Charles ill-informed on TT foreign policy

THE EDITOR: I read with interest and great concern a newspaper report on January 21, headed “TT backs Barbados and blanks Pompeo meeting.” The commentary of MP Rodney Charles, who is widely quoted, lacks substance and is dangerously ill-informed.

The US is our largest trading partner and home to a majority of our nationals in the diaspora. However, such elements of profound ties, even having regard to the tremendous disparity in size and power between the US and TT, ought not to preclude a relationship that is based on mutual respect and understanding.

Diplomatic ties which demand that this country responds to a summons, cap in hand, as it were, abandoning long-standing underpinnings of our foreign policy – self-determination, sovereignty, non-intervention, non-interference, and regional integration – in a whimsical and opportunistic manner, would be irresponsible, unprofessional, and ultimately inimical to our national interests.

If not a transparent attempt to exacerbate division in a body already divided, why was the invitation not extended to all? Maybe it was never intended for Caricom but to “like-minded Caribbean states,” the DR apparently being on the list. Such a notion would be entirely appropriate as the concept of “like-minded” is widely accepted in multilateral diplomacy. Whatever the motivation, its practical effect is certainly not helpful to advocates of our integration movement.

In supporting the position of Barbados not to attend, and in standing with Caricom as a whole, the Rowley administration demonstrated maturity, wisdom, and rectitude, as has been done in the past from Williams through Chambers, Robinson, Manning, Panday, and, yes Charles, Kamla Persad-Bissessar. Some of us remember her strong speech supporting Venezuela at the Summit of the Americas in Panama in 2012.

We have successfully adhered to our principles, on Cuba, on China, on Grenada, on Venezuela, as well as the issue under reference, and been a friendly partner to the US. Supported by all previous prime ministers, the imperatives of our foreign policy are, or should be, beyond partisan politics.

We can stand true to our principles, support Caricom, and be a good neighbour to all in the hemisphere, as we have always done, and sometimes in opposition to the US, and even our Caricom partners.

Are we to understand that the views of Charles represent the views of the UNC? If they do, has the UNC abandoned the cardinal tenets of our foreign policy? If this is not the case, what is the position of the UNC on these important issues, beyond merely attempting to castigate and embarrass the Prime Minister and the Foreign Affairs Minister?

TERRENCE AL WALKER

former chairman

PNM Foreign Affairs Committee