Let's not win battle but lose war

GARY GRIFFITH JR

I AM sending this message to front-line politicians on either side of the UNC's upcoming internal elections. Forgive me for being out of place as I am not in your political party, so some will say that a cockroach has no place in fowl business. However, I am humbly sending this recommendation to consider that in any conflict one must remember that winning the war is the ultimate mission, and winning a battle at the expense of losing the war is not logical.

To clarify, what is said and done in the June 15 internal elections can come back to haunt the victors in the general election, as those same words, comments and actions would come back to haunt the party and be used by your real opponent in the general election. In other words, remember there is a new day on June 16, which would start the mission toward the general election and that success can be affected by what is done pre-June 16.

These internal elections bring out intense emotion, but also uncalled-for hostility and the most disgusting things said about those who are in your same party. It has already commenced and if those in the highest echelon of both sides do not have some degree of diplomatic terms of rules of engagement, then the foot soldiers would follow, causing unacceptable comments to be made on the political leader and senior and respected personnel on either side. The intense mud-slinging would make it difficult to easily wash it all away after June 15.

Yes, any political election is not child's play, but there can be such intense lobbying without resorting to going into the gutter. We have seen the collateral damage done after all UNC internal elections, going back to the worst UNC internals in 2006, which became an election civil war, with Basdeo Panday's slate winning 12-3 over Winston Dookeran's slate. I know the damage because I was one of the three successful candidates on Dookeran's slate.

But what took place after was irreparable, as the scuds targeted at both sides caused not just a fracture, but an amputation, leading to the party being split and the actual political opponent simply strolling into government in 2007. That took three years to mend, but it was still costly due to the damage done by that same internal elections.

The reasons I am getting involved in business that is not my own are because, firstly, if there is any possibility of a strategic alliance in the future, it damages the chances of success if a major ally is fragmented or weakened after what was said and done pre-June 15.

Secondly, knowing that an alliance always ensures victory in a general election, we must accept that even though the base support is the foundation for success, it is the floating voters who eventually decide the outcome of any national election. They are indeed a sensitive lot and many may be cautious to support an incoming government where internal hostility and false allegations and accusations were made on the victors of June 15.

To note, it is the "bridge constituency party" where most of these floating voters reside, so they would indeed be watching on, eating popcorn from the stands, to ascertain if we are mature enough to get into government.

With this in mind, I humbly ask if some degree of restraint be considered on both sides, with hard punches being allowed above the belt, because low erratic blows could cause the puncher to be victorious in the internal battle but would be used against them, causing possible disqualification to ensure defeat when the actual war commences.

And as we all know, the real enemy will actively support and promote any perceived division to undermine the UNC and distract from the absolute chaos that this country is in. The citizens deserve better, and you have the power to prevent even the possibility of another term in office for those responsible for this chaos that has passed as governance in Trinidad and Tobago these past nine years and counting.

In the end, I remain confident that all of us who oppose this runaway dictatorial government and share the common objective of removing the PNM will do the right thing.

Again, my apologies if I sound out of place, but we have seen this before in internal elections. I humbly ask that we just remember the bigger picture and the actual mission.