, “LCI, which Mrs. Marsha Lewis happens to be the managing director [of], is only an advisor with respect to human resource issues to URCA.”

Lloyd pressed further: “Is there a need for a foreigner?”

He asked whether the position was ever advertised locally.

Aranha answered, “I think the answer clearly has to be [no] because if it was done through a competitive biding process the trail would have been there.

“I think the answer clearly has to be that the situation was one whereby Mr. Saadat, having worked with her before, being aware of the product, and probably having a pretty good perception of what the pay for performance system for URCA should look like, decided that maybe that was the best person to engage and having introduced her to the then CEO (Michael Symonette) he was so persuaded and I have to believe that the CEO had great respect for her too.”

When URCA advertised other positions in 2010 — including the CEO and director of policy and regulation positions — applicants were advised to forward their applications to LCI Inc. (Barbados).

As mentioned, Saadat complied. The resume was no doubt a familiar one for his former colleague in Barbados and probably came as no surprise to her.

Pressed on whether this amounted to a conflict, Aranha told The Nassau Guardian that everything relating to the hiring of the CEO was done above board.

“The decision to engage the DPR and CEO were made by the board members,” he also said on Lloyd’s show. “The board members had an opportunity to see every resume. We interviewed the finalists.

“Every other appointment has been via a competitive selection process which is absolutely required in the act for the DPR and CEO for certain…We’re trying to develop in URCA a deep bench.”

He also advised that Lewis’ work with URCA is coming to an end, not because of the firestorm surrounding her engagement, but because she has nearly completed what she was hired to do.

With all the controversy surrounding Saadat’s and Lewis’ past connections to Cable and Wireless, Lloyd asked Aranha whether industry players are likely to be concerned.

“Quite frankly, I don’t think the competitors are going to be a big issue with respect to simply Usman,” he responded.

“With respect to the HR person, the advisor, that one may be a greater issue from the perspective of Mrs. Lewis’ husband and his employer.

“With respect to the services being provided by LCI, I’m not sure they’re going to continue much longer in any event as a consultant.”

The chairman added that something had come across his desk that suggested to him that URCA was engaging a Bahamian human resources professional to carry out some work.

“I think it would be wrong to abandon plans for our HR because of the noise we’re getting,” Aranha said.

Smith, meanwhile, seemed to miss the point on the Bahamianization issue.

“Here it is we have an organization to run and we want to be efficient, we want to be effective, we want to be professional,” she said.

“If our positions are filled by Bahamians and they are qualified and they are experienced that is great, but if when we make the call for these positions and Bahamians are not available, are not qualified, are not experienced, the position still has to be filled and if it means that we have to employ foreigners, we will do so.”

In 2009, URCA never made that call when it was looking for an HR consultant.

3/7/2011

Bahamas: Cable and Wireless Communications (CWC) and the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA)... What's The Connection? (Part-1)

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International