Tweet
Politics over people – again
Head to Head
With Betty Ann Blaine
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Dear Reader,
If there were persons left in the country who for some reason genuinely believed that the politicians on both sides of the fence genuinely cared for the people, then I suspect that even those diehards and apologists must now be rethinking their positions and reassessing their loyalties after the disappointing political gamesmanship surrounding the extension of the State of Emergency.
To fully understand the gamesmanship, however, we need to remind ourselves of the circumstances that led to the imposition of the State of Emergency in the first place. The State of Emergency was not imposed because the prime minister and head of the Jamaica Labour Party became moved by the inordinate levels of crime and violence in the country and felt that the citizens needed additional protection. The State of Emergency came into effect because of a series of events that forced the government to move aggressively against those criminal networks that openly threatened the existence of the state – some of the same criminal elements with alleged links to the governing party.
It was intense pressure from the US Government that led to a series of events and ultimately forced the government to impose a more draconian set of security measures. In fact, were it not for the US determination to apprehend the alleged gun and drug kingpin Christopher “Dudus” Coke, the State of Emergency would not have been imposed. What is ironic is that the same government which imposed the State of Emergency is the same government fingered by the Americans for having ties with what they described as one of the biggest criminal networks in the region.
The arguments for and against the State of Emergency being put forward by the two political sides are inherently dishonest, and do not in any way address the deeper issues of the dismantling of both the PNP and JLP garrisons, the recovery of guns and the chronic social crisis crippling the country. As far as I am concerned, the argument should not be about whether the State of Emergency should have been extended. The focus of the discussions and debates should be to provide a prescription on how the PNP and JLP garrisons and the associated criminal elements are going to be dismantled and arrested.
The fundamental problem with the current dialectic is that the pros and cons regarding the extension of the State of Emergency are being debated in an atmosphere devoid of any moral credibility on both sides of the political fence. The questions that must be asked are: Can the people of Jamaica expect a meaningful debate about the use or misuse of the country's security forces when both political sides continue to operate garrison constituencies? Can there be any objectivity in the discussions when both sides are culpable?
I believe that Jamaicans should insist that a prerequisite to any parliamentary debate and any voting in the House of Representatives on the matter of national security should be a declaration that the two political sides will actively dissociate themselves from garrisons and from the criminal elements that continue to wreak murder and mayhem and to saturate the country with blood. It seems to me that anything less would simply be an exercise in futile and dishonest politicking for which the country has clearly lost its appetite.
It is the height of hypocrisy that while the JLP and PNP are arguing over whether or not the added powers given to the security forces should be sustained, that “one order” constituencies controlled by stongmen are being organised and consolidated in key voting areas and districts in preparation for the next election.
I continue to be amazed by the audacity associated with the narrow and tribal discourse being foisted on the Jamaican people, and the intellectual dishonesty of the partisan surrogates. At no point in the tug of war about the State of Emergency were there any discussions about the entrenched social problems that continue to incite criminality across the country, and the persistent problem of unattached youth in particular. Unless the issue of idle youth is put on the table for discussion with the aim of finding workable solutions for the fingers that pull the triggers of deadly weapons, then as far as I am concerned, the State of Emergency issue is a waste of time.
Not only were the arguments lacking in substance, it is clear that in their haste to score political points the country's Opposition underestimated the views and the mood of the majority of Jamaicans in favouring the extension of the State of Emergency. Of course, the media in its usual style sought to focus on the idea that the PNP was deliberately “bamboozled” by the JLP into taking the wrong side of the argument and are now left embarrassed. While the intrigue and the sensationalism undoubtedly make for spicy news, what we ought to be paying attention to are the polls which corroborate the fact that most Jamaicans want to see the State of Emergency extended.
Across the country, Jamaicans have been expressing the view that they feel a lot safer with the presence of police and soldiers in their communities. Also, it was reported in the media that the residents of Tivoli Gardens were begging for the State of Emergency to be maintained in their community because of the peace of mind and sense of security they were experiencing.
With love,
bab2609@yahoo.com
Head to Head
With Betty Ann Blaine
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Dear Reader,
If there were persons left in the country who for some reason genuinely believed that the politicians on both sides of the fence genuinely cared for the people, then I suspect that even those diehards and apologists must now be rethinking their positions and reassessing their loyalties after the disappointing political gamesmanship surrounding the extension of the State of Emergency.
To fully understand the gamesmanship, however, we need to remind ourselves of the circumstances that led to the imposition of the State of Emergency in the first place. The State of Emergency was not imposed because the prime minister and head of the Jamaica Labour Party became moved by the inordinate levels of crime and violence in the country and felt that the citizens needed additional protection. The State of Emergency came into effect because of a series of events that forced the government to move aggressively against those criminal networks that openly threatened the existence of the state – some of the same criminal elements with alleged links to the governing party.
It was intense pressure from the US Government that led to a series of events and ultimately forced the government to impose a more draconian set of security measures. In fact, were it not for the US determination to apprehend the alleged gun and drug kingpin Christopher “Dudus” Coke, the State of Emergency would not have been imposed. What is ironic is that the same government which imposed the State of Emergency is the same government fingered by the Americans for having ties with what they described as one of the biggest criminal networks in the region.
The arguments for and against the State of Emergency being put forward by the two political sides are inherently dishonest, and do not in any way address the deeper issues of the dismantling of both the PNP and JLP garrisons, the recovery of guns and the chronic social crisis crippling the country. As far as I am concerned, the argument should not be about whether the State of Emergency should have been extended. The focus of the discussions and debates should be to provide a prescription on how the PNP and JLP garrisons and the associated criminal elements are going to be dismantled and arrested.
The fundamental problem with the current dialectic is that the pros and cons regarding the extension of the State of Emergency are being debated in an atmosphere devoid of any moral credibility on both sides of the political fence. The questions that must be asked are: Can the people of Jamaica expect a meaningful debate about the use or misuse of the country's security forces when both political sides continue to operate garrison constituencies? Can there be any objectivity in the discussions when both sides are culpable?
I believe that Jamaicans should insist that a prerequisite to any parliamentary debate and any voting in the House of Representatives on the matter of national security should be a declaration that the two political sides will actively dissociate themselves from garrisons and from the criminal elements that continue to wreak murder and mayhem and to saturate the country with blood. It seems to me that anything less would simply be an exercise in futile and dishonest politicking for which the country has clearly lost its appetite.
It is the height of hypocrisy that while the JLP and PNP are arguing over whether or not the added powers given to the security forces should be sustained, that “one order” constituencies controlled by stongmen are being organised and consolidated in key voting areas and districts in preparation for the next election.
I continue to be amazed by the audacity associated with the narrow and tribal discourse being foisted on the Jamaican people, and the intellectual dishonesty of the partisan surrogates. At no point in the tug of war about the State of Emergency were there any discussions about the entrenched social problems that continue to incite criminality across the country, and the persistent problem of unattached youth in particular. Unless the issue of idle youth is put on the table for discussion with the aim of finding workable solutions for the fingers that pull the triggers of deadly weapons, then as far as I am concerned, the State of Emergency issue is a waste of time.
Not only were the arguments lacking in substance, it is clear that in their haste to score political points the country's Opposition underestimated the views and the mood of the majority of Jamaicans in favouring the extension of the State of Emergency. Of course, the media in its usual style sought to focus on the idea that the PNP was deliberately “bamboozled” by the JLP into taking the wrong side of the argument and are now left embarrassed. While the intrigue and the sensationalism undoubtedly make for spicy news, what we ought to be paying attention to are the polls which corroborate the fact that most Jamaicans want to see the State of Emergency extended.
Across the country, Jamaicans have been expressing the view that they feel a lot safer with the presence of police and soldiers in their communities. Also, it was reported in the media that the residents of Tivoli Gardens were begging for the State of Emergency to be maintained in their community because of the peace of mind and sense of security they were experiencing.
With love,
bab2609@yahoo.com
Comment