Church Picking On Gays
By Byron Buckley , Contributor
ALAS, PRIME Minister Portia Simpson Miller has named her Cabinet, notwithstanding the fear and hysteria expressed by some clergymen during the recent election campaign, about the possible inclusion of homosexuals in her administration.
Indeed, the overwhelming political mandate, in terms of seat count and geographic spread, given to Mrs Simpson Miller and her party is perhaps a rebuff to those who sought to vilify her position that she would appoint persons to Cabinet positions based on merit rather than sexual orientation.
It is shameful and scandalous for a Christian to support the victimisation (beat the B-man) and discrimination (job denial) of homosexuals and any other groups of persons.
The Christian community in Jamaica is grappling with the dilemma of how to embrace homosexuals while not condoning their sexual orientation and lifestyle.
Why do Christians regard homosexuality as an exceptional or grievous sin?
It is in a Christian's 'DNA' to object to homosexual practices. After all, homosexuality runs counter to the natural principle of procreation established by God. Copulation by Adam and Eve (not Steve) ensures the continuation of the human race. In underscoring this point, God, through Scripture, has regarded homosexuality and bestiality as morally reprehensible.
unnatural, sinful and inimical
Throughout Old and New Testament Scripture, God has expressed displeasure at men and women engaging in unnatural sexual acts with persons of the same sex. The Bible has even come out against men behaving effeminately. Importantly, the Bible forbids other kinds of sexual immorality, including fornication, incest, divorce/adultery and prostitution. Indeed, St Paul told Christians at Corinth that persons who practised homosexuality, adultery and idolatry, among other sins, would not enter God's kingdom.
So, the Church is on message in its opposition to homosexuality. And this article is not a call for the Church to abandon its teaching and stance against homosexuality as unnatural, sinful and inimical to procreation and family life as designed by God.
However, this is a critique of the Church's extreme and selective attitude towards homosexuality and those who practise it - which is contrary to Christians' mission to share the good news with ALL.
New Testament writers refer to homosexuality as part of sexual immorality in general. So to be consistent, the Church should oppose, with equal energy, adultery, fornication, wife-swapping, incest, paedophilia and the high rate of broken marriages. The Church can't cherry-pick its favourite sin to oppose. Homosexuals see straight through this double standard and ask, 'Why discriminate and victimise us?'
What's the real reason Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed? Although Christians often point to the destruction of these cities as caused by rampant homosexuality, there is reason to believe the practice was one of a suite of sinful behaviours that God found offensive. The Hebrew prophet Ezekiel explained the iniquity of Sodom and Gomorrah as pride, fullness of bread (material wealth), abundance of idleness (hedonism), lack of care for the poor and needy, haughtiness and abominable (homosexual) practices.
transformative mission
So, again, Christians have chosen to take their own meaning or emphasis from the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah. A more apt message to take away is that as a society, we should ensure that material prosperity does not cause us to descend into an orgy of immorality and sensuality. We should also ensure that we take care of the disadvantaged, the poor and needy. This is why Christians should never be found in the position where they are supporting harm being done to anyone - especially with the Church's dismal record during the Crusades and the transatlantic slave trade.
The transformative mission of the Church requires it to display a higher standard of behaviour towards homosexuals. Christians should be leading the way generally in protecting the welfare of homosexuals. Christians can't join the rowdy chorus of 'kill or beat the B-man.' The challenge for the Church is to establish a caring and grace-filled environment that enables it to share the transformative gospel with homosexuals as well. Jesus Christ came to heal the broken-hearted and set the captives free - in short, to transform lives.
The Church cannot be selective about who it ministers to, nor can it place boundaries against groups - such as homosexuals - as if they are beyond God's love.
I believe while there are persons who have accepted their homosexual orientation, others have not. This is where the Church has a mission to offer counsel and healing. But a condemnatory stance by the Church will only drive away such persons who are likely to be befriended by the wrong crowd.
The homophobic (I deliberately choose this word) reaction by some church leaders and Christians is tactically foolish. In the grand culture war and cosmic struggle between good and evil, Christians must secure victory with the weapon of love, which will bring transformation to individual lives.
Maybe Christians have adopted a hard line against homosexuals because, in the case of Sodom and Gomorrah, God destroyed, rather than mercifully saving them.
But that's not the full story: Sodom and Gomorrah could have been saved if there were enough righteous people there! In the final analysis, no matter how repulsed Christians are by the haughtiness of some homosexuals, we should leave their fate to God.
In the meantime, we anticipate the PM carrying through her campaign promise to debate and review the law against buggery, allowing legislators to vote according to their conscience and upon their constituents' advice.
No doubt, the voice of the Church and faith-based community will be heard. After all, Jamaica is a pluralistic society as well as a robust democracy. And I prefer this to a theocracy.
Byron Buckley is an associate editor at The Gleaner. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily those of the newspaper. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and byron.buckley@gleanerjm.com.
January 8, 2012
jamaica-gleaner
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.
Sunday, January 8, 2012
Saturday, January 7, 2012
October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis - Cuba
October 1962 Missile Crisis
President John F. Kennedy did not react with common sense to the U.S. defeat at the Bay of Pigs. He sought revenge. The Taylor Commission, established by the President to analyze the fiasco, recommended initiating new political, military, economic and propaganda measures "against Castro." The report led to the preparation and implementation of a new undercover operations plan, known as Operation Mongoose, which beginning in November 1961 unleashed thousands of terrorist acts, sabotage, assassination attempts and armed attacks.
Some months later, General Maxwell D. Taylor, at that time serving as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the President that he did not think it would be possible to overthrow the Cuban government without a direct U.S. intervention and recommended a "more aggressive" course of action than Operation Mongoose. He proposed an escalation of the operations authorized by Kennedy to create an incident which could precipitate a massive surprise air attack and/or invasion.
On March 7, 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed "creating a provocation which would justify U.S. military action" and just two days later, the Secretary of Defense submitted to the Joint Chiefs of Staff a set of measures designed to serve as the pretext for such an intervention in Cuba.
Amidst the escalating tension orchestrated by the United States, on May 29, 1962, a Soviet delegation, led by a member of the Communist Party Central Committee Presidium, arrived in Cuba with a proposal to install ballistic nuclear missiles on the island, in order to protect the country from U.S. invasion and strengthen the world’s socialist positions.
THE AGREEMENT
The leadership of the Revolution and the Soviet government signed an agreement establishing military collaboration in the defense of Cuba’s national territory. Despite the fact that the agreement was totally within the boundaries of international law and its signing was a prerogative of sovereign states, the Soviet leadership did not accept the Cuban proposal to make the decisions public, which served as a pretext for the Kennedy administration to precipitate a crisis.
On June 20, 1962, the Soviet General Staff approved the assignment of officers and troops for Operation Anadyr. Commandante Raúl Castro went to Moscow July 3-16 to announce the Cuban-Soviet agreement as a sovereign agreement between the two nations. Nevertheless, the Soviets insisted on keeping the operations secret, which was not possible given their magnitude and the continual U.S. reconnaissance flights over Cuban territory.
Soviet troops began to arrive in Cuba during the first week of August. U.S. intelligence had already detected anti-aircraft missiles, MIG-21 aircraft and unidentified constructions, as well as the presence of Soviet military experts. On October 16, the United States U-2’s confirmed ballistic nuclear missile bases in
San Cristóbal, Pinar del Río province and on this same day, around 11:00am, Kennedy convened a meeting of officials who would later become the Executive Committee of the National Security Council. The group studied various proposals for action over the course of five days and on October 20, decided to impose a "naval blockade" on Cuba, for which five task forces were established.
Beginning on October 21, U.S. Armed Forces were moved from the status of peacetime defense (DEFCON–5) to high alert (DEFCON–3) and ordered to relocate anti-aircraft forces to prepare for combat, reinforce the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo, evacuate families and civilians from the base, and deploy the forces necessary to impose the blockade.
THE CRISIS
On October 22, with the U.S. naval blockade in place and the mobilization of forces to bomb or invade Cuba, the so-called Missile Crisis unfolded. Kennedy demanded the withdrawal of Soviet strategic weapons from Cuba and announced the naval blockade to which the Revolutionary Armed Forces responded with a combat alert for all units and a popular mobilization to confront the possibility of an invasion of gigantic proportions that could unleash a nuclear holocaust.
U.S. reconnaissance flights increased to such an extent that, on October 26, Fidel ordered that, the following day, enemy aircraft flying at low altitudes be fired upon. Given the insolence of the U.S. government, a U-2 was downed with an anti-aircraft missile over Oriente province on October 27, one of the most charged moments during the crisis.
October 26th through the 31st, there was an exchange of messages between Nikita Khrushchev and Fidel. Those sent by Khrushchev made clear the unilateral manner in which the Soviets were acting and their underestimation of Cuba, while those of Fidel warned of the imminent dangers and expressed Cuba’s commitment to revolutionary principles.
On Sunday, October 28, the Kremlin communicated to Washington that orders had been given to halt construction of missile bases in Cuba, to dismantle those in existence and return the nuclear missiles to the USSR. The U.S. responded with a demand to inspect Cuban territory to verify the operations. That afternoon, Cuba rejected the inspection which the two super-powers had agreed to and announced its five point position.
The United States and the Soviet Union reached an agreement based on a proposal made by Khrushchev on October 26 and the U.S. inspected the weapons aboard Soviet ships outside of Cuban territorial waters, which for the two super-powers marked the end of the crisis. The naval blockade was suspended October 30 and 31, for a visit by United Nations General Secretary U. Thant to Cuba, and re-established November 1. At 6:45 pm on November 20, Kennedy ordered the lifting of the blockade and on the 22nd the Revolutionary government declared a return to normalcy on the island, on war footing since October 22.
Havana. January 5, 2012
granma.cu
More on the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis
President John F. Kennedy did not react with common sense to the U.S. defeat at the Bay of Pigs. He sought revenge. The Taylor Commission, established by the President to analyze the fiasco, recommended initiating new political, military, economic and propaganda measures "against Castro." The report led to the preparation and implementation of a new undercover operations plan, known as Operation Mongoose, which beginning in November 1961 unleashed thousands of terrorist acts, sabotage, assassination attempts and armed attacks.
Some months later, General Maxwell D. Taylor, at that time serving as head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told the President that he did not think it would be possible to overthrow the Cuban government without a direct U.S. intervention and recommended a "more aggressive" course of action than Operation Mongoose. He proposed an escalation of the operations authorized by Kennedy to create an incident which could precipitate a massive surprise air attack and/or invasion.
On March 7, 1962, the Joint Chiefs of Staff proposed "creating a provocation which would justify U.S. military action" and just two days later, the Secretary of Defense submitted to the Joint Chiefs of Staff a set of measures designed to serve as the pretext for such an intervention in Cuba.
Amidst the escalating tension orchestrated by the United States, on May 29, 1962, a Soviet delegation, led by a member of the Communist Party Central Committee Presidium, arrived in Cuba with a proposal to install ballistic nuclear missiles on the island, in order to protect the country from U.S. invasion and strengthen the world’s socialist positions.
THE AGREEMENT
The leadership of the Revolution and the Soviet government signed an agreement establishing military collaboration in the defense of Cuba’s national territory. Despite the fact that the agreement was totally within the boundaries of international law and its signing was a prerogative of sovereign states, the Soviet leadership did not accept the Cuban proposal to make the decisions public, which served as a pretext for the Kennedy administration to precipitate a crisis.
On June 20, 1962, the Soviet General Staff approved the assignment of officers and troops for Operation Anadyr. Commandante Raúl Castro went to Moscow July 3-16 to announce the Cuban-Soviet agreement as a sovereign agreement between the two nations. Nevertheless, the Soviets insisted on keeping the operations secret, which was not possible given their magnitude and the continual U.S. reconnaissance flights over Cuban territory.
Soviet troops began to arrive in Cuba during the first week of August. U.S. intelligence had already detected anti-aircraft missiles, MIG-21 aircraft and unidentified constructions, as well as the presence of Soviet military experts. On October 16, the United States U-2’s confirmed ballistic nuclear missile bases in
San Cristóbal, Pinar del Río province and on this same day, around 11:00am, Kennedy convened a meeting of officials who would later become the Executive Committee of the National Security Council. The group studied various proposals for action over the course of five days and on October 20, decided to impose a "naval blockade" on Cuba, for which five task forces were established.
Beginning on October 21, U.S. Armed Forces were moved from the status of peacetime defense (DEFCON–5) to high alert (DEFCON–3) and ordered to relocate anti-aircraft forces to prepare for combat, reinforce the U.S. Naval Base at Guantánamo, evacuate families and civilians from the base, and deploy the forces necessary to impose the blockade.
THE CRISIS
On October 22, with the U.S. naval blockade in place and the mobilization of forces to bomb or invade Cuba, the so-called Missile Crisis unfolded. Kennedy demanded the withdrawal of Soviet strategic weapons from Cuba and announced the naval blockade to which the Revolutionary Armed Forces responded with a combat alert for all units and a popular mobilization to confront the possibility of an invasion of gigantic proportions that could unleash a nuclear holocaust.
U.S. reconnaissance flights increased to such an extent that, on October 26, Fidel ordered that, the following day, enemy aircraft flying at low altitudes be fired upon. Given the insolence of the U.S. government, a U-2 was downed with an anti-aircraft missile over Oriente province on October 27, one of the most charged moments during the crisis.
October 26th through the 31st, there was an exchange of messages between Nikita Khrushchev and Fidel. Those sent by Khrushchev made clear the unilateral manner in which the Soviets were acting and their underestimation of Cuba, while those of Fidel warned of the imminent dangers and expressed Cuba’s commitment to revolutionary principles.
On Sunday, October 28, the Kremlin communicated to Washington that orders had been given to halt construction of missile bases in Cuba, to dismantle those in existence and return the nuclear missiles to the USSR. The U.S. responded with a demand to inspect Cuban territory to verify the operations. That afternoon, Cuba rejected the inspection which the two super-powers had agreed to and announced its five point position.
The United States and the Soviet Union reached an agreement based on a proposal made by Khrushchev on October 26 and the U.S. inspected the weapons aboard Soviet ships outside of Cuban territorial waters, which for the two super-powers marked the end of the crisis. The naval blockade was suspended October 30 and 31, for a visit by United Nations General Secretary U. Thant to Cuba, and re-established November 1. At 6:45 pm on November 20, Kennedy ordered the lifting of the blockade and on the 22nd the Revolutionary government declared a return to normalcy on the island, on war footing since October 22.
Havana. January 5, 2012
granma.cu
More on the October 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis
Thursday, January 5, 2012
The Arab Spring of 2011 in global context... ...no other event in world politics had such wide-ranging effects both in the region and far beyond
Uncertain World: The Arab Spring in global context
By Fyodor Lukyanov
Much has been written about the Arab Spring of 2011 and rightly so: no other event in world politics had such wide-ranging effects both in the region and far beyond.
The process that began in the waning days of 2010 has toppled regimes in four countries (Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen), reinvigorated political Islam, intensified competition among regional powers both in terms of geopolitical ambitions and the Sunni-Shiite confrontation, and led to a reevaluation of NATO’s role in the world. Finally, it has again raised questions about democratization as a means of resolving problems and the meaning of democracy in the modern world.
The countries at the center of the storm are not the poorest or least developed, with the exception of Yemen. So, these upheavals cannot be reduced to strictly economic factors. The authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, which have remained virtually unchanged since the middle of the 20th century, were long considered the only model of governance suitable for the region. However, the changes in the last few decades have made them look increasingly anachronistic, all the more so since the revolution in the media has made international experiences available to the Arab masses , not the overwhelming majority, but a broad enough swathe of society to provoke change.
Legitimacy is the key issue. It is no accident that the conservative Gulf monarchies, where power is inherited, were shaken but unhurt by the Arab Spring, whereas autocratic republics with formally elected presidents who sought to transfer power to an heir crumbled under popular discontent.
Islamic political parties have clearly come out on top in countries that have already held elections (Tunisia and Egypt), and Islamists are becoming more active in countries that have yet to hold democratic elections (Libya, Yemen and Syria). This is no surprise; decades of one-man or at least one-party rule have left no other foundation for building a new political system.
Democracy can develop further in the Middle East if secular parties are established in addition to Islamic ones and if the forces of political Islam are interested in building modern institutions. Otherwise, the democratic spring will serve only to legitimize a new anti-democratic model, this time Islamic in nature.
Two oil monarchies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are at the forefront of the struggle for regional leadership. Their efforts have turned the Arab League, long derided as a club of dictators, into an instrument of regime change (the only exception being Bahrain, where Saudi interference helped suppress the Shiite protest movement) and a pretext for intervention (NATO’s operation in Libya largely succeeded due to Arab support).
The confluence of three processes, great power rivalry in the region (Riyadh - Tehran), Sunni-Shiite confrontation, and increasing international concern over the Iranian nuclear program, is changing the regional context. The risk of military action will increase next year. With the growing alignment of interests among such diverse countries as Saudi Arabia and Israel and the upcoming presidential election in the United States, the prospect of military conflict is rising. The Iranian-Shiite element is moving to the fore in the struggle over Syria. Arab pressure on the Alawite regime increasingly resembles a proxy war against an Iranian ally.
NATO’s intervention in Libya showed that the alliance’s military capability is limited and that the organization itself has become much less of a monolith. In fact, the bombing of Libya was less a NATO operation than an example of individual countries pursuing their own interests. France and Britain gained from their leading role in this campaign, while the United States used Libya to test a model in which leadership is relegated to the Europeans when a conflict is primarily their concern.
This year has yielded contradictory results for the fate of democracy. The invasion of Libya was legally presented as enforcing a no-fly zone, though in reality its direct aim was regime change. The bombing in support of Libya’s “democratic forces,” that is, one side in the civil war, about which nothing was known at the time, went far beyond the bounds of decency, regardless of what you think about the Gaddafi regime. The 20-year transformation of democracy and humanitarian protection from a noble idea to a cynical instrument reached its apogee in Libya and largely discredited these concepts.
Even so, democracy, or rather the desire for the transition of power and the refusal to accept permanent regimes, has taken root and spread all over the world. The public in Egypt and Libya rejected attempts of their leaders to transfer power to heirs. Essentially the same thing happened in other places, such as Transnistria, where people refused to vote for their long-standing ruler or Moscow’s choic, and instead backed an independent candidate. The same phenomenon was seen in Russia, where Vladimir Putin’s unilateral decision to return to the presidency turned the political atmosphere against the government.
Attempts to impose democracy produce the opposite effect but it is impossible to suppress people’s natural desire to express their political views. This is the result not only of 2011 but of the 20 years since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
11:12 05/01/2012
rian.ru
By Fyodor Lukyanov
Much has been written about the Arab Spring of 2011 and rightly so: no other event in world politics had such wide-ranging effects both in the region and far beyond.
The process that began in the waning days of 2010 has toppled regimes in four countries (Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen), reinvigorated political Islam, intensified competition among regional powers both in terms of geopolitical ambitions and the Sunni-Shiite confrontation, and led to a reevaluation of NATO’s role in the world. Finally, it has again raised questions about democratization as a means of resolving problems and the meaning of democracy in the modern world.
The countries at the center of the storm are not the poorest or least developed, with the exception of Yemen. So, these upheavals cannot be reduced to strictly economic factors. The authoritarian regimes in the Middle East, which have remained virtually unchanged since the middle of the 20th century, were long considered the only model of governance suitable for the region. However, the changes in the last few decades have made them look increasingly anachronistic, all the more so since the revolution in the media has made international experiences available to the Arab masses , not the overwhelming majority, but a broad enough swathe of society to provoke change.
Legitimacy is the key issue. It is no accident that the conservative Gulf monarchies, where power is inherited, were shaken but unhurt by the Arab Spring, whereas autocratic republics with formally elected presidents who sought to transfer power to an heir crumbled under popular discontent.
Islamic political parties have clearly come out on top in countries that have already held elections (Tunisia and Egypt), and Islamists are becoming more active in countries that have yet to hold democratic elections (Libya, Yemen and Syria). This is no surprise; decades of one-man or at least one-party rule have left no other foundation for building a new political system.
Democracy can develop further in the Middle East if secular parties are established in addition to Islamic ones and if the forces of political Islam are interested in building modern institutions. Otherwise, the democratic spring will serve only to legitimize a new anti-democratic model, this time Islamic in nature.
Two oil monarchies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, are at the forefront of the struggle for regional leadership. Their efforts have turned the Arab League, long derided as a club of dictators, into an instrument of regime change (the only exception being Bahrain, where Saudi interference helped suppress the Shiite protest movement) and a pretext for intervention (NATO’s operation in Libya largely succeeded due to Arab support).
The confluence of three processes, great power rivalry in the region (Riyadh - Tehran), Sunni-Shiite confrontation, and increasing international concern over the Iranian nuclear program, is changing the regional context. The risk of military action will increase next year. With the growing alignment of interests among such diverse countries as Saudi Arabia and Israel and the upcoming presidential election in the United States, the prospect of military conflict is rising. The Iranian-Shiite element is moving to the fore in the struggle over Syria. Arab pressure on the Alawite regime increasingly resembles a proxy war against an Iranian ally.
NATO’s intervention in Libya showed that the alliance’s military capability is limited and that the organization itself has become much less of a monolith. In fact, the bombing of Libya was less a NATO operation than an example of individual countries pursuing their own interests. France and Britain gained from their leading role in this campaign, while the United States used Libya to test a model in which leadership is relegated to the Europeans when a conflict is primarily their concern.
This year has yielded contradictory results for the fate of democracy. The invasion of Libya was legally presented as enforcing a no-fly zone, though in reality its direct aim was regime change. The bombing in support of Libya’s “democratic forces,” that is, one side in the civil war, about which nothing was known at the time, went far beyond the bounds of decency, regardless of what you think about the Gaddafi regime. The 20-year transformation of democracy and humanitarian protection from a noble idea to a cynical instrument reached its apogee in Libya and largely discredited these concepts.
Even so, democracy, or rather the desire for the transition of power and the refusal to accept permanent regimes, has taken root and spread all over the world. The public in Egypt and Libya rejected attempts of their leaders to transfer power to heirs. Essentially the same thing happened in other places, such as Transnistria, where people refused to vote for their long-standing ruler or Moscow’s choic, and instead backed an independent candidate. The same phenomenon was seen in Russia, where Vladimir Putin’s unilateral decision to return to the presidency turned the political atmosphere against the government.
Attempts to impose democracy produce the opposite effect but it is impossible to suppress people’s natural desire to express their political views. This is the result not only of 2011 but of the 20 years since the end of the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.
11:12 05/01/2012
rian.ru
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
The CARICOM blueprint for illicit drug trafficking
by Melissa Beale, Research Associate for the Council on Hemispheric Affairs
The 1970s marked the dawning of the drug trafficking phenomenon in the Caribbean. Since then, the tentacles of this multibillion-dollar illegal industry has plagued the West Indian islands with expanding drug cartel ramifications from Central and South America which continue to make use of the islands as a channel to deliver supplies to high-demand markets in the United States and Europe. Drug cartels use the Caribbean as a mode of transit, mainly because of its geographic layout. The cartographic projection of the Caribbean islands provides an advantage to drug cartels which make good use of its long coastlines to transport narcotics by means of fishing boats, speedboats, freighter shipments, yachts, and other modes of small commercial, as well as private sea transportation conveyances, along with light aircraft. For instance, The Bahamas is a favored transit point for Jamaican marijuana and South American cocaine cultivated and processed specifically for sale in the United States. Due to the far-flung Caribbean archipelago that contains over 700 islands spread across some 15,000 square miles[1], only thirty or forty of which are inhabited, thus making it difficult to regulate and detect such illegal activities taking place in such waters. In addition, “small commercial and private conveyances along short-distance maritime and aerial routes”[2] also contribute to what has become a security dilemma.
New Developments: The Spillover Along the U.S./Mexico Border Control
Mexico is infamous for its out-of-control gang violence that escalated from 2006 onward, when President Felipe Calderón began putting increased security pressure on drug trafficking organizations, as well as began to militarize the anti-drug war. In the 1980s and early 1990s, most drugs were trafficked into the U.S. from the Caribbean to South Florida.[3] Currently, however, Mexico is the primary supplier of methamphetamine to the U.S, and is responsible for 95 percent of all cocaine entering the country. With the current tightening of the Mexican/U.S. borders, drug traffickers once again have returned to the Caribbean to transport their narcotics. Due to this increased trafficking in the region, alliances and hostilities also have developed between Central and South American criminal groups and their Caribbean counterparts. As a result, drug and gang violence has been exacerbated along with other associated malignant socioeconomic indicators throughout the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), as part of the spill over from the rest of Latin America.
U.S./Caribbean Tactics
Along with the U.S.’ present tightening of its border with Mexico, there seems to be a significant shift in Washington’s focus on international security issues towards the Caribbean, with the creation of the Caribbean-U.S. Security Cooperation Dialogue. This annual event was established in 2010, to deal specifically with drug- related issues. [4] In accordance to a news report, the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations was charged that the new subcommittee responsible for creating the Caribbean Basin Security Initiative (CBSI) to control and reduce drug trafficking and related violence within the region, which Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ), would oversee the hearing. The CBSI has now decided to expand its focus to provide job training for youth and to help end corruption throughout the CARICOM region. U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who attended the Caribbean-U.S. Security Cooperation Dialogue held this November, seems to be supporting an open line of discussions with CARICOM on this matter. In fact, Holder spoke to members of the Judiciary Committee in December. In his testimony in that forum, he asserted that drug trading in the Caribbean “is a national security issue that we must face.”[5] The U.S. must be aware of the fact that drug trafficking and related violence is a global problem and necessitates a global solution. Therefore, Latin America should also be invited to talks, as most Caribbean drug trafficking is a result of Latin American gangs using the region as a means of convergence of narcotics and marketed into the U.S. and Europe. This seems to be the case particularly regarding Puerto Rico, as frequent daily flights and being legally part of the U.S., make it easier for drug traffickers to smuggle their illegal cargo into North America.
Presently, there is a lot of speculation about Puerto Rico becoming a narco-state with the increase in the illicit flow of drugs. Officials have noted that “75 percent of the [year’s] murders are drug-related.”[6] According to a report by CBS news, “Drug smuggling is as much a part of Puerto Rico as palm trees and sand – American sand.”[7] The main reason for this is that “For drug traffickers…once they get to Puerto Rico, no more customs checkpoints on the way to the mainland.”[8] This is also the case for other U.S. Caribbean territories such as the U.S. Virgin Islands, which needs to be examined by U.S. authorities. Greater emphasis, therefore, needs to be made in when it comes to U.S.’ tactics to combat drug trafficking in their Caribbean territories – Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands come to mind since “domestic commercial cargo shipments between these U.S. territories and the continental U.S. ordinarily are not subject to US Customs inspection”.[9] Additionally, these U.S. territories, which are often less rigorously controlled and monitored by officials, become popular ocean drop-off points for Latin American cocaine shipments that have been previously airdropped on other eastern Caribbean islands such as St Martin and St Kitts.
Haiti’s Continuous Vulnerability
With the tightening of U.S./Mexico borders, vulnerable islands within the Caribbean have become even more susceptible to the lure of drug trafficking. Haiti is of particular interest to drug traffickers, as the island’s population has become more prone to participate in this illegal narcotic trade for a number of reasons, such as: poverty and corruption, economic and political instability, as well as an unsafe environment and a profaned ceiling on the availability of jobs – all of which has been worsened by the aftermath of the devastating January 2010 earthquake.
Even before the earthquake, Haiti was the unlucky member of CARICOM, experiencing long periods of poverty and corruption. Of course Haiti is the poorest country in the Western Hemisphere and arguably, the most corrupt. Since the earthquake, poverty has been exacerbated, resulting in many Haitians turning towards drug dealing and trafficking in order to gain a fast injection of income. Furthermore, many Haitians have also started consuming drugs in order to ease the daily challenges of gathering adequate water, food and shelter for their survival. This has created an alarming number of addicts without access to treatment facilities, as there are presently no NGO- or government-sponsored rehabilitation programs or treatment centers available to the public within the country.[10]
The earthquake also has amplified the breadth of corruption on the island, which amply was already present even before the disaster. In 2009 and 2010, a number of Haitian National Police (HNP) officers were arrested for conspiring with drug traffickers and other criminal organizations in gang-related activities.[11] For instance, in an extensively publicized event reported in September 2010, “the Director of the Central Judicial Police, which oversees all HNP investigative units, announced the arrest of seven officers – most of them traffic police from the Brigade d’Intervention Motorisée (BIM) – accused of aiding drug traffickers and kidnappers.”[12] Haitian officers described the seizures as part of a widespread cleanup within the local police force.
Despite Herculean efforts, Haiti still struggles with drug traffickers whose presence has increased significantly after the earthquake. Since a large portion of the country’s infrastructure was damaged, the HNP has been left with additional difficulties to combat drug trafficking. Although Haiti is not a major supplier of drug and products, (only marijuana is grown in certain parts of the island) it is an ideal transit zone in which aircraft from Latin American countries perform drop-offs on a profusion of clandestine, unmonitored runways. Haiti’s topology also features long coastlines, which are woefully inadequate when it comes to the proper number of coast guard stations, and a mountainous interior that is perfect for accommodating drug trafficking routes as police officers are unable to chart the functionality of drug routes in such a geologically intricate area.
Jamaica
Jamaica has experienced similar social and economic instabilities. The largest English-speaking island in the Caribbean, Jamaica is both the largest supplier and most prominent consumer of marijuana in the Caribbean. This is due in part to its thriving Rastafarian culture, in which its followers historically have “viewed marijuana as a medicine, intoxicant, and a religious sacrament.”[13] Many drug traffickers and farmers continue to cultivate the plant in the northeastern part of the island, known as the Blue Mountains. This affords an ideal location for the drug’s cultivation, as the layout of the mountainside, valleys and natural ridges make the production of marijuana difficult to monitor. Traditionally, farmers have been able to conceal their production of marijuana plants amidst banana and coconut trees.
In addition, many drug traffickers have become both respected as well as feared figures within Jamaican society, such as the infamous drug lord Christopher “Dudus” Coke, one of the most dangerous criminals in the Caribbean and the United States. Drug lords such as Dudus have been able to win the loyalty of the local community by providing “employment, education, medical and food supplies” for their neighbors, when the government was unable to do so.[14] Island governments in the Caribbean, therefore, need to focus on the felt needs of the population in order to allocate adequate funds to social and economic development efforts so that locals do not turn to drug traffickers for such support. But, this is far more easily said than done.
Reduction Challenges
Drug trafficking seems to be on the rise within the Caribbean, particularly in Haiti, Jamaica and Puerto Rico. Persistent issues such as poverty, corruption, and political and economic instability recurrent plague these small island-nations. The limited development funding available within these chronically under-financed islands remains an important challenge. Many of them, such as Barbados, rely on tourism for their survival, and with the current relatively unfavorable status of the current world economy, tourists are less likely to be engaging in discretionary traveling around the globe. This has had a spiraling effect on the economic and social stability of islands, where, for instance, many agriculturalists who own small parcels of land or local businesses in St Vincent and the Grenadines now are found turning to growing marijuana for much-needed supplemental income.
Furthermore, numerous Caribbean governments also lack the necessary funds needed to properly address security issues involved in combating drug trafficking, as some islands are still without a designated police force or coastguard service to properly monitor and ward off the danger posed by it. Moreover, these governments usually do not have adequate funds for the creation or maintenance of rehabilitation clinics. This is particularly alarming for women and children who are battling drug addictions as their needs are often far different from those presented by males, and frequently involve sexual trauma on top of their other addictions.[15] Female drug users are dramatically increasing in Central America and in the Caribbean, where the International Narcotics Control Board’s (INCR) annual report has advised CARICOM governments “to ensure that, in efforts to combat drug abuse, adequate programmes are in place to ensure that special attention is given to female drug abusers”.[16] On the bright side, however, islands such as Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago are engaged in preventative programs that target youth, who are particularly vulnerable to the shallow temptations of the drug world, through school lectures and training programs at all levels of education.
In conclusion, the Caribbean drug dilemma exposes the severity of the danger that illicit drug trafficking presents to these small islands, as well as to the rest of the Western Hemisphere. This will continue to be a problem for local CARICOM governments unless they team up with much wealthier, as well as much more developed countries such as the U.S., which can help provide the much needed funds and other resources, such as training of local police officers and coast guard official, in order to professionally rebut this phenomenon.
References for this article can be found here.
The Council on Hemispheric Affairs, founded in 1975, is an independent, non-profit, non-partisan, tax-exempt research and information organization. It has been described on the Senate floor as being "one of the nation's most respected bodies of scholars and policy makers." For more information, visit www.coha.org or email coha@coha.org
January 3, 2012
caribbeannewsnow
Tuesday, January 3, 2012
Politics in the Caribbean - 2011: ...Never before in the history of the region have there been general elections in two Caribbean countries on the same date; coupled with a State of Emergency in another; allegations of assassinations against two prime ministers; the surprise resignation of a prime minister, not to mention the democratic change of government in Haiti, all within a 12-month period
Politics dominated 2011 in the Caribbean
By Peter Richards
BRIDGETOWN, Barbados (CMC) — For political historians, 2011 has provided lots of fresh fodder.
Never before in the history of the region have there been general elections in two Caribbean countries on the same date; coupled with a State of Emergency in another; allegations of assassinations against two prime ministers; the surprise resignation of a prime minister, not to mention the democratic change of government in Haiti, all within a 12-month period.
In addition, Barbados’ Prime Minister Freundel Stuart warned leading members of his administration that any attempt to derail his government would have certain consequences.
“If I understand history at all, if a coup is attempted and it succeeds, the person against whom the coup was aimed usually pays for it with his neck. If the coup fails, the plotters and those who were trying to execute it pay for it with their necks,” he said.
His finance minister, Chris Sinckler, acknowledged that he and 10 of his colleagues were seeking an “urgent audience” with Stuart because some members felt that the Democratic Labour Party’s level of public engagement on issues affecting the country was found wanting.
“I am hoping that by putting this on the record that those who feel that I am after some office and I spend all of my waking hours thinking about how to unseat this person or the other, or cause confusion that would lead to that, I really hope that they would stand down,” he added.
At the start of the year, St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Dr Ralph Gonsalves stunned parliament with his disclosure of an alleged assassination plot against him.
“Cocaine traffickers and money launderers are conspiring actively with others to kill the prime minister and on the public airwaves people are being exhorted by some to use any means necessary to remove a democratically elected government,” he added. This statement followed public pronouncements by Opposition Leader Arnhim Eustace that the government would fall by the end of 2011.
Nine months later, Gonsalves’ counterpart in Trinidad and Tobago, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, caused an even bigger stir when she announced that the police had uncovered a plot to kill her and senior government ministers.
“I am advised by the law enforcement authorities that they have, through their intelligence resources uncovered an assassination plot against members of my government and myself,” she told the nation, adding that the assassination threats were as a direct result of the “successful” 105-day State of Emergency that had severely disrupted the activities of the criminals.
But in the end, despite the detention of 17 people, police were unable to lay any charge and the opposition termed the “assassination plot” as nothing more than “an exaggerated political stunt” by the government.
Whether he was forced out of office or not, Bruce Golding surprised Jamaicans with his announcement that he was stepping down as head of the government in October less than five years after taking the oath of office as prime minister.
“The challenges of the last four years have taken their toll and it was appropriate now to make way for new leadership to continue the programmes of economic recovery and transformation while mobilising the party for victory in the next general elections,” Golding said in a farewell statement.
His successor, Andrew Holness, 39, became the youngest ever prime minister since political Independence in 1962, but also now has the unenvious record of being booted out of office just after two months.
Holness gambled and called a general election on December 29 but the voters decided that Portia Simpson Miller, the first ever woman prime minister they sent packing in 2007, was a better choice to lead the country. They gave her People’s National Party an overwhelming 42-21 margin of victory.
Simpson Miller, affectionally referred to as ‘Sista P’, faces deep problems as she takes over the government, with debt running at approximately 130 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product and unemployment at more than 12 per cent.
The new government has already said it will be seeking to renegotiate the multi-billiondollar Standby Agreement from the International Monetary Fund.
“We have plenty of work ahead of us... you will hear from us soon as we move to put our team in place,” she told supporters, urging all Jamaicans “to work with us as we move this country forward together.
“We will tell you as it is, we will hide nothing from you, when it is tough and rough we will let you know, when it is easy we will let you know,” Simpson Miller said, informing all investors and businesses “that you have a government you can trust”.
The Jamaican election apart, voters in Guyana and St Lucia created history by going to the polls on the same day to elect their respective governments.
For Dr Kenny Anthony, November 28 allowed him another bite at governing St Lucia, following his 11-6 defeat in the 2006 poll. The incumbent United Workers Party (UWP) had been predicting a landslide, but the voters instead sent Stephenson King and his UWP team packing.
“I ask God to give me the strength and courage and most of all the wisdom to manage the affairs of the country in the next few years or until such time it is necessary for me to say goodbye to political life,” an emotional 60-year-old Anthony said.
Donald Ramotar, meanwhile, ensured that the People’s Progressive Party/Civic would remain at the helm of government in Guyana, even though it failed to obtain a majority in the 65-member National Assembly.
Ramotar faced a formidable challenge from the Alliance for Change (AFC) and the opposition grouping, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) that between them controlled 33 of the seats in Parliament.
The 61-year-old economist said the “elections have reaffirmed our maturity as a democratic nation, something of which we should all be proud.
“I wish to therefore congratulate my Guyanese brothers and sisters from all walks of life, who participated in this latest renewal of our democracy, for playing their part in this vital national process! Regardless of the results we are all winners — Guyana and all the people of Guyana,” he added.
In March, Haitians also celebrated the continued renewal of their democracy by electing musician Michael “Sweet Micky” Martelly as their new head of state, replacing Rene Preval, who like Bharrat Jagdeo in Guyana had been barred by their country’s constitution from seeking a third consecutive term in office.
Martelly had received nearly 68 per cent of the votes cast in the March 20 second-round run-off and easily defeated former first lady and law professor Mirlande Manigat.
“We’ll work for all Haitians. Together we can do it,” he promised voters soon after his victory, but Martelly found it was easier said than done, having to nominate three persons before legislators agreed to his nominee for prime minister and the Frenchspeaking Caricom country still coming to grips with the January 2010 earthquake and a cholera outbreak.
Grenada’s Prime Minister Tillman Thomas, the then Caricom chairman, said the successful completion of the presidential election signalled a “renewal of spirit and the rise of a new political generation” in Haiti despite the return to the country of former dictator Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier and former president Jean Bertrand Aristide.
The High Court is likely to determine the future political careers of Dominica’s Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit and his education minister Petter St Jean after the main opposition United Workers Party (UWP) argued that the two ministers were illegally nominated to contest the December 2009 general election because they held dual citizenship at the time. A ruling is expected in early 2012.
In Nevis, the opposition Concerned Citizens Movement (CCM) has maintained that the July poll won by the ruling Nevis Reformation Party (NRP) was rigged and it, too, has gone to the courts seeking redress.
Despite early pronouncements, the British government failed to name a date for general elections in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) and citizens took to the streets to demand an end to being ruled by London.
But the TCI was not the only overseas territory having problems with Britain. Anguilla’s Chief Minister Hubert Hughes has called on citizens to seriously consider seeking political independence after the governor of the 35 square mile island Alistair Harrison refused to sign off on the 2011 budget.
“We have come far enough and fought hard enough to have an Anguillian governor or governor general, an Anguillian flag and being identified to the world as Anguillians and not ‘Belongers’,” Hughes said.
While the feud between Hughes and Harrison continued at year end, Reuben Meade in Montserrat upgraded his chief minister status to that of premier even while acknowledging that the new Constitution that went into effect from September was not a perfect document.
“We must continue the work of improving the document over time. We must, however, not lose sight of the focus on development issues while at the same time honouring the provisions of the constitution,” Meade said.
In the British Virgin Islands, 67-year-old physician Orlando Smith was voted as premier replacing Ralph T O’Neal in the general election.
The political upheavals in the region were taking place amid the problems associated with the ongoing global economic and financial crisis that continue to thwart socioeconomic development to the point that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that Caribbean countries will continue to struggle and governments will have to tighten on their economic spending.
“The Caribbean region continues to struggle to recover from a long and protracted recession. Drags from fiscal consolidation and higher energy prices continue to constrain private demand, while the recovery in tourism flows remains tepid amid high unemployment in advanced economies,” said the IMF’s deputy director for the Western Hemisphere, David Vegara.
For its part, China continued its largesse in the region pumping millions of dollars in assistance to Caricom as part of its diplomatic initiative to improve relations with this region a point that was underscored by Vice Premier Wang Qishan as he addressed the China Caribbean Economic and Trade Cooperation Forum held in Trinidad.
The economic situation has been blamed by the Trinidad and Tobago Government for its reluctance to provide more than a five per cent wage increase for public workers, resulting in trade unions mounting street demonstrations and warning that a nationwide shutdown of the country is on the cards.
The introduction of the lowcost carrier REDjet is seen by its owners as an attempt to deal with the high cost of travel, but while the Barbados-based carrier appeared to be soaring, its Antigua-based competitor LIAT, was continuing to face financial as well as industrial problems.
Meanwhile, Caricom has also sought to put its own house in order. In August, the regional grouping named Dominican Irwin La Rocque as the seventh Caricom secretary-general, following the resignation of Trinidadian Edwin Carrington after 18 years in the post.
“I am humbled and privileged for this opportunity to continue my service to the Governments and people of the Caribbean Community,” La Rocque said, adding “as we strive towards the goal of a community for all, the confidence of the heads of government, the support of the people of the Community and the committed staff of the Caricom Secretariat are vital in achieving that objective”.
His statement may have had the effect of easing the fears of the population in the region, particularly after Caribbean governments indicated that the process towards a single economy within the 15-member grouping that would have gone into effect by 2015, will now “take longer than anticipated’.
But for the smaller subregional Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, progress was made on August 1, with the free movement of nationals.
But as the historians mull over the political developments of 2011, they will also have to deal with the ongoing crime situation that continues unabated in several Caribbean countries despite efforts by regional governments to push other options rather than resorting to murder in dealing with domestic and personal squabbles.
The Guyana-based Caricom Secretariat has been spearheading national consultations on gangs and gang violence under a project funded by the United Nations Development Programme.
A move by the Trinidad and Tobago Government to implement the death penalty in response to the rising murder rate was defeated in Parliament after the Opposition failed to provide the required special majority needed.
Death, meanwhile, continued to stalk the region in 2011 bringing with it a tragic accident in St Lucia which claimed the lives of 16 people when a mini-bus plunged down a cliff into the sea at Mount Sion in Choiseul in November in what authorities said was “probably the single most vehicular accident or tragedy ever suffered by St Lucia”.
Politicians like former Belize prime minister George Price; St Lucia’s second prime minister Sir Allan Fitzgerald Louisy; Jamaica’s former deputy prime minister and attorney general David Coore; former national security minister, Colonel Trevor McMillan; long standing member of the Opposition People's National Party (PNP), Donald Buchanan and Trinidad and Tobago’s first Governor General Sir Ellis Clarke and former trade and industry minister, Kenneth Valley, died during 2011.
Death also claimed the former governor general of St Lucia, Sir Stanislaus James, Dame Bernice Lake, one of the Caribbean’s foremost jurists, the Jamaican academic Professor Aggrey Brown, journalists and broadcasters Desmond Bourne, Allyson Hennessy, Dame Olga Lopes-Seale; Sharief khan; Keith Smith and Louis Daniel.
The region also mourned the passing of Jeff Joseph, the lead singer of the Dominican group, Grammacks New Generation, the acclaimed folk violinist Joseph Ives Simeon, Veteran mas designer and multiple Band of the Year winner, Wayne Berkeley; Valentina Medina, who served as the Queen of the indigenous Carib population in Trinidad and Tobago.
January 03, 2012
jamaicaobserver
By Peter Richards
BRIDGETOWN, Barbados (CMC) — For political historians, 2011 has provided lots of fresh fodder.
Never before in the history of the region have there been general elections in two Caribbean countries on the same date; coupled with a State of Emergency in another; allegations of assassinations against two prime ministers; the surprise resignation of a prime minister, not to mention the democratic change of government in Haiti, all within a 12-month period.
In addition, Barbados’ Prime Minister Freundel Stuart warned leading members of his administration that any attempt to derail his government would have certain consequences.
“If I understand history at all, if a coup is attempted and it succeeds, the person against whom the coup was aimed usually pays for it with his neck. If the coup fails, the plotters and those who were trying to execute it pay for it with their necks,” he said.
His finance minister, Chris Sinckler, acknowledged that he and 10 of his colleagues were seeking an “urgent audience” with Stuart because some members felt that the Democratic Labour Party’s level of public engagement on issues affecting the country was found wanting.
“I am hoping that by putting this on the record that those who feel that I am after some office and I spend all of my waking hours thinking about how to unseat this person or the other, or cause confusion that would lead to that, I really hope that they would stand down,” he added.
At the start of the year, St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister Dr Ralph Gonsalves stunned parliament with his disclosure of an alleged assassination plot against him.
“Cocaine traffickers and money launderers are conspiring actively with others to kill the prime minister and on the public airwaves people are being exhorted by some to use any means necessary to remove a democratically elected government,” he added. This statement followed public pronouncements by Opposition Leader Arnhim Eustace that the government would fall by the end of 2011.
Nine months later, Gonsalves’ counterpart in Trinidad and Tobago, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, caused an even bigger stir when she announced that the police had uncovered a plot to kill her and senior government ministers.
“I am advised by the law enforcement authorities that they have, through their intelligence resources uncovered an assassination plot against members of my government and myself,” she told the nation, adding that the assassination threats were as a direct result of the “successful” 105-day State of Emergency that had severely disrupted the activities of the criminals.
But in the end, despite the detention of 17 people, police were unable to lay any charge and the opposition termed the “assassination plot” as nothing more than “an exaggerated political stunt” by the government.
Whether he was forced out of office or not, Bruce Golding surprised Jamaicans with his announcement that he was stepping down as head of the government in October less than five years after taking the oath of office as prime minister.
“The challenges of the last four years have taken their toll and it was appropriate now to make way for new leadership to continue the programmes of economic recovery and transformation while mobilising the party for victory in the next general elections,” Golding said in a farewell statement.
His successor, Andrew Holness, 39, became the youngest ever prime minister since political Independence in 1962, but also now has the unenvious record of being booted out of office just after two months.
Holness gambled and called a general election on December 29 but the voters decided that Portia Simpson Miller, the first ever woman prime minister they sent packing in 2007, was a better choice to lead the country. They gave her People’s National Party an overwhelming 42-21 margin of victory.
Simpson Miller, affectionally referred to as ‘Sista P’, faces deep problems as she takes over the government, with debt running at approximately 130 per cent of the Gross Domestic Product and unemployment at more than 12 per cent.
The new government has already said it will be seeking to renegotiate the multi-billiondollar Standby Agreement from the International Monetary Fund.
“We have plenty of work ahead of us... you will hear from us soon as we move to put our team in place,” she told supporters, urging all Jamaicans “to work with us as we move this country forward together.
“We will tell you as it is, we will hide nothing from you, when it is tough and rough we will let you know, when it is easy we will let you know,” Simpson Miller said, informing all investors and businesses “that you have a government you can trust”.
The Jamaican election apart, voters in Guyana and St Lucia created history by going to the polls on the same day to elect their respective governments.
For Dr Kenny Anthony, November 28 allowed him another bite at governing St Lucia, following his 11-6 defeat in the 2006 poll. The incumbent United Workers Party (UWP) had been predicting a landslide, but the voters instead sent Stephenson King and his UWP team packing.
“I ask God to give me the strength and courage and most of all the wisdom to manage the affairs of the country in the next few years or until such time it is necessary for me to say goodbye to political life,” an emotional 60-year-old Anthony said.
Donald Ramotar, meanwhile, ensured that the People’s Progressive Party/Civic would remain at the helm of government in Guyana, even though it failed to obtain a majority in the 65-member National Assembly.
Ramotar faced a formidable challenge from the Alliance for Change (AFC) and the opposition grouping, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) that between them controlled 33 of the seats in Parliament.
The 61-year-old economist said the “elections have reaffirmed our maturity as a democratic nation, something of which we should all be proud.
“I wish to therefore congratulate my Guyanese brothers and sisters from all walks of life, who participated in this latest renewal of our democracy, for playing their part in this vital national process! Regardless of the results we are all winners — Guyana and all the people of Guyana,” he added.
In March, Haitians also celebrated the continued renewal of their democracy by electing musician Michael “Sweet Micky” Martelly as their new head of state, replacing Rene Preval, who like Bharrat Jagdeo in Guyana had been barred by their country’s constitution from seeking a third consecutive term in office.
Martelly had received nearly 68 per cent of the votes cast in the March 20 second-round run-off and easily defeated former first lady and law professor Mirlande Manigat.
“We’ll work for all Haitians. Together we can do it,” he promised voters soon after his victory, but Martelly found it was easier said than done, having to nominate three persons before legislators agreed to his nominee for prime minister and the Frenchspeaking Caricom country still coming to grips with the January 2010 earthquake and a cholera outbreak.
Grenada’s Prime Minister Tillman Thomas, the then Caricom chairman, said the successful completion of the presidential election signalled a “renewal of spirit and the rise of a new political generation” in Haiti despite the return to the country of former dictator Jean-Claude ‘Baby Doc’ Duvalier and former president Jean Bertrand Aristide.
The High Court is likely to determine the future political careers of Dominica’s Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit and his education minister Petter St Jean after the main opposition United Workers Party (UWP) argued that the two ministers were illegally nominated to contest the December 2009 general election because they held dual citizenship at the time. A ruling is expected in early 2012.
In Nevis, the opposition Concerned Citizens Movement (CCM) has maintained that the July poll won by the ruling Nevis Reformation Party (NRP) was rigged and it, too, has gone to the courts seeking redress.
Despite early pronouncements, the British government failed to name a date for general elections in the Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) and citizens took to the streets to demand an end to being ruled by London.
But the TCI was not the only overseas territory having problems with Britain. Anguilla’s Chief Minister Hubert Hughes has called on citizens to seriously consider seeking political independence after the governor of the 35 square mile island Alistair Harrison refused to sign off on the 2011 budget.
“We have come far enough and fought hard enough to have an Anguillian governor or governor general, an Anguillian flag and being identified to the world as Anguillians and not ‘Belongers’,” Hughes said.
While the feud between Hughes and Harrison continued at year end, Reuben Meade in Montserrat upgraded his chief minister status to that of premier even while acknowledging that the new Constitution that went into effect from September was not a perfect document.
“We must continue the work of improving the document over time. We must, however, not lose sight of the focus on development issues while at the same time honouring the provisions of the constitution,” Meade said.
In the British Virgin Islands, 67-year-old physician Orlando Smith was voted as premier replacing Ralph T O’Neal in the general election.
The political upheavals in the region were taking place amid the problems associated with the ongoing global economic and financial crisis that continue to thwart socioeconomic development to the point that the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has warned that Caribbean countries will continue to struggle and governments will have to tighten on their economic spending.
“The Caribbean region continues to struggle to recover from a long and protracted recession. Drags from fiscal consolidation and higher energy prices continue to constrain private demand, while the recovery in tourism flows remains tepid amid high unemployment in advanced economies,” said the IMF’s deputy director for the Western Hemisphere, David Vegara.
For its part, China continued its largesse in the region pumping millions of dollars in assistance to Caricom as part of its diplomatic initiative to improve relations with this region a point that was underscored by Vice Premier Wang Qishan as he addressed the China Caribbean Economic and Trade Cooperation Forum held in Trinidad.
The economic situation has been blamed by the Trinidad and Tobago Government for its reluctance to provide more than a five per cent wage increase for public workers, resulting in trade unions mounting street demonstrations and warning that a nationwide shutdown of the country is on the cards.
The introduction of the lowcost carrier REDjet is seen by its owners as an attempt to deal with the high cost of travel, but while the Barbados-based carrier appeared to be soaring, its Antigua-based competitor LIAT, was continuing to face financial as well as industrial problems.
Meanwhile, Caricom has also sought to put its own house in order. In August, the regional grouping named Dominican Irwin La Rocque as the seventh Caricom secretary-general, following the resignation of Trinidadian Edwin Carrington after 18 years in the post.
“I am humbled and privileged for this opportunity to continue my service to the Governments and people of the Caribbean Community,” La Rocque said, adding “as we strive towards the goal of a community for all, the confidence of the heads of government, the support of the people of the Community and the committed staff of the Caricom Secretariat are vital in achieving that objective”.
His statement may have had the effect of easing the fears of the population in the region, particularly after Caribbean governments indicated that the process towards a single economy within the 15-member grouping that would have gone into effect by 2015, will now “take longer than anticipated’.
But for the smaller subregional Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, progress was made on August 1, with the free movement of nationals.
But as the historians mull over the political developments of 2011, they will also have to deal with the ongoing crime situation that continues unabated in several Caribbean countries despite efforts by regional governments to push other options rather than resorting to murder in dealing with domestic and personal squabbles.
The Guyana-based Caricom Secretariat has been spearheading national consultations on gangs and gang violence under a project funded by the United Nations Development Programme.
A move by the Trinidad and Tobago Government to implement the death penalty in response to the rising murder rate was defeated in Parliament after the Opposition failed to provide the required special majority needed.
Death, meanwhile, continued to stalk the region in 2011 bringing with it a tragic accident in St Lucia which claimed the lives of 16 people when a mini-bus plunged down a cliff into the sea at Mount Sion in Choiseul in November in what authorities said was “probably the single most vehicular accident or tragedy ever suffered by St Lucia”.
Politicians like former Belize prime minister George Price; St Lucia’s second prime minister Sir Allan Fitzgerald Louisy; Jamaica’s former deputy prime minister and attorney general David Coore; former national security minister, Colonel Trevor McMillan; long standing member of the Opposition People's National Party (PNP), Donald Buchanan and Trinidad and Tobago’s first Governor General Sir Ellis Clarke and former trade and industry minister, Kenneth Valley, died during 2011.
Death also claimed the former governor general of St Lucia, Sir Stanislaus James, Dame Bernice Lake, one of the Caribbean’s foremost jurists, the Jamaican academic Professor Aggrey Brown, journalists and broadcasters Desmond Bourne, Allyson Hennessy, Dame Olga Lopes-Seale; Sharief khan; Keith Smith and Louis Daniel.
The region also mourned the passing of Jeff Joseph, the lead singer of the Dominican group, Grammacks New Generation, the acclaimed folk violinist Joseph Ives Simeon, Veteran mas designer and multiple Band of the Year winner, Wayne Berkeley; Valentina Medina, who served as the Queen of the indigenous Carib population in Trinidad and Tobago.
January 03, 2012
jamaicaobserver
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Multiplying possibilities for CARICOM
By Dr Isaac Newton
2011 wasn’t just another year. Powerful politicians went to jail, joblessness hardened into recession, and many of our assumptions about the status quo froze to death. Some of us were inclined to laugh, but found dark sorrow everywhere our teardrops fell.
2011 was a powerful reproach for some of the world’s most ruthless dictators. From whispers to daylight, the worthy causes of global protesters prevailed. Where once emerging economies were looked upon with suspicion, European and American dominance of financial markets dwindled. Bad things happened to good companies, due to poor practices by executives, unwise decisions by board members, and self-serving ties between public officials and wealthy elites.
Circles
We didn’t place into perspective, the chaotic gyrations of the global village. Neither did we rely on regional values to reinforce our identity nor reposition ourselves. It was our reluctance to embrace local intelligence that moved CARICOM from bleak orchards to ruined gardens.
We like crony circles. We dislike public-serving ideals.
Reflect! The Caribbean Court of Justice could not expand its acceptance radius. In the politics in which our success rate is formed, economic unification eavesdropped on national elections and discovered that they were parodies of changing cooks or keeping old menus.
Our leaders appeared less able to provide hands-on social and financial answers. Non communicable diseases escalated. Natural disasters were not as brutal. Observe! Violent crimes shook the foundations of our streets and homes. With tearful eyes, we watched peace sink into the sea. At the regional and sub-regional levels, speech-eloquence flourished.
While traveling between islands inspired hostile hospitality, labour unions pushed governments and corporations to bargaining turbulence. Our colleges and universities granted degrees. They did not generate work-related research or expanded quality of life opportunities for Caribbeaners.
If you think you understand the Caribbean mindscape, you don’t understand island people. We congratulated ourselves for sitting on big committees in high places. Good! But we delivered nothing to better the region. Pay attention! Our desire for national growth did not get along with our capacity to overcome micro-thinking. Instead, we thundered mighty promises only to drift further apart.
At the end of 2011, we were still satisfied with square mileage fantasies -- a phenomenon caught in the vagueness of sovereign versus colonial politics.
To escape circles and climb ladders, an underlying question persistently arises: What is the quality assurance test to ensure that the Caribbean goes beyond Twitter talk about regional development?
Ladders
An action-packed vision of self-sufficiency that starts with an appetite for 75 percent food independence should be the Caribbean’s chief activity. Nothing should prevent us from creating cost-containing technologies to reduce our dependency on refined, imported foods.
To climb ladders is to hear vast discoveries screaming for our attention.
Missing is a deep deductive passion for experimental investigation of our immediate surroundings. There is too much sun, wind, water and sand in our midst, not to devise penny cheap transportation and build strong infrastructure. Taking advantage of our advantages will make us cut the edge.
Rather than hurricanes being a source of terror, perhaps our scientific adventures could turn them into a platform of renewable energy. Ever wonder if there is hidden energy to be harnessed from this yearly ritual of howling winds? If not, what else could we extract from stormy rains?
Suppose we constantly challenge our intuitions. We could find healing elements in banana roots and coconut bark. We could grind them with lime juice and sea shells. Upsetting concoction? But perhaps we might uncover combined intelligence that may cure prostrate and breast cancers, high blood pressure and diabetes. Are we curious enough to find out? If our genius is freed from photocopying anxieties, it will bring extraordinary success. But if it’s stifled, it will suffer from self-doubt and baptize everything foreign.
CARICOM could generate a blueprint for thinking globally with all sorts of local connections and sub-regional tradeoffs. We must take a pragmatic approach to economic growth, and a coordinated view of regional diplomacy. But we’ll have to set higher leadership criteria. Empathy and responsibility mixed with competence and justice are necessary traits. Passion, courage, and commitment to regionalism are needed too.
Our growth opportunities require new networks of interdependent alliances to increase gains in investments and stability. We could melt the right economic and social resources to collaborate with Brazil, Russia, India and China. We could further bolster important partnerships with Asia, and gel our interests with US policies for our betterment.
To do this, we-the-people must provide our leaders with advisory and implementation support in areas of urgent need. We must customize solutions with local cultures and global standards, while rewarding and punishing leadership behaviour based primarily on moral principle and operational performance.
I agree with Paul Romer‘s concept of “nonrival goods.” It highlights the power of information and ideas to expand our material world. He observed that:
“…every generation has underestimated the potential for finding new recipes and ideas. We consistently fail to grasp how many ideas remain to be discovered. The difficulty is the same one we have with compounding. Possibilities do not add up. They multiply.”
Pressed for application, our prosperity will multiply at the edge of innovation. I urge us to see lights. Let’s hide the wrinkled wisdom of those adorned with old age deep inside our children. It is then that the powerhouses of today -- our young people -- will be mentored into greatness. Release them to the wonders of possibilities.
2012 will operate in whole. If you sow magnificence, you’ll reap amazement. Upon a contagious Caribbean dream with focus is imprinted the seal of joyful accomplishments. Perhaps CARICOM could reproduce men and women of honour, resplendent with durable characters and spiritual values. This is the essence of regional development.
Drink deep of this truth, and live it!
December 29, 2011
caribbeannewsnow
2011 wasn’t just another year. Powerful politicians went to jail, joblessness hardened into recession, and many of our assumptions about the status quo froze to death. Some of us were inclined to laugh, but found dark sorrow everywhere our teardrops fell.
2011 was a powerful reproach for some of the world’s most ruthless dictators. From whispers to daylight, the worthy causes of global protesters prevailed. Where once emerging economies were looked upon with suspicion, European and American dominance of financial markets dwindled. Bad things happened to good companies, due to poor practices by executives, unwise decisions by board members, and self-serving ties between public officials and wealthy elites.Circles
We didn’t place into perspective, the chaotic gyrations of the global village. Neither did we rely on regional values to reinforce our identity nor reposition ourselves. It was our reluctance to embrace local intelligence that moved CARICOM from bleak orchards to ruined gardens.
We like crony circles. We dislike public-serving ideals.
Reflect! The Caribbean Court of Justice could not expand its acceptance radius. In the politics in which our success rate is formed, economic unification eavesdropped on national elections and discovered that they were parodies of changing cooks or keeping old menus.
Our leaders appeared less able to provide hands-on social and financial answers. Non communicable diseases escalated. Natural disasters were not as brutal. Observe! Violent crimes shook the foundations of our streets and homes. With tearful eyes, we watched peace sink into the sea. At the regional and sub-regional levels, speech-eloquence flourished.
While traveling between islands inspired hostile hospitality, labour unions pushed governments and corporations to bargaining turbulence. Our colleges and universities granted degrees. They did not generate work-related research or expanded quality of life opportunities for Caribbeaners.
If you think you understand the Caribbean mindscape, you don’t understand island people. We congratulated ourselves for sitting on big committees in high places. Good! But we delivered nothing to better the region. Pay attention! Our desire for national growth did not get along with our capacity to overcome micro-thinking. Instead, we thundered mighty promises only to drift further apart.
At the end of 2011, we were still satisfied with square mileage fantasies -- a phenomenon caught in the vagueness of sovereign versus colonial politics.
To escape circles and climb ladders, an underlying question persistently arises: What is the quality assurance test to ensure that the Caribbean goes beyond Twitter talk about regional development?
Ladders
An action-packed vision of self-sufficiency that starts with an appetite for 75 percent food independence should be the Caribbean’s chief activity. Nothing should prevent us from creating cost-containing technologies to reduce our dependency on refined, imported foods.
To climb ladders is to hear vast discoveries screaming for our attention.
Missing is a deep deductive passion for experimental investigation of our immediate surroundings. There is too much sun, wind, water and sand in our midst, not to devise penny cheap transportation and build strong infrastructure. Taking advantage of our advantages will make us cut the edge.
Rather than hurricanes being a source of terror, perhaps our scientific adventures could turn them into a platform of renewable energy. Ever wonder if there is hidden energy to be harnessed from this yearly ritual of howling winds? If not, what else could we extract from stormy rains?
Suppose we constantly challenge our intuitions. We could find healing elements in banana roots and coconut bark. We could grind them with lime juice and sea shells. Upsetting concoction? But perhaps we might uncover combined intelligence that may cure prostrate and breast cancers, high blood pressure and diabetes. Are we curious enough to find out? If our genius is freed from photocopying anxieties, it will bring extraordinary success. But if it’s stifled, it will suffer from self-doubt and baptize everything foreign.
CARICOM could generate a blueprint for thinking globally with all sorts of local connections and sub-regional tradeoffs. We must take a pragmatic approach to economic growth, and a coordinated view of regional diplomacy. But we’ll have to set higher leadership criteria. Empathy and responsibility mixed with competence and justice are necessary traits. Passion, courage, and commitment to regionalism are needed too.
Our growth opportunities require new networks of interdependent alliances to increase gains in investments and stability. We could melt the right economic and social resources to collaborate with Brazil, Russia, India and China. We could further bolster important partnerships with Asia, and gel our interests with US policies for our betterment.
To do this, we-the-people must provide our leaders with advisory and implementation support in areas of urgent need. We must customize solutions with local cultures and global standards, while rewarding and punishing leadership behaviour based primarily on moral principle and operational performance.
I agree with Paul Romer‘s concept of “nonrival goods.” It highlights the power of information and ideas to expand our material world. He observed that:
“…every generation has underestimated the potential for finding new recipes and ideas. We consistently fail to grasp how many ideas remain to be discovered. The difficulty is the same one we have with compounding. Possibilities do not add up. They multiply.”
Pressed for application, our prosperity will multiply at the edge of innovation. I urge us to see lights. Let’s hide the wrinkled wisdom of those adorned with old age deep inside our children. It is then that the powerhouses of today -- our young people -- will be mentored into greatness. Release them to the wonders of possibilities.
2012 will operate in whole. If you sow magnificence, you’ll reap amazement. Upon a contagious Caribbean dream with focus is imprinted the seal of joyful accomplishments. Perhaps CARICOM could reproduce men and women of honour, resplendent with durable characters and spiritual values. This is the essence of regional development.
Drink deep of this truth, and live it!
December 29, 2011
caribbeannewsnow
Friday, December 30, 2011
Blowout in Jamaica General Election: the People's National Party (PNP) Won 41 Seats and Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) 22 Seats
BLOWOUT: PNP 41 - JLP 22
by Daraine Luton, Senior Staff Reporter
jamaica-gleaner
Jamaica, W.I.
Defying opinion polls that suggested yesterday's general election was too close to call, the People's National Party (PNP) secured a stunning victory, winning 41 of the 63 seats in the House of Representatives.
The party gained 53 per cent of the popular vote.
The result will propel the PNP's president, Portia Simpson Miller, back to the premiership, a job she held for 18 months and lost a mere four years ago when her party was prised from government after more than 18 years in office.
In fact, the defeat of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) meant the first time since the advent of universal adult suffrage, nearly seven decades ago, that an administration has been chucked out after a single term - an outcome that will likely lead to much soul-searching within the organisation.
Indeed, in yesterday's election, several leading JLP figures, including Cabinet ministers Robert Montague and Clive Mullings, spectacularly lost their parliamentary seats
"I want to thank the prime minister who called earlier to congratulate me, and he was very gracious," Simpson Miller said.
"I am humbled by the support of the Jamaican people and I ask you to ensure that you greet JLP supporters with love."
Shaping future together
Simpson Miller said her team would be working with all Jamaicans as one Jamaican family "as we shape the future together".
She had special commendation for Arnaldo Brown, Julian Robinson, Damion Crawford, André Hylton and Raymond Pryce - first-time candidates who secured victories.
She also commended candidates who came close to victory, saying "you are winners".
In conceding the election, outgoing prime minister and JLP leader, Andrew Holness, accepted the result as the will of the people and said the party would listen to the voice of the people.
"It is a time of reflection and introspection for the Jamaica Labour Party. We see it as an opportunity to rebuild and, starting tomorrow, we will be rebuilding," a sombre Holness said.
"It is apparent that the people of Jamaica still have concerns about the JLP and we will reflect on that. I wish the new Government well. They will face several challenges, but I hope for the benefit of the country they will do a good job."
He added: "I was privileged to have served in a short time. I really did not have much room. I had to make the decision that we made. I feel good that I have executed the duties of prime minister over the short time to the best of my ability, and I look forward to another opportunity."
Holness was prime minister for just over two months, having been catapulted to the job after the surprise resignation of his predecessor, Bruce Golding, who accepted that the JLP would have little chance of victory with him at the helm.
Confidence lost
Golding lost public confidence over his administration's resistance of the United States' request for the extradition of now-convicted gangster Christopher 'Dudus' Coke, and the hiring of lobbyists to encourage Washington to go soft on the matter.
In its election manifesto, the PNP promised to renegotiate the country's agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), implement a Jamaica Emergency Employment Programme (JEEP) to arrest the problem of unemployment; and renegotiate the contract of the Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) to allow for competition in the transmission and distribution of electricity, among others.
It was also the first time that persons were vying for 63 seats in the House of Representatives.
The JLP won the 2007 general election by a razor-thin majority, securing 32 of the 60 seats in the House. The PNP won the other 28.
The PNP had greeted Holness' announcement of election and nomination day, saying the symbolism of the dates meant a lot to leaders of the party. Simpson Miller celebrated her 66th birthday on nomination day, December 12.
"I want to thank Mr Andrew Holness for giving me the best birthday possible that anyone could ever have. And an excellent Christmas gift for the Jamaican people, and a wonderful and beautiful new year," Simpson Miller said after the election date was announced by Holness in Mandeville.
Nomination day was also special for the PNP's campaign director, Dr Peter Phillips, as it marked the 24th anniversary of his marriage to Sandra Minott Phillips while the eve of yesterday's election was his 62nd birthday.
The PNP has been on the election trail for more than a year. It had blasted the JLP government for the handling of the economy and said it had brought shame on Jamaica with its handling of the extradition request for Coke.
All-island tour
In its bid for leadership of the country, the PNP embarked on an all-island tour during which party officials, led by Simpson Miller and 'Star Boy' K.D. Knight, told the country that Bruce Golding was not suitable to continue as prime minister and that the country needed to go to the polls in a general election.
According to Gleaner-commissioned Bill Johnson polls, 21 per cent of Jamaicans lined up behind the JLP in June with that number increasing to 26 per cent by November with Holness at the helm.
The last Gleaner-Johnson poll before the election, done on December 17 and 18, found 38 per cent of Jamaicans were prepared to cast their ballot for the PNP, while 36 per cent would vote JLP.
Heading into the election, the PNP was confident that Jamaicans had accepted its message that it was capable of leading a return to sustained economic growth for the country.
The PNP also claimed the turnout at its mass meetings was "overwhelming, demonstrating the fact that the people are ready for a change of Government."
Yesterday's victory added to general election success secured by the PNP in 1955, 1959, 1972, 1976, 1989, 1993, 1997 and 2002.
The JLP won the elections in 1944, 1949, 1962, 1967, 1980, 1983 and 2007.
daraine.luton@gleanerjm.com
December 30, 2011
jamaica-gleaner
by Daraine Luton, Senior Staff Reporter
jamaica-gleaner
Jamaica, W.I.
Defying opinion polls that suggested yesterday's general election was too close to call, the People's National Party (PNP) secured a stunning victory, winning 41 of the 63 seats in the House of Representatives.
The party gained 53 per cent of the popular vote.
The result will propel the PNP's president, Portia Simpson Miller, back to the premiership, a job she held for 18 months and lost a mere four years ago when her party was prised from government after more than 18 years in office.
In fact, the defeat of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) meant the first time since the advent of universal adult suffrage, nearly seven decades ago, that an administration has been chucked out after a single term - an outcome that will likely lead to much soul-searching within the organisation.
Indeed, in yesterday's election, several leading JLP figures, including Cabinet ministers Robert Montague and Clive Mullings, spectacularly lost their parliamentary seats
"I want to thank the prime minister who called earlier to congratulate me, and he was very gracious," Simpson Miller said.
"I am humbled by the support of the Jamaican people and I ask you to ensure that you greet JLP supporters with love."
Shaping future together
Simpson Miller said her team would be working with all Jamaicans as one Jamaican family "as we shape the future together".
She had special commendation for Arnaldo Brown, Julian Robinson, Damion Crawford, André Hylton and Raymond Pryce - first-time candidates who secured victories.
She also commended candidates who came close to victory, saying "you are winners".
In conceding the election, outgoing prime minister and JLP leader, Andrew Holness, accepted the result as the will of the people and said the party would listen to the voice of the people.
"It is a time of reflection and introspection for the Jamaica Labour Party. We see it as an opportunity to rebuild and, starting tomorrow, we will be rebuilding," a sombre Holness said.
"It is apparent that the people of Jamaica still have concerns about the JLP and we will reflect on that. I wish the new Government well. They will face several challenges, but I hope for the benefit of the country they will do a good job."
He added: "I was privileged to have served in a short time. I really did not have much room. I had to make the decision that we made. I feel good that I have executed the duties of prime minister over the short time to the best of my ability, and I look forward to another opportunity."
Holness was prime minister for just over two months, having been catapulted to the job after the surprise resignation of his predecessor, Bruce Golding, who accepted that the JLP would have little chance of victory with him at the helm.
Confidence lost
Golding lost public confidence over his administration's resistance of the United States' request for the extradition of now-convicted gangster Christopher 'Dudus' Coke, and the hiring of lobbyists to encourage Washington to go soft on the matter.
In its election manifesto, the PNP promised to renegotiate the country's agreement with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), implement a Jamaica Emergency Employment Programme (JEEP) to arrest the problem of unemployment; and renegotiate the contract of the Jamaica Public Service Company (JPS) to allow for competition in the transmission and distribution of electricity, among others.
It was also the first time that persons were vying for 63 seats in the House of Representatives.
The JLP won the 2007 general election by a razor-thin majority, securing 32 of the 60 seats in the House. The PNP won the other 28.
The PNP had greeted Holness' announcement of election and nomination day, saying the symbolism of the dates meant a lot to leaders of the party. Simpson Miller celebrated her 66th birthday on nomination day, December 12.
"I want to thank Mr Andrew Holness for giving me the best birthday possible that anyone could ever have. And an excellent Christmas gift for the Jamaican people, and a wonderful and beautiful new year," Simpson Miller said after the election date was announced by Holness in Mandeville.
Nomination day was also special for the PNP's campaign director, Dr Peter Phillips, as it marked the 24th anniversary of his marriage to Sandra Minott Phillips while the eve of yesterday's election was his 62nd birthday.
The PNP has been on the election trail for more than a year. It had blasted the JLP government for the handling of the economy and said it had brought shame on Jamaica with its handling of the extradition request for Coke.
All-island tour
In its bid for leadership of the country, the PNP embarked on an all-island tour during which party officials, led by Simpson Miller and 'Star Boy' K.D. Knight, told the country that Bruce Golding was not suitable to continue as prime minister and that the country needed to go to the polls in a general election.
According to Gleaner-commissioned Bill Johnson polls, 21 per cent of Jamaicans lined up behind the JLP in June with that number increasing to 26 per cent by November with Holness at the helm.
The last Gleaner-Johnson poll before the election, done on December 17 and 18, found 38 per cent of Jamaicans were prepared to cast their ballot for the PNP, while 36 per cent would vote JLP.
Heading into the election, the PNP was confident that Jamaicans had accepted its message that it was capable of leading a return to sustained economic growth for the country.
The PNP also claimed the turnout at its mass meetings was "overwhelming, demonstrating the fact that the people are ready for a change of Government."
Yesterday's victory added to general election success secured by the PNP in 1955, 1959, 1972, 1976, 1989, 1993, 1997 and 2002.
The JLP won the elections in 1944, 1949, 1962, 1967, 1980, 1983 and 2007.
daraine.luton@gleanerjm.com
December 30, 2011
jamaica-gleaner
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)