Caribbean & Central America - May 2011 (ISSN 1741-4458)

The coming election in Guyana and the recent change of government in Trinidad & Tobago have both had the effect of once again bringing racial politics to the fore.

Guyana and Trinidad & Tobago are the two countries in the Caribbean where the Indian-origin population more or less matches that of African origin.  In Guyana, according to the 2002 census the proportions are: Indian 43.5%, African 30.2%, mixed 16.7%, Amerindian 9.1%, other 0.5%.  In Trinidad & Tobago, according to the 2000 census, the proportions are: Indian 40%, African 37.5%, mixed 20.5%, other 1.2%, unspecified 0.8%.

The political manifestation of this racial divide began in 1955 when Forbes Burnham split from the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) led by Cheddi Jagan.  After the split, the Afro-Guyanese supported Burnham’s People’s National Congress (PNC), while the Indo-Guyanese overwhelmingly stayed with Jagan and the PPP.

In Trinidad, the People’s National Movement (PNM) founded by independence leader Eric Williams has traditionally captured the bulk of the Afro-Trinidadian vote, while the United National Congress (UNC) founded by Basdeo Panday has been the traditional repository for Indo-Trinidadian votes.

The electoral cycle in Guyana, where elections are due by the end of the year, has seen a resurgence in racial politicking, with President Bharrat Jagdeo starting the downward spiral in remarks made to PPP-Civic(PPPC) supporters on 13 March.  Following the choice by PNC-Reform (PNCR) of David Granger as its new leader, Jagdeo warned that Granger had “blood on his hands”.

According to Jagdeo, Granger had been active in what he termed “the era of oppression”.  He said: “The people in Berbice, just here, the people who were killed protecting the ballot boxes, protecting democracy, were killed in full knowledge of people like Granger and others who controlled the political directions of the country at the time”.

This tirade caught the attention of Guyana’s Ethic Relations Commission (ERC), which has described his remarks as dangerous and setting an unnecessary precedent.  But the precedent had been set, and the PPPC’s presidential candidate, Donald Ramotar, followed up Jagdeo’s remarks by accusing the PNCR of having “a very close link [with] the criminal gangs”.
Ramotar said that the PNCR is trying to ramp up the crime wave in an attempt to derail the PPPC. He also criticised a call from Tacuma Oganseye, a leading member of the African Cultural and Development Association (ACDA), for Afro-Guyanese to take to the streets to force the PPPC to share power should it win the elections.

ACDA subsequently distanced itself from Oganseye’s remarks, but a 4 May commentary by the Guyanese academic David Hinds showed how deep the divisions are.  Hinds wrote: “Oganseye’s critics conveniently ignore the gist of his message: Guyana cannot be a civil society if half its population is treated as political aliens.”

Warming to his theme, and illustrating beyond doubt the depth of the malaise, Hinds wrote: “Three things have become clearer in the last few months.  First, the East Indian cabal that controls the PPP is committed to the notion that never again will the representatives of African Guyanese get their hands on political power.  Second, the African Guyanese people are being punished by this cabal for the excesses of the PNC when it governed.  The message is clear: if African Guyanese want to survive in Guyana they must cooperate with and vote for the PPP.  Third, the PPP cabal is confident that they have bought over enough African Guyanese from villages, towns, media, and unions who are willing to engage in race-trading their fellow Africans.”

Race in Trinidad
In Trinidad & Tobago it is not a forthcoming election that has stirred up racial politics but the general election in May 2010 that brought the Indian-aligned UNC to power under Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar at the expense of the African-oriented PNM.

The latest row was kicked off in late March when the chairman of the Police Service Commission (PSC), Nizam Mohammed complained: “Out of the 10 Assistant Commissioners of Police, you don’t have a single one of Indian origin.  Out of three Deputy Commissioners, none of Indian origin.  Well we have one Commissioner of Police.  Senior Superintendant: you have 15 all of African origin, none of Indian origin.”  Mohammed then said: “I intend to address this with the help of the Parliament of Trinidad & Tobago.  We need protection.”

Mohammed was quickly slapped down (and subsequently dismissed) by the government, which “categorically condemned” his statement.  The government, although dominated by the UNC, comprises a five-party People’ Party (PP) coalition and does not want to be seen siding with Indian chauvinism.

The five leaders of the coalition met on 20 April to discuss the issue.  The meeting included Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar; Makandal Daaga, leader of the National Joint Action Committee (NJAC); Congress of the People leader Winston Dookeran; Movement for Social Justice chairman David Abdullah; and Tobago Opposition for the People leader Ashworth Jack. After the meeting, Daaga, who had been a leader of the Black Power movement in 1970, warned:  “The society has become concerned about race and race divisions and not about racial unity.  We are playing with trouble if this continues.”

Nevertheless, when the issue was raised in parliament – in a debate on the same day – the UNC appeared to have no compunction in using its chairman Jack Warner, who is of African origins – to attack the anti-Indian bias of the PNM.  Warner accused the PNM of having no Indian MPs and of favouring Africans in appointments to government boards and corporations when it was in power.

Warner argued that under the PNM there were 508 (79%) non-Indian board appointments and 138 (21%) Indian appointments.  In contrast, under the PP government the split was 47% non-Indian and 53% Indian.  Nor did Warner confine himself to criticism of the present PNM.  He highlighted that between 1956 and 1986 the PNM did not have a single Hindu in its cabinet.  Between 1956-57, of the 13 people in the Cabinet, two were of Indian origin (16%).  From 1957-58 the proportion was 14%.  It was 15% between 1958-59 and 20% from 1959-61, but it then dropped down to just 11% from 1961-66.

Warner contrasted this record with the UNC government from 1997-2000 in which Indians made up 58%, although it was 63% in the 1995-97 government.  Under the present PP government, of 26 cabinet ministers, 14 are Indians (53%) and 12 African (47%).

Warner also offered some support to Nizam Mohammed, pointing out that opposition leader Keith Rowley, as Minister of Planning in 2003, had approved a programme that targeted Afro-Trinidadians.  Warner asked: “If it was good for him then, how is it bad for Nizam now?”