Tweet
Jack and Jill
By Selwyn Ryan
Story Created: Jun 26, 2011 at 12:44 AM ECT
Story Updated: Jun 26, 2011 at 12:44 AM ECT
The resignation of Jack Warner from FIFA came as a surprise to many of us. My assumption was that Jack and Blatter would do a deal and that the embarrassing bones of both men would remain buried. Now Jack is left all alone trying to hold back the unrushing tsunami of which he warned.
My column today is however only indirectly about FIFA. Its main concern has to do with the implications of what has occurred so far for the country as a whole, and for the People's Partnership Government, the UNC, the COP, and the Prime Minister who must be the most "injury prone" female Prime Minister in the democratic world.
My own view is that Persad-Bissessar needs to red card Jack. I recall advising her a year ago that it was inadvisable to have Jack serve in the Cabinet while remaining in FIFA. He should be made to choose. Regretfully, my advice was not taken; the anticipated "cock up" has now occurred.
Persad-Bissessar and Jack probably assume that they can stonewall and stand pat on the matter, and that the "crisis" would be superseded by another in less than the proverbial nine days that news cycles last in Trinidad and Tobago. They assume the Government can "move on" since nominally, Jack has not yet been found guilty of the alleged charges. The agreement negotiated between Warner and FIFA was however a deceptive trick that fooled none but the most naive. Jack resigned in order to avoid having to face the ethics Committee the damning 17-page report from which he was shown.
The deal was however not sustainable, and pressure continues to mount for Jack's Jack to be hung.The question is whether Persad-Bissessar can carry Jack on her political back without stumbling under the weight of Jack's burden. He might argue that he is "nimble and quick" and "ain't heavy". My wager, however, is that Jill will fall down and break her crown, and that Jack will come tumbling after.
In retrospect, it is clear that Jack has been sedulously preparing himself for such a crunchtime which, as a seasoned FIFA apparatchik, he must have anticipated. He must have known that he would one day have to defend himself from the conspiratorial cliques in the Cabinet who hug him by day, and unsheath their knives at night. His strategy for advancement and survival involves working hard to build a personal base upon which to ground his political edifice.
Mr Warner's strategy also involves reassuring the Prime Minister (whom he had already diagnosed as being 'weak') that he is loyal and dependable, and that she needs his political muscle and skills as well as the grease needed to keep the wheels of government turning. Every prime minister needs a fixer or someone who makes the hard calls that leave political blood on the head or hand. Jack had grabbed that role for himself
The Prime Minister is no doubt aware of the claim made by Messrs Panday, Manning et al, that Warner constitutes a "monkey [and a tiger] on her back and that she will have difficulty persuading him to climb down whenever such is called for. Warner's strategy is to persuade her that he does not constitute a threat to her now or in the future. One wonders whether he succeeded in doing so. Women "know" a lot of things, about which they play deaf, dumb and blind as they seek to survive.
Persons in the Cabinet are not unaware of Warner's leadership ambitions, and do not look benignly at the hold which he seems to have on the Prime Minister who openly calls him her "main man". Warner is himself fully aware of their ambivalence and is reported to have said that he is the "most loved man in the country and the most hated man in the Cabinet". The latter is correct; I have doubts about the former.
In deciding what to do, the Prime Minister has to be aware that she is in a fragile and dangerous phase in her political career, and that a "good press", in the broadest sense of the term, is critical to her sustained political well-being. Most elected governments have a cycle. They begin life in the glow of high public expectations and high tolerance for unforced errors and missteps. In this phase, seemingly, they can do little that is wrong, and hubris leads them to think that they might govern forever. In most cases, the honeymoon lasts for a year or so, following which the floaters and swingers in the electorate see "through" the leader and conclude that what is on offer is the "same ol same ol". New presbyter is naught but old priest writ large. To change the metaphor, the empress begins to reveal that she either has no clothes or that the robes of state are tattered and have lost their pristine shine and colour.
Political arousal is not easily sustained, especially in aging regimes, and leaders are easily tempted to resort to gimmicks and media manipulation to do what is necessary to keep the crowd cheering. Progressively, "spin" and "reverse spin" replace the information order that was promised. Indeed, transparency and democratic accountability become virtual oxymorons. In the end, the public becomes cynical, sullen and tired of the lies; the leadership responds by trying to keep enthusiasm alive, and in the end falls back on the explanation that their predecessors in office did much the same thing and that they too are entitled to benefit from the immunities that were allowed others.
Whether they are given another turn at the crease however depends on the availability of alternatives with whom to replace them when they try to decide whether they should throw the rascals out.
This model seems to fit the extant case of the People's Partnership which was launched amidst great expectations. The Prime Minister seemingly could do no wrong. She listened, consulted and invited the people to pray with her and to judge her and her government. With the help of the ubiquitous energiser bunnies, she flayed the critics in general and the parliamentary opposition in particular. Her errors were downgraded to missteps or misspeaks, the products of understandable inexperience on her part, or that of her ministers and advisers.
Persad-Bissessar's ironic misfortune was that her party, the UNC, won 23 of the 41 seats, an outcome that allowed her to govern without needing the help of the other parties in the coalition. Policy need not be the product of inter party compromise.
To this must be added the fact that Prime Ministers under the Westminster system, with its commitment to the oligarchic principle of collective responsibility, readily become transformed into monarchs and empresses.
Their erstwhile equals become deferential, and fawn on them; opportunists in search of booty make them believe that "God" himself had chosen them from all other possibilities to embody the people and the state. Weak subalterns who do not have gyroscopes of their own to keep them in range, do not stand a chance in the face of such sustained flattery. Strong ones take advantage of the opportunities and do what they want to do with impunity. Caesarism eventually triumphs over democratic sensibilities.
Where is Persad-Bissessar heading? Is she like Icarus, the wax from whose wings melted, causing him to fall into the churning waters of the Mediterranean, or will she make the needed course correction to avoid a collision with the sun? Tragic heroic myths are not irreversible. The most that we can hope for is that her fall comes later rather than sooner. Her decision on Jack will help determine the outcome.
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/comme...124553029.html
By Selwyn Ryan
Story Created: Jun 26, 2011 at 12:44 AM ECT
Story Updated: Jun 26, 2011 at 12:44 AM ECT
The resignation of Jack Warner from FIFA came as a surprise to many of us. My assumption was that Jack and Blatter would do a deal and that the embarrassing bones of both men would remain buried. Now Jack is left all alone trying to hold back the unrushing tsunami of which he warned.
My column today is however only indirectly about FIFA. Its main concern has to do with the implications of what has occurred so far for the country as a whole, and for the People's Partnership Government, the UNC, the COP, and the Prime Minister who must be the most "injury prone" female Prime Minister in the democratic world.
My own view is that Persad-Bissessar needs to red card Jack. I recall advising her a year ago that it was inadvisable to have Jack serve in the Cabinet while remaining in FIFA. He should be made to choose. Regretfully, my advice was not taken; the anticipated "cock up" has now occurred.
Persad-Bissessar and Jack probably assume that they can stonewall and stand pat on the matter, and that the "crisis" would be superseded by another in less than the proverbial nine days that news cycles last in Trinidad and Tobago. They assume the Government can "move on" since nominally, Jack has not yet been found guilty of the alleged charges. The agreement negotiated between Warner and FIFA was however a deceptive trick that fooled none but the most naive. Jack resigned in order to avoid having to face the ethics Committee the damning 17-page report from which he was shown.
The deal was however not sustainable, and pressure continues to mount for Jack's Jack to be hung.The question is whether Persad-Bissessar can carry Jack on her political back without stumbling under the weight of Jack's burden. He might argue that he is "nimble and quick" and "ain't heavy". My wager, however, is that Jill will fall down and break her crown, and that Jack will come tumbling after.
In retrospect, it is clear that Jack has been sedulously preparing himself for such a crunchtime which, as a seasoned FIFA apparatchik, he must have anticipated. He must have known that he would one day have to defend himself from the conspiratorial cliques in the Cabinet who hug him by day, and unsheath their knives at night. His strategy for advancement and survival involves working hard to build a personal base upon which to ground his political edifice.
Mr Warner's strategy also involves reassuring the Prime Minister (whom he had already diagnosed as being 'weak') that he is loyal and dependable, and that she needs his political muscle and skills as well as the grease needed to keep the wheels of government turning. Every prime minister needs a fixer or someone who makes the hard calls that leave political blood on the head or hand. Jack had grabbed that role for himself
The Prime Minister is no doubt aware of the claim made by Messrs Panday, Manning et al, that Warner constitutes a "monkey [and a tiger] on her back and that she will have difficulty persuading him to climb down whenever such is called for. Warner's strategy is to persuade her that he does not constitute a threat to her now or in the future. One wonders whether he succeeded in doing so. Women "know" a lot of things, about which they play deaf, dumb and blind as they seek to survive.
Persons in the Cabinet are not unaware of Warner's leadership ambitions, and do not look benignly at the hold which he seems to have on the Prime Minister who openly calls him her "main man". Warner is himself fully aware of their ambivalence and is reported to have said that he is the "most loved man in the country and the most hated man in the Cabinet". The latter is correct; I have doubts about the former.
In deciding what to do, the Prime Minister has to be aware that she is in a fragile and dangerous phase in her political career, and that a "good press", in the broadest sense of the term, is critical to her sustained political well-being. Most elected governments have a cycle. They begin life in the glow of high public expectations and high tolerance for unforced errors and missteps. In this phase, seemingly, they can do little that is wrong, and hubris leads them to think that they might govern forever. In most cases, the honeymoon lasts for a year or so, following which the floaters and swingers in the electorate see "through" the leader and conclude that what is on offer is the "same ol same ol". New presbyter is naught but old priest writ large. To change the metaphor, the empress begins to reveal that she either has no clothes or that the robes of state are tattered and have lost their pristine shine and colour.
Political arousal is not easily sustained, especially in aging regimes, and leaders are easily tempted to resort to gimmicks and media manipulation to do what is necessary to keep the crowd cheering. Progressively, "spin" and "reverse spin" replace the information order that was promised. Indeed, transparency and democratic accountability become virtual oxymorons. In the end, the public becomes cynical, sullen and tired of the lies; the leadership responds by trying to keep enthusiasm alive, and in the end falls back on the explanation that their predecessors in office did much the same thing and that they too are entitled to benefit from the immunities that were allowed others.
Whether they are given another turn at the crease however depends on the availability of alternatives with whom to replace them when they try to decide whether they should throw the rascals out.
This model seems to fit the extant case of the People's Partnership which was launched amidst great expectations. The Prime Minister seemingly could do no wrong. She listened, consulted and invited the people to pray with her and to judge her and her government. With the help of the ubiquitous energiser bunnies, she flayed the critics in general and the parliamentary opposition in particular. Her errors were downgraded to missteps or misspeaks, the products of understandable inexperience on her part, or that of her ministers and advisers.
Persad-Bissessar's ironic misfortune was that her party, the UNC, won 23 of the 41 seats, an outcome that allowed her to govern without needing the help of the other parties in the coalition. Policy need not be the product of inter party compromise.
To this must be added the fact that Prime Ministers under the Westminster system, with its commitment to the oligarchic principle of collective responsibility, readily become transformed into monarchs and empresses.
Their erstwhile equals become deferential, and fawn on them; opportunists in search of booty make them believe that "God" himself had chosen them from all other possibilities to embody the people and the state. Weak subalterns who do not have gyroscopes of their own to keep them in range, do not stand a chance in the face of such sustained flattery. Strong ones take advantage of the opportunities and do what they want to do with impunity. Caesarism eventually triumphs over democratic sensibilities.
Where is Persad-Bissessar heading? Is she like Icarus, the wax from whose wings melted, causing him to fall into the churning waters of the Mediterranean, or will she make the needed course correction to avoid a collision with the sun? Tragic heroic myths are not irreversible. The most that we can hope for is that her fall comes later rather than sooner. Her decision on Jack will help determine the outcome.
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/comme...124553029.html
Comment