Sunday, May 29, 2011

Fred Mitchell, opposition Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) spokesman on Foreign Affairs criticized The Nassau Guardian for reporting on the [WikiLeaks] United States Embassy in Nassau confidential cables

U.S. was unimpressed with new opposition


By BRENT DEAN
NG Deputy News Editor
thenassauguardian
brentldean@nasguard.com



Cable says PLP was concerned by claim U.S. favored FNM


The Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) sought to project the image of an energized opposition in a meeting with senior officials of the United States Embassy in Nassau shortly after it lost the 2007 general election, but the American description of the party after the sit down indicated that those officials were not impressed with the PLP.

The confidential cable, with the surname of then Chargé d'affaires Brent Hardt at the end of it, said the September 2007 working lunch was hosted by PLP leader Perry Christie and former Foreign Minister Fred Mitchell.

“The lunch, which emerged from a discussion Hardt had with Christie in the weeks after the elections, itself reflected the shortcomings of the PLP's governing style. The date and format was repeatedly changed at the PLP's request as they could not agree internally on a suitable date,” said the cable obtained by The Nassau Guardian from the whistleblower WikiLeaks.

“Characteristic of the PLP, half of the 12 participants arrived late. And, while there was some substance in the discussions, the PLP seemed more interested in photographs and a press release of the meeting to signal their continuing good relations with the U.S.

“The party as a whole continues to have difficulty accepting their surprise electoral defeat, and the divisions that plagued the party during elections have become worse in the wake of the defeat, with blame for the loss usually being directed at Christie for his indecisive leadership style or at those ministers with scandals that tainted the party.”

According to the cable, Christie emphasized his party's commitment throughout its tenure in office to maintaining close relations with the U.S. and his desire that the U.S. continues to view the PLP as a trusted partner.

The cable said the PLP was concerned about a suggestion by the Free National Movement (FNM) after the election that relations with the U.S. were better under that party than they were under the PLP.

Referring to Christie, the cable said, “He noted that many PLP supporters felt that the U.S. had been ‘unhappy’ with the PLP prior to elections, and that this had had an impact on the campaign.
“The chargĂ© d'affaires pointed out that whenever he had been asked publicly about the foreign minister's statement, (Brent Symonette) he had stated that we enjoyed outstanding relations with the current government and outstanding relations with the previous government.”

The Americans, according to this cable, emphasized that it was fortunate that in The Bahamas the major political parties both wanted “to have and be seen to have close relations with the U.S.”

After reviewing the highlights in bilateral relations during Christie's tenure, including agreement on mega-ports and container security initiatives and mutual support for the new Haitian government, “the charge reiterated U.S. appreciation for Christie's support for the close partnership we enjoyed,” said the cable.

Despite the assurance given to Christie and the PLP, in a confidential April 2007 cable, the embassy remarked that “the FNM would likely be a stronger supporter of U.S. international goals” while affirming that both parties were friendly bilateral partners.

PLP on policy issues

The September 2007 cable also said that the PLP was concerned that the U.S. was unhappy with the Christie administration because of perceived closer ties with Cuba.

“He (Hardt) explained that the U.S. understood The Bahamas’ need to work with Cuba to resolve migration matters and look after Bahamians who travel to or study in Cuba,” said the cable.
“At the same time, we sought to encourage democratic countries, such as The Bahamas, to use their relationship with Cuba to encourage Cuban government respect for the same values and rights that people in The Bahamas demand.”

PLP officials, according to the cable, also queried embassy staff on the incoming ambassador, Ned Siegel, the status of Operation Bahamas, Turks and Caicos (OPBAT), the Caribbean Basin Initiative, the Western Hemisphere Travel Initiative, Haiti and visa issues, “even including some specific visa concerns on behalf of constituents,” said the cable of the meeting.

With the PLP having raised relevant questions about these numerous policy issues, it is unclear why the Americans concluded the meeting with such a mediocre view of the party’s performance.

PLP decries commentary on cables

Fred Mitchell, opposition spokesman on Foreign Affairs, issued a statement yesterday criticizing The Nassau Guardian for reporting on the cables.

Major international news organizations such as The New York Times, The Guardian, Le Monde, El Pais and Der Spiegel have made the same decision as The Nassau Guardian to publish the cables.
In Jamaica, The Gleaner started publishing cables on that country one day before The Nassau Guardian.

“(Yesterday) morning in a drop box on its front page May 26, The Nassau Guardian is promoting the continued release of the gossip papers that they have obtained by WikiLeaks,” said Mitchell.
“In it they attack the PLP, repeating untested, unproven and hearsay statements about a meeting which allegedly took place with the PLP and the United States Embassy officials in Nassau in 2007.

“The information which they are promoting is certainly prejudicial and uninformed. In addition, it is incredible that a national newspaper of record in the face of the major issues of crime and unemployment would be engaging in the promotion of tattle tale gossip as if it were fact.”

Mitchell argued that the information contained in the “so called cables is almost certainly biased and skewed to reflect the current FNM propaganda of the day.”

He added: “The PLP remains focused on returning to government and seeking to put people back to work and to lessen crime. We urge The Guardian to get focused on what is actually happening in the country and not seeking to rehash untested gossip about what happened four years ago.

“The PLP is not the government today. The FNM is the government and they bear responsibility for the foreign affairs of this country and the state of this economy and the level of crime.”
The Nassau Guardian’s coverage of the cables has provided to The Bahamas historic coverage of the behind-the-scenes decision-making process between the U.S. and The Bahamas.

The cables cover the period from 2003 to 2010, mostly pertaining to the PLP’s period in power from 2002 to 2007. Stories published thus far have revealed opinions, held by both sides, of the bilateral relationship never before revealed to the Bahamian public.

The cables detail meetings the Americans had with PLPs, FNMs, fringe politicians, church leaders, businessmen, journalists, law enforcement officials, civil servants and many others.

5/27/2011

thenassauguardian