YorickBrown
09-23-03, - 07:29 PM
My people, we have to be careful of putting ourselves in situations where we will end up feeling completely obligated to return favors in the future. Recent developments obviously show that we are currently in the "good books" of certain countries, but are we really going to benefit later on? :dgi:
It's tough to divert from the first-world lifestyles that we currently live, but it is imperative that we begin to make provisions as soon as possible to be able to feed ourselves, teach ourselves, heal ourselves, clothe ourselves, and yes, defend ourselves - without relying so heavily on other countries. Other than that, we will always be at the mercy of other nations. In fact, some defeatists say that it's already too late; many of our world-class professionals with their valuable knowledge prefer to stay in other more advanced countries and avoid the short-sighted mentalities of some within our society. Being aware of this, I have one question: Who will be the ones to finally stand up and lead us into making this nation :bahamas: truly INDEPENDENT?
I live the "life" as well, so I'm quite aware of the hypnotic effect of being able to turn on a light switch and get light, be able to drive my car wherever I want to and dress up in my tie and slacks to head off to my nice job. BUT I also sense the impending doom of hands that are ultimately gaining power over the matters that should be left exclusively to our native decision makers. We do not want to end up looking like well-dressed, arrogantly ignorant puppets in the eyes of the world because of our inability to make up our own mind on world matters and not be influenced by outside governments. In other words, we do not want to look like suck-ups that are given insignificant, short term rewards in return for our absolute concurrence.
We are a valuable part of the Caribbean and should be taking a firm stance in building a solid foundation for our economy, as well as neighboring third world nations. But we have to do it in a way that does not compromise our own sense of morals. Take careful note of the following excerpt from the Jamaica Gleaner (http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20030923/lead/lead4.html) :jamaica: :
CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY (CARICOM) countries were warned yesterday to expect attempts by the United States to divide and rule the region, as Washington seeks to develop more bilateral agreements at various levels to counter growing opposition to its plans.
Professor Vaughan Lewis, of the Institute of International Research at the University of the West Indies, was commenting on the non-participation of at least six Caribbean leaders in a working breakfast with US President George Bush to be held in New York tomorrow.
Lewis told the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC) that it has been obvious for "some time" that CARICOM countries have been holding divergent views on various US policies.
He recalled that the region had appeared divided on the issue of financial services policy adopted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) when it was felt that Barbados had broken ranks, even though Bridgetown later denied the allegation.
Lewis said another issue was the region's position on the Iraq war, when some Caribbean states, notably St. Vincent and the Grenadines, had claimed that since some of their nationals might be fighting in Iraq, they would have to show a certain degree of sympathy.
"Next keen observers would have wondered why Jamaica and St. Lucia, for example, did not ratify the International Criminal Court (ICC) and still have not, leaving its main promoter Trinidad and Tobago in a sense isolated," Lewis said.
Washington had suspended military aid from a number of Caribbean states including Port of Spain for not entering into bilateral agreements to exempt US nationals from the jurisdiction of the ICC.
"We know the consequences of this in terms of who was and was not exempted from military assistance sanctioned by the United States," Lewis told CMC, adding "so if we can see these differences, so can the US."
:hot:"Naturally in the new climate of "you are either with us or against us" policy of the Bush administration, we can expect, and our governments will know how to expect, both sanctions and rewards, whether subtle or overt and in accordance with their situation in these serious economic times, appear willing to risk regional division," Lewis added.
He warned the region "there is more to come."
He noted that the US Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, writing in Monday's edition of the Financial Times in the wake of the failed World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks in Cancun, said "the US will continue its policy of bilateralism in negotiating free trade areas."
It's tough to divert from the first-world lifestyles that we currently live, but it is imperative that we begin to make provisions as soon as possible to be able to feed ourselves, teach ourselves, heal ourselves, clothe ourselves, and yes, defend ourselves - without relying so heavily on other countries. Other than that, we will always be at the mercy of other nations. In fact, some defeatists say that it's already too late; many of our world-class professionals with their valuable knowledge prefer to stay in other more advanced countries and avoid the short-sighted mentalities of some within our society. Being aware of this, I have one question: Who will be the ones to finally stand up and lead us into making this nation :bahamas: truly INDEPENDENT?
I live the "life" as well, so I'm quite aware of the hypnotic effect of being able to turn on a light switch and get light, be able to drive my car wherever I want to and dress up in my tie and slacks to head off to my nice job. BUT I also sense the impending doom of hands that are ultimately gaining power over the matters that should be left exclusively to our native decision makers. We do not want to end up looking like well-dressed, arrogantly ignorant puppets in the eyes of the world because of our inability to make up our own mind on world matters and not be influenced by outside governments. In other words, we do not want to look like suck-ups that are given insignificant, short term rewards in return for our absolute concurrence.
We are a valuable part of the Caribbean and should be taking a firm stance in building a solid foundation for our economy, as well as neighboring third world nations. But we have to do it in a way that does not compromise our own sense of morals. Take careful note of the following excerpt from the Jamaica Gleaner (http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20030923/lead/lead4.html) :jamaica: :
CARIBBEAN COMMUNITY (CARICOM) countries were warned yesterday to expect attempts by the United States to divide and rule the region, as Washington seeks to develop more bilateral agreements at various levels to counter growing opposition to its plans.
Professor Vaughan Lewis, of the Institute of International Research at the University of the West Indies, was commenting on the non-participation of at least six Caribbean leaders in a working breakfast with US President George Bush to be held in New York tomorrow.
Lewis told the Caribbean Media Corporation (CMC) that it has been obvious for "some time" that CARICOM countries have been holding divergent views on various US policies.
He recalled that the region had appeared divided on the issue of financial services policy adopted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) when it was felt that Barbados had broken ranks, even though Bridgetown later denied the allegation.
Lewis said another issue was the region's position on the Iraq war, when some Caribbean states, notably St. Vincent and the Grenadines, had claimed that since some of their nationals might be fighting in Iraq, they would have to show a certain degree of sympathy.
"Next keen observers would have wondered why Jamaica and St. Lucia, for example, did not ratify the International Criminal Court (ICC) and still have not, leaving its main promoter Trinidad and Tobago in a sense isolated," Lewis said.
Washington had suspended military aid from a number of Caribbean states including Port of Spain for not entering into bilateral agreements to exempt US nationals from the jurisdiction of the ICC.
"We know the consequences of this in terms of who was and was not exempted from military assistance sanctioned by the United States," Lewis told CMC, adding "so if we can see these differences, so can the US."
:hot:"Naturally in the new climate of "you are either with us or against us" policy of the Bush administration, we can expect, and our governments will know how to expect, both sanctions and rewards, whether subtle or overt and in accordance with their situation in these serious economic times, appear willing to risk regional division," Lewis added.
He warned the region "there is more to come."
He noted that the US Trade Representative, Robert Zoellick, writing in Monday's edition of the Financial Times in the wake of the failed World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks in Cancun, said "the US will continue its policy of bilateralism in negotiating free trade areas."