Wikileaks reveals Mitchell 'criticism' of Christie cabinet
tribune242
CRITICISM of the decision-making process in Perry Christie's Cabinet made by then Minister of Foreign Affairs Fred Mitchell have been revealed in the latest US Embassy cables released by Wikileaks.
During a lunchtime meeting hosted by US Charge Robert Witajewski for Mr Mitchell and then Permanent Secretary for the US Foreign Ministry Patricia Rodgers on March 29, 2004, Mr Mitchell complained of prolonged Cabinet debate, according to the newly-released cable about the 'Bahamian perspective on Caricom and Haiti'.
In response, inquiries from the US envoy about the status of ratification of the comprehensive maritime agreement (CMA), which had been negotiated over 18 months, Mr Mitchell said it had been decided there would be a formal briefing to the Cabinet about the document because of its significance and complexity.
"Optimistically, Mitchell thought that this could be completed in two Cabinet sessions over a two-week period," Mr Witajewski reported in the cable.
"What is essentially a codification and rationalisation of existing agreements, Mitchell again wistfully mused about how the Bahamian decision-making process might be improved.
"He related that he had learned as a result of his Caricom attendance that in other Commonwealth countries, debate and intervention on issues in the Cabinet is restricted to their ministers whose portfolios are directly impacted by the issue, or ministers that assert fundamental issues of principle.
"In contrast, Mitchell intimated, in the Christie Cabinet of the Bahamas operates much less efficiently since any minister can intervene and express a view on any issue before the government."
When contacted by The Tribune yesterday, Mr Mitchell said: "I didn't say that, I dont think I said that at all. I just don't see myself engaging in that kind of dialogue with a US diplomat."
But according to the cable, the then Foreign Minister also complained about Caricom's "cumbersome" decision-making style and said too much time was wasted by the ceremonial opening and closing of the sessions at the latest meeting of Caricom heads of government in St Kitts.
He said if each government had not insisted "on getting their own paragraph" into the final declaration, "they might have both accomplished more and not have been forced to hold their closing press conference at 2am," according to the cable.
Caricom-US relations were also discussed during the meeting, as the status of ex-Haitian president Jean Bertrand Aristide, and Caricom's request for a UN investigation of the events related to Aristide's resignation and departure from Haiti, also came under discussion.
Mr Witajewski reported that Mr Mitchell described a 'north-south' division within Caricom on Haiti, as northern Caribbean countries are more careful to balance their interests with Caricom and the US, being cognisant of the importance of their relations with the US, while the southern Caribbean nations are, "guided by political agendas".
Mr Mitchell warned the US not to "overreact" to Jamaica's offer to take in ex-President Aristide as he insisted the US should not be concerned with or opposed to Aristide's presence in the Caribbean.
And he, "argued that a perceived 'banishing policy' has racial and historical overtones in the Caribbean that reminds inhabitants of the region of slavery and past abuse."
The former Minister also insisted the US should not be concerned with Aristide meddling in Haiti's internal affairs from Jamaica, and was, "emphatic that Jamaica will not allow Aristide to play such an intrusive role and would 'deal' with Aristide if such a situation were to arise."
In his comments on the meeting, Mr Witajewski commented on Mr Mitchell's character.
He said: "Foreign Minister Mitchell was his usual business-like self during lunch as he pursued his agenda of downplaying the consequences of a division between Caricom and the United States on Haiti.
"Underlying many of Mitchell's arguments was the premise that Caricom/The Bahamas as small countries take (and are entitled to take) principled stands while the US necessarily engages in real politick.
"Despite a life-long career as a politician in a country where politics is personalised to the extreme, neither kissing babies nor making small talk comes naturally to Fred Mitchell.
"He prefers to deal with agendas expeditiously and then engage in philosophical discussions or reviews of international relations drawing on his seminar's at Harvard's Kennedy School.
"Holding two time-consuming portfolios, managing the civicl service and foreign policy, is also taking its toll on Mitchell's private time.
"Mitchell told Charge a year ago that he hoped to write a 12 chapter book combining policy, history and personal ideology to be published on his 51st birthday. Ruefully, he admitted he hasn't progressed beyond chapter four."
Although he published a third edition of his book 'Great moments in PLP history' last year, including a previously unpublished essay entitle 'Pindling and Me', Mr Mitchell has not yet completed the project he spoke of seven years ago.
As he approaches his 58th birthday on October 5, Mr Mitchell said he still plans to write his book, before he retires, but it has taken longer than he anticipated.
"It's a combination of allocating the time to do it and putting retrospective notes in order, with the difficulty being that I am an active politician," Mr Mitchell said.
"But I am hoping to do it before I retire."
August 22, 2011
tribune242
A political blog about Bahamian politics in The Bahamas, Bahamian Politicans - and the entire Bahamas political lot. Bahamian Blogger Dennis Dames keeps you updated on the political news and views throughout the islands of The Bahamas without fear or favor. Bahamian Politicians and the Bahamian Political Arena: Updates one Post at a time on Bahamas Politics and Bahamas Politicans; and their local, regional and international policies and perspectives.
Showing posts with label Perry Christie WikiLeaks. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perry Christie WikiLeaks. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
Perry Christie's response to a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks: ...he (Christie) never considered resigning as PLP chief over Kenyatta Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP)
Christie: I never considered quitting over Gibson departure
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
KENYATTA Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party "meant nothing" to Opposition leader Perry Christie who told The Tribune he never considered resigning as PLP chief over the ordeal.
In fact, Mr Christie said he was relieved to turn over a "problem" Member of Parliament - whose notorious Cabinet "fight" hurt Mr Christie's image - to the Free National Movement.
The Farm Road MP's comments came after a newspaper claimed the veteran politician considered stepping down in the wake of Mr Gibson's exit - and an earlier election court case defeat - based on a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks.
Mr Christie dismissed the cable as mere speculation crafted around political fodder of 2008.
"This is absolutely a figment of someone's imagination. I never told that to my wife, my children, never told it to my best friend, never told it to the people in the political organisation that I lead," Mr Christie told The Tribune yesterday.
"No one who is close to me could say that," Mr Christie said. He added that he did not forge close relationships with American diplomats in 2008, the year Mr Gibson left the PLP, and did not discuss his political future with them.
Although he conceded Mr Gibson's exodus was a blow to the PLP and to his image, Mr Christie said he redeemed himself after he won 84 per cent of his party's vote in his re-election bid at the party's 2009 convention. He added that the PLP's victory in the 2010 Elizabeth by-election was another redeeming factor which strengthened the party.
"The whole Kenyatta Gibson thing meant nothing to me. In fact I thought I had transferred a problem I had to the FNM and I thought 'God bless them'. I went on to the (PLP's) national convention and scored a very successful victory and went into the by-election and won."
The PLP leader conceded he paid a "political price" for not demanding that Mr Gibson and former Mount Moriah MP Keod Smith leave the party after having a scuffle in the Cabinet room in 2006. Despite opposition in some quarters, both men were nominated to represent the party in the 2007 general election. Mr Gibson won over FNM newcomer Michael Turnquest while Mr Smith was defeated by National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest.
"At the end of the day there is no doubt that I suffered as a result of what people perceived to be my response to the fight in Cabinet. Clearly after the fight there was a body of opinion that felt Kenyatta nor Keod Smith ought to be nominated to contest the seats (in 2007).
"I paid a price on Kenyatta so when he left I would have been disappointed that someone I made that commitment for (resigned) but that happens in politics and we moved on to demonstrate that the party has grown stronger as a result of it."
The men were not booted from the party because Mr Christie believed in second chances. He claimed that the altercation was just a heated moment that was exaggerated by political opponents.
"The fight I think was intensely blown out of proportion. I had always had a commitment to the redemptive power of a second chance. (From all accounts) it was one of those sparks that took place and everyone moved on.
"Politics being what it is, it was near election time and the FNM blew it up. When we reviewed the matter our opinion was they should not be disqualified," Mr Christie said.
June 18, 2011
tribune242
By TANEKA THOMPSON
Deputy Chief Reporter
tribune242
tthompson@tribunemedia.net
KENYATTA Gibson's departure from the Progressive Liberal Party "meant nothing" to Opposition leader Perry Christie who told The Tribune he never considered resigning as PLP chief over the ordeal.
In fact, Mr Christie said he was relieved to turn over a "problem" Member of Parliament - whose notorious Cabinet "fight" hurt Mr Christie's image - to the Free National Movement.
The Farm Road MP's comments came after a newspaper claimed the veteran politician considered stepping down in the wake of Mr Gibson's exit - and an earlier election court case defeat - based on a US Embassy cable obtained by whistleblower Wikileaks.
Mr Christie dismissed the cable as mere speculation crafted around political fodder of 2008.
"This is absolutely a figment of someone's imagination. I never told that to my wife, my children, never told it to my best friend, never told it to the people in the political organisation that I lead," Mr Christie told The Tribune yesterday.
"No one who is close to me could say that," Mr Christie said. He added that he did not forge close relationships with American diplomats in 2008, the year Mr Gibson left the PLP, and did not discuss his political future with them.
Although he conceded Mr Gibson's exodus was a blow to the PLP and to his image, Mr Christie said he redeemed himself after he won 84 per cent of his party's vote in his re-election bid at the party's 2009 convention. He added that the PLP's victory in the 2010 Elizabeth by-election was another redeeming factor which strengthened the party.
"The whole Kenyatta Gibson thing meant nothing to me. In fact I thought I had transferred a problem I had to the FNM and I thought 'God bless them'. I went on to the (PLP's) national convention and scored a very successful victory and went into the by-election and won."
The PLP leader conceded he paid a "political price" for not demanding that Mr Gibson and former Mount Moriah MP Keod Smith leave the party after having a scuffle in the Cabinet room in 2006. Despite opposition in some quarters, both men were nominated to represent the party in the 2007 general election. Mr Gibson won over FNM newcomer Michael Turnquest while Mr Smith was defeated by National Security Minister Tommy Turnquest.
"At the end of the day there is no doubt that I suffered as a result of what people perceived to be my response to the fight in Cabinet. Clearly after the fight there was a body of opinion that felt Kenyatta nor Keod Smith ought to be nominated to contest the seats (in 2007).
"I paid a price on Kenyatta so when he left I would have been disappointed that someone I made that commitment for (resigned) but that happens in politics and we moved on to demonstrate that the party has grown stronger as a result of it."
The men were not booted from the party because Mr Christie believed in second chances. He claimed that the altercation was just a heated moment that was exaggerated by political opponents.
"The fight I think was intensely blown out of proportion. I had always had a commitment to the redemptive power of a second chance. (From all accounts) it was one of those sparks that took place and everyone moved on.
"Politics being what it is, it was near election time and the FNM blew it up. When we reviewed the matter our opinion was they should not be disqualified," Mr Christie said.
June 18, 2011
tribune242
Sunday, June 19, 2011
WikiLeaks cables: Perry Christie, the opposition leader planned to resign from the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) if it was unsuccessful in its Election Court challenges that followed the 2007 general election - according to a U.S. Embassy diplomatic cable written in 2008
Cable: Christie considered resigning
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
U.S. Embassy official says 'backstabbing' plagued PLP govt
Opposition Leader Perry Christie told a U.S. Embassy official that he planned to resign from the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) if the party was unsuccessful in its Election Court challenges that followed the 2007 poll, according to a diplomatic cable written in 2008.
The official wrote that Christie indicated that “he would stay on only as long as the PLP had a realistic chance of being named the victor in the contested seats.”
It is unclear which embassy official wrote the cable, but then Ambassador Ned Siegel’s name is at the end of the document.
Following the 2007 general election, the PLP through its defeated candidates challenged three seats: Pinewood, Marco City and Blue Hills.
It lost both the Pinewood and Marco City challenges. The Blue Hills challenge was dropped.
Leslie Miller, who ran for the PLP in Blue Hills, said he considered the challenge a waste of time, as elections are not won in court.
After the Pinewood loss, and Kenyatta Gibson’s resignation from the PLP, the American diplomat speculated in the 2008 cable that Christie was about to step down.
“For the foreseeable future, the PLP will be distracted and consumed with its ongoing internal disarray and lack of direction,” the official wrote.
“The party convention, if and when it is held, may not resolve even the leadership crisis....With this defection (Gibson) and the FNM victory in the first court challenge, it is likely that Christie will now step aside unless the factionalism is so strong that no consensus can be reached on a successor.”
In the 2008 cable, the embassy official wrote, “Gibson’s resignation is a big nail in Perry Christie’s political coffin.
“It will intensify pressure for Christie to step aside for new leadership. It also eases political pressure on the FNM, which is expecting to win ongoing court challenges to three seats by the PLP.”
The embassy official expressed the view that Gibson’s “attack” on Christie after his resignation from the party was ironic given that he was one of the MPs involved in a high-profile fight in the Cabinet Office while the PLP was in office.
“Christie’s unwillingness to replace Gibson fed the image of his indecisiveness as a leader, and of the PLP as a party without internal discipline,” the cable said.
“Christie no doubt feels personally betrayed for having stood by Gibson only to have Gibson bite his hand.”
The cable added: “The resignation has laid bare the fractional lines in the party, with the party’s official website now being used to criticize other members, and those members in turn publicly criticizing the party’s own website.”
The embassy official wrote that Gibson’s resignation undermined the PLP leadership’s post-election strategy of contesting the three seats.
“The resignation, which was accompanied by a blistering exchange with the PLP leadership, is a blow to the embattled PLP leader, former Prime Minister Perry Christie.”
The official opined at the time that Gibson’s resignation was certain to reopen debate about Christie’s record and the need for strategic changes following the PLP’s “shock election defeat” in May 2007.
“The unexpected resignation has bared to the public the infighting and backstabbing that had plagued the PLP during its time in office and has only intensified following the PLP’s loss,” the cable said.
“The turnabout in parliamentary fortunes eases pressure on the FNM government as it struggles to deal with daunting challenges of crime and stagnating tourism numbers.”
The U.S. Embassy official also wrote that Gibson’s surprise resignation not only upset the PLP’s post-election strategy, but further undermined the already “weak position of PLP leader Perry Christie who, like the rest of the party, was reportedly blindsided by the news.”
The official noted in that 2008 cable that Gibson’s resignation came only days after the PLP’s spokesman on foreign affairs, Fred Mitchell, sought to downplay in a media statement the liklihood of any leadership challenges at the next PLP convention.
“On the contrary, Gibson’s strategically timed announcement on the eve of the anniversary of the PLP’s achievement of Majority Rule in 1967 added insult to injury by upstaging the party’s commemoration,” the official said.
“It has also intensified questions about Christie’s viability as opposition leader.”
But at the party’s convention in 2009, Christie crushed his opponents, winning more than 80 percent of the votes cast for party leader.
RELIEF FOR EMBATTLED FNM
The 2008 cable characterized Kenyatta Gibson’s resignation as a relief for the “embattled Free National Movement”.
“Striking like a thunderbolt out of a clear blue sky, news of Gibson’s resignation came just in time to become the top story on evening news broadcasts and morning newspaper headlines, pushing all other current affairs aside,” the official wrote.
The cable added that the media splash handed the FNM a bit of unexpected relief after months of pressure from negative crime stories and unfavorable tourism numbers, coupled with stinging opposition attacks over both.
“The FNM’s presumed courtship of another MP whose allegiance to the PLP may be shaky, Malcom Adderley, may also return to center stage,” the official wrote.
“Speculation about Adderley’s loyalties returned to the forefront recently after Prime Minister Ingraham reappointed him to a two-year position as chairman of the Gaming Board, the sole PLP member to hold on to such a position after the May 2007 elections.
“While the urgency of such an effort might wane, the prospects for another defection cannot be ruled out.”
Adderley resigned from the PLP and Parliament in early 2010, triggering the Elizabeth by-election, which was won by the PLP’s Ryan Pinder.
In a recent interview with The Nassau Guardian, Christie said some of what the American diplomats attributed to him was inaccurate, and their characterization of him as weak and indecisive was also wrong.
Christie said the leak of the cables is a lesson to public officials that they need to be more disciplined in how they deal with foreign diplomats.
Christie added that he had no concerns that the cables would negatively affect him politically.
Jun 17, 2011
thenassauguardian
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
U.S. Embassy official says 'backstabbing' plagued PLP govt
Opposition Leader Perry Christie told a U.S. Embassy official that he planned to resign from the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) if the party was unsuccessful in its Election Court challenges that followed the 2007 poll, according to a diplomatic cable written in 2008.
The official wrote that Christie indicated that “he would stay on only as long as the PLP had a realistic chance of being named the victor in the contested seats.”
It is unclear which embassy official wrote the cable, but then Ambassador Ned Siegel’s name is at the end of the document.
Following the 2007 general election, the PLP through its defeated candidates challenged three seats: Pinewood, Marco City and Blue Hills.
It lost both the Pinewood and Marco City challenges. The Blue Hills challenge was dropped.
Leslie Miller, who ran for the PLP in Blue Hills, said he considered the challenge a waste of time, as elections are not won in court.
After the Pinewood loss, and Kenyatta Gibson’s resignation from the PLP, the American diplomat speculated in the 2008 cable that Christie was about to step down.
“For the foreseeable future, the PLP will be distracted and consumed with its ongoing internal disarray and lack of direction,” the official wrote.
“The party convention, if and when it is held, may not resolve even the leadership crisis....With this defection (Gibson) and the FNM victory in the first court challenge, it is likely that Christie will now step aside unless the factionalism is so strong that no consensus can be reached on a successor.”
In the 2008 cable, the embassy official wrote, “Gibson’s resignation is a big nail in Perry Christie’s political coffin.
“It will intensify pressure for Christie to step aside for new leadership. It also eases political pressure on the FNM, which is expecting to win ongoing court challenges to three seats by the PLP.”
The embassy official expressed the view that Gibson’s “attack” on Christie after his resignation from the party was ironic given that he was one of the MPs involved in a high-profile fight in the Cabinet Office while the PLP was in office.
“Christie’s unwillingness to replace Gibson fed the image of his indecisiveness as a leader, and of the PLP as a party without internal discipline,” the cable said.
“Christie no doubt feels personally betrayed for having stood by Gibson only to have Gibson bite his hand.”
The cable added: “The resignation has laid bare the fractional lines in the party, with the party’s official website now being used to criticize other members, and those members in turn publicly criticizing the party’s own website.”
The embassy official wrote that Gibson’s resignation undermined the PLP leadership’s post-election strategy of contesting the three seats.
“The resignation, which was accompanied by a blistering exchange with the PLP leadership, is a blow to the embattled PLP leader, former Prime Minister Perry Christie.”
The official opined at the time that Gibson’s resignation was certain to reopen debate about Christie’s record and the need for strategic changes following the PLP’s “shock election defeat” in May 2007.
“The unexpected resignation has bared to the public the infighting and backstabbing that had plagued the PLP during its time in office and has only intensified following the PLP’s loss,” the cable said.
“The turnabout in parliamentary fortunes eases pressure on the FNM government as it struggles to deal with daunting challenges of crime and stagnating tourism numbers.”
The U.S. Embassy official also wrote that Gibson’s surprise resignation not only upset the PLP’s post-election strategy, but further undermined the already “weak position of PLP leader Perry Christie who, like the rest of the party, was reportedly blindsided by the news.”
The official noted in that 2008 cable that Gibson’s resignation came only days after the PLP’s spokesman on foreign affairs, Fred Mitchell, sought to downplay in a media statement the liklihood of any leadership challenges at the next PLP convention.
“On the contrary, Gibson’s strategically timed announcement on the eve of the anniversary of the PLP’s achievement of Majority Rule in 1967 added insult to injury by upstaging the party’s commemoration,” the official said.
“It has also intensified questions about Christie’s viability as opposition leader.”
But at the party’s convention in 2009, Christie crushed his opponents, winning more than 80 percent of the votes cast for party leader.
RELIEF FOR EMBATTLED FNM
The 2008 cable characterized Kenyatta Gibson’s resignation as a relief for the “embattled Free National Movement”.
“Striking like a thunderbolt out of a clear blue sky, news of Gibson’s resignation came just in time to become the top story on evening news broadcasts and morning newspaper headlines, pushing all other current affairs aside,” the official wrote.
The cable added that the media splash handed the FNM a bit of unexpected relief after months of pressure from negative crime stories and unfavorable tourism numbers, coupled with stinging opposition attacks over both.
“The FNM’s presumed courtship of another MP whose allegiance to the PLP may be shaky, Malcom Adderley, may also return to center stage,” the official wrote.
“Speculation about Adderley’s loyalties returned to the forefront recently after Prime Minister Ingraham reappointed him to a two-year position as chairman of the Gaming Board, the sole PLP member to hold on to such a position after the May 2007 elections.
“While the urgency of such an effort might wane, the prospects for another defection cannot be ruled out.”
Adderley resigned from the PLP and Parliament in early 2010, triggering the Elizabeth by-election, which was won by the PLP’s Ryan Pinder.
In a recent interview with The Nassau Guardian, Christie said some of what the American diplomats attributed to him was inaccurate, and their characterization of him as weak and indecisive was also wrong.
Christie said the leak of the cables is a lesson to public officials that they need to be more disciplined in how they deal with foreign diplomats.
Christie added that he had no concerns that the cables would negatively affect him politically.
Jun 17, 2011
thenassauguardian
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Perry Christie - Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) leader was wise and measured in his response to the United States Embassy cables being published by The Nassau Guardian via WikiLeaks
Christie's WikiLeaks remarks appropriate
thenassauguardian
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) leader Perry Christie was wise and measured in his response to the United States Embassy cables being published by The Nassau Guardian via WikiLeaks.
In an interview with this newspaper published yesterday, Christie said, “This kind of exposure that we’re getting now is more to give Bahamians an understanding that these things happened and perhaps at the end of the process those of us who are in public life clearly will be more disciplined in any discussions we have (with U.S. Embassy officials) moving forward.”
Christie is correct.
Too many Bahamians appeared to have thought that the conversations they were having with the Americans were chats between personal friends. The release of the cables has shattered that childish notion.
Going forward Bahamians, while talking to any foreign officials, should remain detached and only advance the interests of The Bahamas.
“When someone sits with you as prime minister, a communication is made to Washington based on what an ambassador says was his experience with a prime minister, who is me, and there is no third party to certify the truth of that,” added Christie.
In that interview, the former prime minister did not attack The Nassau Guardian as others in his party have done.
PLP MP Fred Mitchell during the budget debate in the House of Assembly stated: “Here we have a press that does not support the PLP. They oppose the PLP. They have now used their resources to get these so called cables. They do not get an independent panel to edit and release the information. Instead they arrogate to themselves the right to selectively choose what to release.”
Additionally Mitchell said: “Now in a situation where there is support for the FNM, why would anybody not be surprised that the PLP is the subject of these attacks with the same tendentious propaganda and slogans of the FNM now repeated in the mouths allegedly of U.S. diplomats.”
Mitchell was too excited when the cables were first published. Most Bahamians we have encountered are curious about the views of the Americans. And they certainly realize that what is written in the cables is written by the Americans and not The Nassau Guardian.
Though Mitchell still seems to think this newspaper has waged war against the PLP, maybe he is warming to the position espoused by Christie.
In that same budget contribution, he said, “Our public officials, including myself, can learn the cautionary tale of being careful with your mouths, not to let these positions cause you to show off. ”
This, really, is one of the main lessons of the cables. Christie is right on and Mitchell seems to be getting on the right track. We hope Mitchell calms down and abandons his view that the publishing of these cables is a part of a vast anti-PLP conspiracy by this newspaper.
Jun 15, 2011
thenassauguardian
thenassauguardian
Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) leader Perry Christie was wise and measured in his response to the United States Embassy cables being published by The Nassau Guardian via WikiLeaks.
In an interview with this newspaper published yesterday, Christie said, “This kind of exposure that we’re getting now is more to give Bahamians an understanding that these things happened and perhaps at the end of the process those of us who are in public life clearly will be more disciplined in any discussions we have (with U.S. Embassy officials) moving forward.”
Christie is correct.
Too many Bahamians appeared to have thought that the conversations they were having with the Americans were chats between personal friends. The release of the cables has shattered that childish notion.
Going forward Bahamians, while talking to any foreign officials, should remain detached and only advance the interests of The Bahamas.
“When someone sits with you as prime minister, a communication is made to Washington based on what an ambassador says was his experience with a prime minister, who is me, and there is no third party to certify the truth of that,” added Christie.
In that interview, the former prime minister did not attack The Nassau Guardian as others in his party have done.
PLP MP Fred Mitchell during the budget debate in the House of Assembly stated: “Here we have a press that does not support the PLP. They oppose the PLP. They have now used their resources to get these so called cables. They do not get an independent panel to edit and release the information. Instead they arrogate to themselves the right to selectively choose what to release.”
Additionally Mitchell said: “Now in a situation where there is support for the FNM, why would anybody not be surprised that the PLP is the subject of these attacks with the same tendentious propaganda and slogans of the FNM now repeated in the mouths allegedly of U.S. diplomats.”
Mitchell was too excited when the cables were first published. Most Bahamians we have encountered are curious about the views of the Americans. And they certainly realize that what is written in the cables is written by the Americans and not The Nassau Guardian.
Though Mitchell still seems to think this newspaper has waged war against the PLP, maybe he is warming to the position espoused by Christie.
In that same budget contribution, he said, “Our public officials, including myself, can learn the cautionary tale of being careful with your mouths, not to let these positions cause you to show off. ”
This, really, is one of the main lessons of the cables. Christie is right on and Mitchell seems to be getting on the right track. We hope Mitchell calms down and abandons his view that the publishing of these cables is a part of a vast anti-PLP conspiracy by this newspaper.
Jun 15, 2011
thenassauguardian
Tuesday, June 14, 2011
The WikiLeaks cables should be viewed as a learning experience by public officials... and the release of the diplomatic documents have allowed Bahamians to see more clearly the actions of their leaders... says Former Prime Minister Perry Christie
Christie: WikiLeaks a learning experience
CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Former Prime Minister Perry Christie says public officials should view the WikiLeaks cables as a learning experience and added that the release of the diplomatic documents have allowed Bahamians to see more clearly the actions of their leaders.
“This kind of exposure that we’re getting now is more to give Bahamians an understanding that these things happened and perhaps at the end of the process those of use who are in public life clearly will be more disciplined in any discussions we have (with U.S. Embassy officials) moving forward, “ said Christie in a recent interview with The Nassau Guardian.
He added, “I think as a result of what we have seen, the entire world will learn from the experience of the leaks.
“That is very obvious because one can not take anything for granted.
“When someone sits with you as prime minister, a communication is made to Washington based on what an ambassador says was his experience with a prime minister, who is me, and there is no third party to certify the truth of that.
“And so you ask me, did I say it and I said it is not the kind of thing I would say to an ambassador.”
Christie in that respect was referring specifically to a comment attributed to him in the cables, that he did not appoint former Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller to his cabinet because of his qualifications, but to keep an eye on him.
He denied making the comment and suggested that something he said may have been taken out of context.
“Leslie Miller and I enjoy an incredibly strong relationship today,” Christie added.
In the cables, U.S. Embassy officials are overwhelmingly critical of Christie and his style of leadership.
After he called elections in 2007, an Embassy official wrote, “The timing of the elections is typical of Christie’s style of governance — uncertain, waiting until the last possible moment, with action forced by outside events rather than strategic planning.”
Comparing current Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and Christie, the official wrote: “Ingraham is known from his time as prime minister as a decisive leader who accomplished much while suppressing dissension. His critics claim he rode roughshod over opponents.
“Christie has a well-deserved reputation as a waffling, indecisive leader, who procrastinates and often fails to act altogether while awaiting an elusive consensus in his Cabinet.”
Christie told The Guardian he is disappointed as a public official that the Embassy officials “seem to have taken on the FNM propaganda on me, I mean even to minute details”.
“They seem to mirror what has been said,” he said.
In another cable that was written in 2003 after Ingraham had a meeting with a U.S. Embassy official, the then former prime minister was quoted as saying Christie has always been weak and indecisive and lacks vision, but is a good man.
Ingraham, according to the cable, also described the Christie Cabinet as a “collection of incompetents.”
Christie told The Guardian that he was not surprised that Ingraham expressed such strong views about him.
“I have strong views about him,” the opposition leader added. “I don’t know whether I would have said it to anyone.”
Christie brushed aside repeated suggestions in the cables that he did not have a firm grip on his cabinet.
“Anyone who sat around that table would know that I was in charge of my cabinet, and that whether it’s foreign affairs or any other subject, that I would have been very assiduous in understanding all of the issues,” he said.
“The one thing though that I think was very clear to me is that I had the opportunity to meet with the president of the United States of America (George W. Bush) on a number of occasions, one very formal visit with two other leaders in the region.
“And I used that opportunity to impress upon him all of the principles of the relationship between the United States and the Commonwealth of The Bahamas, so that there was no misunderstanding.”
Christie said he also made it clear to then U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she visited The Bahamas that it is important for The Bahamas to have a relationship with Cuba.
“I made it very clear that when it came to the Commonwealth of The Bahamas and its relationship with Cuba and other countries in the region we were in the region and it was a matter of necessity that we understood what was taking place in the region, including Cuba, and that it ought to be for the benefit of the Americans that they would have a friend like the Bahamas sitting in places like Cuba and Haiti and being able to represent the fact that we enjoy relationships that are very strong historically and will continue to be so,” he said.
Christie said he does not think the cables will hurt him politically.
“At the end of the day you try as a public figure to get people to know you, to know who you are, what you’re like and your integrity,” he said.
“And so, when Prime Minister Ingraham, for example, who spent near 20 years of his life in a direct partnership with me, trusting his future and his family’s future with me, I know he knows me.
“I know he knows my integrity. I know he knows the degree of my responsibility and so when he mischaracterizes me, it is all politics. He is very adept at it and oftentimes I chide myself for not being able to match him in kind in being able to do it, but you know I can’t be Hubert Ingraham.”
Christie also responded to comments attributed to Mount Tabor Baptist Church Bishop Neil Ellis.
Referring to Ellis’ alleged comment to an embassy official that he (Christie) was not a “true man of God”, Christie responded with a chuckle, “Well, he might be right.”
“The bishop has an assignment and the bishop understands people,” he added.
“He knows my heart. We’ve been close enough for him to know that. He knows the respect I have for him and I would expect him to be honest in his deliberations.
“If he doesn’t have a clear understanding of my commitment to the Lord and Christianity and how I manifest it…I think he’s very safe in what he said about me — not being a true man of God.
“And I assume a true man of God are people like him.”
Another cable suggested that Christie did not have a grip on foreign affairs matters while he was prime minister and deferred to Fred Mitchell, who served as foreign affairs minister in his administration.
In that 2006 cable, Christie responded to then U.S. Ambassador John Rood’s concerns over The Bahamas’ voting record in the United Nations and limited multilateral cooperation with the U.S. at the U.N.
“In response to the ambassador’s concerns, Christie distanced himself from Mitchell’s handling of Bahamian policy, saying ‘foreign policy is driven by Fred and Ministry of Foreign Affairs without involvement of my office’,” the cable said.
Asked to respond to this, Christie explained to The Guardian that as a prime minister he did not micromanage.
“That is what a prime minister like me would have tried to do with ambassadors to stop them from coming directly to the Office of Prime Minister unless it was a matter of great import and to channel whatever they do through the foreign minister,” he said.
“Fred Mitchell was an incredibly adept foreign minister and was recognized in this region as that. Whatever one wants to say, he was very, very good at performing the obligations of his office and therefore I had great confidence in Fred Mitchell being able to receive information from the Americans, interpret that information and pass it on to me and to colleagues.
“And to that extent I was trying to create a culture that foreign affairs was sufficiently important that you didn’t have to have a prime minister trying to wield the power [over] the office of the foreign minister.”
Christie said Mitchell communicated with the Office of the Prime Minister practically every day, and still communicates with him often as shadow minister of foreign affairs.
Jun 14, 2011
thenassauguardian
CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Former Prime Minister Perry Christie says public officials should view the WikiLeaks cables as a learning experience and added that the release of the diplomatic documents have allowed Bahamians to see more clearly the actions of their leaders.
“This kind of exposure that we’re getting now is more to give Bahamians an understanding that these things happened and perhaps at the end of the process those of use who are in public life clearly will be more disciplined in any discussions we have (with U.S. Embassy officials) moving forward, “ said Christie in a recent interview with The Nassau Guardian.
He added, “I think as a result of what we have seen, the entire world will learn from the experience of the leaks.
“That is very obvious because one can not take anything for granted.
“When someone sits with you as prime minister, a communication is made to Washington based on what an ambassador says was his experience with a prime minister, who is me, and there is no third party to certify the truth of that.
“And so you ask me, did I say it and I said it is not the kind of thing I would say to an ambassador.”
Christie in that respect was referring specifically to a comment attributed to him in the cables, that he did not appoint former Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller to his cabinet because of his qualifications, but to keep an eye on him.
He denied making the comment and suggested that something he said may have been taken out of context.
“Leslie Miller and I enjoy an incredibly strong relationship today,” Christie added.
In the cables, U.S. Embassy officials are overwhelmingly critical of Christie and his style of leadership.
After he called elections in 2007, an Embassy official wrote, “The timing of the elections is typical of Christie’s style of governance — uncertain, waiting until the last possible moment, with action forced by outside events rather than strategic planning.”
Comparing current Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham and Christie, the official wrote: “Ingraham is known from his time as prime minister as a decisive leader who accomplished much while suppressing dissension. His critics claim he rode roughshod over opponents.
“Christie has a well-deserved reputation as a waffling, indecisive leader, who procrastinates and often fails to act altogether while awaiting an elusive consensus in his Cabinet.”
Christie told The Guardian he is disappointed as a public official that the Embassy officials “seem to have taken on the FNM propaganda on me, I mean even to minute details”.
“They seem to mirror what has been said,” he said.
In another cable that was written in 2003 after Ingraham had a meeting with a U.S. Embassy official, the then former prime minister was quoted as saying Christie has always been weak and indecisive and lacks vision, but is a good man.
Ingraham, according to the cable, also described the Christie Cabinet as a “collection of incompetents.”
Christie told The Guardian that he was not surprised that Ingraham expressed such strong views about him.
“I have strong views about him,” the opposition leader added. “I don’t know whether I would have said it to anyone.”
Christie brushed aside repeated suggestions in the cables that he did not have a firm grip on his cabinet.
“Anyone who sat around that table would know that I was in charge of my cabinet, and that whether it’s foreign affairs or any other subject, that I would have been very assiduous in understanding all of the issues,” he said.
“The one thing though that I think was very clear to me is that I had the opportunity to meet with the president of the United States of America (George W. Bush) on a number of occasions, one very formal visit with two other leaders in the region.
“And I used that opportunity to impress upon him all of the principles of the relationship between the United States and the Commonwealth of The Bahamas, so that there was no misunderstanding.”
Christie said he also made it clear to then U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she visited The Bahamas that it is important for The Bahamas to have a relationship with Cuba.
“I made it very clear that when it came to the Commonwealth of The Bahamas and its relationship with Cuba and other countries in the region we were in the region and it was a matter of necessity that we understood what was taking place in the region, including Cuba, and that it ought to be for the benefit of the Americans that they would have a friend like the Bahamas sitting in places like Cuba and Haiti and being able to represent the fact that we enjoy relationships that are very strong historically and will continue to be so,” he said.
Christie said he does not think the cables will hurt him politically.
“At the end of the day you try as a public figure to get people to know you, to know who you are, what you’re like and your integrity,” he said.
“And so, when Prime Minister Ingraham, for example, who spent near 20 years of his life in a direct partnership with me, trusting his future and his family’s future with me, I know he knows me.
“I know he knows my integrity. I know he knows the degree of my responsibility and so when he mischaracterizes me, it is all politics. He is very adept at it and oftentimes I chide myself for not being able to match him in kind in being able to do it, but you know I can’t be Hubert Ingraham.”
Christie also responded to comments attributed to Mount Tabor Baptist Church Bishop Neil Ellis.
Referring to Ellis’ alleged comment to an embassy official that he (Christie) was not a “true man of God”, Christie responded with a chuckle, “Well, he might be right.”
“The bishop has an assignment and the bishop understands people,” he added.
“He knows my heart. We’ve been close enough for him to know that. He knows the respect I have for him and I would expect him to be honest in his deliberations.
“If he doesn’t have a clear understanding of my commitment to the Lord and Christianity and how I manifest it…I think he’s very safe in what he said about me — not being a true man of God.
“And I assume a true man of God are people like him.”
Another cable suggested that Christie did not have a grip on foreign affairs matters while he was prime minister and deferred to Fred Mitchell, who served as foreign affairs minister in his administration.
In that 2006 cable, Christie responded to then U.S. Ambassador John Rood’s concerns over The Bahamas’ voting record in the United Nations and limited multilateral cooperation with the U.S. at the U.N.
“In response to the ambassador’s concerns, Christie distanced himself from Mitchell’s handling of Bahamian policy, saying ‘foreign policy is driven by Fred and Ministry of Foreign Affairs without involvement of my office’,” the cable said.
Asked to respond to this, Christie explained to The Guardian that as a prime minister he did not micromanage.
“That is what a prime minister like me would have tried to do with ambassadors to stop them from coming directly to the Office of Prime Minister unless it was a matter of great import and to channel whatever they do through the foreign minister,” he said.
“Fred Mitchell was an incredibly adept foreign minister and was recognized in this region as that. Whatever one wants to say, he was very, very good at performing the obligations of his office and therefore I had great confidence in Fred Mitchell being able to receive information from the Americans, interpret that information and pass it on to me and to colleagues.
“And to that extent I was trying to create a culture that foreign affairs was sufficiently important that you didn’t have to have a prime minister trying to wield the power [over] the office of the foreign minister.”
Christie said Mitchell communicated with the Office of the Prime Minister practically every day, and still communicates with him often as shadow minister of foreign affairs.
Jun 14, 2011
thenassauguardian
Friday, June 10, 2011
[WikiLeaks] U.S. Embassy official in a 2004 diplomatic cable: Franklyn Wilson argued that the U.S. should support Perry Christie’s hope to become a regional leader since the Bahamian prime minister was America’s “Tony Blair” inside CARICOM
Cable: Wilson defended Christie to Americans
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Diplomatic cables reveal detailed discussions American diplomats had with prominent Bahamian businessman Franklyn Wilson who repeatedly defended the Pindling administration’s actions during the 1980s drug era, and also defended the Christie administration’s “record of inaction.”
“Mr. Wilson emotionally presented the case for Perry Christie, calling him the United States’ best friend inside CARICOM councils,” wrote a U.S. Embassy official in a 2004 cable.
The diplomat wrote that Wilson argued during a September 30, 2004 luncheon that the U.S. should support Christie’s hope to become a regional leader since the Bahamian prime minister was America’s “Tony Blair” inside CARICOM.
“Wilson again raised the prime minister’s belief that he was ignored and left exposed by the United States during events surrounding the resignation of Haitian ex-President Aristide and that he should have been consulted by senior [U.S. government] officials,” the diplomat wrote.
“Wilson claimed, however, that Christie bore no grudges at being left out of the loop by the United States and Canada.”
According to the cable, Wilson remained loyal to Christie, telling diplomats that Christie’s personality and manner made it possible for him to become friends with everyone, including President George W. Bush, thereby allowing him to exert a moderating and calming influence within CARICOM to counter the proclivities of that body’s more extreme members.
Wilson compared Christie to the late former prime minister Sir Lynden Pindling, saying Sir Lynden had quietly and effectively served as a moderating influence during the 1970s and thus served U.S. strategic interests, the cable said.
“What was true some 30 years ago, argued Wilson, was equally true today,” the embassy official said.
“The United States, continued Wilson, needed to ignore tactical deviations and remember that strategically Perry Christie was America’s best friend and supporter in the region.”
According to the cable, Wilson declared several times that the United States should support and enhance Christie’s stature within CARICOM in its own self-interest.
Wilson reportedly expressed the view that Christie believed that he had been in the forefront of the CARICOM effort to persuade the ex-Haitian president to peacefully resign his office.
“Given his leadership role in the effort, argued Wilson, the United States owed it to Christie to have received a call from senior [U.S. government] officials, or the White House, advising him ‘when the United States decided to change direction on Aristide’ and ‘remove him from power’.”
According to the cable, a U.S. Embassy official reminded Wilson that Christie had been briefed on the rapid spiral of breaking events leading up to Aristide demitting office and that CARICOM “was not an organization well-suited to handling crises.”
Noting that Prime Minister Christie was scheduled to speak at the approaching Miami Herald’s annual Americas Conference, the U.S. ambassador expressed the hope that Christie would take a positive position that reflected the deep, long-standing and overall positive relationship between the United States and the region, the cable said.
It noted that the theme of Christie’s remarks at the conference was ‘Friend or Foe? Can the Caribbean and the U.S. Repair Their Damaged Relations?’
The cable said Christie “feigned surprise” and dismay at the topic assigned to him when he had an opportunity to speak to a U.S. Embassy official before the trip.
The official expressed to Christie, according to the cable, the ambassador’s hope that he “would use his spotlight to focus on the overwhelmingly positive bilateral and mutually beneficial multilateral regional relationship and not engage in an unproductive negative analysis.”
SIR LYNDEN’S LEGACY
Referring again to Wilson, the embassy official noted that he has been closely identified with the PLP throughout his life and holds Sir Lynden “in a status close to sainthood.”
The official wrote that Wilson was a member of Christie’s “kitchen cabinet” and one of the PLP’s principal financiers and fundraisers.
“He is accustomed to serving as a transmission belt both to send, and to receive, messages intended for the prime minister,” the cable said.
The official wrote: “Wilson is very proud of his rise to meteoric wealth and, during the course of the meeting, repeatedly referred to his humble past, when, as the youngest of 11 children in a working class family, he had to sleep on the floor until his older sisters grew up and moved out of the house and a bed opened up for him.
“He is fanatically devoted to Pindling, who identified him, became his godfather, and opened the doors that allowed Wilson to be successful.”
In a 2003 cable, an embassy official described Wilson as a “bombastic speaker who frequently cuts others off in conversation.”
The official wrote that Wilson “spent much of the hour and half meeting offering a passionate defense of the record of Sir Lynden Pindling.”
“He insisted that allegations of narcotics corruption against Pindling were completely unfounded and claimed that the Commission of Inquiry bore him out on this point,” the cable said.
“He brushed aside questions about how Sir Lynden had amassed his obvious wealth during his years in office and the influence of notorious Colombian narcotics kingpin Carlos Lehder, and said that the stories about Pindling were the result of jealousy and ingratitude, a plot orchestrated by former U.S. Ambassador Carol Boyd Hallett and former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who ‘wouldn’t have been anything without Pindling’.”
Wilson told the Americans, according to the cable, “no one has cooperated more” with the U.S. on drug interdiction than Pindling and said the seizure statistics bear him out on this assertion.
The diplomat wrote: “He expressed great scorn toward Hubert Ingraham for betraying Pindling then setting out to destroy his reputation after Ingraham became prime minister, which Wilson claimed destroyed Pindling’s health and led to his death.
“Wilson said that only when Pindling neared his death did Ingraham ‘repent’ and seek reconciliation with Pindling on the latter’s death bed.
“Wilson claimed that the impressive sendoff given to Pindling by Ingraham’s government when he died in 2000 was proof that Ingraham felt remorseful about what he had done to Pindling’s reputation.”
According to the cable, Wilson believed that the seeds of the PLP’s 2002 election victory were laid at Pindling’s funeral, as the state ceremony and effusive eulogies allowed the PLP to escape from its image of corruption.
In the cable, Wilson and Bishop Neil Ellis were described as “the two individuals outside of the Bahamian government considered to have the most influence on Prime Minister Perry Christie’s government.”
Jun 09, 2011
thenassauguardian
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Diplomatic cables reveal detailed discussions American diplomats had with prominent Bahamian businessman Franklyn Wilson who repeatedly defended the Pindling administration’s actions during the 1980s drug era, and also defended the Christie administration’s “record of inaction.”
“Mr. Wilson emotionally presented the case for Perry Christie, calling him the United States’ best friend inside CARICOM councils,” wrote a U.S. Embassy official in a 2004 cable.
The diplomat wrote that Wilson argued during a September 30, 2004 luncheon that the U.S. should support Christie’s hope to become a regional leader since the Bahamian prime minister was America’s “Tony Blair” inside CARICOM.
“Wilson again raised the prime minister’s belief that he was ignored and left exposed by the United States during events surrounding the resignation of Haitian ex-President Aristide and that he should have been consulted by senior [U.S. government] officials,” the diplomat wrote.
“Wilson claimed, however, that Christie bore no grudges at being left out of the loop by the United States and Canada.”
According to the cable, Wilson remained loyal to Christie, telling diplomats that Christie’s personality and manner made it possible for him to become friends with everyone, including President George W. Bush, thereby allowing him to exert a moderating and calming influence within CARICOM to counter the proclivities of that body’s more extreme members.
Wilson compared Christie to the late former prime minister Sir Lynden Pindling, saying Sir Lynden had quietly and effectively served as a moderating influence during the 1970s and thus served U.S. strategic interests, the cable said.
“What was true some 30 years ago, argued Wilson, was equally true today,” the embassy official said.
“The United States, continued Wilson, needed to ignore tactical deviations and remember that strategically Perry Christie was America’s best friend and supporter in the region.”
According to the cable, Wilson declared several times that the United States should support and enhance Christie’s stature within CARICOM in its own self-interest.
Wilson reportedly expressed the view that Christie believed that he had been in the forefront of the CARICOM effort to persuade the ex-Haitian president to peacefully resign his office.
“Given his leadership role in the effort, argued Wilson, the United States owed it to Christie to have received a call from senior [U.S. government] officials, or the White House, advising him ‘when the United States decided to change direction on Aristide’ and ‘remove him from power’.”
According to the cable, a U.S. Embassy official reminded Wilson that Christie had been briefed on the rapid spiral of breaking events leading up to Aristide demitting office and that CARICOM “was not an organization well-suited to handling crises.”
Noting that Prime Minister Christie was scheduled to speak at the approaching Miami Herald’s annual Americas Conference, the U.S. ambassador expressed the hope that Christie would take a positive position that reflected the deep, long-standing and overall positive relationship between the United States and the region, the cable said.
It noted that the theme of Christie’s remarks at the conference was ‘Friend or Foe? Can the Caribbean and the U.S. Repair Their Damaged Relations?’
The cable said Christie “feigned surprise” and dismay at the topic assigned to him when he had an opportunity to speak to a U.S. Embassy official before the trip.
The official expressed to Christie, according to the cable, the ambassador’s hope that he “would use his spotlight to focus on the overwhelmingly positive bilateral and mutually beneficial multilateral regional relationship and not engage in an unproductive negative analysis.”
SIR LYNDEN’S LEGACY
Referring again to Wilson, the embassy official noted that he has been closely identified with the PLP throughout his life and holds Sir Lynden “in a status close to sainthood.”
The official wrote that Wilson was a member of Christie’s “kitchen cabinet” and one of the PLP’s principal financiers and fundraisers.
“He is accustomed to serving as a transmission belt both to send, and to receive, messages intended for the prime minister,” the cable said.
The official wrote: “Wilson is very proud of his rise to meteoric wealth and, during the course of the meeting, repeatedly referred to his humble past, when, as the youngest of 11 children in a working class family, he had to sleep on the floor until his older sisters grew up and moved out of the house and a bed opened up for him.
“He is fanatically devoted to Pindling, who identified him, became his godfather, and opened the doors that allowed Wilson to be successful.”
In a 2003 cable, an embassy official described Wilson as a “bombastic speaker who frequently cuts others off in conversation.”
The official wrote that Wilson “spent much of the hour and half meeting offering a passionate defense of the record of Sir Lynden Pindling.”
“He insisted that allegations of narcotics corruption against Pindling were completely unfounded and claimed that the Commission of Inquiry bore him out on this point,” the cable said.
“He brushed aside questions about how Sir Lynden had amassed his obvious wealth during his years in office and the influence of notorious Colombian narcotics kingpin Carlos Lehder, and said that the stories about Pindling were the result of jealousy and ingratitude, a plot orchestrated by former U.S. Ambassador Carol Boyd Hallett and former Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who ‘wouldn’t have been anything without Pindling’.”
Wilson told the Americans, according to the cable, “no one has cooperated more” with the U.S. on drug interdiction than Pindling and said the seizure statistics bear him out on this assertion.
The diplomat wrote: “He expressed great scorn toward Hubert Ingraham for betraying Pindling then setting out to destroy his reputation after Ingraham became prime minister, which Wilson claimed destroyed Pindling’s health and led to his death.
“Wilson said that only when Pindling neared his death did Ingraham ‘repent’ and seek reconciliation with Pindling on the latter’s death bed.
“Wilson claimed that the impressive sendoff given to Pindling by Ingraham’s government when he died in 2000 was proof that Ingraham felt remorseful about what he had done to Pindling’s reputation.”
According to the cable, Wilson believed that the seeds of the PLP’s 2002 election victory were laid at Pindling’s funeral, as the state ceremony and effusive eulogies allowed the PLP to escape from its image of corruption.
In the cable, Wilson and Bishop Neil Ellis were described as “the two individuals outside of the Bahamian government considered to have the most influence on Prime Minister Perry Christie’s government.”
Jun 09, 2011
thenassauguardian
Tuesday, June 7, 2011
WikiLeaks: Perry Christie had deep concerns about the Petrocaribe agreement with Venezuela while he was prime minister...and his worries about certain moves then Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller was making, allegedly without Cabinet approval
Christie hit out at Miller
U.S. Cables reveal sharp Cabinet division over Petrocaribe in 2005
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through the whistleblower WikiLeaks reveal deep concerns Perry Christie had about the Petrocaribe agreement with Venezuela while he was prime minister, and his worries about certain moves then Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller was making, allegedly without Cabinet approval.
In fact, the cables reveal that the Christie Cabinet was “sharply divided” on Petrocaribe, a program under which countries purchase oil from Venezuela on conditions of preferential treatment.
One cable claims Christie made a direct negative comment relative to Miller as a minister.
“Some ministers, the PM continued, were brought into the Cabinet because of their qualifications; others, like Minister Miller, were included in an effort, at times unsuccessful, to keep an eye on what they’re doing,” said the cable, which was classified by then U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas John Rood.
The cable said that at a private meeting Rood had with Christie in July 2005, the then prime minister discussed several energy matters as well as his political future.
“The PM indicated that he has concerns about the Petrocaribe agreement signed on behalf of The Bahamas on June 29 by Trade and Industry Minister Leslie Miller,” the cable said.
“He stated that Minister Miller ‘got way out in front of the Cabinet’ on the issue and suggested that Cabinet’s eventual consideration of the Petrocaribe agreement would not be favorable.
“...The PM recalled that there were no disruptions to local fuel supplies during [the 2004] busy hurricane season.
“He doubted that government, given its poor record running hotels, airlines, and utilities, would be able to do as well as the international oil companies had done. The PM confided that the Trinidadian government had expressed to him its displeasure that Minister Miller signed the Petrocaribe agreement.”
In another cable penned about a month earlier, a U.S. Embassy official wrote that Christie had up to that point remained silent on the issue but “has shown no inclination to embark on the type of sweeping project that Minister Miller envisions”.
“On the other hand, Christie has also shown no inclination to silence a minister whose more outrageous comments regularly make for embarrassing headlines,” the June 2005 cable said.
“Minister Miller is an erratic figure within the Christie Cabinet and his frequent dramatic pronouncements on issues ranging from Petrocaribe, to hurricane relief funding, to liquefied natural gas projects are taken with a large grain of salt.
“His recent comments on high gasoline prices have focused less on Venezuela and more on decreasing the fixed markups that local gasoline importers and retailers are permitted to charge,” the cable said.
The American diplomat observed: “The Bahamas is sufficiently interested in possibly lowering its energy bill to keep sending Minister Miller to Petrocaribe meetings, but it has little in common politically with President [Hugo] Chavez.
“The one possible exception is Cuba, with which The Bahamas shares a pragmatic working relationship based on migrant issues and other people-to-people matters such as tourism and medical training and treatment.”
That same cable reveals that a high level government official had privately expressed concern that a “loose cannon” like Miller would be representing The Bahamas at an upcoming meeting between CARICOM and Chavez.
The Bahamian official suggested to the Americans that rather than request Miller to speak out, “it might be better for both countries (The Bahamas and the United States) if he stayed in the background and made no other substantive comment.”
MILLER’S RESPONSE
According to that cable, Miller called a U.S. Embassy official to discuss his trip.
Responding to the official’s urging that the best long-term solution to the energy situation would be a market-based solution within the context of a stable, democratic political system, Miller said that in petroleum, economics and politics are always mixed, the diplomat recorded.
“He called on the United States to itself construct new oil refineries in the U.S. to relieve supply shortages,” the cable said.
“Miller then went on to describe himself as a ‘nationalist’ saying that he understood why ‘dirt poor people in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Argentina’ were upset with oil companies.
“When [the embassy official] cautioned against concluding an agreement with an unstable government whose president had a penchant for tearing up and re-writing contracts, Miller responded by declaring that paying royalties from extracted natural resources of ‘one percent’ was ‘ridiculous and unfair’.”
The embassy official, according to the cable, told Miller that investment required stability, transparency, and predictability and that all of these were in short supply in Chavez’s Venezuela.
In another cable, the Americans wrote that Miller had returned from Venezuela “waving the Petrocaribe agreement and declaring cheap gas prices in our time.”
Miller was quoted as saying, “What we got from the Venezuelans is a dream come true. This is an extraordinary agreement, one that I have been behind for the past two and a half years.”
But the Americans wrote: “Reducing the price of gas in The Bahamas without reducing either wholesaler or dealer profit margins or the government tax has long been one of Leslie Miller’s signature theme projects.
“His past predictions of cheap gas in our time have gone unfulfilled while he has lurched from political gaffe to political gaffe. The local oil companies have long been suspicious of his maneuverings and have challenged his proposals both publicly and privately.
“His permanent secretary, the senior civil servant in his ministry, has long given up trying to explain to him the economics of the oil business in general and in The Bahamas in particular.”
The diplomat said the lack of consultation with the local oil companies suggested that any real changes to The Bahamas’ energy market “remains a distant dream”.
In the comment section of the cable, the American diplomat wrote: “Local reaction to Petrocaribe has been skeptical ever since its signing.
“Minister Miller’s actions have been criticized in terms of process (not having Cabinet’s authorization) and on substance (creating another inefficient government entity, relying on a single source of supply, and endorsing Venezuela’s political agenda).”
The cable said that while Miller was pushing Petrocaribe, Christie indicated to the ambassador that he intended to walk away from the agreement.
Miller has said he will not ever accept a cabinet appointment again. He has already been ratified by the PLP to run again in Blue Hills, a seat he lost to attorney Sidney Collie in 2007.
The July 2005 cable also revealed that Christie, at the time, was unsure as to whether he would be able to lead the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) into the 2007 general election, as he was still recovering from a mild stroke.
“The PM stated that he has already begun internal discussions on the timing of the next elections, which he must call no later than May 2007,” the cable said.
“He believed he would know by his party’s annual convention in November whether or not he is strong enough to lead the party into elections for another five-year term. If he is fit enough to run, the PM is confident that no one will be able to defeat him.”
Christie was strong enough to lead his party into the election. However, his party was defeated.
When the Free National Movement (FNM) came to office in 2007, it made it clear that The Bahamas government was not interested in the oil alliance with Venezuela.
In a May 2007 cable, a U.S. Embassy official wrote, “We do not expect any warming of relations between Caracas and Nassau.
“Indeed we expect the FNM government to be a stronger partner of the Untied States in addressing Venezuela-related issues.”
Not long after, Minister of State for Public Utilities Phenton Neymour confirmed that Petrocaribe was not, and would not be, a priority for the new Bahamian government.
An embassy official later wrote that Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham called the Petrocaribe accord a “stupid proposal”.
The Americans noted: “The Bahamas has a wholly privatized oil distribution system that is incompatible with Petrocaribe. Further, both FNM and PLP senior leadership are leery about being beholden to Venezuela.”
Jun 07, 2011
thenassauguardian
U.S. Cables reveal sharp Cabinet division over Petrocaribe in 2005
BY CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com
Cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through the whistleblower WikiLeaks reveal deep concerns Perry Christie had about the Petrocaribe agreement with Venezuela while he was prime minister, and his worries about certain moves then Minister of Trade and Industry Leslie Miller was making, allegedly without Cabinet approval.
In fact, the cables reveal that the Christie Cabinet was “sharply divided” on Petrocaribe, a program under which countries purchase oil from Venezuela on conditions of preferential treatment.
One cable claims Christie made a direct negative comment relative to Miller as a minister.
“Some ministers, the PM continued, were brought into the Cabinet because of their qualifications; others, like Minister Miller, were included in an effort, at times unsuccessful, to keep an eye on what they’re doing,” said the cable, which was classified by then U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas John Rood.
The cable said that at a private meeting Rood had with Christie in July 2005, the then prime minister discussed several energy matters as well as his political future.
“The PM indicated that he has concerns about the Petrocaribe agreement signed on behalf of The Bahamas on June 29 by Trade and Industry Minister Leslie Miller,” the cable said.
“He stated that Minister Miller ‘got way out in front of the Cabinet’ on the issue and suggested that Cabinet’s eventual consideration of the Petrocaribe agreement would not be favorable.
“...The PM recalled that there were no disruptions to local fuel supplies during [the 2004] busy hurricane season.
“He doubted that government, given its poor record running hotels, airlines, and utilities, would be able to do as well as the international oil companies had done. The PM confided that the Trinidadian government had expressed to him its displeasure that Minister Miller signed the Petrocaribe agreement.”
In another cable penned about a month earlier, a U.S. Embassy official wrote that Christie had up to that point remained silent on the issue but “has shown no inclination to embark on the type of sweeping project that Minister Miller envisions”.
“On the other hand, Christie has also shown no inclination to silence a minister whose more outrageous comments regularly make for embarrassing headlines,” the June 2005 cable said.
“Minister Miller is an erratic figure within the Christie Cabinet and his frequent dramatic pronouncements on issues ranging from Petrocaribe, to hurricane relief funding, to liquefied natural gas projects are taken with a large grain of salt.
“His recent comments on high gasoline prices have focused less on Venezuela and more on decreasing the fixed markups that local gasoline importers and retailers are permitted to charge,” the cable said.
The American diplomat observed: “The Bahamas is sufficiently interested in possibly lowering its energy bill to keep sending Minister Miller to Petrocaribe meetings, but it has little in common politically with President [Hugo] Chavez.
“The one possible exception is Cuba, with which The Bahamas shares a pragmatic working relationship based on migrant issues and other people-to-people matters such as tourism and medical training and treatment.”
That same cable reveals that a high level government official had privately expressed concern that a “loose cannon” like Miller would be representing The Bahamas at an upcoming meeting between CARICOM and Chavez.
The Bahamian official suggested to the Americans that rather than request Miller to speak out, “it might be better for both countries (The Bahamas and the United States) if he stayed in the background and made no other substantive comment.”
MILLER’S RESPONSE
According to that cable, Miller called a U.S. Embassy official to discuss his trip.
Responding to the official’s urging that the best long-term solution to the energy situation would be a market-based solution within the context of a stable, democratic political system, Miller said that in petroleum, economics and politics are always mixed, the diplomat recorded.
“He called on the United States to itself construct new oil refineries in the U.S. to relieve supply shortages,” the cable said.
“Miller then went on to describe himself as a ‘nationalist’ saying that he understood why ‘dirt poor people in Ecuador, Bolivia, and Argentina’ were upset with oil companies.
“When [the embassy official] cautioned against concluding an agreement with an unstable government whose president had a penchant for tearing up and re-writing contracts, Miller responded by declaring that paying royalties from extracted natural resources of ‘one percent’ was ‘ridiculous and unfair’.”
The embassy official, according to the cable, told Miller that investment required stability, transparency, and predictability and that all of these were in short supply in Chavez’s Venezuela.
In another cable, the Americans wrote that Miller had returned from Venezuela “waving the Petrocaribe agreement and declaring cheap gas prices in our time.”
Miller was quoted as saying, “What we got from the Venezuelans is a dream come true. This is an extraordinary agreement, one that I have been behind for the past two and a half years.”
But the Americans wrote: “Reducing the price of gas in The Bahamas without reducing either wholesaler or dealer profit margins or the government tax has long been one of Leslie Miller’s signature theme projects.
“His past predictions of cheap gas in our time have gone unfulfilled while he has lurched from political gaffe to political gaffe. The local oil companies have long been suspicious of his maneuverings and have challenged his proposals both publicly and privately.
“His permanent secretary, the senior civil servant in his ministry, has long given up trying to explain to him the economics of the oil business in general and in The Bahamas in particular.”
The diplomat said the lack of consultation with the local oil companies suggested that any real changes to The Bahamas’ energy market “remains a distant dream”.
In the comment section of the cable, the American diplomat wrote: “Local reaction to Petrocaribe has been skeptical ever since its signing.
“Minister Miller’s actions have been criticized in terms of process (not having Cabinet’s authorization) and on substance (creating another inefficient government entity, relying on a single source of supply, and endorsing Venezuela’s political agenda).”
The cable said that while Miller was pushing Petrocaribe, Christie indicated to the ambassador that he intended to walk away from the agreement.
Miller has said he will not ever accept a cabinet appointment again. He has already been ratified by the PLP to run again in Blue Hills, a seat he lost to attorney Sidney Collie in 2007.
The July 2005 cable also revealed that Christie, at the time, was unsure as to whether he would be able to lead the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) into the 2007 general election, as he was still recovering from a mild stroke.
“The PM stated that he has already begun internal discussions on the timing of the next elections, which he must call no later than May 2007,” the cable said.
“He believed he would know by his party’s annual convention in November whether or not he is strong enough to lead the party into elections for another five-year term. If he is fit enough to run, the PM is confident that no one will be able to defeat him.”
Christie was strong enough to lead his party into the election. However, his party was defeated.
When the Free National Movement (FNM) came to office in 2007, it made it clear that The Bahamas government was not interested in the oil alliance with Venezuela.
In a May 2007 cable, a U.S. Embassy official wrote, “We do not expect any warming of relations between Caracas and Nassau.
“Indeed we expect the FNM government to be a stronger partner of the Untied States in addressing Venezuela-related issues.”
Not long after, Minister of State for Public Utilities Phenton Neymour confirmed that Petrocaribe was not, and would not be, a priority for the new Bahamian government.
An embassy official later wrote that Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham called the Petrocaribe accord a “stupid proposal”.
The Americans noted: “The Bahamas has a wholly privatized oil distribution system that is incompatible with Petrocaribe. Further, both FNM and PLP senior leadership are leery about being beholden to Venezuela.”
Jun 07, 2011
thenassauguardian
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)