DOES BARBADOS BENEFIT FROM GOING REPUBLIC?
Barbados Prime Minister: Mia Mottley
So Barbados has taken the plunge to become a republic. What does that really mean? Has the country stopped being a democracy? Is there any real difference between a democracy and a republic? These and similar questions have been making the rounds, leaving some people in confusion about the terms. Let us explore the meanings for a while.
The term republic refers to a democratic state which does not have a monarch or royalty as the head. Barbadians still have to vote to choose their government representatives, but Queen Elizabeth is no longer the head of state. They have chosen Barbadian Dame Sandra Mason as president and she replaces the queen as head of the Barbadian state.
Under the previous arrangement Barbados was an independent democracy which recognized Queen Elizabeth or her delegated representative as head of state. The country took responsibility for all its affairs, but recognized Britain as responsible for its defense in case of war. Barbados still retains its places in CARICOM and the Commonwealth, it is still a democracy, and the citizens still have to vote every five years to choose the government they believe will work in their best interests, because the country still retains its democratic type of government.
Prime Minister Mia Motley explained that Barbadians wanted to get rid of their colonial past, and forge their own national identity, so they opted to break ties with the British monarch, the defacto and dejure head of state for almost 400 years. However, Ms. Motley was quick to point out that she wanted to retain good relations with Britain, and leverage every trade and other benefit available. To solidify her intentions, she gave her special guest Prince Charles, a Freedom Of Barbados Award. The prince had been up to that very day on November 30, 2021 the heir apparent king of Barbados.
So how does Barbados really benefit from this new move? Will there be any tangible or material improvement to the status quo? Many Barbadians welcome the new status, but some express the belief that nothing meaningful will result to make life easier for them.
One caller to a radio show expressed the fear that severing these ties with Britain will hinder any possible benefits that the people of Barbados might expect from the former motherland. She wanted to know if such a move would make it easier or harder for the payment of any expected reparations on account of the slave trade. There is the fear in some circles that the new status will make it even harder for Britain to agree to pay reparations as a country, although some individuals and families have been voicing acknowledgement that some form of payment is definitely owed to the descendants of slaves. Of course, not everyone agrees with this assessment.
The fact that a Barbadian is now the head of state will bring some psychological advancement to some Barbadians, especially the younger generations, but because there have been and continue to have so many Barbadians taking pride in themselves as citizens of Little England, that anticipated change will be a long time coming. Some changes have been made on paper, and the president is there in the flesh, but as far as the thinking of many Barbadians projects, the concept of Little England will be a hard nut to crack. This kind of thinking has been embedded in the psyche of many Barbadians for centuries, and because of that, Barbados might well be the Commonwealth country which finds it hardest to psychologically cut ties with Britain.
This line of reasoning could linger for a while because some Barbadians believe that the transition was a rushed job, and that the citizens were not adequately prepared to receive and buy into that move. In other words, some believe that the change was a matter of political expediency with inadequate sensitizing of the population, although talks of going republic have been on the cards for a very long time.
Another area of concern for some Barbadians is the closeness of the ties between the Motley administration and Beijing. Some believe that the government has become too entwined with the Chinese government, especially now that international concern is mounting about the human rights abuses by the Chinese government.
Some Barbadians are also looking at the performance of China in several other countries, and worry that the fate of Jamaica and several African countries might be replicated in Barbados.
In other words, there is the suspicion that China might offer the Motley administration a sweetheart deal which will be very difficult to resist, but which could end up in China owning half of Barbados because of the government’s inability to repay money received without doing due diligence.
Chinese culture was very visible during the celebrations in Bridgetown, and one concerned Barbadian has pointedly asked if China is to become a replacement for England.
Please, do not laugh at that question. It is not far-fetched to imagine that the government in communist China is already crafting a programme to get itself so deeply involved in Barbadians affairs that nobody will be able to reverse the situation. It is no secret that the Chinese government has already envisioned itself becoming the most dominant force on earth within the next decade or so, and the Caribbean cannot be left out of the formulation that gets them there.
The relations between China and the rest of Asia have not been very solid of late and the need to spread its influence to every corner of the globe has not been lost to Beijing. There have also been rumbles of disillusionment on the African continent, and America is beginning to fear the real intentions of the dragon. Businessmen and social institutions are becoming increasingly wary of the communist agenda, and the favour which China had been able to garner in pre-pandemic days is slowly waning.
Now let us turn our focus on St. Lucia, as far as the republic agenda is concerned. Should St. Lucia follow Barbados? Some St. Lucians have already been calling for such a move, but caution is being advised here. It might be politically expedient for a political leader to make such a move, but will the benefits redound to the ordinary man?
Who will truly benefit from that ‘transformation’?
Some people see going republic as more cosmetic than a fundamental change, and believe that this will simply enlarge the bureaucracy and the cost to the tax payer. With St. Lucia as part of the very successful OECS grouping, some advise that any thought of going republic should be pursued by the OECS as a whole, although Dominica has already taken the plunge.
The real troubling spot here is, will the individual Prime Ministers agree to work with one President of the OECS? If the president is simply an administrative figure than anything else, that might be easy to do, although Mr. Ego could be the major stumbling block. If we have to get individual presidents for all the OECS countries that would certainly lead to redundancies and laws which could end up confusing the entire system.
So in conclusion, St. Lucia could consider such a move, but the greater all round benefit would only come if the change is made in collaboration with the other sister members of the OECS sub-grouping.
