Shame on the “THREE BLIND MICE” of the Caribbean Community! (Commentary by DAVID COMISSIONG)

DAVID COMISSIONG. * Photo credit: Barbados Today

All over the world today, the United States Department of State and the US’s billionaire Secretary of State Rex Tillerson (former CEO of the rapacious American multi-national oil corporation Exxon Mobil) are gleefully boasting about the coup that they pulled off in engineering the so-called “Lima Group of States” (inclusive of the CARICOM states of St Lucia and Guyana) into issuing an international Declaration that attacks and vilifies the socialist Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, as well as the success of Tillerson’s recent diplomatic effort to enlist Prime Minister Andrew Holness and the government of Jamaica in the USA’s ongoing crusade against Venezuela.

These recent happenings are all part and parcel of a well coordinated strategy on the part of the Donald Trump administration to cause maximum disruption and subversion in our sister Caribbean country of Venezuela in the lead up to Venezuela’s critical Presidential election of April 2018.

And so, one is forced to query why three of our Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member states — Jamaica, St. Lucia, and Guyana — would remove themselves from our collective CARICOM umbrella, and instead associate themselves with this sinister “big power” campaign of subversion against a fellow developing country that is trying desperately hard to keep its precious natural resources out of the dirty hands of greedy North American multi-national corporations.

The US Department of State website is telling us that St. Lucia and Guyana are members of something called “The Lima Group of states” !

The questions therefore arise:- Do the citizens of St. Lucia and Guyana know anything at all about this “Lima Group of States” that their governments have joined? Was any of this discussed with the people of St. Lucia and Guyana by Prime Minister Alan Chastanet and President David Granger respectively?

Is it the case that St. Lucia, Guyana, and Jamaica (under the relatively conservative, right-wing administrations that now govern those countries) have been transformed into myopic puppet states of Donald Trump’s USA? Have these three once proud pillars of Caribbean nationhood become the “three blind mice” of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) ?

Messers Chastanet, Holness, and Granger are all relative newcomers to Caribbean political leadership, but surely they must be aware that one of the fundamental objectives of our Caribbean Community (CARICOM), as enshrined in Article 4 of the Treaty of Chaguaramas, is the coordination and the collective articulation of the foreign policy of our 15 CARICOM member states, and “the achievement of a greater measure of……..effectiveness of Member States in dealing with third States, groups of States, and entities of any description”.

It is therefore inexcusable that these three conservative right-wing political leaders have snubbed and disregarded our Caribbean Community (CARICOM) and our forty year commitment to formulating and pursuing a collective foreign policy, for by so doing they have severely tarnished the international image of CARICOM, and have done serious damage to the morale, stability and effectiveness of our regional organization.

And what should be particularly distressing for the people of St. Lucia, Guyana, and Jamaica is that these three neophyte heads of government are seemingly unaware that each of their nations possess outstanding records as architects and champions of the CARICOM determination to formulate and articulate a collective foreign policy, and to adopt a unified CARICOM position in our dealings with the “great” powers of this world.

Who can forget the historic and critical role played by Guyana’s Forbes Burnham in crafting the Treaty of Chaguaramas and its commitment to a collective foreign policy?

Likewise,who can forget Michael Manley’s collaboration with the said Forbes Burnham in insisting that CARICOM formulate and deploy a common foreign policy in relation to such critical issues as support for the anti-apartheid /anti-imperialist movements of Southern Africa; the Caribbean’s engagement in negotiations at Lome for a new relationship with the then European Economic Community; and advocacy for the establishment of a New International Economic Order?

And who could fail to acknowledge that it was in the island of St. Lucia in July of 1974 that the heads of Government of the newly established CARICOM first enunciated the principle that our nations would embark on such wider hemispheric matters as crafting relationships with the Central American Common Market, the Andean Common Market, and the nation of Mexico, NOT as individual states, but on a collective, region-wide CARICOM basis !

In light of the foregoing, all right-thinking citizens of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) should rebuke these three errant heads of Government and deprecate the folly that they have engaged themselves in.

Our Caribbean has a proud tradition of standing up and courageously speaking truth to power. It was — after all — four small Caribbean states that — in 1972 — defied the mighty United States of America and broke the diplomatic isolation of the nation of Cuba. We took a stance based on PRINCIPLE, and the rest of the hemisphere followed us.

That is the type of Caribbean Community (CARICOM) that we must remain committed to being !

We must therefore NOT permit our unity as a regional community to be fractured, nor must we allow ourselves to be led down a path of unprincipled, self-seeking, and undignified behavior by any number of “blind mice”.

DAVID COMISSIONG
Coordinator

(19)(9)
This article was posted in its entirety as received by stlucianewsonline.com. This media house does not correct any spelling or grammatical error within press releases and commentaries. The views expressed therein are not necessarily those of stlucianewsonline.com, its sponsors or advertisers.

6 comments

  1. DESPITE THE COMMITTMENTS MADE BY EACH MEMBER STATE TO HONOUR THE CARICOM AGREEMENT, I DOUBT VERY MUCH THAT MEMBERS WERE RESTRICTED FROM SETTING UP BI-LATERAL AGREEMENTS WITH INDIVIDUAL COUNTRIES OUTSIDE OF CARICOM. FRANKLY CARICOM HAS NOT ACHIEVED A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF ITS INTENDED GOALS. MANY COUNTRIES HAVE MULTIPLE TRADE AGREEMENTS WITH VARIOUS COUNTRIES. EVERY BAICOM MEMBER IS STILL FREE TO EXPLORE OTHER AVENUES FOR DEVELOPMENT AND IN NO WAY IS TANTAMOUNT TO A BETRAYAL OF ANY NATURE. HAS CARICOM MADE US MORE PROGRESSSIVE IN SOME AREAS ...YES...BUT NOT TO THE EXTENT THAT TOGETHER WE ARE ECONOMICALLY STRONGER AS A REGION. MANY COUNTRIES IN THE REGION HAVE HAD TO EXPLORE OTHER AVENUES TO BE FISCALLY SUSTAINABLE. WE ALL COMPETE FOR TOURIST DOLLARS. NOTHING'S WRONG WITH A LITTLE COMPETITION! FORCES US TO UP OUR GAME TO THE NEXT LEVEL.

    (0)(0)
  2. Lima Group of States huh? Another confirmation that we speak of unity but we are not committed to it.

    (0)(0)
  3. Is it true to say that ..."In light of the foregoing, all right-thinking citizens of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) should rebuke these three errant heads of Government and deprecate the folly that they have engaged themselves in; without ensuring that they were involved and have engaged in this act of betrayal.

    (0)(0)
  4. I could not have said better. The use of economic and military power to have others to bend your will cannot be right. The way America covers the resources of others is next savagery. Anyway this is part of its very fabric. Didn't they go about destroying the food source of the Indians in order to defeat them and take over their and country?

    (0)(0)
  5. Well said sir. Perhaps Allen chastenet and his national security minister thinks it a strategic move to side with the US in order for the us state department to remove the leahy law sanctions placed on our police force for alleged extra judicial killings. Lmfao ..... aint gonna happen hermingild and allen. These r two separate issues. So your bright idea that siding with the us will appease them and have them remove the sanctions will fall flat on you all faces.

    (1)(0)
  6. Francis Jean-baptiste

    What about the contribution of Sir John Melvin Compton

    (0)(0)
  7. Advertisement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.