Monday, August 17 2009

Quite rightly we are complimented at home and abroad for our racial harmony. But there are currents of racial divisiveness, well known, not normally obtrusive, but especially in our politics, quite powerful. Two ethnic groups almost equally dominate the population. Each of the two dominant political parties has its base in one of these ethnic groups. In the struggle to gain and maintain political power, political parties, especially when in Government, allegedly favour their base ethnic group in employment, disbursement of funds, and other areas.

The parties and their followers also subtly or openly woo their ethnic base and, because in politics emotions are easily aroused, the political war easily becomes racial. Recent world history shows that, if left to itself, such conflict can develop into open warfare and even that notorious “ethnic cleansing”. Guyana so near to us, Uganda, Bosnia are all samples of disaster to which racial strife leads.

As with hurricanes, we have been saved from major disasters. We cannot say we shall always be so fortunate. Tobago was touched, wasn’t it, with Flora? We must prepare ourselves not to withstand but to prevent the hurricane of racial strife. Prevention can come only with planning, calming undercurrents and discussing and removing causes. Who will do this for us? In our picturesque language, how will they make “the Ganges meet the Nile” to form a powerful river bringing peace, joy and wealth to all our people?

At this time Government cannot. Their handicap is that they did not attempt it soon after coming into power and there have been too many allegations of divisiveness against them. Short of a representative independent Commission, it will be difficult for Government’s proposals not to be seen by other political parties as a shady political manoeuvre by the party in power. Suspicion and political cutlasses will get in the way.

Since the problem is greatest in politics, the political parties should be the best starters, all of them. Party leaders and executives must first pledge themselves to the task of national unity and the end to racial divisiveness. A memorandum of understanding (MOU) may be agreed on. They will need to convince their followers that it is not a sham by clearly outlining their goals, the benefits and details of their planning, request for their suggestions and answers to their questions. Surely, being intelligent men and women, they should easily see that when a country has trust and confidence in the peace and unity among its multiple groups, there will be peace for all groups, their men, women, children and property. War between the groups means suffering and disaster for all, even the “victors”.

Firstly, therefore, each party should declare its intent to have all ethnic groups join in friendly co-operation and national unity. No negative statements will be made in or out of the meetings except that there is such and such a problem and the need for solutions; nor will attacks be directed at any individual or party.

Party representatives with co-opted individuals will form the central committee or commission. From the questions, circumstances, incidents, suggestions and proposals, research groups or sub-committees may logically evolve. The Government may adopt the groups and furnish them with supporting staff and other resources for success in the national interest. Although the purpose is simple and precise, it will likely involve a variety of areas like: distribution of wealth; occupations; entertainment; recreation; business; education; valuing of cultures, occupation and history; personality perceptions; political practices; housing; conflicts and unrest that sometimes arise in new communities from the difficulty in assimilating strangers of varied backgrounds.

Of course, this initiative will content with the people’s cynicism: “What they trying to do? You know nothing will come from all that fuss they making.” But vast numbers of citizens want to see a change from the suspicion and distrust, the claim that the other group is the enemy, the claim of alienation that led Lloyd Best to say that all our “tribes” feel alienated, the hypocrisy of “all ah we is one”. Surely, then, all these people can support the politicians by proclaiming that it is time for change. We can make it. We can try a little harder.