Learning from crisis of 1979

It is a strange coincidence that the rainstorms of the past week hit our country almost 32 years to the day after the eruption of the La Soufrière volcano of 1979.

That disaster occurred on Good Friday of that year, falling then on April 13, but this year the Good Friday/Easter weekend falls one week later. While, in terms of geographical spread, and certainly in terms of dislocation of people, the volcanic eruption was far more disruptive, the current situation is no less a national crisis than that of 1979, with serious implications for our development options.{{more}}

In view of this, it is more than useful for us to re-examine the crisis of 1979, not for nostalgic purposes, but to see what we can learn from our handling of it. The real extent of the grave damage caused becomes clearer after each survey, but except for images on the television, most of our people do not quite appreciate the scale of the destruction, and hence its effects on the economy of our country. This is so because, as with hurricane Tomas of last October, the most significant devastation is confined to a geographical area, to the north and east of St. Vincent. Yet, as Prime Minister Gonsalves has pointed out, that area is a very important one, both economically, and population-wise.

Given those factors, and the compounding of the effects of Tomas, it is correct to deem the current situation a national crisis and to frame our response in that context. It may not be the same as 1979, for crises do differ in scope and nature, but it is a crisis, nevertheless. What is more, in a world where almost every week there is some natural disaster, many of them thought to be the direct result of the negative effects of human activity, it is becoming harder and harder for small countries like ours to attract international attention as the scale of our problems seems miniscule on the global stage.

So how did we handle the challenges of 1979? I shall refer here largely to the words and deeds of an organisation with which I was privileged to be associated, the Youlou United Liberation Movement (YULIMO). Its weekly organ was called FREEDOM, and in the immediate aftermath of the eruption, it dedicated its issue of Friday, April 20,1979, to the Soufrière events.(Incidentally, 20% of the sales of that Special Issue was donated to the Relief Effort). The front page of the issue said it all. Its bold headline read: “NATIONAL CRISIS DEMANDS NATIONAL UNITY, NATIONAL EFFORT”. The whole lead article was a statement by YULIMO on the crisis in which the following points were made:

1. The less destructive eruption of 1971 “should have taught us to be more on guard”.

2. The crisis facing the country “is a national one” and therefore what is required “is national leadership”.

One disturbing factor was the display of political opportunism by some elements, refusing to recognize the national character of the crisis, and rather seeking, via rumour-mongering, to use the crisis for narrow political gains. It is tragic that some three decades later, similar traits should emerge, first post-Tomas and now in current circumstances. Responding to such unpatriotic behaviour, I had written, then, in a letter to the VINCENTIAN newspaper:

“In attempting to grapple with the problems….one has not only got to look at the social and economic problems, we need to try and come up with political solutions as well. But these solutions have got to evolve on the basis of national good and not on narrow, selfish aims of this or not party. …One has therefore got to approach politics at the present time, not within a framework of partisanship which sows disunity and discord but within the framework of national unity. …We need at this due hour cooperation at all levels of the society and a broad consensus among all political parties on a common programme of action which can never be successfully implemented in an atmosphere of politicking, division and distrust. This will do neither the nation nor the various political parties any good”.

So said then, so saying now. Note that it refers to both Opposition and Government alike. In 1979, there were several examples on both sides of this sort of selfishness. There was even irresponsibility with one political party being guilty, in that its leaders were visiting emergency centres, telling evacuees that the Government was “…getting plenty money….”, and that it could afford to give them “…a raise”. The Government of the day, too, revealed its biases in not sufficiently involving non-governmental organisations and almost picking and choosing donors.

One example of this was its treatment of donors of a different political persuasion. For example, two weeks after the eruption, through the intervention of YULIMO, the city of Pointe-à-Pitre in Guadeloupe sent a plane load of relief supplies. However, the bearers were slighted by the Government on arrival. This prompted a YULIMO response, with its then General Secretary, Renwick Rose, condemning the attitude and expressing the view that “…this is no time to make political or ideological views harm the national interests”.

By contrast, there were many positive local responses. Opposition Member of Parliament, Hon. James Mitchell, donated his parliamentary salary towards the Emergency Relief Fund, a gesture highly praised by FREEDOM. Mass organisations like the National Youth Council made critical contributions towards the running of the emergency centres. Patriotic Vincentians abroad, mobilised by the likes of Mike Browne (Canada, USA and UK), Dr. Ralph Gonsalves (Barbados), and a humble Vincentian tailor, Richard ‘Dickie’ Wilson, then living in St. Lucia, all chipped in with donations.

Today, in our hour of need, we need to emulate those manifestations of patriotism and put the national good above all else.

Follow Renwick each week in Searchlight Midweek

Renwick Rose is a community activist and social commentator.