Political ineptness in The Bahamas... ...

Rights and wrongs of Cuban migrant dispute

By Front Porch
frontporchguardian@gmail.com
Nassau, The Bahamas

Last week was settling into another stretch of bad news for the inept and faltering Christie administration. Suddenly, on Thursday, Opposition Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis handed a government in a defensive crouch a line of offense, an unexpected opening to attempt to switch the storyline from that of its gross incompetence to one of Dr. Minnis’ patriotism.

With the announcement of its trading places two-step, swapping the placements of ambassadors to the U.S. and the UN, the bungled appointment of Dr. Elliston Rahming neared a sort of climax, though leaving serious unanswered questions, the government on its heels, looking amateurish and incompetent.

Of alleged abuse of Cuban migrants at the detention center and the domestic and international fallout from what is now widely acknowledged as a fake video of the alleged abuse, the government seemed stuck in Goldilocks mode with Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell often too hot in his rhetoric and Prime Minister Perry Christie too cool when it came to taking charge of the matter.

The opposition was left with two prime opportunities to flex its policy and political muscles. First, continuing to hammer away at the ambassadorial appointment fiasco.

Secondly, in the vacuum left by the government’s too cool indecision and too hot impetuousness on the Cuban migrant issue, Dr. Minnis had a golden opportunity to get it just right on a contentious matter at the intersection of domestic and foreign policy.

Tone-deaf

Prudence and good judgment are synonyms for getting it just right. Gifted by events with the opportunity to demonstrate prudential judgment, Dr. Minnis proved to be foolhardy and tone-deaf.

Effective communication involves not just what one intends to says. More importantly, it concerns what others hear you to say and what they don’t feel they have heard.

There are multiple issues related to the current Cuban migrant affair. Dr. Minnis and the opposition are right in vigorously pressing for the full disclosure of any abuse at the detention center.

But what has been sorely lacking in the opposition’s response is a more comprehensive approach. That approach should have included a clearer message reaffirming the opposition’s support of basic immigration policy relative of migrants.

More so, the opposition needed to be more emphatic in demonstrating national unity in the face of those seeking to scuttle our immigration policy, run roughshod over Bahamian sovereignty and inflict damage to our tourist-based economy.

Dr. Minnis’ failure to ensure the proper sequencing and calibration of the FNM’s messaging left the opposition open to severe criticism. And it has been withering, from charges of recklessness to failing to stand up for the country.

While Dr. Minnis may not have shown the best judgment in handling the complex of issues at hand, attacks on his patriotism and that of the opposition are ridiculous and offensive.

Mitchell is no more of a patriot than Dr. Minnis. And vile and contemptuous are claims by some that various of Dr. Minnis’ remarks were treasonous; which is not to say that such attacks are ineffective.

In his handling of the Cuban migrant issue, Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell has often proven imperious, rattled, undiplomatic, bellicose and belligerent.

Understatement

The Opposition and others are justified in criticizing various elements of his conduct of the matter at hand, as minister responsible for both foreign affairs and immigration. Mitchell himself has admitted that matters could have been handled better. Which of course is an extraordinary understatement.

By failing to act quicker and in a more forthright manner in addressing the abuse claims, the government helped provide fodder to the Florida-based interest group Democracy Movement, endlessly itching for any opening to attempt dictating Bahamian immigration policy to their liking.

As an aside, by interfering in domestic politics in calling for the resignation of Minister Mitchell, the interest group again demonstrated its unbridled arrogance. Imagine how out of bounds it would be for a Bahamian group to call for the resignation of a federal U.S. Cabinet member.

Now Prime Minister Perry Christie is hemming and hawing about whether information will be provided to the public on abuse at the detention center, abuse that is said to be quite gruesome and sickening.

When will politicians learn that covering up certain matters makes a bad situation even worse. The information should be released as soon as possible. Failure to do so will fuel more demonstrations and potential international fallout. Meanwhile the credibility of the Christie administration continues to dwindle.

Amidst its prevarication, ineptitude and bungling, the government has seized the politics of nationalism and the politics of empathy, something Dr. Minnis, thus far, has gotten wrong to the amazement and consternation of many, including many FNMs.

The FNM has often gotten wrong the politics of nationalism and the politics of empathy, despite its record of protecting the country’s national interests and better record than the PLP in areas ranging from social policy to economic empowerment to women’s rights.

Pretending

And yet the FNM has consistently allowed the PLP to get away with pretending to be the more nationalist and empathetic party. A part of the PLP’s winning combination in 2012 was to appear as the feeling party that also put Bahamians first.

In politics, empathy typically beats arguments of competence and effectiveness. And nationalism is usually a trump card, something that many in the FNM seem unwilling to learn.

The PLP’s claim of being more nationalistic than the FNM is laughable and far from credible given its record of allowing drug barons to overrun the country in the 1980s, its dalliances with all manner of shady foreign interlopers, the massive giveaway of land at Mayaguana, clear conflicts of interest by the Prime Minister and Deputy Prime Minister with a foreign oil exploration company, and many other examples.

But when Dr. Minnis failed initially and more clearly to express common cause with the government in the face of certain attacks from abroad, it made the FNM seem less empathetic and nationalistic than the PLP on an issue necessitating a demonstration of national unity.

This is yet another blunder by Dr. Minnis, who has now demonstrated an entrenched pattern of misjudgement and shockingly poor judgment.

Increasingly more and more Bahamians and FNMs are concluding that Dr. Minnis is far from up to his current role, which is disheartening as the country desperately needs a more prudent and capable opposition leader who can mount a more effective opposition to a feckless and disaster of a government that is the Christie administration.

In the end, the Cuban migrant affair is not about the opposition’s response. It is about whatever abuse may have taken place at the detention center and the government’s response in getting the facts out and taking appropriate action in a timely manner.

Further, it is the prime minister and his Cabinet who are ultimately responsible for acting appropriately or with “gross stupidity”, negligence and arrogance in handling the domestic and foreign policy elements of this entire affair.

August 29, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

What happened to Cuban detainees at Carmichael Road Detention Center in The Bahamas?

The Cuban backlash

Detainee controversy sparks political row

By Candia Dames
Guardian News Editor
candia@nasguard.com
Nassau, The Bahamas

The matter of an obviously fake video purporting to show Cubans being abused at the detention center has exploded into a nasty and venomous spat between the Official Opposition and Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell.

In a stunning but not completely surprising display of bad judgment, Opposition Leader Dr. Hubert Minnis called an emergency press conference last Wednesday to announce he had concluded that at least five Cuban detainees were abused back in May.

Prime Minister Perry Christie later said Minnis was bordering on “gross stupidity”.

Mitchell accused the opposition of “siding with enemies of The Bahamas against Bahamians”.

The urgency of the tone of the FNM official advising of the press conference suggested that the party was set to release damning evidence to force major action of some kind — possibly the minister’s resignation.

No such evidence was produced, but Minnis was strong in his conclusions that the Bahamian people had been kept in the dark over an issue that has spilled into the international arena and is threatening the country’s reputation.

Minnis accused Mitchell of keeping this information under wraps and using “strong, combative and undiplomatic language intended to deflect attention from the underlying legitimacy of the issue raised by the demonstrators” in Miami in recent weeks.

Mitchell, meanwhile, prayed for “the patience of Job” as he fired back at Minnis, accusing him and the Free National Movement of being “unpatriotic” and “un-Bahamian”.

The foreign affairs minister also denied that there was a cover-up in relation to abuse claims against Cuban detainees.

He accused the FNM of “talking a jumble of foolishness” and prayed that its “allies in the press do not go walking into a place where fools have rushed in”.

This was followed by a warning from Mitchell that he will be watching every word and accusation.

“And if they miss and make one false allegation or innuendo we will see them in court”.

Minnis reported that the FNM found that in the early hours of May 20, 2013, there was an attempted escape from the detention center by seven Cuban detainees. This escape attempt was prevented.

As punishment for the attempted escape, at least five detainees were physically abused to a severe degree, he said.

The abuse was so significant that three of the detainees had to be taken to Princess Margaret Hospital for treatment.

One person was detained and two others returned to the detention center.

Following the beatings, the remaining detainees performed and videotaped a reenactment of the earlier beatings, according to Minnis.

“Our information is that the reenactment was facilitated with the assistance of one or more Defence Force officers who provided the fatigues for the actors in the performance,” he said.

“The FNM has been further advised that several senior government officials and ministers became aware fairly early that a major instance of abuse had in fact taken place.

“There was at least one major meeting of senior law enforcement officers and Cabinet ministers who were briefed as to what had transpired. As a result of that briefing, a more intensive investigation was ordered.”

Minnis said the FNM is aware that the report of the government’s preliminary investigation has been completed and is in circulation. He said this has been completed from as early as late June.

The videotape in question was aired on a Spanish language TV station in Florida. It sparked weeks of protests against The Bahamas in Miami by a group called the Democracy Movement.

Force

Mitchell first reported on this videotape in a statement on June 17.

He said, “We have had the video examined by the Royal Bahamas Defence Force, and it is being further reviewed by the Royal Bahamas Police Force.”

Mitchell noted — and we agree — that the video is a complete falsehood and an outrageous concoction.

“There appears to be a manufactured attempt to create a damaging and defamatory impression of The Bahamas,” he said.

“The television station ought to be ashamed of itself for publishing something which is so patently false.”

The foreign affairs minister added, “It remains to be said that The Bahamas government does not beat those in its custody. All detainees are treated with respect and in accordance with all applicable conventions and with human dignity and courtesy.”

Mitchell also said in that statement that a follow up investigation was being done to seek to find out if by some remote chance there is any aspect of this that bears a scintilla of truth.

At this point, there is much that is unclear about this matter. What is clear is that the government has repeatedly said that it is investigating abuse claims, and both the government and opposition agree that the video that sparked the outrage in Florida is in fact fake.

Mitchell has said, and Prime Minister Christie has reiterated, that the Government of The Bahamas does not condone abusing detainees and the “chips will fall where they may” after an investigation.

Admittedly, it has been at times hard to follow the trail that led to this current controversy.

There was no immediate report about the alleged incident at the detention center. It came a week later after the media made inquiries.

In the brief statement issued on May 31, the Department of Immigration said a Cuban detainee escaped from the detention center during severe thunderstorms a week earlier.

“In response to press inquiries, we wish to advise the public that during the rain storm in Nassau last week, there was an attempt to escape the detention center at Carmichael Road. All were prevented from escaping, but one person,” the statement read.

The statement did not say that detainees had to be hospitalized.

Cuban Ambassador to The Bahamas Ernesto Soberon Guzman told The Nassau Guardian after that statement was released that no one from the government had contacted him about the incident.

Guzman later said that Mitchell failed to inform him until June 19 about the matter.

He called it a “communications break down”.

Guzman said during his meeting with the minister, Mitchell said officers used some degree of force to counteract the attempted escape.

He said he was told that in the process, three Cuban detainees were injured and hospitalized.

Guzman’s revelation was made in The Nassau Guardian on June 21, one month after the alleged incident.

According to Guzman, Mitchell said the incident had nothing to do with the controversial video that purported to show Cuban detainees being beaten by Bahamian law enforcement officers.

When asked if he was satisfied with the explanation, Guzman said, “That was what they informed us.

“In this case, we have a particular situation. Some people tried to escape from the detention center and they used force, and now I have to check if the force was excessive or not.”

But Mitchell has been careful in his public utterances on the matter, staying clear of acknowledging any abuse or hospitalization.

He repeated last week after Minnis’ press conference that the entire matter is being reviewed by a retired justice of the Court of Appeal and a leading cleric.

Mitchell said when the investigations are complete the government will act. He repeated, “The chips will fall where they may.”

But the FNM is demanding that the government release the full, unedited report into any investigation that has already been conducted to date.

Division

Christie has said that Minnis’ comments could give the international community the impression that there is a division in The Bahamas on the controversial issue.

The comments had the immediate effect of the Democracy Movement spokesman calling for Mitchell’s removal from handling this issue.

It is important to acknowledge that Mitchell had opportunities to table in Parliament the preliminary report completed by law enforcement authorities.

The government has instead decided to have a more extensive probe.

On the weekend, a photo purportedly showing the severe injuries of an abused Cuban detainee made the rounds on Facebook after it was posted by activist Rodney Moncur.

Its authenticity could not be verified.

But there is acknowledgement from sources inside the government that some of the Cubans had to be hospitalized. One assumes there are hospital records the investigators will have access to.

It has now been more than three months since the alleged incident occurred.

The government must strike the balance between having a thorough investigation concluded and ensuring the matter does not drag on for much longer that it worsens any perceptions of a cover-up.

It seems the controversy has dragged on too long. The public deserves answers on what transpired at the detention center in May or any other time if it involved abuse.

Transparent reporting and punishing of any officer who may be guilty of wrongdoing are indeed keys to bringing this row to an end.

This would send the right message to the international community as well.

It would have been in the national interest and in the interest of the opposition for its leader to first deal with the government privately on any concerns, or evidence he has to prove his claims of a cover-up.

Many people have grown weary of the sparring over this issue. They want answers and finality.

The war of words between the government and the opposition has created unnecessary noise, and even confusion as the country’s reputation hangs in the balance.

What is required at this time is a unified voice on our foreign policy. In the opposition party itself, there are deep divisions on how the claims have been aired.

Political theatrics and efforts to show up the minister or the government must at all times take a backseat to the national interest.

This was a view expressed privately by several prominent FNMs after their leader’s statement.

The possible emergence of a report confirming abuse might not be enough to vindicate Minnis on this one.

Leadership requires good judgment. On that score, he has so far fallen short.

August 26, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

The brisk, rude utterances by Fred Mitchell, Minister of Foreign Affairs, on the recent allegations of abuse of Cuban nationals detained at Carmichael Road Detention Centre in The Bahamas ...suggests that he does not have ...or is ignoring the advice on the matter from professional diplomats

Opinion: The Cowboy Diplomat

 

Tribune 242 Guest Commentary by Kirkland Turner
Nassau, The Bahamas

THERE is a humorous catchphrase about diplomacy – it’s the “art of telling someone to go to hell and having them look forward to the journey”. In a nutshell, diplomacy is not about who carries the biggest stick, who shouts the loudest or who proves to be the rudest in international exchanges. The international landscape is not a school yard where poorly behaved boys scrimmage to prove “who’s the man”.

The dictionary describes diplomacy as the art and practice of conducting negotiations between representatives of groups or nations. Successful diplomacy is polite, well-mannered, respectful and gracious even when it requires the delivery of difficult messages and positions.

With reference to international diplomacy, it describes the conduct of relations between two or more countries through the mediation or negotiation of professional diplomats with regard to issues of peace-making, culture, economics, and trade. International agreements are typically negotiated by professional diplomats prior to endorsement by national politicians.

The Bahamas-US Relationship is the singularly most important relationship for our country. So, our self-interest dictates that this relationship is tendered by seasoned, experienced individuals with a good understanding of the myriad issues that make-up our relationship. Regrettably, today, it appears that those now in charge of Bahamian diplomacy, particularly as regards our relationship with the United States, have not got a clue.

The Consequences of Cowboy Diplomacy

One important area of discussion between The Bahamas and the United States of America, and on a larger plain with the international human rights establishment, has been the treatment of undocumented persons detected, arrested and detained by Bahamian authorities.

The brisk, rude utterances by Fred Mitchell, Minister of Foreign Affairs, on the recent allegations of abuse of Cuban nationals detained in The Bahamas suggests that he does not have or is ignoring the advice on the matter from professional diplomats.

This begs the question of who is advising the Minister. It seems that this Christie-led administration has removed or sidelined its professional diplomatic corps in favour of a cadre of political friends and associates to the detriment of the interests of our country.

For more than a year, we were alone in the Caribbean having no resident Ambassador in the US capital, Washington, DC. Today, 20th August, on the eve of Mr Christie’s 70th birthday and following months of agitation for comment on the matter from the Opposition, the Government sheepishly announced what has long been rumoured – that the Bahamian Permanent Representative to the United Nations (UN), septuagenarian Dr Eugene Newry, is to switch positions with Elliston Rahming, becoming the Bahamian Ambassador E&P to Washington. The terse announcement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that Mr Rahming will continue to serve as Permanent Representative to the Organization of American States (OAS) in Washington, DC, and assume the Permanent Representative Post at the UN in New York. This compromise is an expensive undertaking. If Mr Rahming is to properly fulfil his obligations before both the United Nations and the OAS, it will require weekly travel between the two cities and often enough require overnight stays.

The Bahamas also continues to be alone in the English-speaking Caribbean in having no American Ambassador resident in Nassau.

This state of affairs cannot be good for our relationship.

Recently, Obie Wilchcombe, the Minister of Tourism, and not the Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fred Mitchell, met with US Government representatives in Florida to discuss the most recent allegations about the treatment of Cuban nationals in The Bahamas.

More recently still, we have had the most startlingly irresponsible verbal insults thrown at US Congressional Representatives by the Minister of Foreign Affairs. Mr Mitchell has opined that US Congressional Representatives do not reflect the views or opinions of the US Administration. In his view, presumably what these individuals had to say on US-Bahamas relations is irrelevant. Mr Mitchell is American-educated; he either knows better or ought to know better. If he is not listening to the concerns of Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio and US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, he should know that the US Administration – the same Obama-led Administration that refused to recognise Mr Elliston Rahming as Bahamas Ambassador to the US and who has not bothered to appoint a US Ambassador to The Bahamas – listens to the views and opinions of American Senators and Congressmen! And, Mrs Ros-Lehtinen is the Chairperson of the powerful US House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Mr Mitchell has similarly been rudely dismissive of overtures from the Government of Panama regarding the possible interests of that country to offer residence to certain Cuban nationals detained in New Providence. While the Panamanian offer may not be practical given agreements in place between The Bahamas and the Republic of Cuba, there is no reason for the boorish behaviour of the Minister in discussing a proposal commented upon by the Panamanian Honorary Consul in The Bahamas, Mr David McGrath. Mr McGrath is a long time resident of The Bahamas and the McGrath family has long been considered “true friends” of The Bahamas.

That said, The Bahamas has been challenged by the inflow of undocumented persons or illegal immigrants for more than half a century. While people of many nationalities have been arrested, detained and repatriated from The Bahamas over many decades, people from Haiti and Cuba have posed the most difficult to deal with.

Challenges Presented by Undocumented Economic Migrants

Until the first FNM Government came to office in 1992, illegal immigrants found in The Bahamas were detained at Her Majesty’s Prison at Fox Hill together with persons detained for numerous other offences, some violent. This ran contrary to all international agreements and treaties concerned with the treatment of refugees or undocumented persons. Notwithstanding that only a small number of persons entering The Bahamas illegally actually meet the standard of an internationally recognised “political refugee”, the first FNM Government of The Bahamas took early steps to remove immigration violators from the prison and relocated them to more humane accommodation at an Immigration Detention Centre it created at Carmichael Road.

The Detention Centre has had a difficult history not least of all because of the added financial burden its creation, staffing, maintenance and upkeep have created for The Bahamas.

Most Cuban nationals ending up in The Bahamas have come because their intended travel to the United States has been interrupted – by bad weather, shoddy sailing vessels, etc. During the early 1990s, most of those with relatives in the United States were quickly able to arrange a transfer to Florida which kept their numbers in The Bahamas down.

However, with the adoption of the “US wet foot, dry foot” policy during the Clinton Administration, Cuban nationals leaving their home island and being stranded in The Bahamas discovered that they were no longer welcomed in the United States.

The new US policy admitted that most Cubans seeking to depart their home country were economic and not political refugees. The US also agreed that it would accept such Cuban economic immigrants who were successful in landing on US territory; eg “dry foot”. Those immigrants detained at sea “wet foot” would be returned to Cuba. The US Government also agreed to cooperate with The Bahamas in intercepting “refugee-laden vessels” – whether from Haiti or Cuba – when detected in international waters or in Bahamian waters so that the immigrants could be expeditiously and safely returned to their countries of origin.

Reluctant to return to their home island, Cuban nationals successfully landing In The Bahamas and aware of the new US policy which would not permit their easy transfer to that country have sought refugee status in The Bahamas. Most among this group continue to harbour hopes of eventually relocating to the United States.

Enter the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR)

The small Bahamian economy cannot absorb large numbers of economic immigrants. Moreover, were we to agree to extend economic refugee status to Cuban migrants, we would be forced to adopt a similar position toward requests from large numbers of economic refugees from many other countries, notably Haiti and other near-neighbour Caribbean countries.

Faced with the dilemma, The Bahamas, during the 1990s, engaged the assistance of the United Nations Office of the High Commissioner for Refugees in dealing with the growing numbers of undocumented persons arriving in The Bahamas and seeking to remain here. With the assistance of the UNHCR, The Bahamas was able to develop a protocol for interviewing new arrivals, separating out political from economic migrants and arranging for the timely, humane repatriation of economic migrants to their country of origin.

The success of this programme of repatriation has been dependent on The Bahamas also reaching agreement with the Governments of the Republic of Haiti and the Republic of Cuba, to accept their undocumented nationals being repatriated from The Bahamas. It should be recognised that having entered into such agreements with Cuba and Haiti The Bahamas cannot arbitrarily renege on the terms of the agreements and approve select number of economic migrants who may arbitrarily be facilitated in relocating to a third country if and when such offers might materialise. This would not augur well for orderly relations between The Bahamas and the governments of Haiti or Cuba.

Arrests, detention and repatriation exercises of primarily Haitian and Cuban nationals have been continuous over the past 15 to 20 years. They have been costly for The Bahamas, a small developing country with limited financial resources. No foreign country and no international agency, that we are aware of, has ever made financial assistance available to The Bahamas Government to defray these costs. Further, no country has ever agreed to offer undocumented economic migrants arriving in The Bahamas safe passage and residence in their country.

The costs of detaining, housing and repatriating undocumented nationals have been aggravated by the sometimes violent protests against confinement by immigration detainees. Apart from damage to furniture and supplies, these protests have resulted in serious damage to portions of the Detention Centre, including destruction of a dormitory by fire.

Protesting Cuban Detainees

Protests at the Carmichael Road Detention Centre have been almost exclusively carried out by Cuban nationals, sometimes with the vociferous support and financial backing of some Cuban nationals’ resident in either The Bahamas or in the United States of America.

In the most recent staged protest against their confinement in The Bahamas, Cuban nationals have released a staged video in which it is alleged that Cuban detainees at the Carmichael Detention Centre are subject to abuse by their Bahamian minders. The video is universally believed to be a fake by Bahamians of all political persuasions. However, there is a growing unease among some Bahamians that notwithstanding the bogus video, some allegations of abuse made against some Bahamian Immigration or Defence Force Officers posted at the Carmichael Road Immigration Detention Centre may have elements of truth.

After vehemently denying the authenticity of the staged video, the Government maintained a period of silence on any allegation of abuse at the Detention Centre. As leaks of reports of Cuban nationals being treated at the Princess Margaret Hospital for wounds possibly sustained during a break-out from the Detention Centre, the Minister of Foreign Affairs confirmed that investigations of allegations of abuse or use of excessive force in the recapture of escapees from the Detention Centre were underway.

Bahamian human rights activists have long campaigned against allegations of abuse against police and prison officers. And reports of human rights abuse have long been attached to tactics employed by immigration officers conducting immigration raids at the residences or in neighbourhoods frequented by undocumented migrants. It is not too far-fetched then for some to believe that some Immigration Officers might, in their exercise of their duties, exceed acceptable and sanctioned “use of force” when dealing with escaping immigration detainees.

Minister Mitchell has said that it is not Bahamian Government policy to abuse detainees. Of course, he is correct on that score. But that does not mean that abuse does not happen. Allegations of abuse must be investigated, vigorously and expeditiously. It is not good enough to say that allegations are being looked into and then carry on with “business as usual”.

The Minister has also engaged in juvenile bully diplomacy suggesting that Bahamian nationals adopt a “my country right or wrong” attitude in the face of allegations of abuse from Cuban Americans and threaten a Bahamian boycott of South Florida businesses.

Mr Mitchell’s suggestion of a Bahamian boycott is so immature and childish as to provoke laughter. Mr Mitchell must have some new secret market for Bahamian tourism and a more convenient source for the importation of so many of the essentials to life in The Bahamas now obtained from and through South Florida.

Certainly, the Minister has forgotten that tourism is the mainstay of our economy; that 90 plus per cent of our tourists come from the United States and that fully half of those originate from or transit South Florida on their way to our shores! Mr Mitchell has clearly forgotten that the money which Bahamians spend in South Florida is money made from American investments and American visitors to our country.

This is not child’s play. It is now urgent for the Minister of Foreign Affairs who also holds responsibility for Immigration, to bring the investigation into the alleged abuse of Cuban nationals to a speedy conclusion.

The results of that investigation should be made public and if it is determined that any officers or group of officers inflicted unnecessary harm on escaping detainees, they should be disciplined up to and including having criminal charges laid where warranted.

Fire Mitchell

A casual attitude toward physical violence in law enforcement circles cannot be tolerated by a democratic government which maintains its respect for the human rights of all individuals living or resident in our country and which, as a member of the United Nations, has affirmed its commitment to respect and observe the international human rights conventions.

And, The Bahamas Government must do the necessary to restore Bahamian-US Relations to the warm and mutually advantageous footing. This can only bode well for the progress of both our peoples. That requires Prime Minister Christie placing responsibility for the conduct of the foreign affairs of our country in the hands of a new foreign minister, one capable of making appropriate recommendations for senior diplomatic and consular posts that would not cause embarrassment to the country, one not given to wasting scarce dollars pretending to open a Consulate General in Washington, DC, where a full Bahamas Embassy exists, one who will not needlessly rent extravagant accommodation for the high commissioner in London and one who will not undertake at public expense questionable travel around the globe unaccompanied by professional officers.

August 21, 2013

Tribune242 

Bahamas Blog International

Florida Congresswoman Illeana Ros-Lehtinen says: “It is unconscionable that the Bahamian authorities have decided to forcibly repatriate Cuban freedom seekers back to their brutal oppressors under the Castro regime.”

U.S. lawmaker blasts Bahamas

Calls decision on Cubans ‘spineless’

By Krystel Rolle
Guardian Staff Reporter
krystel@nasguard.com
Nassau, The Bahamas

A Florida lawmaker has branded as “spineless” and “immoral” The Bahamas’ decision to repatriate a group of Cubans last week.

In a press statement posted on her website, Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the U.S. representative for Florida’s 27th congressional district, said, “It is unconscionable that the Bahamian authorities have decided to forcibly repatriate Cuban freedom seekers back to their brutal oppressors under the Castro regime.”

Ros-Lehtinen said the Bahamas government took this “misguided approach” despite the fact that Panama had offered to grant asylum to 19 Cuban nationals.

She added: “Cuba maintains one of the world’s worst human rights records, and this spineless decision to send them back is not only unacceptable, it is immoral.”

Additionally, U.S. Senators Bill Nelson and Marco Rubio and Congress members Mario Diaz-Balart, Albio Sires and Ros-Lehtinen wrote a letter to Prime Minister Perry

Christie asking that the government halt any further Cuban repatriations.

At a press conference at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs yesterday, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Immigration Fred Mitchell confirmed that 24 Cubans were repatriated on Friday.

He said another group of 20 is expected to be returned to Cuba shortly.

Last week, Honorary Consul General of Panama to The Bahamas David McGrath said Panama intends to offer humanitarian exile to 19 Cuban nationals.

However, Mitchell said the government has not received official word from the Panamanian government.

Yesterday, Mitchell also shot down an assertion made by Ros-Lehtinen, who suggested that a video purporting to show Cuban detainees at the Carmichael Road Detention Centre being beaten by Bahamian officers is legitimate.

According to an article appearing in the Miami Herald, Ros-Lehtinen said on Friday that U.S. State Department officials told her that Nassau officials have confirmed the video was real and fired the “guilty guards”.

However, Mitchell said, “The Bahamas has not admitted to the authenticity of the video which the protestors themselves have admitted is a fake.”

The government has been criticized in the past several months for law enforcement officials’ alleged treatment of Cuban detainees.

The Democracy Movement, a group made up of Cubans based in Miami, Florida, launched a series of protests shortly after the video was aired on a Spanish television station in Miami.

The group is pushing for all of the Cubans to be sent to a third country.

However, Mitchell made it clear that only the immigrants who are judged to have asylum status will be eligible for entry into a third country.

He said 18 Cubans fit the criteria. He added that 10 of those appear to have been accepted by the United States and eight appear to be eligible to go elsewhere.

“If Panama makes an offer for the eight then they are free to go to Panama,” he said.

“One of the things that we are concerned about, and we have said this to our friends across the pond, we do not want a signal to go out to the Cubans, who are a potential pool of migrants, that all you have to do is reach The Bahamas and then you get into some country by some artifice,” Mitchell said.

“That would open the floodgates and then it would be a problem that we cannot contain. So we want to make it clear that the laws will be enforced.”

While the video has been branded as false, investigations into the alleged abuse remains under investigation.

“The chips will fall where they may when the investigation concludes,” Mitchell said.

August 19, 2013

thenassauguardian

Bahamas Blog International

Florida Congresswoman Illeana Ros-Lehtinen protested the Bahamian government’s decision to repatriate 24 Cuban nationals to what she called “the Castro Dictatorship”

U.S. Anger As Cubans Deported To Havana

Tribune242
Nassau, The Bahamas



A FLORIDA Congresswoman yesterday vowed to continue to put pressure on the Bahamian government following the repatriation of 24 Cuban nationals, who were at the centre of a months-long protest and a hunger strike, to Havana, Cuba.

 

The announcement of the repatriation came from the Department of Immigration and follows months of protests by Cuban-American human rights activists in Miami over claims that undocumented migrants have been abused to “the point of torture” while detained at Her Majesty’s Prison and the Carmichael Road Detention Centre in Nassau.

 

Two members of the Miami-based Democracy Movement staged hunger strikes and there were demonstrations in front of the Bahamian Consulate and near the piers where Bahamas-bound cruise ships embark.

 

The protest drew support from members of the US Congress and Miami Mayor Tomas Regalado.

 

The Democracy Movement claimed that the detainees had been beaten by guards, denied access to adequate food, water and medical care, and deprived of the ability to file asylum claims, claims all denied by The Bahamas’ Immigration Minister Fred Mitchell.

 

Mr Mitchell said that the government had not received any specific, credible claims of abuse and no investigation had been conducted. He said officials had looked into a ‘video’ released by supporters of the detained Cubans allegedly showing men being struck by guards in the detention centre and determined that it was “cleary a staged event.”

 

Originally it was thought that the men would be taken to Panama after that country granted the Cuban detainees visas and territorial asylum.

 

Yesterday, Congresswoman Illeana Ros-Lehtinen protested the government’s decision to repatriate Cubans to what she called “the Castro Dictatorship”.

 

“Members of my staff and have been coordinating with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) personnel who are on the ground in Nassau. The UNHCR officials inform us that the Cubans who are being repatriated may not be the same ones who have been offered asylum in Panama,” the Congresswoman said in a statement.

 

“The Bahamian government has finally acknowledged that the beatings that were caught on video occurred and we hope that the new security cameras, as well as the removal of these abusive guards, will have some positive impact on the lives of these freedom seeking Cubans. It is shameful that because the Bahamian government rejected their refugee status, the State Department policy states that the US cannot take them in after proper vetting.

 

“I will continue to monitor this sad situation and I will continue to press the Bahamian government that it must cease the deplorable detainment conditions under which Cubans are not fed adequately nor treated humanely; it must honour the generous asylum protections offered by third countries, such as Panama and it must coordinate with US officials and the UNHCR so that the present conditions of a lack of information ceases,” she said.

 

August 16, 2013

 

Tribune 242

 

Bahamas Blog International

...reparations for Caribbean slavery and native genocide

Payback for slavery's terror

By Omar Ryan, Guest columnist:



Over the past few weeks, the matter of reparations for Caribbean slavery and native genocide has become very topical, and rightly so, because of the developments in CARICOM and the active media discussions carried out by ourown National Commission on Reparations (NCR).

Despite the NCR's efforts to educate our people about these historical injustices, the sufferings of their ancestors and the contemporary implications of past atrocities, the ignorance, self-denial, even self-hate are still apparent among our people trapped in colonial-style education and historical amnesia.

I was appalled by the view expressed in your Letter of the Day of August 9, 2013 titled 'Stop flogging reparations', in which the writer said advocates for reparations are wasting their time, and even quoted the Bible justifying slavery.

I want us not to forget that the enslavers and colonialists were armed with the Bible while they took away Africans and brought them to the Americas to be treated less than humans. I believe that the voices of the naysayers, the non-interest and apathy with regard to the issue of reparations are mental attitudes resulting from our people not being fully aware of what justice means.

There appears to be a willed ignorance that a great injustice was carried out against their own people.
The fact was that Africans were forcibly taken away from their continent, exploited and enslaved for almost four hundred years, and upon the ending of bondage, the enslavers were paid twenty million pounds for loss of 'property' (enslaved Africans), not land. Hitherto, no compensation has been paid to the victims.

Against slavery

It must be noted that Africans, from the outset, were against the forcible taking away of their people from the continent. One African, King Nzinga Mbemba, wrote to the king of Portugal in a letter dated October 18, 1526 outlining the ramifications of the kidnapping of Africans and his opposition to it.
However, the opposition of the Africans was no match for the military and naval power of the mighty Europeans.

Well over 100 claims for compensation were filed by members of the Church. One such example was the Rev Charles William Davy, who filed six claims for 661 enslaved Africans on properties in Trelawny and who received £12,641 in compensation).

Among the recipients were educators like the Rev Thomas Pierce Williams, principal of Wolmer's, 1813-14, who received £7,054 for 356 enslaved in the parish of Manchester.

They and others amassed wealth that set the catalyst for the economic prosperity we now see countries of especially Western Europe reaping.

It must be known that one Hermann J. Abs, a German Jew, helped to finance the Auschwitz concentration camp where thousands of Jews met their demise. As a Jew, he played a role in the terrible crime against fellow Jews, and it never stopped the Jews from getting reparations from the German State. And it was the offspring of the victims that were compensated, not the victims themselves.

So it must be understood that a crime was committed against Africans and native peoples of the Americas (Caribbean), and no compensation was paid.

Within a world where we hope to move forward as peaceful beings, reparations must be paid to the descendants of the victims who are living with the scars and ills transmitted through generations from slavery.

The NCR urges people to rid themselves of that mental slavery that continues to trap them in a cycle of ignorance, even in the face of overwhelming evidence. Such attitudes as displayed in The Gleaner's Letter of the Day and the responses to it remind us that "Aluta continua!"

Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and omaryan@live.com.

August 12, 2013

Jamaica Gleaner

Bahamas Blog International

Nicaragua Inter-oceanic canal: A wise move?

By María Julia Mayoral

Nicaragua could, within a few years, become a new international logistics and transportation center, if an inter-oceanic canal megaproject succeeds in this country blessed with an enviable geographic location.

"Central America sits midway along both North-South and East-West trade routes," said Chinese executive Wang Jing during a visit to Managua, "We believe this is the ideal place for another link between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans." The company he leads has been granted a concession to undertake the canal project.

According to international estimates, between 2011 and 2025, maritime trade traffic will increase some 40% and providing a route through Nicaragua for large cargo ships would provide significant savings in terms of fuel and days at sea.

The Hong Kong Nicaragua Canal Development Investment Group (HKND), with headquarters in the Chinese city cited and Managua, is optimistic about the venture, according to Wang Jing, president and executive director of the company.

HKND Group received exclusive rights over planning, design, construction, operation and management of the canal and other related projects, including ports, railroads, free-trade zones on both coastlines, airports and a cross-isthmus oil pipeline.

"Trends in world trade and maritime transportation indicate that there is demand for a new canal. Our intention is to build a world class project, developed in accordance with the best international practices," the company announced.

The framework for the concession was signed in Managua mid-June by Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and the company’s directorate, while the country’s Parliament approved two pieces of legislation supporting the agreement.

Experts and established companies have been contracted to undertake studies of the project’s environmental, social, financial and technological feasibility. The British consulting firm Environmental Resources Management will independently evaluate the project’s social and environmental impact, in order to determine the most appropriate route for such a canal, which could require five to ten years to construct.

Building a second Central American canal, substantially larger that the existing one, makes sense to HKND. Estimates indicate that the volume of Panama Canal transactions could increase 240% by 2030, while the value of all goods transported through canals in Panama and Nicaragua could surpass 1.4 billion dollars.

According to this analysis, continual growth in trade volume could lead to congestion in Panama within 10 to 15 years, clearly suggesting that another route is needed.

As for possible savings, HKND has estimated that a ship traveling from Shanghai to Baltimore in the United States, using a Nicaraguan canal, could shorten its voyage by 4,000 kilometers in comparison to a common route currently taken through the Suez Canal and by 7,500 in comparison to a voyage around South Africa's Cape of Good Hope. Considering current fuel prices, an average-sized container ship could save a million dollars on one round trip using a new canal.

Preliminary estimates indicate that a new inter-oceanic canal could capture maritime traffic carrying 450 to 500 million metric tons of goods and serve ships up to 250,000 tons, 400 meters long and 59 wide, with draughts of up to 22 meters.

Paul Oquist, the Ortega administration's secretary for public policy believes that the canal will allow Nicaragua to practically double its gross domestic product (GDP) by 2018 and triple formal employment. With the beginning of necessary studies and works associated with the canal next year, Oquist estimates the GDP could increase by 10.8% and by 12.6% in 2016, to subsequently stabilize around 9.5 to 10% annual growth by 2018.

NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY DEFENDED

Nicaragua granted a concession for construction and future operation of the canal, but did not privatize its territory. Additionally, the state is participating as a partner and its ownership share will expand over time, Oquist clarified.

The concession granted the Chinese company is for 100 years but should not compromise national sovereignty, since the country will hold 51% ownership within 50 years, according to Deputy Foreign Minister Manuel Colonel Kautz, who is heading Nicaragua's Gran Canal Authority.

A canal connecting the Pacific and Atlantic oceans through Nicaragua has been a long-standing dream, one which was frustrated by foreign interests in the early 1900's, added Francisco Mayorga, the country's representative to the Inter-American Development Bank.

The 1914 Chamarro-Bryan Treaty mortgaged national territory to the United States government, effectively preventing the development of a canal similar to Panama's within Nicaragua, the official explained.
 

The United States had used its military and economic power to force Nicaragua to forego constructing a canal without U.S. participation, to protect its interests in the Panamanian isthmus, Mayorga concluded. (Orbe)

August 01, 2013

Granma.cu 

Bahamas Blog International