THE HARD-LEARNED LESSONS OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

[dropcap]E[/dropcap]very now and then, certain developed countries at the United Nations reach for a word that is loosely bandied about by the rest of the membership. The word is often embraced because of its perceived utility. It seems empowered to set weak minds at ease and send mendicant leaders from the developing world into a state of anticipation, even euphoria.

History teaches us that as far as the developed world is concerned, it will take care of kith and kin before anyone else. Leftovers in the thrust for development will later be passed down to the begging bowls of the poor and marginalized countries. Amongst the latter, those that have resolutely stood for national pride, free thinking and independence are the least favoured. Still, words such as technology transfer, building resilience and sustainable economic development, sound utopian to the ears of the hungry seeking welfare, and an escape from their horrible existence.

The visit of former US president Bill Clinton to Dominica on February 6, 2018 grabbed my attention. Prime Minister Skerrit had garnered international media attention, bringing the plight of his devastated island by hurricane Maria in 2017, to the world body. The aggressive media agenda by Skerrit has certainly helped bring attention to his island as well as others that were destroyed by hurricanes Irma and Maria.

The Dominican leader has been focused on the emergency help his people need. He has adamantly advocated that the rebuilding process ought to be sustainable and resilient. It may be the first time since the passage of these damaging storms that a Caribbean leader has been so focused on building resilience and sustainability into a national development and the recovery process. Perhaps aid donors had finally decided that these are crucial if Caribbean states are to feed, house and clothe their populations in a sustainable way. Such an approach, it is believed, will obviate the need for the annual migration of Caribbean graduates to the north, further strengthening the developed countries while exacerbating the Caribbean development issue.

The Caribbean needs to lean more on its experts and to draw-up plans for each member country to build resilience and sustainability in its development model. Caricom and the CDB ought to be mandated to seek necessary international financial assistance for implementing these plans. In the meantime, each state should seek its best scientific minds, to work more diligently in ensuring the building of resilience and sustainability, regardless of which political party holds office. The capacity to recover quickly from difficulties, and the ability to maintain its development goals at a certain rate, plus the avoidance of the depletion of its natural resources and the maintenance of ecological balance, ought to be the goal of each Caricom member state.

In addition, the region needs to bear in mind the fiasco that visited Haiti after it was struck by a terrible earthquake on January 12, 2010. The same Bill Clinton who visited Dominica was also in Haiti promising help. Reports from Haiti suggest that only 20- 25% of Clinton’s plan has been implemented after millions were earmarked for Haiti’s recovery. Clearly, that was not what was envisaged and hopefully the rest of the Caribbean has learned valuable lessons from Haiti.

There is no gain in saying that we need to strengthen the region’s ability to protect itself from natural disasters and to recover as speedily as possible, avoiding the loss of life without acting on these observations. If there is more resilience and if better sustainability is built into development projects such as roads, water, schools, electricity, hospitals and health centres, the likely outcome is a better-protected and safer population and country, when disaster strikes.

In addition, it’s high time that the developed world, through UN efforts, realizes that the developing countries of the Caribbean need more support to help facilitate development, instead of an annual aid-package that does not focus on long-term sustainable development and resilience. Strenuous efforts have long been in process (since the banana days of Compton, Eugenia Charles and Son Mitchell) to persuade the developed world to disregard the apparent signs of prosperity one sees in the Caribbean. It takes only one severe hurricane, earthquake or tsunami for that apparent progress to disappear.

In the final analysis each country has a moral obligation to look after its own people and to do so in a scientific, smart and sustainable way. This should lead to more rapid social and economic development for the largest number of persons. In this regard, the efforts of the Minister for Infrastructure in Saint Lucia and his team ought not to go unnoticed. Road rehabilitating and repairs are proceeding at some pace and one looks forward to the drainage works, in particular along these roads.

True to form, Minister King and his ministry have tackled the task like old pros and they have published a pictorial magazine detailing some of the works undertaken. There is still much to be done. One hopes that the Minister and his government never let Saint Lucians forget the mess they inherited in June 2016. By some estimates, it will be seven to ten years before Saint Lucia returns to the sweet place that Sir John Compton left it at his passing.

In the meantime, constant rains last year and early this year have brought smiles to the faces of happy farmers. One prays that these farmers are being educated to appreciate the words diversification, resilience and sustainability. There is everything to work for in the transformation of the island from a backward, illiterate society to one of prosperity, confidence and hope. The theme must be to build stronger, better, more resilient and sustainable infrastructure — even more aesthetically pleasing than Sir John Compton left it.