Thoughts on NDP policy switch to recognize mainland China

Editor: Please permit me to comment on the New Democratic Party’s “decision to recognize the United Nations accepted norm of a ‘One China Policy’,” as announced last week by its leader, Arnhim Eustace.

I do so as a journalist with formal media and communication training and experience, the beneficiary of a trip to Taiwan, (courtesy the local Taiwanese Embassy) and as someone with a political education, which began in his early teens. Long live the seventies!{{more}}

Firstly, the attempt to suggest that official recognition of the One China Policy will bring a halt to scholarships to study in Taiwan is dishonest and unfair. This is certainly not the case. As pointed out in an article in I-Witness News, whenever a country switches diplomatic relations from Taiwan to Beijing, “Taiwan continues to fund the education of students that are already studying in the country, but do not grant any additional diplomatic scholarships to citizens of the former ally.”

In short, the change of policy will not prevent Vincentians from pursuing degrees in Taiwan on scholarships, despite the loss of those through the government in Taipei. Both Taiwan and China offer a world respected tertiary education. Stu­dents from the mainland study in Taiwan and vice versa.

I wish also to comment on the label of “ungrateful” which is being attached to Mr Eustace’s announcement. What then do we call the current government’s policy, which virtually denies the people of St Vincent and the Grenadines (SVG) the opportunity to take full advantage of the relations with Taiwan which can bring tremendous benefits to our country, including wealth generation – a policy which instead focuses on receiving mainly “handouts” to be used to condition us to feel we are helpless if we do not receive the assistance of one man?

It is my view that while a switch in diplomatic relations to the People’s Republic of China will be a disadvantage to Taiwan, politically and otherwise, it certainly does not prevent our citizens (Vincentians and Taiwanese) benefiting from what each other’s country has to offer. I have been encouraging students over the years to pursue studies in Taiwan and I’ll continue to do so. I am also encouraging them to seek similar opportunities on mainland China.

I recently came across an article in the Jamaica Observer, which captures what is being done to us here in SVG, the vast majority of whom are descendants of African slaves. The article is written by Valerie Dixon under the heading: Black Leadership and the Stockholm Syndrome. In reference to the definition of Stockholm Syndrome, she wrote: “….basically it is when people are placed in a situation where all their values, beliefs and morals change in some way. So small acts of kindness that the captors or oppressors show to their victims, hostages, slaves or others held in bondage, prompt a ‘primitive gratitude for the gift’ and as a result of this gratitude, the hostage, slave or captive experiences a powerful, primitive positive feeling towards their captor, owner, oppressor and even employer. These people feel ‘privileged’ to be chosen to receive the acts of kindness and enter into a state of denial and refuse to accept that this is the person who caused them to be in the state of capture or bondage in the first place.”

It is not by accident that we are being pauperized as a people and the wings of the eagles among us, who attempt to soar, are constantly being clipped. According to a warped thinking, the descendants of slaves are not supposed to build wealth. Those of this view are confident that “when push comes to shove”, we shall still be grateful to them for their “acts of kindness” which are made available to us in forms such as “Poor Relief”, Lives to Live” and more recently,” Zero Poverty”. Even programmes with the potential to empower are used for an evil purpose. I refer to programmes such as YES and SET.

The captors and oppressors are calculating. Do you think that they don’t keep a database of the beneficiaries of the programmes which I have mentioned, as well as others? I shall not be surprised if the beneficiaries are reminded from time to time, including during election campaigns, of the “generosity” and “kindness” they have received. To understand my point, I want us to reflect on the farce that took place on December 9, 2015, which some boldfacedly insist was a “free and fair election,” despite mounting evidence that it was stolen.

Those with state power are confident that they have the measure of us. An indication of this confidence is reflected in the comment (made shortly after Mr Eustace’s announcement), by a senior member of the Government, in which he said: “People here are Christian people; they believe in gratitude, and this act of great ingratitude would be rewarded by putting them (NDP) right back in Opposition…” Do I need to further explain “primitive gratitude”? I rest my case.

Apart from Mr Eustace and a few others, why aren’t more descendants of African slaves who “have made it” speaking out? Ms Dixon’s article in the Jamaica Observer helps us to understand this dilemma.

According to her, “the chosen black leaders and tokens appear to be experiencing the primitive gratitude for the gift of the great life, and so will be eternally grateful for their positions, jobs opportunities to excel academically and economically, and thefore do not want anyone or anything to upset their ‘apple cart’. They are now in a class above all other blacks and will defend this status, even if it means they have to betray their race and become spies and agents for their captors and benefactors.”

Mr Eustace’s announcement has put the leadership of the Govenment in a quandary. He has put them on the back foot. His statement is unambiguous. Can one say the same of the Prime Minister’s statements on the issue? For sure, the Prime Minister has admitted that “those days are gone,” when one can “play one side against another” in the China matter. Arnhim Eustace has certainly put an end to “those days” here in St Vincent and the Grenadines. Much to the disappointment and embarassment of some charlatans.

Bernard Joseph