Among the major global events that occupied attention in recent times are International Human Rights Day (December 10) and the virtual Climate Ambition Summit (December 12). Their respective themes “Stand up for Human Rights” and “Sprint to Glasgow” where the substantive meeting, COP-26 will be held in December 2021, were influenced by the intervention of the COVID-19 pandemic. It was recognized that human rights must be at the centre of the post COVID-19 world, and ambitious Climate Commitments must embrace the three pillars of the Paris Agreement: mitigation, adaptation and finance that will help to build towards a green and resilient recovery from COVID-19.
Human Rights must be at the Centre of the post COVID-19 world The major takeaways from this year’s Human Rights agenda fall under the UN Human Rights generic call to action, “Stand up for Human Rights. They require: (a) ensuring that Human Rights are central to the recovery efforts; (b) reaching common global goals by creating equal opportunities for all; (c) re-building the world we want through global solidarity as well as interconnectedness and shared humanity; and (d) fostering more resilient and just societies by applying human rights standards to tackle entrenched, systematic, and intergenerational inequalities, exclusion and discrimination. The COVID-19 crisis has been fueled by deepening poverty, rising inequalities, structural and entrenched discrimination and other gaps in human rights protection. The UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres is convinced that "only measures to close these gaps and advance human rights can ensure we fully recover and build back a world that is better, more resilient, just, and sustainable". The Climate Ambitious Summit and the Global Surge Driven by COVID-19 What emerged out of virtual event was encouraging for those of us who participated. The Summit, co- hosted by UK, France and the UN attracted 70 Heads of State, along with regional and city leaders, and heads of major businesses. They delivered a raft of new measures, policies and plans, aimed at making a big dent in greenhouse gas emissions, and ensuring that the warming of the planet is limited to 1.5c. The commitments to strengthen national climate plans (NCPs) grew significantly and came from of the world's biggest emitters. The UK, which is hosting next year’s UN Climate Conference in Scotland, announced that it will cut emissions by 68 per cent, compared to 1990 levels, the European Union bloc committed to a 55 per cent cut over the same time period. At least 24 countries announced new commitments, strategies or plans to reach carbon neutrality, and a number of states set out how they are going even further, with ambitious dates to reach net zero: Finland by 2035, Austria by 2040 and Sweden by 2045. Pakistan announced that it is scrapping plans for new coal power plants; India will soon more than double its renewable energy target, and China committed to increasing the share of non-fossil fuel in primary energy consumption to around 25% by 2030. In addition, The UN Global Compact continues to support companies around the world to operate in a socially and environmentally responsible way and that includes coming up with innovative solutions to build prosperity without harming the planet. While the coronavirus wrought economic havoc on the world, with the release of COVID-19vaccines already being rolled out, economies are expected to begin opening up, and the UN is spearheading attempts to ensure that the world will “build back better”, rather than returning to a fossil-fuel dependent business as usual. The innovative video interactions involving a wide range of stakeholders, revealed real momentum towards the next big step on the road to carbon neutrality at the COP-26 UN Climate Conference, in November 2021. Some of the UN features on the fight against the climate crisis through news stories, interviews and more, you will find here. The Prospects for a Worthwhile Intervention by Latin America and the Caribbean(LAC) One issue that emerged that may yet introduce an important development to be considered in Glasgow in 2021 is the Escazú Treaty by LAC designed to ensure rights to environmental information, public participation in environmental decision-making and access to justice in environmental matters. It is the first such legally binding regional environmental and human rights agreement to a healthy environment. It addresses impunity of environmental human rights defenders and advocates for timely delivery of information to the public on environmental matters. This historic treaty on environmental rights from 22 LAC countries has so far been ratified by eleven: Antigua & Barbuda, Argentina, Bolivia, Ecuador, Guyana, Nicaragua, Panama, St. Kitts & Nevis, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and Uruguay. The implications of this LAC Initiative will be explored in greater detail, subsequently. Let Voices Propel the Convergence of Human Rights and Climate justice Access to Justice in environmental matters is supported by the "UN Elders". But more and more civil society activists are lending their voices to the cause as are angry youth. At the Ambition Climate Summit, youth leader, Ms. Selina Neirok Leem, described as a climate warrior, noted that the very survival of her home in The Marshall Islands is threatened by climate change and that, since Paris, temperatures have continued to rise, forest fires have continued to rage, and glaciers are still melting. Ms. Leem said that, even though she successfully fought for the 1.5c “lifeline” to be included in the Paris Agreement, she like Greta Thunberg remains angry and disappointed at the slow pace of change. While I do not have access to Ms. Leem's verbatim statement , the stern rebuke by Greta Thunberg at the UN General Assembly in November 2019 says it all. CLIP - Climate activist Greta Thunberg's remarks at the Climate Action Summit at UN HQ in NY Tags: The Climate Ambitious Summit and the Global Surge Driven by COVID 19 Human Rights the centre of the post COVID-19 world Prospects of worthwhile intervention by LAC Civil Society Advocates and Angry Youth Propel the Convergence of Human Rights Climate justice Eddie Greene
1 Comment
12/10/2020 Latin America is being left out of the World to Come By Nicolás Albertoni and Jorge HeineRead NowPerhaps it went unnoticed by many, but this month Asia broke into the commercial world: the Regional Comprehensive Economic Association (RCEP) was signed, a trading bloc formed by China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, New Zealand, and all Southeast Asian countries. It is a milestone. Together, they are a market of 2.2 billion people (30 percent of the world's population) and a GDP of just over $ 26 trillion (about 30 percent of world output).
In the midst of the coronavirus pandemic, while tensions between the United States and China rise, while the European Union still has not managed to resolve Brexit, the message sent by the RCEP is strong and clear: in Asia, no time is wasted. It is a message that Latin America seems neither to hear nor to heed. In Asia they understand, for example, that the protectionism that shakes the North Atlantic countries is not the best way to go. They have understood that geopolitical differences, such as those between China and Japan and South Korea, or between Australia and China itself, should not stand in the way of more open trade flows. What does the RCEP mean for Latin America? On the one hand, it indicates that Asia, the main market for a good part of the South American countries, will continue to grow in importance and make up an ever greater part of the world economy. On the other hand, as Latin America is not part of the agreement, it reflects the marginalization of the region from these plurilateral treaties that arise from the stalemate in the Doha Round of the World Trade Organization (WTO). The sad reality is that the region's fragmentation and its inability for collective action at the multilateral level condemns it to an increasingly secondary role in the global political economy, with dire consequences for its development. The contrast to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) - promoters of the RCEP - couldn't be greater. In addition to the RCEP, these agreements include the Trans-Pacific Economic Cooperation Agreement (CPTPP), made up of, among others, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, Chile, Peru and Mexico; the attempt for a Transatlantic Agreement on Trade and Investment (TTIP) between the United States and the European Union; the Agreement on Trade in Services (ACS) —which accounts for 70 percent of world trade in the sector— and others. These treaties tell us that countries committed to trade liberalization seek “safe havens of consensus” in the face of stagnation in multilateral negotiations. The signing of these international "mega-treaties" could have a strong impact on the world economy. Not only because of the dimensions of the two recent mega-treaties (the RCEP and the CPTPP), but also because the RCEP, for example, covers areas as diverse as the regulation of emissions, agricultural subsidies, intellectual property, communications and services. And emerging economies like those of Latin America should see how to adapt to the new regulations that this type of negotiations can promote. On the other hand, the US elections, and the possibility of seeing a more proactive United States in reestablishing its commercial ties with the world, were key for the RCEP members (China especially) to continue the negotiations and sign a pact that will greatly facilitate the trade between their countries. This makes it possible that the United States, led by Biden, does not want to be left out of the mega-treaties and reactivates its ties with the CPTPP. The bad news is that this will make up a bipolar commercial world made up of two large trading blocs in which much of Latin America does not participate. Specifically in the RCEP, Latin America has no art or part (although Chile took steps to join it at the time), and it is largely emblematic of the isolation that the region suffers from the great processes of change that occur in the world from today. The international insertion of the region, very distant from the global value chains on which production is currently based, contrasts with the situation of the countries of Southeast Asia, which have known how to link themselves to these value chains, something that they strengthen with this treaty. The ideal would be to advance these issues of trade liberalization and other items in universal multilateral negotiations. However, we live in an imperfect world, with suboptimal solutions. The central point for Latin America is to understand that the countries that make up these mega-treaties will continue to advance to promote greater diversification of their markets. And the countries of the region are increasingly removed from those talks. It is an unfavorable scenario: from these mega-treaties the rules of the 21st century trade are being written. Those who are not part of the large agreements will be at a disadvantage, not only commercially, but also for not having participated in the design of new regulations that will emerge. It is possible that, in a few years, these countries that today advance in the most ambitious treaties will say: “We have already concluded the new rules for our trade. Take them or leave them ”. So, what to do? It is crucial that Latin American countries that are not party to these agreements react and join them. It is there that the world to come is being forged. It would be best for these discussions to take place within the WTO, but today it is increasingly difficult to reach a global consensus on these matters. For Latin American countries, this means not just associating themselves with these agreements, but also taking the initiative for the creation of new ones. If ASEAN has done it, there is no reason why Latin America shouldn´t be able to do so. The great powers do not have a monopoly on this matter. The time to act is now. November 30, 2020 at 05:00 ET https://www.nytimes.com/es/2020/11/30/espanol/opinion/acuerdos-comerciales-america-latina.html Nicolás Albertoni is professor of International Relations at the Catholic University of Uruguay. Jorge Heine is Professor of International Relations at the Pardee School of Global Studies at Boston University. He was Chile's ambassador to China from 2014 to 2017. I combed the literature released by academics and journalists, discussed with my friends and colleagues, listened to endless talk shows, visited websites, and social media for answers to the question. Christine Amanpour summarizes my confusion adequately — “At the end of Trump’s term, what I’ve learned is that I really don’t understand America well at all.”
Let us face the reality of the elections results. Joe Biden received 81,012,489 poplar votes (52.3%) and Donald Trump, 74,113,538 (47%). President Trump’s disastrous mishandling of the coronavirus pandemic probably cost him re-election. Yet it seems mind-boggling that he still won more votes than any incumbent President in American history. Will Wilkinson, the notable investigative journalist offers an explanation for understanding America. He highlights that to the dismay of Democrats, Trump's strategy of ignoring the pandemic mostly worked for Republicans. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/opinion/trump-democrats-coronavirus.html. Given these contending views, I present a collage of opinion on this matter for your consideration of possible answers. Resentment trumps Reality In Barack Obama’s recently released biography, A Promise Land he hinted to “resentment” flowing from his 8 years as a major reason for the virulence of Trumpism. Nate Silver the renowned US pollster in a post mortem four years ago confirmed this view noting that Donald Trump won in 2016, partly by tapping into this resentment, of rural people and white nationalists and tapped into anti-establishment sentiments. Although Biden won 6 Million more of the popular vote than Trump, Democrats' majority in the House dropped by 9 seats in a 222-209 split and could at best achieve a 50-50 composition in the Senate, depending on the results of the January runoff of 2 seats in Georgia. White Nationalism prevails despite Black Lives Matter The Black Lives Matter movement sparked by the killing of George Floyd in the summer demonstrated that institutionalized racism through violent dehumanization of Black people cannot be ignored in this country. While it triggered multiracial support both in the USA and globally, the counter narrative promoted by Trump highlighted riots and looting that became associated with the protests. By promoting law and order and protection of property rather than defunding of the police attached to the demands of BLM movement, he stigmatized Democratic “radicals’ among his supporters. These tendencies were further inflamed by blaming everything related to bad economic times on immigrants and foreigners that rolled into Trump's promise of restoring greatness. These factors according to interpretations in post electoral surveys, appealed to white nationalist sentiments and attracted sizeable support of white women, even among those who voted for Hilary Clinton in 2020. Racism associated with Trumpism: a revival of an Old time reality When Trump entered office in 2016, the nation knowingly or not elected to return to the struggles of the 1980s. An elaboration of the revival of racism deeply rooted in Trump’s psyche is illustrated by his stand in the New York culture of white urban racial violence, racialized assumptions about crime, widespread homelessness and decaying infrastructure. Crimes were committed by young white men who thought black people didn’t deserve to be in “white spaces.” Meanwhile, Trump was silent on these crimes, but took out a full-page ad demanding the execution of The Central Park Five — black youth who were proven to be innocent. The spill over of race and politics dates to over 200 years, but the contemporary version according to Obama's interpretation, started with the signing of the Civil Rights Act in 1964 by President L.B. Johnson that led to the South abandoning the Democratic Party and political gerrymandering, which fortified the playbook adopted by Nixon and Regan and more glaringly dramatized by Trump. Efforts at voter suppression and the blatant attempts through legal challenges to disenfranchise black voters are among the crass and blatant manifestations of racism associated with Trumpism. The Trump Alternative Reality bolstered by complicit Republican leadership It is with alarm that most self-respecting citizens would have witnessed how Trump's alternative reality could not have been sustained without the collaboration of other Republican Party leaders, especially in the Senate. This resulted in failure to check his abuses of the Constitution resulting in his impeachment and dangerous post-election behaviour. Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who in 2016 described Trump as a “xenophobic, race-baiting, religious bigot,” recently lobbied Republican Secretaries of State in Georgia and Arizona to see whether they might be able to disqualify any votes cast in Democratic areas. Chris Patton, Chancellor, Oxford University writing in Project syndicate (November 25, 2020) best illustrates this complicit behaviour as "the fifth column" under Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky as its commander, determined that the Republicans retain control of the Senate, following two run-off elections in Georgia in early January. Hence he does not want to do anything that may deter Trump supporters there from turning out to vote. Truth trumped by Lies, Propelled by Social Media - Lethal The digital marketplace of ideas where most people now get our news, is pervasive, subject to infiltration by sources intent on interfering with the electoral process and purveyor of falsehoods that go viral while facts go begging. An extensive MIT study of Twitter posts, published in Science in 2018, found that fake or otherwise misleading news stories are 70 percent more likely to be retweeted than truthful ones. Accordingly, in the 20th century, propaganda came from the top down. Tyrants would seize control of radio, TV and other mass media to broadcast their poison to the public. In the 21st century, propaganda is a bottom-up phenomenon. Trump fully understands that falsehoods seeded from the White House tweets circulate through the public’s own posts and tweets. Without far-reaching institutional, educational and legal remedies, lies will continue to trump truth. The Push for Equity and the Contortion with Socialism It is almost a consensus by creditable sources that Trump’s GOP tax cuts benefited only the wealthiest, leaving the middle and working classes behind. This justifiably prompted the push by the so called ‘radical left' of the Democratic Party for equity. Its platform is no different from that of the Obama's in 2008-2009 that pivoted around a crumbling infrastructure exacerbated by climate change; and an ever-widening gap between those with stable access to a living wage, education for their children, and proper nutrition and health care. Both now, as it was then, the call for greater equity is erroneously promoted as an attempt to erode the economic gains. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/27/opinion/trump-democrats-coronavirus.html Conclusion Most commentators are of the view that the populist and anti-establishment of Donald Trump’s candidacy and presidency exposed a rift between partisanship and patriotism. They also increased the toxic polarization and exploited racism for political advantage. They demonstrate that nothing is inviolable. As I examined the collage of opinion by a cross section of respected analysts, recently released polls, show that approximately 75 percent of Republicans believe that Trump won the 2020 elections. Trump's alternative reality prevails. I am regrettably back to square one. Like Christine Amanpour, "I really don’t understand America well at all.” Eddie Greene In recent weeks many articles have been released on the future of US Caribbean Foreign Policy relations. Among them include insightful contributions by Sir Ronald Sanders, Ambassador Curtis Ward and Professor Percy Hintzen. Together with other knowledgeable spokespersons, there are sentiments ranging from cautious to enthusiastic optimism that the Caribbean will be on the radar of the Biden-Harris administration. It has been generally agreed that immediate policies may revolve around cooperation in rolling out a coronavirus vaccine, tackling the climate resilience, and reinstating the principles of multilateralism and diversity. But there are also possible roadblocks like China, impediments to US defense strategy, the geopolitical environment and the chaotic signals of an unprecedented transition period that could pose challenges to rational diplomacy.
The blurred Domestic and Foreign Policy Lens Optimism, therefore, must be placed in the context of a transition period in which outgoing President Trump and his allies attempt to delegitimize the Biden-Harris Government, disrupt American democratic processes and deepen partisan and racial polarization. While the decline began well before the election of Donald Trump as President in 2016, he has severely damaged the norms, and to some extent the institutions on which American democracy is rooted. Most credible sources refer to his constant effusion of lies and disinformation; his relentless assaults on the media, the courts, the career civil service, and the political opposition; his efforts to politicize and demand personal loyalty from the military, the intelligence apparatus, and federal law enforcement; his misuse of presidential power and his quest for political and financial advantage are all glaring illustrations. Many countries and regions like the Caribbean may no doubt have foreign policies cued up for recognition. But the maladies in USA domestic political arena that must engage the immediate attention of the Biden Presidency are likely to blunt the attention to all but the most important issues in the foreign policy agenda. Coronavirus: ‘American exceptionalism that Kills’ The coronavirus as a foreign policy issue will pivot on the judicious and equitable roll out of the vaccine produced by multinational enterprises and anticipated to be available by the first quarter of 2021. This situation is much different to what other incoming Presidents faced. Writing in Foreign Policy magazine (November 18, 2020), James Palmer expands on the delusion of Donald Trump that American is ‘turning the corner’ even while the US government is failing while poorer countries flatten the curve. He starkly labels this trend as “American exceptionalism kills.” It is first and foremost what has to be overcome before an economic recovery can be achieved. Most Caribbean countries, especially those tourism dependent economies, will be severely affected by the new surge of the virus in the US and elsewhere just as they enter the peak season. They will require collaboration with the US to place emphasis on stopping the spread and to introduce robust tools to closure or reopening of their economies based on scientific models, both at source and destination countries. Surviving COVID-19 and Revival of the Economy-a Global Issue Economic revival is interconnected with measures to curb the COVID-19 spread. An IDB Report – “A Pandemic Surge and Evolving Policy Responses indicates that investing in infrastructure is one of the most viable options for an economic revival. The Report advocates that fiscal space will remain an important constraint, but as economic recovery emerges, additional resources would need to be channeled into productivity-boosting infrastructure projects to further stimulate near term growth, and long-term development. This is a useful template, touted by Biden during his presidential campaign and flags an essential policy conjuncture between the Caribbean and the USA. Collective and unified approaches to advocate for debt relief , forgiveness and resilience are necessary for the Caribbean to insert its economic priorities linked to the COVID response. The Caribbean with the support of the US has the opportunity to make its case in various international theaters such as the UN and the G7, the World Bank and IMF. There are also opportunities where Caribbean countries are involved in the hierarchy of leading multilateral agencies. Guyana now holds the chair of the G77 and China while St Vincent and the Grenadines is a members of the UN Security Council. Not using these avenues to engage will be a missed opportunity. On the same page with US on Climate Resilience Climate Change linked to economic revival is seen as a basis for rekindling US global leadership. Biden’s appointment of former Secretary of State John Kerry to lead US re-entry into the Paris Agreement is a strong indication of this intention. The US-Caribbean Resilience partnership provides a practical entry point for the region with its focus on disaster management, risk reduction, disaster reliance funding. Based on its geographic location, the Caribbean may yield longer term benefits by ensuring that its region-wide management integrates energy policy, disaster management and climate change impacts.https://www.cepal.org/en/publications/45098-enhancement-resilience-disasters-and-climate-change-caribbean-through What is important is that the template tallies with a well-constructed US-Caribbean Resilience Partnership Working Group in Barbados (October 2020) to which CARICOM States are committed. https://www.state.gov/successful-u-s-caribbean-resilience-partnership-working-group-in-barbados-concludes-with-9-5-million-in-disaster-resilience-funding/. This partnership illustrates that the Caribbean does not need to reinvent the wheel but rather to chart a constructive path to ensure that its priorities are included in the global platform in the reconstruction of US’ global leadership. The China Equation: A US-Caribbean Balancing Act China is an important pivot in the US- Caribbean foreign policy relations. Today, they are more inherently hostile than during Obama’s presidency. As a recent Times story puts it, China has adopted “increasingly aggressive and at times punitive policies that force countries to play by its rules.” Trump challenged China’s ambitions in ways that his predecessors did not. He treated it as America’s most serious threat since the Soviet Union during the Cold War. While Biden’s approach in principle may vary only slightly from Trump’s, it will most likely be implemented through softer diplomacy. Trump’s posture, is graphically referred by Chinese economist and London School of Economic Professor, Key Jin as ‘a strategic gift to China’. Biden will no doubt be more concerned with building alliances with Japan, other South East Asia-Pacific, African and European states, all of which are worried about China’s rise. Many of these states are locked into China’s development leadership captured during the diminished engagement by the US. In this context, a concerted Caribbean policy is more likely to yield positive results for the region by allowing maneuverability in engaging both China and the USA simultaneously. Defense Strategy, Geopolitical Environment and Diversity It is clear from the early cluster of Cabinet picks by President-elect Biden, the priority he places on forging a robust U.S. defense strategy and shaping the geopolitical environment. These have to do not only with China’s rise but with many unanswered but urgent questions: how Russia’s resurgence intersect and challenge U.S. interests? how quickly can the bridge building with NATO occur? how will Iran and North Korea disrupt and destabilize US’ regional defense strategies? How will a range of non-state actors affect the defense landscape? What surprises or havoc will Trump reek to destabilize US defense strategy? What opportunities for U.S. defense and security exist in this complex environment? Where does the Caribbean fit? The US Representative to the UN, Thomas-Greenfield penned a piece along with William J. Burns in an article "The Transformation of Diplomacy: How to Save the State Department" in the Foreign Affairs November/December 2020 issue, provides another preview of the new thrust in US’ foreign policy strategy. It advocates that "to start, the United States needs a top-to-bottom diplomatic surge. The Trump administration's unilateral diplomatic disarmament is a reminder that it is much easier to break than to build. The country doesn't have the luxury of waiting for a generational replenishment, marking time as new recruits slowly work their way up the ranks." The indications are that the Caribbean and others countries in the South may benefit from the diversification in the ranks of the Biden foreign policy team and the staff composition at the State Department. They are likely to result in greater appreciation of the needs and virtues rather than dismissive ridicule of the Trump administration. Closer to home it is unlikely that the US position on Venezuela is likely to be different except in tone. Yet it is most likely to revert to the rapprochement with Cuba which again will signal a convergence of interests between US and the Caribbean. Conclusion While not intending to intervene in the policies of a sovereign state, the close ties between US and the Caribbean make it appropriate for its states to join the ranks supporting the call for US electoral reform. After all, any disarray in United States domestic politics tends to propel ripple effects on global diplomatic waters. The US is almost alone among major democracies in taking so long to install a new head of state. The image of a divided nation has been exacerbated by the petulant travesty of Donald Trump who after three weeks has yet to concede the elections he lost. In France, the president takes office within ten days of the election. In the United Kingdom, the moving trucks arrive at 10 Downing Street the morning after the incumbent loses. So too in Caribbean nations where peaceful electoral outcomes are the hallmarks of their adherence to democratic principles. This is fully illustrated in the recent ‘COVID 19 elections in St Kitts and Nevis, Trinidad and Tobago, Jamaica, St Vincent and the Grenadines and Belize. That the United States takes two and a half months is reasonable in times of a normal transition. But the abnormality of Trump and Trumpism is likely to have lasting disruptive effects on US Democracy. This looks good only in comparison to Mexico, where the transition lasts an arduous five months and in the case in Guyana that ironically received threats of sanctions from the Trump administration. Eddie Greene 11/20/2020 THIS WAS A JOURNEY FORETOLD. P.J. Patterson, My Political Journey: Jamaica’s Sixth Prime Minister. Kingston: University of the West Indies Press, 2018. xvi + 434 pp. Reviewed by Sir Ron SandersRead Now“ In 1962, the Lancaster House Conference in London on Jamaica’s independence had concluded and Norman Washington Manley had just taken off for Jamaica aboard what was then a BOAC flight. He remarked to colleagues: “We have just left a future prime minister on the ground.” The person to whom Norman Manley referred was P.J. Patterson, then reading for the law in London, but already an activist politician for the People’s National Party (PNP). Norman Manley’s very accurate prediction in 1962 was unlike that of Bruce Golding’s some twenty-seven years later when Manley’s forecast came through, and P.J. took up the baton of leader of the PNP and prime minister of his nation. According to Golding, then chairman of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP), the PNP had selected “a boy to do a man’s job”. Few politicians, in their exuberance to belittle their opponents, have been proven as wrong as Golding. P.J. not only performed manfully as prime minister, he became the first person in Jamaica to lead his party to three consecutive election victories and to set a record for serving as its leader for fourteen years. No one else, in the past, had won such confidence by the Jamaican people, and it is doubtful that any one will in the future. Norman Manley knew what he was talking about. Of course, P.J.’s political journey, lucidly and entertainingly recounted in his book, did not begin in March 1989, when the mantle of prime minister was placed upon his shoulders. It is difficult to think of any political leader anywhere in the entire world who had been better prepared for the qualities, comprehension and disposition to be a leader at the apex of a nation’s affairs. He had served as minister of industry, trade and tourism; deputy prime minister and minister of foreign affairs and foreign trade; deputy prime minister and minister of development, planning and production; and deputy prime minister and minister of finance and planning. And, in between, he served in Opposition – in the senate and outside of the legislature; and in the councils of the people’s parliament conducted in villages across Jamaica. That impressive list of ministerial portfolios tells a bare-bones story of political progress. Remarkable though it is, the list does not convey the human tale: the beginnings in a rural village; the thirst for education; winning scholarships that made such education possible; the natural intellectual attributes that marked him for a bright future; the openness of his personality; the deep commitment to the improvement of the lives of his people; his unconditional love of his native land; and his devotion to the idea of a diverse but single Caribbean society. It is to his contributions to the wider Caribbean that I now turn. For, it is those contributions that inspired a generation of West Indians like me who were privileged for over four decades to marvel at his genius, to learn from his bargaining skills and, more than anything else, to believe decisively and resolutely in the worthiness of the Caribbean people to command respect in the world. In this regard, P.J. was in the company of a group of his compatriots that everyone knew to be West Indian but few could recall the exact country of their birth – such was the depth and quality of their service to the region and their unwavering belief in the strength that unity brings. Among those persons are Sir Shridath Ramphal, Sir Alister McIntyre, William Demas – all labourers in the vineyard of the Caribbean’s development. In 2006, P.J. received the accolade of the Chancellor’s medal from the hands of the then chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Sir George Alleyne – another outstanding and distinguished Caribbean son. In accepting the medal, P.J. delivered a message to the entire Caribbean. He said: “We cannot allow ourselves to be swept away by the tide of a passive acceptance of globalisation or ignore the real opportunities to tell our Caribbean story and assert our rights in various international organisations to which we belong.” Those words resound with a compelling freshness and significance today as the Caribbean is beset by forces that seek to marginalise our region, to deprive us of a voice in global affairs that materially affect us, and to treat our small, individual territories as annoying complications. In his book, P.J. summons us all, time and again, to resist such relegation and to adhere to the value of joint and collective action by Caribbean nations. He says, for instance: “The assertion of our united voice as sovereign nations singing from the same hymn sheet is the only way for us to be heard in the global din” (31). And, he knows with authenticity, born of lived experience, of the truth of which he speaks. P.J. was an integral participant in the most significant demonstration of unity by developing states at a significant crossroads of their fortunes. Ironically, given today’s Brexit where the UK is seeking to break away from the other twenty-seven nations of European Union with no clear roadmap for its future, it was the UK’s decision to join the European Union in 1973 that occasioned the unification of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries to negotiate a trade and development agreement with the European Economic Community (EEC). The arrangement involved three regions, but one voice on each aspect of the negotiating pillars. The Caribbean’s main spokespersons on behalf of the ACP group were Ramphal and Patterson. Many lessons arose for the Caribbean from those negotiations, not least that the unity of developing countries is a formidable force in bargaining with other countries and regions, much bigger and powerful than themselves. It is no exaggeration to say that the Lomé Convention that emerged from those ACP-EEC negotiations continues to stand today as the most beneficial trade and development document ever signed by developing states. Another lesson is that, in international bargaining, it is sometimes necessary to stand up vigorously for Caribbean rights: to let slip the agreeable countenance of diplomacy in the face of downright bullying and show our mettle. P.J. tells the story, for instance, that in the closing days of the ACP- EEC negotiations over sugar, the divide was wide and the tensions high. “So much so”, he says, that he and his counterpart, the EEC commissioner for agriculture, “almost came to blows” (77). But this virulent standing up for Caribbean rights became a matter of deep respect by the EEC. Today, there is in the headquarters of the European Union (EU) in Brussels, a Patterson-Ramphal room so named by the Europeans themselves in honour of these two outstanding West Indian champions with whom they had to contend. P.J. Patterson is a lawyer and a good one. His political life adhered to two fundamental principles both at home in Jamaica and on the wider global stage on which he acted in Jamaica’s and the Caribbean’s interests. Those principles are respect for democracy and upholding the rule of law. He maintained these values in his political life in Jamaica and he championed them in every international forum on which he appeared. In his own words: While small and [powerless] states do not in fact receive equal treatment in the application of international law, we in the Caribbean who lack military power are nevertheless compelled to continue the search for that ideal in which the international system will uphold right over might and law over force. That is wisdom from an authentic voice speaking from Caribbean trenches in international battlegrounds that have not diminished; they have simply appeared in other forms: (a) in the EU blacklisting Caribbean countries in language that pretends cooperation but actions that manifest coercion; (b) in the World Trade Organization where big countries deny justice to small ones; (c) in the Organization of American States where, after more than fifty years of membership, our development aspirations still play second fiddle to the political ambitions of others; and (d) in the lip service paid to the adverse effects of climate change that point like a dagger at the heart of our existence. In all of this, as P.J. has long and often advocated: “There is an urgent need to create a cohesive and effective strategic alliance among small developing economies” (339). And such an alliance must be cemented first among the countries of the Caribbean. P.J. says this of himself: “Pride and loyalty to the land of my birth have never deterred me from becoming and remaining an unrepentant regionalist” (31). Persons, like me, have been eyewitnesses to both those fervent commitments. P.J. played decisive roles in deepening Caribbean integration and, importantly, in maintaining it. He did so in many remarkable ways. And I will relate one story, not included in the book, that illustrates the unique role he played. At a certain CARICOM Heads of Government Conference, angry disagreement between two prime ministers became so intense that the possibility of fisticuffs loomed large. P.J., with the authority only he could exercise, lodged himself between the two men shouting and gesticulating at each other, and in his persuasive but powerful style, calmed the tempers and cooled the temperature. Just to be sure that peace would continue to prevail, P.J. spent most of the conference, not at his seat before the Jamaica flag, but in a chair between the two prime ministers, engaging them in friendly banter and discussion that focused their attention on the real issues at hand. In this and many other unique ways, P.J. Patterson helped to hold our region together, concentrating not on transient differences that could divide us, but on the greater unity that can strengthen us. There is much more that could be said of P.J.: the role he played in the Commonwealth and in the fight against apartheid in South Africa; his stand on principle with Cuba; his resistance to pressure over Haiti and the devious removal of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in service to external agendas – for he played a part in all that – and more. For a generation of persons who dedicate their lives to public service, we are privileged to have witnessed P.J. Patterson in action and to be inspired by the high quality of his leadership. He makes us all proud to be West Indian and inspires us to summon the best of ourselves in service to our region. His book is compulsory reading for all who aspire to leadership and even those entrusted with leadership today. This is an edited version of the address delivered at the book launch held at the OAS Headquarters, Washington, DC, on 13 March 2019. it is, the list does not convey the human tale: the beginnings in a rural village; the thirst for education; winning scholarships that made such education possible; the natural intellectual attributes that marked him for a bright future; the openness of his personality; the deep commitment to the improvement of the lives of his people; his unconditional love of his native land; and his devotion to the idea of a diverse but single Caribbean society. It is to his contributions to the wider Caribbean that I now turn. For, it is those contributions that inspired a generation of West Indians like me who were privileged for over four decades to marvel at his genius, to learn from his bargaining skills and, more than anything else, to believe decisively and resolutely in the worthiness of the Caribbean people to command respect in the world. In this regard, P.J. was in the company of a group of his compatriots that everyone knew to be West Indian but few could recall the exact country of their birth – such was the depth and quality of their service to the region and their unwavering belief in the strength that unity brings. Among those persons are Sir Shridath Ramphal, Sir Alister McIntyre, William Demas – all labourers in the vineyard of the Caribbean’s development. In 2006, P.J. received the accolade of the Chancellor’s medal from the hands of the then chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Sir George Alleyne – another outstanding and distinguished Caribbean son. In accepting the medal, P.J. delivered a message to the entire Caribbean. He said: “We cannot allow ourselves to be swept away by the tide of a passive acceptance of globalisation or ignore the real opportunities to tell our Caribbean story and assert our rights in various international organisations to which we belong.” Those words resound with a compelling freshness and significance today as the Caribbean is beset by forces that seek to marginalise our region, to deprive us of a voice in global affairs that materially affect us, and to treat our small, individual territories as annoying complications. In his book, P.J. summons us all, time and again, to resist such relegation and to adhere to the value of joint and collective action by Caribbean nations. He says, for instance: “The assertion of our united voice as sovereign nations singing from the same hymn sheet is the only way for us to be heard in the global din” (31). And, he knows with authenticity, born of lived experience, of the truth of which he speaks. P.J. was an integral participant in the most significant demonstration of unity by developing states at a significant crossroads of their fortunes. Ironically, given today’s Brexit where the UK is seeking to break away from the other twenty-seven nations of European Union with no clear roadmap for its future, it was the UK’s decision to join the European Union in 1973 that occasioned the unification of African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries to negotiate a trade and development agreement with the European Economic Community (EEC). The arrangement involved three regions, but one voice on each aspect of the negotiating pillars. The Caribbean’s main spokespersons on behalf of the ACP group were Ramphal and Patterson. Many lessons arose for the Caribbean from those negotiations, not least that the unity of developing countries is a formidable force in bargaining with other countries and regions, much bigger and powerful than themselves. It is no exaggeration to say that the Lomé Convention that emerged from those ACP-EEC negotiations continues to stand today as the most beneficial trade and development document ever signed by developing states. Another lesson is that, in international bargaining, it is sometimes necessary to stand up vigorously for Caribbean rights: to let slip the agreeable countenance of diplomacy in the face of downright bullying and show our mettle. P.J. tells the story, for instance, that in the closing days of the ACP- EEC negotiations over sugar, the divide was wide and the tensions high. “So much so”, he says, that he and his counterpart, the EEC commissioner for agriculture, “almost came to blows” (77). But this virulent standing up for Caribbean rights became a matter of deep respect by the EEC. Today, there is in the headquarters of the European Union (EU) in Brussels, a Patterson-Ramphal room so named by the Europeans themselves in honour of these two outstanding West Indian champions with whom they had to contend. P.J. Patterson is a lawyer and a good one. His political life adhered to two fundamental principles both at home in Jamaica and on the wider global stage on which he acted in Jamaica’s and the Caribbean’s interests. Those principles are respect for democracy and upholding the rule of law. He maintained these values in his political life in Jamaica and he championed them in every international forum on which he appeared. In his own words: 59 While small and [powerless] states do not in fact receive equal treatment in the application of international law, we in the Caribbean who lack military power are nevertheless compelled to continue the search for that ideal in which the international system will uphold right over might and law over force. That is wisdom from an authentic voice speaking from Caribbean trenches in international battlegrounds that have not diminished; they have simply appeared in other forms: (a) in the EU blacklisting Caribbean countries in language that pretends cooperation but actions that manifest coercion; (b) in the World Trade Organization where big countries deny justice to small ones; (c) in the Organization of American States where, after more than fifty years of membership, our development aspirations still play second fiddle to the political ambitions of others; and (d) in the lip service paid to the adverse effects of climate change that point like a dagger at the heart of our existence. In all of this, as P.J. has long and often advocated: “There is an urgent need to create a cohesive and effective strategic alliance among small developing economies” (339). And such an alliance must be cemented first among the countries of the Caribbean. P.J. says this of himself: “Pride and loyalty to the land of my birth have never deterred me from becoming and remaining an unrepentant regionalist” (31). Persons, like me, have been eyewitnesses to both those fervent commitments. P.J. played decisive roles in deepening Caribbean integration and, importantly, in maintaining it. He did so in many remarkable ways. And I will relate one story, not included in the book, that illustrates the unique role he played. At a certain CARICOM Heads of Government Conference, angry disagreement between two prime ministers became so intense that the possibility of fisticuffs loomed large. P.J., with the authority only he could exercise, lodged himself between the two men shouting and gesticulating at each other, and in his persuasive but powerful style, calmed the tempers and cooled the temperature. Just to be sure that peace would continue to prevail, P.J. spent most of the conference, not at his seat before the Jamaica flag, but in a chair between the two prime ministers, engaging them in friendly banter and discussion that focused their attention on the real issues at hand. In this and many other unique ways, P.J. Patterson helped to hold our region together, concentrating not on transient differences that could divide us, but on the greater unity that can strengthen us. There is much more that could be said of P.J.: the role he played in the Commonwealth and in the fight against apartheid in South Africa; his stand on principle with Cuba; his resistance to pressure over Haiti and the devious removal of Jean-Bertrand Aristide in service to external agendas – for he played a part in all that – and more. For a generation of persons who dedicate their lives to public service, we are privileged to have witnessed P.J. Patterson in action and to be inspired by the high quality of his leadership. He makes us all proud to be West Indian and inspires us to summon the best of ourselves in service to our region. His book is compulsory reading for all who aspire to leadership and even those entrusted with leadership today. This is an edited version of the address delivered at the book launch held at the OAS Headquarters, Washington, DC, on 13 March 2019. Can Trump Be Prosecuted?
Posted on November 11, 2020 by Richard Messick President Trump and diehard supporters continue to maintain on Twitter, in interviews, and at press conferences that tens of thousands of votes at the November 3rd election were fraudulently cast and that once these ballots are excluded, he will be declared the winner. But under American law only a judge can invalidate a vote, and unlike Trump sympathizers, judges demand clear and convincing evidence of voter fraud — something Trump has yet to produce and is quite unlikely to be able to. So Joe Biden will indeed take office January 20. While President Trump’s term in office ends at noon that day, his legal problems will not. Indeed, they are likely to accelerate. For whatever immunity he enjoyed from prosecution as a sitting president ends too. By far the greatest threat Trump faces are the investigations led by Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance, Jr. and Letitia James, New York’s attorney general. Both are independently investigating criminal charges related to Trump’s dealings while a New York businessman. James may also be continuing her investigation of abuses involving Trump’s now defunct New York charity. The charges both are pursuing involve violations of New York state law, meaning a presidential pardon would do him no good. It excuses only violations of federal law. In her November 1 story on Trump’s criminal exposure, New Yorker writer Jane Mayer writes that the Vance investigation appears “to be particularly strong.” He is reportedly looking into possible violations of state tax and insurance laws and bank fraud. One charge seems almost irrefutable. New York law makes it a crime to falsify business records, and the evidence presented in the criminal case against former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen shows the $130,000 hush money Trump allegedly paid a porn star was recorded as a business expense. On the other hand, New York prosecutors face two obstacles to bringing charges against Trump. There is first the statute of limitations. The possible offenses all appear to pre-date Trump’s four years as president, and in New York felonies must be prosecuted within five years of their commission and misdemeanors, like falsifying business records, two (here). Exceptions apply, however, if prosecutors can show Trump took steps to hide his wrongdoing or the offense can be cast as one involving a continuing course of conduct . Moreover, the New York legislature is considering a bill that would toll (stop the running) of any applicable state statute of limitations while the defendant was serving as president of the United States. Even if statute of limitations problems can be overcome, the challenge of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that Trump himself actively engaged in fraud remains. Ex-Trump lawyer Cohen told Mayer that Trump writes down little, does not send e-mails or texts, and often speaks indirectly. Argument is heard to this day whether Henry II was complicit in the murder of Thomas Becket for asking: “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” Was that a wish or a disguised order? Think how much harder it would be for New York prosecutors to make a case on the basis of a vague Trump comment like “do what needs to be done”? Especially if the jury were to contain even a single Trump supporter. Federal charges are possible too. While conflict of interest laws do not apply to presidents, and hence Trump’s many schemes to monetize his presidency, tracked on this blog, are legal if unseemly, his conduct in office is subject to federal criminal law. Even if one accepts the view presidents cannot be charged with a federal crime while in offense. Lawfare’s Quinta Jurecic’s analysis of the Mueller report on the Russia investigation finds one federal law Trump has repeatedly broken: the obstruction of justice statute. Tax fraud is another a possibility. As Trump has admitted on numerous occasions, his federal tax returns are being audited. If the evidence were to show he took deductions for which he knew there was no legal basis, he would be guilty of criminal tax fraud. Hanging over any possible federal investigation is the pardon power, and President Gerald Ford’s exercise of it to pardon Richard Nixon for Watergate-related crimes. Ford granted Nixon “a full, free, and absolute pardon” for any crime Nixon “committed or may have committed or taken part in” while president. Although Ford’s pardon did not reach offenses Nixon might have committed before he became president, there is no reason why a Trump pardon could not. It could excuse him not only for tax fraud but for any other federal crime he may have committed or taken part in no matter when. Scholars agree a president’s power to issue pardons for federal offenses reaches broadly. Where they disagree is whether a sitting president can pardon himself. Mayer cites a Justice Department memo issued when Nixon was said to be considering pardoning himself. It concluded that, “under the fundamental rule that no one may be a judge in his own case, it would seem that the question should be answered in the negative.” Nixon did not pardon himself. According to Mayer, it was because he believed he would disgrace himself if he did. Trump thinks he can pardon himself; whether Nixon-like qualms would stay his hand remains to be seen. If he did, it would be up to a Biden Administration to challenge it and the Supreme Court to decide the validity of a self-pardon (here). How it would rule is another unknown. Jack Goldsmith, a former assistant attorney general and now Matthew’s Harvard Law School colleague, told Mayer “scholars are all over the map” on whether a self-pardon is valid. (Were the court to hear the case, justices committed to textualism would likely have to exercise judgment in ruling on the pardon’s validity, rather than, as they often claim, simply mechanically applying rules of statutory construction.) Although the author of the Justice Department memo opined that a self-pardon was likely invalid, she offered Nixon a way around the prohibition. He could declare he was unable to perform his presidential duties of the office, have the vice-president take over and as acting president issue a pardon. Nixon’s vice-president was Gerald Ford, a strait-laced Midwesterner with an unvarnished reputation for probity. Nixon almost certainly never approached Ford with such a proposal. Vice-President Pence is cut from the same mold as Ford, making it equally unlikely he would go along with the work-around. In pardoning Nixon, Ford hoped to end the discord and recriminations the Watergate scandal had churned up. A trial of Nixon’s Watergate crimes would take a year or more to prepare he explained. “In the meantime, the tranquility to which this nation has been restored by the events of recent weeks could be irreparably lost by the prospects of bringing to trial a former President of the United States. The prospects of such trial will cause prolonged and divisive debate over the propriety of exposing to further punishment and degradation a man who has already paid the unprecedented penalty of relinquishing the highest elective office of the United States.” Ford did not demand Nixon admit wrongdoing in return for the pardon. That, Mayer writes, allowed Nixon in his later years to create a counter-history of Watergate, to say he had done nothing others had not, that he was a “victim, hounded by the liberal media.” Ford did not believe that, and he must have regretted that his unconditioned pardon gave Nixon an opening to claim victimization for he began carrying a card with the Supreme Court’s statement that a pardon “carries an imputation of guilt; acceptance a confession of it.” At some point Biden will have to decide how to address the allegations swirling around Trump. Trump may even force the issue by pardoning himself on his way out of office. That would put an immediate end to the current audit of Trump’s federal tax returns. Would the incoming Biden Administration accept the validity of the self-pardon by not reviving the audit? Even if Trump does not attempt self-exoneration, the pardon question will dog the Biden presidency. Demands Trump be held accountable will not fade, and already some argue accountability should include criminal prosecution (here). Others suggest that Biden can duck the issue by pointing to the New York investigations. But will those incensed by Trump policies and Trump’s apparent wrongdoing be content to wait on the outcome of uncertain state law investigations? How long? What if statute of limitations issues or problems of proof foreclose state prosecution? The best solution seems to be the one suggested by the experience with the Nixon pardon. Biden pardons Trump in return for Trump admitting wrongdoing. The obstacles to such a resolution, however, are many. They start with the fact that nothing about Trump suggests he has it in him to admit he made a mistake, let alone that he committed a crime. They continue with how to handle the state cases. Would Vance and James agree to drop their investigations if Trump admitted wrongdoing? Would they insist he admit to violations of state law as the price? What about the civil penalties Trump would face if he is found to have underpaid his federal taxes? President-elect Biden has rightly made bringing Americans together his highest priority. His greatest challenge will be whether he can lead the nation into a reckoning with the Trump years without further inflaming passions. Richard E. Messick consults for international organizations, development agencies, and non-governmental organizations on legal development and anticorruption issues. As an attorney in the United States he advised political parties, office holders, corporations, and political committees on campaign finance and ethics issues and represented individuals and corporations in state and federal matters involving fraud and corruption. After serving as Chief Counsel of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, he joined the World Bank where he worked until his retirement on legal and judicial reform and anticorruption projects. His writings have appeared in scholarly and popular publications including the American Political Science Review, the World Bank Research Observer, the Wall Street Journal, and the Washington Post Even though I delayed writing this blog in the hope for a relatively clear official indication of who will be the next President of the USA, the results remain in limbo. The outcome hinges on the results from Pennsylvania and Georgia where President Donald Trump's holds an unsteady lead and in Nevada and Arizona that are trending toward former Vice President, Joe Biden. With counting of votes in a shifting race, the verdict in all cases, is “too close to call”. With 270 being the required number of Electoral College votes for victory, the projected scenarios include a probable win for Biden, a possible though narrow path for Trump and the prospect of a 269-269 tie, leading to a constitutional decision. My call is for a Biden win.
But here is the deal (as Joe Biden is used to say). Indications are that Donald Trump will refuse to concede defeat and with his Republican associates, engage in a series of disputes requiring settlements in the Courts. Both instances may result in delays which could drag on inordinately. Despite evidence to the contrary, the President is defiant in his claims of electoral fraud associated with mail in votes, which has been predominantly in favour of his Democratic rival. This is not only consistent with President Trump's penchant for undermining the integrity of the American electoral system, but it is not an augury for a peaceful transfer of power. How such a close election? What has caused the whittling away of the landslide predicted for Biden by the polls will have to be analyzed very carefully as political scientist and party strategists seek to explain voting patterns across the electoral domains of so-called Blue (democratic) Red (republic) and Purple (marginal) states. At first glance — looking at the granular results from districts within states — neither candidate has made appreciable inroads in the distribution of votes by the respective states in the 2016 elections when Donald Trump defeated Hilary Clinton. The major factor has been the projected high level turnout of the electorate, estimated at 66.3% surpassing the previous highest, 65% in 1908 and compared with 60.1% in 2016 and 61.6% in 2008. Already both Biden with popular votes higher than any Presidential candidate in the history of US elections and Trump with a similar acclaim among Republican candidates, have contributed to this record. In fact, the data show that Donald Trump is the most effective Republican electoral candidate since Ronald Regan especially with his high level of support in rural areas. A compounding factor is that Democrats have retained control of Congress and Republicans, the Senate, with little, if any change in the composition of the both Houses. Did Issues really matter? The prominent issues to emerge were COVID-19 and the Economy. They did not seem to make a difference in partisan support at the polls. The glaringly devastating rate of the coronavirus pandemic afflicting over the past eight months and the established mismanagement of the Trump administration that led to a record average of 102,000 cases per day coinciding with Election Day were estimated to give the Biden campaign an overwhelming advantage. At the same time with Trump’s higher rating on the economy was estimated to be accompanied by the highest unemployment, and even downturn on the stock market.Yet partisan electoral cleavages for the most part remained steadfast. It is ironic that during the last two weeks of the campaign, Donald Trump mounted mass rallies across many states with many supporters without masks, wearing 'Make America Great Again' red caps and jerseys demonstrating vibrancy of the Trump “tribe”. This no doubt has had a psychological impact that spilled over to votes beyond his “loyal base”. The optics of these events conveyed the image of a President caring more about the adulation of supporters and winning votes and much less that many of them may contract the coronavirus and even die. Among the other issues that featured on platforms during the campaign were institutionalized racism highlighted by the Black Lives Matter movement, law and order, health care and climate change. They resonated differently with various constituents but seemed to have had less impact on changing voter behavior. They also consolidated already formed attitudes and preferences, shifting the pendulum of support imperceptibly from one party to another one. How else to explain the extraordinary electoral vote of 48% received by President Trump? Trumpism Overpowering the conservative traditions The 2016 Elections set US on course toward isolationism and tribalism. At his inauguration Trump announced his policy of 'America First' Trump's apparent endorsement of white nationalism which according to an insightful study, Caste:The Origins of our Discontent by Isabel Wilkerson highlights its close association with institutional racism and the persistence of a caste system in the USA that preceded Donald Trump but which he fueled. Caste (Oprah's Book Club): The Origins of Our Discontents ...www.amazon.com › Caste-Origins-Discontents-Isabel. Accordingly 2017 was deadliest time for mass shootings in modern American history that magnified racial hatred. They occurred in parking lots, public schools, city streets superstores. Las Vegas accounted for the largest massacre. A white supremacist drove into a crowd in Virginia killing a young white women leading to President Trumps famous statement "they are good and bad guys on both sides". In 2018, eleven worshippers were slain in the worse anti-Semitic attack on a Jewish synagogue in Pittsburg. Nowhere was tribalism more visible than in 2019 when President was impeached by the House and acquited by the loyalist in the Senate, and subsequently in the vitriol accompanying the hearings leading to the appointments of Supreme Court Judges, Brett Kavanaugh (2018) and Amy Coney Barrett (2020). The major propensity of President Trump for blatant falsehoods seemed not to have phased his electoral base and was overlooked by the high numbers who voted for him. If this scars the moral fabric of our accepted norms of leadership, The New York Times Fact Tracker revealed the stark reality of Donald Trump's character. According to its data, between his inauguration January 20, 2017 and September 30, 2020, Donald Trump told of an average of 15 lies per day. Readers may be interested in the book by the Washington Post Fact Checker staff Donald Trump and His Assault on Truth: The President’s Falsehoods, Misleading Claims and Flat-Out Lies. They drew on the database to compile a guide to Trump’s most frequently used misstatements, biggest whoppers and most dangerous deceptions. They detail how Trump misleads about himself and his foes, the economy, immigration, the Ukraine controversy, foreign policy, the coronavirus crisis and many other issues. The reality is that the roots of Trumpism did not begin nor will it end with Trump. They are connected to pervasive economic and political currents affecting much of the world Conclusion Who will reach the 270 Electoral College votes to claim the Presidency?. We await the results of the votes from 5 battleground states -- Arizona, Georgia, Nevada, North Carolina and Pennsylvania-- all still too close to call. The delay is mainly due to the magnitude of the mail-in ballots propelled by the safety requirements imposed by COVID-19. Since the close of the polls on evening of November 3, 2020, the President has railed against the extended vote count, tweeted conspiracy theories and vowed to appeal to the Courts. His ugly rhetoric is a direct attack on American democracy. It could leave a poisonous legacy of bitterness among his supporters and erode the legitimacy of the U.S. political system. While Biden is expected to emerge victorious, the Republican party appears to have retained control of the U.S. Senate, added seats in the House and gained ground in a number of state legislatures. Two weeks ago, we reflected on the implications of the 2020 elections for a Post American World. We were concerned about the diminished global presence and stature of America with another four years of Donald Trump. The casting of gloom by this prospect could mean erosion of America's democratic governance structure and even its civilization. So what's the deal? The first hand in the ultimate deal is whether Republican leaders will dissociate from the President and even speak out against vile maneuvers to reverse legitimate election results. The second, is immediately restoring the balance between health and economics in the height of a flaming coronavirus pandemic. The third is the need to focus on the healing of the nation. And the fourth, revolves around repurposing US foreign policy to rescue the nation from the brink of a Post American World. Eddie Greene By the time the next GOFAD's Blog is written, there should be indications or the possible results of what has been referred to as the most consequential elections in the USA. Based on the trends in the polls and assessment of the data, it appears that former Vice President Biden should emerge as the 46th President. The state of a post American world would however extend beyond the Presidency to Democratic control of both the Congress and Senate.
What Polls and Data indicate Evaluation of President Trump's overall performance is reflected in his 43% approval rating compared with 54% for Joe Biden. While on the major issues, the President's best approval rating of 54% for the economy exceeds Biden's at 45% they are below Biden's for Health care 43% to 57%; for COVID 41% to 57% and race relations 38%- 68%. Among the issues with the greatest impact on voter appeal is the President's mishandling the coronavirus pandemic. The data released today show approximately 80,000 new infections per day that have persisted over the past week, the highest level since April. This is to be measured alongside the news that GDP growth has risen by 33%. While this is good news for President Trump, it has to be compared with 31% negative GDP growth in the third quarter, which still leaves the economy in a deep hole and its recovery, in reality, benefiting those at the top of the income scale. There is overwhelming evidence that the Trump administration provided multi-tax cuts to the richest Americans and corporations; and before COVID-19, cut food stamps and welfare programmes, and failed to provide financial support to low income households and small businesses during the pandemic. Issues that Determine Choices In the equation to affect the final outcome of the elections are the performances of the candidates in pivotal states such as Pennsylvania and Florida and battleground states including Texas, Ohio, Georgia, Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan some of which Trump flipped from Democrats in 2016. There are also demographic trends among special groups including urban women, black males, the elderly and Hispanic subgroups (Latinos, Cubans, Puerto Ricans), all of which can tilt the balance. The emerging choices except for the Hispanic group, favour the platform being promoted by Biden-Harris that the economic trajectory need to follow the management of the health crisis. This is in contradiction to the Trump-Pence posture, intentionally denying the great risk of COVID-19, failure to implement a coherent pandemic strategy and touting the incredible view unsupported by the scientific data that the US is turning the bend in curbing the disease. Much more than choices highlighting the coronavirus are the dangers of white supremacy, climate change, criminal justice, education, overturning the Affordable Care Act and immigration including the separation of the over 500 Hispanic children from their parents. In response, Biden has announced that one of his first acts as President would be to establish a Task Force to advise on the immediate strategies to unite these children with their parents. Despite these trends, generally favorable to the Democrats, the elections are far from sealed and delivered. Pronouncements from the Trump campaign seem designed to foster voter intimidation, undermine the integrity of mail-in ballots which favour Democrats, blatant attempts to use the Supreme Court to subtract the votes from Democratic leaning states. The Interregnum in Foreign Policy What is important to note is that foreign policy and national security, issues of importance to developing countries like Latin America and the Caribbean, have been residuals in the campaign. This is no doubt due to the fact that Jihadist terrorism, for example, has not been a dominant concern for the first time since 2000. The President benefited from voters’ fear of terrorists in 2016. This year, threats - chief among which are the coronavirus pandemic, the racial justice movement and “Donald Trump's leadership -- are closer home. This is also due to the fact that under President Donald Trump, the infrastructure of diplomacy is crumbling. According to Democratic Congressman Joaquin Castro in an interview with the Foreign Policy Magazine (October 28, 2020) the barrage of attacks from the president on appointees has torpedoed morale and thinned the ranks of seasoned foreign policy professionals. Applications to join the U.S. Foreign Service have plummeted since Trump took office, starving the State Department of new talent". The call is to 'bring American diplomacy back from the brink' which is fundamental to a post elections reconstruction of America's global image. Character and a Just Future are on the Ballot The final statements of the second Presidential debate on October 23, 2020 were perhaps a microcosm of each candidate's overall campaign. The responses encapsulated perhaps the most crucial difference between the two presidential candidates The host, Kristen Welker asked each what they would say to Americans who didn't vote for them in their inaugural address. Trump: "I am cutting taxes, and he wants to raise everybody’s taxes, and he wants to put new regulations on everything.. He will kill it. If he gets in, you will have a depression the likes of which you have never seen. Your 401(k)s will go to hell and it will be a very, very sad day for this country.” Biden: “Character is on the ballot ... As America’s President, I will represent all of you, whether you voted for me or against me. And I’m going to make sure that you’re represented. I’m going to give you hope… Decency, honor, respect, treating people with dignity, making sure that everyone has an even chance. And I’m going to make sure you get that.” It is however an article in the The Lancet (October 19), that best summarizes why and how we vote: "In the 2020 US election, we can choose a just future" https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)32140-1/fulltext Eddie Greene 10/22/2020 Guyana Chairing the G77: An Opportunity to "Pivot” the Caribbean to Global LeadershipRead NowAs Guyana prepares to chair the meeting of the Group of 77 at the UN’s Virtual session on October 29-30 2020, it is clear from a statement by Hon Hugh Todd, Guyana’s Minister of Foreign Affairs and international Business that the forum will provide the opportunity for discourse on some of the most important global issues, the SDGs, Climate Change, the COVID-19 pandemic and the restructuring of Financing for Development .
Barbados Prime Minister Mia Mottley at the Virtual Pivot Event coordinated by the IDB, October 16, aptly frames the aspirational goal for Guyana’s role at the G77: “Time to Pivot the Caribbean as a Global leader.” (For those who may not have seen it, this brilliant YouTube presentation is attached at the end of the blog). The context for Guyana’s agenda at the G77 has also been established at the 75th Anniversary of the UN General Assembly (UNGA) September 22-29, 2020 and the IMF-World Bank annual meetings October 12-18, 2020. First is the call for a Marshall Plan for the most affected COVID-19 developing countries by Jamaican Prime Minster Andrew Holness, joint chair with Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of the UNGA Conference “The Future we want, the United Nations we need: reaffirming our collective commitment – confronting COVID-19 —through effective multilateral action ( September 22-29, 2020). This position was generally endorsed at both the IMF-World Bank Annual Meetings following the UNGA and the UN ECLAC Meetings which preceded it. The case was made for Latin American and Caribbean economies, particular the latter with high dependence on tourism for international support to prioritize critical spending for health, transfers to the poor to ensure maximum efficiency. These require international grants, concessional financing, and debt relief in some cases. Where debt is unsustainable, there has been strong advocacy for forgiveness rather than restructuring to free up finances to deal with the crisis. GOFAD’s Reflection on the Issues from its blog on January 10, 2020 The decade of 2020 began with St Vincent and the Grenadines and Guyana headlining the Caribbean at the helm of global leadership at the United Nations. On January 2, St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) signified the magnitude of its international status, the smallest country ever to sit on the Security Council, the highest UN organization. It is one of 10 non-permanent members of the Security Council, which also comprises 5 permanent members. At the UWI Vice Chancellor’s Forum on November 7, 2019, Prime Minister Ralph Gonsalves aptly described this moment as “St. Vincent and the Grenadines representing the World but with geographic interests of the Caribbean civilization". It is important to note that St. Vincent and the Grenadines continues its year as Chair of the Caribbean ACP Forum (CARIFORUM) and assumed the Chair of CARICOM in July, 2020. At the same time, Guyana succeeded Palestine as Chair of the Group of Group of 77 (G-77). A formal handover on January 15, was significant. G-77 is the largest intergovernmental organization of developing countries in the United Nations. It provides the means for advancing South-South Cooperation and for the countries of the South to articulate and promote their collective economic interests and enhance their joint negotiating capacity on all major international economic issues within the United Nations system. For The Record This is not the first time that Caribbean countries have held prestigious positions in the UN system. In 1993, H. E. Mr. Samuel R. Insanally, Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations, had the distinction of being the first CARICOM representative to be elected to the Presidency of the General Assembly. At the 58th General Assembly, in 2003, Ambassador Julian Hunte of St Lucia assumed the Presidency. Previous CARCOM non-permanent members of the Security Council include Guyana (1976 and 1983); Jamaica (1980 and 2000); and Trinidad and Tobago (1986). In the case of Chairs of G-77 the record shows: Jamaica 1977 and 2005; Guyana 1999 and Antigua and Barbuda 2008 . What is at Stake? At the start of the new Decade of 2020, and prior to the coronavirus pandemic, the international arena was consumed by mandates to achieve the comprehensive targets of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Within this framework for action, the most prominent for both the Security Council and the G77 are peace and security, climate change, equality and inclusiveness and financing for development. In recent years, the Security Council has found the Syrian conflict particularly difficult to manage, with Russia using its veto powers to bloc resolutions aimed at making the Assad regime accountable for atrocities documented by UN sources. St. Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) will no doubt be involved in the debates on (a) institutional change resulting from the outsized power of veto wielding member states; (b) the issue of aspirants to permanent status including Brazil, Germany and India; (c) the peace keeping mandates including the scope, cost and abuses of peacekeepers; and (d) the case of protection of civilians and migrants, especially grave violations against children in conflict situations. It is reasonable to assume that the Caribbean interests in the Security Council will, in addition, revolve around achieving the goals of the Paris Agreement on Climate Change; the priorities of the Alliance of Small Island States (AOSIS), upholding international humanitarian law, UN reform, the Convention on land degradation and comprehensive agreement on biodiversity and deforestation. Within the G-77, Guyana as Chair may have greater leverage than SVG as a non-permanent member of the Security council. This has more to do with the structure of the G-77 and the more flexible scope of its programme than with the competence of the diplomats involved. The First Ministerial meeting of the G-77 held in Algeria in October 1967, and the adoption of the Charter of Algiers, the Group of 77 laid down the institutional mechanisms and structures that have contributed to shaping the international development agenda and changing the landscape of the global South for the past five decades. Over the years, the Group has gained an increasing role in the determination and conduct of international relations through global negotiations on major North-South and development issues. Today, the G-77 remains the only viable and operational mechanism in multilateral economic diplomacy within the U.N. system. The growing membership to 135 members is proof of its enduring strength. Based on a public opinion survey by the Pew Research Center among G-77 Leaders 2018-2019, the emerging priorities include global financial stability, global economic stability, climate change, energy and the environment, technological innovation and cybersecurity, trade and investment and women empowerment. In addition, the sectoral meetings of G-77 in areas such as food and agriculture, energy, trade and finance, science and technology, industrialization and sustainable development, allows for increased participation by and in a variety of member states. The overarching issue of China and the global South will offer special challenges which is highlighted in a lecture in the GOFAD Resource page by Prof Heine Jorge, China and the Global South: From Debt Diplomacy to Dependency Grasping Opportunities to enhance Profile and Influence Pivoting to Caribbean to Global Leadership On the basis of lessons learned, success arising from leadership positions for the Caribbean depends on a number of factors. Among them: the international environment, whether stable or volatile; cooperation among developed and developing country partners; technical and negotiating capability required to broker patterns of conflict and conflict management; financial sustainability to support administration and diplomacy and the backing of CARICOM Member states. There are other success factors that must be considered to enhance the roles of SVG and Guyana in the leadership structures of the UN. Among them are adherence to a coordinated regional foreign policy, one of the pillars of CARICOM; recognition that the purpose of foreign policy is to utilize sovereignty to engage in multilateral/bilateral arrangements; sustaining and promoting the Caribbean as a zone of peace; standing firm on the AOSIS agenda for Climate action and building coalitions of the willing. COVID 19 has dramatized the essence of these factors around which to pivot See Barbados Prime Minister, Mia Mottley: "Time To Pivot: The Caribbean As A Global Leader" https://youtu.be/Dxb6tH4slqI Eddie Greene As we embark on this week’s theme, the plenary addresses by the IMF Managing Director, Kristalina Georgieva and the World Bank Group President, David Malpass at the IMF-World Bank Annual Meeting this morning (October 15) sounded the dire warning that the world faces a new Bretton Woods moment. This is a recognition of two major factors. The first is that a durable global economy is possible only if the COVID-19 pandemic can be defeated. The second, that sustainable recovery depends on staving off a combined health, economic and hunger crisis by protecting nature, helping the poorest and increasing jobs. The base line message is that a resilient global recovery requires global solidarity. This has been reinforced in the IMF-World Bank sessions at this 2020 Annual Meeting through policies for debt forgiveness, placing emphasis on emergency aid to bolster health systems, boasting human capital with special reference to strengthening education and training, closing the gender gap, investing in young people and digitization with equity. These are vital conditions for University leaders in the Caribbean and elsewhere to balance priorities, invest in the current generation now to meet the needs of the future, thereby achieving a better normal.
This is the context in which to place the International Association of Universities (IAU) webinar, Leading Universities in an Age of Uncertainty, October 6, moderated by Andreas Cocoran, IAU Secretary General and panelists: Manokgethi Phakeng, Vice Chancellor University of Cape Town; Andrew Deeks, President, University of Dublin; and Sir Hilary Beckles, Vice Chancellor, University of the West Indies. The panelists agreed that the current pandemic has accelerated the future of higher education for enhanced relevance, survival and revising business models while maintaining the mission for research, teaching and innovation. This means that the planning process must be responsive to national policy and embrace collegiate dimensions based on a team approach of collective leadership. These are essential elements on which to base logistical arrangements, unambiguous communications and decision making. The key principles include commitment to the students’ journey within rapidly changing government public health guidelines and an eye on long term ambitions for telegraphing the high value of the University to national, regional and global economic sustainability. It is clear that the Vice Chancellors of the Universities of Cape Town and UWI were required to take into consideration the importance of poverty and inequality affecting their student populations, resulting in the fact that not all students are able to move online because of lack of resources. The most basic of these are unavailability of laptops, unstable network connections and difficulties to undertake social distancing because of crowded living conditions. At the University of Cape Town, its Center for Innovation and Learning was charged with the responsibility for communicating with key stakeholders including alumni and other donors. It also involved readjusting modules, technical services and getting learning material to students with no or inadequate digital access. But there was another aspect involving both academic and non- academic, administrative and support staff requiring moving offices from campus to people’s homes. Most of these activities require mobilizing resources, compassionate responses and reprogramming budgets within the University, including establishing COVID-19 Emergency Funds. For UWI the greatest challenge was keeping the University focused on retention of students, supporting continuing students and motivating potential students. To sustain a vibrant student population was another challenge. This is due to the pain and suffering that afflicted many of their of families caused by curfews and economic dislocations compounded by primary/secondary students now doing online learning, competing for the use of the scarce technical resources and physical space. In addition, is the urging of young people, especially girls, not to retreat from education. Notwithstanding these challenges, enrollment at UWI in 2020-2021 is 5 percent higher than in 2019-2020. In the case of Dublin University, the proactive policy for moving business online created tensions with the faction that supported keeping students on campus. It meant that the efforts of the leadership team needed to placate the gulf between the low and high risk aversions within the system. This resulted in a nuanced approach due to a diversity of responses. These differences between University leadership at Dublin and those at Cape Town and UWI tended to mirror the tensions in the wider society. Among the most critical factors common to all universities in this discussion, include cohesive and decisive leadership from which emerge lessons learned are as follows:
Sir Hilary Beckles and the New Paradigm Over and above these lessons Sir Hilary Beckles provided a key refrain by promoting a new paradigm based on "never let a recession go to waste". It is his view that Universities have pivoted within the knowledge economy and therefore constructed their missions to produce students within the prisms of knowledge, science and technology and economic development models. This was predicated on the assumption that the University's role is to stimulate movement from underdevelopment to sustainable development. COVID-19 has upended this. It has laid bare the social inequalities due to the fact that the majority of its community maybe described as marginalized and disenfranchised students. Consequently, the University faces an ethical crisis. Its response must therefore change. The UWI Task Force on the COVID-19 response, for example, became the authentic source for disseminating scientific information, engaging the public and winning their trust. Its membership was drawn from the faculties of medicine, social sciences, business, gender and law among others in a transdisciplinary discourse. This is likely to even usher more multidisciplinary approaches to learning and building a better future. To vision this better future calls into question a series of issues such as: how to re-arrange, re-programme and re-align activities? Is it a logistical exercise only? What are the implications for financial security? Where to get the required funding? Why must there be a weighting of the allocation of funding that disadvantages tertiary education? Who are the viable partners? Responses to these questions are important. They hark back to the context of this blog. Besides dealing with the scientific basis of overcoming COVID-19, the primary concerns centre on investing in human capital: education and training, closing the gender gap, young people, digitization with equity. The financing of public universities such as UWI is based on contributions from government, student fees and sponsorships and endowments. Therefore, when higher education is seen as an expenditure, it is among the first items to be cut in a budget crunch. This is contrary to the perspectives of the new paradigm proposed by Sir Hilary, which like the IMF-World Bank sees it as an investment. It is important to note that Sir Hilary champions an activist University. And it is heartening that Professor Paloma Mohamed Martin, recently appointed University of Guyana’s Vice Chancellor in her inaugural presentation to Council, "Imperatives Now", is in sync with Sir Hilary. The COVID vision in the new paradigm is one of hope, a preparation for the future based on 'a holistic theory of development', 'imagining 2025' and 'going global toward a globalized university'. Indeed, the excitement of Sir Hilary's optimism resonates: "Let's get through this and get to the future" Eddie Greene |
Details
AuthorEdward and Auriol Greene Directors, GOFAD. Archives
April 2022
Categories |