Showing posts with label United States Embassy cables Bahamas. Show all posts
Showing posts with label United States Embassy cables Bahamas. Show all posts

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

WikiLeaks: Perry Christie, the United States Embassy in Nassau diplomatic cables on The Bahamas and the Leadership issue

Christie, the Cables and the Leadership issue


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


A journey through the files in the archives of The Nassau Guardian on Perry Christie confronts the investigator with the privileged life of a man who has done much, seen much and been a key part of the history of the modern Bahamas.

He was a favorite of Sir Lynden Pindling; he was a senator, member of Parliament, Cabinet minister and prime minister; he married one of the more beautiful women ever produced by these islands.

Despite all this, Christie has a problem – a big problem. Some in his party, his good friend Hubert Ingraham and a significant part of the electorate find him to be a leader who has great difficulty steering an organized and disciplined ship.

The release of the leaked diplomatic cables from the United States Embassy in Nassau by WikiLeaks revealed that diplomats from the richest and most powerful nation in the world shared the same view.

In a tight election, such criticism does not help. And that criticism was not the Americans parroting Free National Movement (FNM) propaganda. It was their view based primarily on their engagement with Christie and his government from 2002 to 2007.

For powerful politicians, being told the truth by those close to you is rare. Everybody wants something from ‘the chief’. So, they tell him what he needs to hear to keep him happy in order to get what they want.

What the Americans said about Christie is what his friend Hubert Ingraham says about him publicly and privately. What the Americans said about Christie is also what many of his supporters and party officers say about him in secret during conversations with journalists.

With such a range of people, PLPs and FNMs, thinking that the labels ‘indecisive’, ‘late’, and ‘disorganized’ truly describe Christie, he needs to pause and consider why they all have come to this view.

Many of the scandals and gaffes the PLP has endured during its last term in office, and during this term in opposition, result from the lack of fear and respect of Christie and his opting not to level hard punishment swiftly against some of those he leads.

Despite the crime problem in the country, despite the down economy, the PLP and Christie will only win the next general election if Bahamians think he has changed.

Christie, simply put, must search within himself and be stronger, more organized, more focused and more aggressive than he has been since he assumed leadership of the PLP in 1997 if he seriously wants to be PM one more time.

If the Valley Boy with the beautiful wife, the beautiful home and the beautiful life continues to think the criticisms of him are just believed by a few, that denial will allow Ingraham to steal one more contest from him, forever relegating Christie in the history books to being the one-term PM who could never come back.

When diplomats from our closest ally, after engaging with you for years at the highest levels, speak of your leadership style with ridicule and condescension, shouldn't that be a wakeup call for change?

The American view of Christie in the cables

Sitting and talking once to a PLP who knows Christie well, the question was posed to him, “Why does Christie wait so long to resolve some situations, allowing small problems to escalate into crises?”

The PLP sighed and replied, “Christie is intelligent and he is usually aware of the scope of an issue. However, he has a problem. He likes to be liked, does not like to be disliked and he too often wants to be all things to all people.”

Christie's indecisiveness, or hesitance to make quick tough decisions as the PLP described it, is not due to lack of capacity. That supporter thought the nice guy simply had an aversion to coming to conclusions that disappointed or angered others.

Throughout the diplomatic cables on The Bahamas, the Americans touch on this issue of leadership and decisiveness. That PLP member was kind in his analysis of Christie. The Americans set feelings aside in their internal correspondence.

“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,” said a cable in April 2007.

The Americans acknowledged that Christie was capable. That issue was not in question.
In a February 2004 cable on Christie’s role in negotiations on Haiti the Americans said that while his decision-making style may be "protracted and indecisive" Christie was also an "impressive, dynamic, charismatic and ebullient presence."

Ingraham, Christie’s friend and former law partner, regularly pokes at this issue of decisiveness when he talks about the PLP leader publicly, and apparently privately too.

In the recent budget debate, while chiding Christie for being ‘late again’ for not delivering his party’s recommendations for amendments to the country’s election laws, Ingraham told Christie to his face that he “is not” a leader.

In a 2003 conversation with U.S. diplomats, according to a cable, Ingraham fleshed out his thoughts on Christie’s leadership style.

“He (Ingraham) said that he believes Christie is a good man and well intentioned, but criticized his leadership style,” said the cable.

“Ingraham said, ‘Perry has always been indecisive, and will always be indecisive. It's just the way he is. He can't change.’ He also alleged that Christie had no real vision other than a general desire to improve social programs, and nothing he really wanted to accomplish.”

In an interview with The Nassau Guardian earlier this month, Christie defended his legacy.

He said he was disappointed as a public official that U.S. Embassy officials seem to have taken on FNM propaganda about him.

“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.

Christie has been officially in charge of the PLP, in and out of government, for about 14 years. No one has suggested that he is not in charge of the organization. What he must prove is that he can use that authority to take charge of the host of characters in his party who have a wide range of competing interests.

A divided house shall not stand

The PLP and the FNM have been closely divided since the 2007 general election. The FNM won that contest by fewer than 4,000 votes after nearly 139,000 votes were cast.

In the February 2010 Elizabeth by-election, FNM candidate Dr. Duane Sands was ahead by two votes after counting concluded. PLP candidate Ryan Pinder won the seat after the Election Court allowed five votes in his favor.

A reasonable examination of the 41 constituency seats in the country could break down the current political landscape as follows based on the current constituency boundaries: there are nine safe PLP seats; eight safe FNM seats; five seats that lean FNM; five seats that lean PLP and 14 swing seats.

It is likely that significant negative perception of Christie, as revealed by the study done by the Greenberg group for the PLP after it lost in 2007, remains a major factor behind the PLP being unable to break clearly away from the FNM and win a landslide majority during these difficult times for the country. A fourth murder record in five years will be set this year and the country is not clearly and definitively out of the recession that started after the financial crisis of 2008.

In private conversations, some PLPs feel trapped. They know this is an election they should win, but perceptions of Christie by the electorate are problematic. And because the party is set up to allow leaders 'god-like' power, Christie cannot be moved.

So these PLPs, in many instances, publicly praise Christie and savage him in private conversations. In fact, some speak worse of Christie that they do of Ingraham.

They do this because they do not believe in their leader. They merely say they do to advance their own desire to return to power under the banner of the PLP. The public senses this duplicity. It is yet another barrier to PLP success.

Christie should not read this commentary as an attack on him. He should read it as the truth those close to him may not be willing to present to him.

In the twilight of his career, Christie will be 68 in August, the PLP leader has to address this confidence issue surrounding his leadership.

Through action, and not just talk, he must demonstrate to his party and country that he can be a strong leader. He can do so by presenting a firm bold vision via his party's manifesto as to where he will lead the country if re-elected; he can do so by expelling the next PLP who embarrasses the party through gross misconduct; he can do so by not running candidates who travel around the country talking about him in private, and in semi-public venues, in derogatory terms.

In the 2007 general election, Ingraham said he was a grandfather and that he had changed from his overly aggressive, confrontational and sometimes hostile ways. He knew then, as he knows now, that Bahamians for the most part do not like those parts of his personality. Christie has his weaknesses too. For him it is critical to reform.

Being satisfied with your legacy

After being fired from Sir Lynden Pindling’s Cabinet in 1984 along with Ingraham, Christie was reappointed a minister in Sir Lynden's last government in 1990. At a rally in April that year, Christie said, “…when you support the person who will be elected, you will also be supporting his judgement.”

He was right. And the issues of leadership and judgement will be the things Bahamians evaluate when they examine Christie and Ingraham one last time (it is unlikely that Branville McCartney will make much of an impact his first time out as a leader). The PLP would like to run away from these issues, but it cannot.

For Christie the stakes are high. Going into the general election at 68, he will likely never have another chance to be PM again if he loses this race. He would then be confronted with never being able to change a legacy he thinks is incomplete.

Christie can win. He is liked by many people. But he must take on what is likely issue number one for the PLP: his leadership style.

The issue cannot be ignored or shuffled around. Bahamians want to know if the Valley Boy can be a different man.

Jun 20, 2011

thenassauguardian

Friday, June 17, 2011

WikiLeaks United States Embassy cables: Embassy officials viewed the cozy relationship between Foreign Affairs Minister Brent Symonette and then Charge d'affaires Brent Hardt as a major plus in convincing The Bahamas to be more supportive of U.S. positions on the world stage

Cables reveal DPM's close U.S. ties


CANDIA DAMES
NG News Editor
thenassauguardian
candia@nasguard.com


United States Embassy officials viewed the cozy relationship between Foreign Affairs Minister Brent Symonette and then Charge d'affaires Brent Hardt as a major plus in convincing The Bahamas to be more supportive of U.S. positions on the world stage, according to cables obtained by The Nassau Guardian through WikiLeaks.

One of the cables described Symonette as “a reluctant foreign minister”.

Symonette was also described as “a frank and open interlocutor” for the embassy and “a good friend”.

“In recent years, he has been a valuable contact on political and economic issues,” said the 2007 cable.

“He and the charge (Brent Hardt) — whose residence is next door to Symonette’s — enjoy a close personal relationship reinforced by family friendships.”

The cable added, “The charge enjoys direct access to Symonette, and expects that the new professional relationship will benefit from the outstanding communication they enjoy.

“The charge has found Symonette to be direct, pragmatic, and generally pro-U.S., though a staunch defender of Bahamian national interests.”

The cable said Free National Movement (FNM) insiders had predicted that former Bahamian Ambassador to the U.S. Joshua Sears would be named foreign minister.

“Asked last summer by the charge about his potential portfolios in an FNM government, Symonette dismissed the idea of serving as foreign minister, saying he could not see himself for hours in ‘endless, unproductive meetings with CARICOM officials,” said the 2007 cable.

“However, with Sears losing his race for Parliament, and with Symonette’s experience as opposition spokesperson on foreign affairs, he and the prime minister apparently had a change of heart.”

The cable said Symonette’s appointment as foreign minister is “a best-case scenario” for the United States.

“[Prime Minister Hubert] Ingraham’s decision to tap his deputy prime minister, a known friend of the U.S., as minister of foreign affairs reflects Ingraham’s understanding of the importance of the U.S. relationship and Ingraham’s commitment to making it work for both sides,” the cable said.

“It may also have reflected a recognition that Symonette’s extensive web of local business activities could have created conflicts of interest with other portfolios, as was the case with the airport contract in his last administration.

“Symonette also had little interest in positions such as minister of works, repairing roads and installing stoplights.

“Symonette’s pragmatism, openness to the U.S. and our views, and direct channels of communication with Post promise a stronger, more productive relationship than under the often brooding, sensitive, and aloof Fred Mitchell.”

The embassy official wrote that Symonette will also strongly support the Unites States’ core counter-drug and migrant interdiction programs.

“His Bahamian nationalist focus may lead to a more pragmatic direction in foreign affairs that abandons former Minister Mitchell’s penchant for world travel, building distant ties with India and China, and activism in the Non-Aligned Movement.

“Given his avowed skepticism of the value of CARICOM, we expect Symonette will keep Bahamian engagement with its neighbors to the minimum necessary for good relations.

“With Bahamian national issues dominating his focus, regional and big picture international issues will likely fade as priorities. As a result, we expect The Bahamas’ flirtation with Cuba to cool, potentially reducing Bahamian presence in Cuba from an embassy to a consulate.

“We also hope that Symonette’s pragmatic orientation will lead to greater receptiveness to concluding a Proliferation Security Initiative Agreement — which had languished over the past year with the indecisive PLP government.”

UBP LEGACY

The embassy official noted that Symonette is a successful businessman and a former attorney general and minister of tourism in previous FNM governments.

“Symonette, whose father was the last pre-Independence premier of The Bahamas, is one of a handful of white Bahamians who have remained engaged in post-Independence Bahamian politics,” the cable said.

Symonette was described as a “no-nonsense leader with limited tolerance for inefficiency.”

“We can expect him to be a strong partner for the U.S., who will be more decisive and more inclined to support U.S. positions than his predecessor,” the cable said.

“As he is new to international diplomacy, we have an opportunity to shape his perceptions early on priority U.S. concerns such as a Proliferation Security Agreement and U.N. human rights issues.”

The embassy official wrote that the appointment of Symonette as DPM and The Bahamas’ representative to foreign governments was seen in part as Ingraham’s response to the Progressive Liberal Party’s effort to play the race card during the campaign against Symonette and the FNM, whose roots go back to the white-dominated United Bahamian Party (UBP) of the pre-Independence Bahamas.

“Brent Symonette’s UBP heritage has been a political liability, and became a focus of PLP campaigning leading up to the elections in the overwhelmingly black Bahamas,” the cable said.

“While safe in his wealthy eastern constituency, some public perceptions of Symonette have inescapably been tied to issues of race and [his father’s] minority rule legacy.

“The PLP went out of (its) way to exploit his father’s past — with mixed successs.

“The FNM victory in the face of PLP charges that Ingraham intended to turn power over to Symonette, who would then ‘turn back’ to the era of racial discrimination, suggests a growing political maturity among a majority of Bahamian voters for whom such racial politics had limited traction.”

The cable noted that Symonette was defiant of PLP campaign efforts to marginalize him because of his race and legacy.

“In fact, Symonette derives extra motivation from his desire to ensure that all Bahamians, black and white alike, can participate in the political life of The Bahamas,” the official wrote.

“His willingness to face the barrage of PLP attacks in a political campaign and to stand up for his father despite a difficult legacy are telling of a highly motivated and strong-minded politician.”

The official wrote that Symonette was voted deputy leader reportedly to help balance the fiery Ingraham with his calm, thoughtful demeanor in the 2007 general election.

“Symonette’s deep ties with the Bahamian business community and access to local investors contributed to his appeal to the party faithful,” the cable said.

“...Among the wealthiest individuals in Bahamian politics, Symonette reported $56 million in net worth in required pre-election disclosures.

“However, those disclosures reportedly do not include interests held in trust or partnership, and some estimate Symonette’s wealth to exceed $250 million.

“Symonette nevertheless lives modestly and supports many causes without fanfare and behind-the-scenes.”

Jun 16, 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

Wednesday, June 8, 2011

Will the United States Embassy cables being published by The Nassau Guardian via WikiLeaks have an impact on how Bahamians vote in the upcoming general election?

WikiLeaks: An election issue?

thenassauguardian editorial


Within a year, Bahamians will again be voting for a government. The third non-consecutive term of the Free National Movement (FNM) in office is coming to an end. The general election campaign hasn’t officially started yet, but both the FNM and the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP) have hosted sporadic rallies.

The economy, the crime problem and leadership are likely major issues to be discussed along the way. Reading some of the Bahamian blogs and websites, some seem to also wonder if the United States Embassy cables being published by The Nassau Guardian via WikiLeaks will have an impact on how Bahamians vote.

They should, as Bahamians should evaluate as much information as possible before making a decision on the party they will vote for. The times are serious. Irrational voting based on old family ties or tradition will not help advance the country from where it is to where we all want it to be.

The cables present a behind the scenes view of diplomacy in this country and also the opinions of our closest and most powerful friend, the United States. More specifically, they provide insight into how our leaders are perceived by the U.S. The analysis is raw and candid, as it was not meant for public consumption.

The Americans have interacted closely with our political leaders and ruling class for years. It is their job to get to know Bahamian power brokers as demonstrated by their interviews and conversations with FNM leader Hubert Ingraham and PLP leader Perry Christie. It is also their job to get to know the want to be power brokers, such as Cassius Stuart who had too much to say to an American official during the Elizabeth by-election.

The Americans have also worked closely with both parties and both prime ministers – Christie and Ingraham – during their terms in office. At times, as will be revealed in upcoming cables, the embassy officials and our leaders worked very closely together on issues of local and international significance.

Thus far, based on the cables published, Ingraham has come across as over-confident, competent and a little arrogant. Christie has come across as less than organized, a nice guy and indecisive. The Americans have perceived character traits in the men that Bahamians have too.

What the cables can offer to voters is the impression of a critic, the U.S., who has a major interest in The Bahamas. For that critic The Bahamas is important, as it is one of three countries bordering the U.S. Its friendship and partnership are very important to America, as Bahamian intransigence would lead to a massive spike in the amount of drugs and illegal migrants flowing into that country.

The cables present serious analysis from a serious partner. They are not gossip. They are meant to help the U.S. State Department set policy towards this country.

With The Bahamas still not clearly out of recession, a recession that began at the end of 2008, and a fourth homicide record in five years a near certainty, the cables will likely not be the main issue at the general election. However, they will make for some good reading over the next few months.

At the end of this process we suggest that our readers take another read of the volumes of material written by the Americans on the issues analyzed between 2003 and 2010.

Then, if there is a particular issue that piques your curiosity, we suggest questions should be asked to canvassing politicians during the campaign.

Jun 07, 2011

thenassauguardian editorial