Independence in the Yankees’ backyard

THE EDITOR: Last year, for 40 nights we feted in celebration of what was the 40th anniversary of formal independence. But events over the year since, raise serious questions about the meaningfulness of such extravaganza.

During that time we have had an American diplomat tell us, together with other Caricom countries, to “watch our mouths” when we sought to say our piece about the US invasion of Iraq. In a pretty open threat, Trinidad and Tobago was told that it would be “remembered” for whatever it might say on the matter. We did not say very much afterwards. Not too long after, the US would seek to intimidate us because this country did not agree that they should be above the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court. The meek reaction of our leaders to this outrage was to describe it as a minor “disagreement between friends.” On the eve of the grand celebration of our supposed sovereignty, we should not forget that for more than a year now we have had reason to wonder whether we even have sovereignty over Marli Street. These events serve to remind us that on August 31, we may sing the national anthem as loudly as we want, the soil on which it is sung is in Uncle Sam’s backyard. The American stranglehold on our economy is about to be increased with our planned entry into the US dominated Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA).

The FTAA has been decried as one of the most notorious instruments of colonialism in the 21st century. The controversial “investor-state principle” in its rules grants American corporations a status quo equal to that of the host countries. Generally, these rules will limit the role of governments in protecting the environment and establishing proper labour standards. In so doing they will facilitate the plunder of labour and natural resources by American corporations. All this will be done in profitable collaboration with local businessmen, and in Trinidad and Tobago, patriotism does not exist among our privileged class. Indeed last year, a local business mogul let us know that he and his kind do not “invest money in nationalism.” He uttered this as he fought against efforts to keep Trinidad Cement Limited (TCL) ownership local. For him the supreme consideration was the deal, that is the lucrative opportunity to sell TCL shares to the Mexican multinational, Cemex.

Now, guess what? He has now been appointed to play a leading role in the national effort to achieve developed country status by 2020. Under such leadership we would soon develop into a full-fledged colony of the United States. This generation seems indifferent to, if not comfortable with, the state of affairs. For many, considerations of Independence amount to little more than another opportunity to fete down the place. But this is not what those patriots of 1937 had in mind when they raised the demand for “Home Rule.” It is not for this that twelve persons lost their lives in the anti-colonial uprisings that flared in June of that year. In the current conditions of the resurgence of colonialism, what are we doing with their legacy? What would history record of this generation’s effort to further the Independence project: a series of parades and parties?

TERRENCE  REGIS
Trou Macaque