Of Comrades, Incumbent Parties and Irrational Exuberance!

The late Errol Barrow, the father of Barbados’s independence in 1967, delivered an address at the United Nations declaring that Barbados would “be friends of all, satellites of none.”  Twelve years later, in 1979, Sir John Compton confirmed a variation of Errol Barrow’s foreign policy stance that essentially suggested Saint Lucia would not position ourselves in matters beyond our capacity or place.  I am sure you’re asking (and rightly so): “What kind of writing is this that the author would dare offer a personal summary instead of accurately quoting the words of the “father of our nation?” It was deliberate, to suggest a parallel to the absolutely inane statement that the Saint Lucia Labour Party recently attended a meeting in Beijing in place of a duly authorised and appropriate government representative.

Perchance you have not read it, I’m referencing an incredible revelation from our External Affairs Ministry about Saint Lucia’s participation in the meeting between the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States (CELAC) and the People’s Republic of China. 

The story was authored by Liz Lee and Eduardo Baptista, and was carried by Reuters and MSN to mention just two media outlets.  What was said that raised question? Presumably in some misguided effort to dodge the perceived impropriety of a country having diplomatic ties with Taiwan attending a meeting with the People’s Republic of China—to negate the false perception of impropriety, the Ministry would falsely state that Ambassador Peter Lansiquot was in attendance, not on behalf of Saint Lucia but as a representative of the Saint Lucia Labour Party.

I pray you aren’t one of those asking the presumably rhetorical question, “So wha’ wrong wid dat?” In any event, please read on regardless. Why would the External Affairs Ministry speak on behalf of a political party?  Is there no longer in Saint Lucia a separation between party and government/state?  Well, the statement implies there is no separation. But more troubling are the following facts that the statement pretends are merely inconvenient:

1. The meeting was between member states that comprise CELAC and the People’s Republic of China.
2. The Saint Lucia Labour Party is not a state actor and does not and cannot represent Saint Lucia internationally.
3. Should Ambassador Peter Lansiquot have represented the Party, he would not be allowed participation in the CELAC meeting.  His participation would have been sponsored by the political party, and necessarily he should have been granted leave from his official duties to function in such a manner.  His name plate indicated Peter Lansiquot was representing all of Saint Lucia, not the Saint Lucia Labour Party.  That is how he was identified by the reporters. Derived fact from this: he was there in his capacity as a representative of Saint Lucia–the country.
4. Should Lansiquot have been granted leave for such a purpose would clearly raise issue with Civil Service Staff orders, but given the fact that my parliamentary representative also campaigned for his current parliamentary seat while still employed within the public and foreign service, a precedent of disregard has already been established at the highest level. While it is understandable the culture of disregard that follows thereafter, it is certainly not acceptable nor condoned.
5. Peter Lansiquot is Saint Lucia’s accredited Ambassador to multiple Latin American states as well as the Bolivarian Alliance for the Peoples of our America—Peoples’ Trade Treaty (ALBA).  He is a trained economist and a career diplomat specialising in economic affairs.  His suitability to attend the meeting rides on his professional discharge, not his political affiliation.

The story should have been nothing of special interest, considering the PRC Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian confirmed that “China has always welcomed and supported the participation of CELAC member states in the activities within the framework of the forum.”  In keeping with the obvious reality acknowledged by the Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman, Haiti confirmed that their Foreign Minister was there because Haiti is a member of CELAC.  But no, as the local warning phrase goes, “doh do majee with yourself.” Perhaps unfamiliar with this bit of native parlance, the Saint Lucia External Affairs Ministry had to embarrass Saint Lucia, itself—and the Saint Lucia Labour Party.  Not surprisingly, to date the party has remained mute on the obvious self-inflicted mess. Why self-inflected? I have good reason to believe what we have here is an over-inflated and exuberant hack, who, without expertise, assumed liberties.

I have had the opportunity to meet Peter Lansiquot over the years while making the rounds in Laborie, obviously in support of his comrade Alva.  I have reason to believe him a consummate professional who would never indulge in such obvious buffoonery, and I expect before long he will confirm the declaration to be misguided, ill-informed and that he was at the meeting representing Saint Lucia, a member of CELAC. I have no reason to believe he will perjure himself and commit to an extravagant deceit that makes a mockery of Saint Lucia.