JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Sunday, July 27, 2025

Relations between T&T, US

by

1892 days ago
20200522

We are deeply con­cerned that the cur­rent con­tro­ver­sies bear­ing up­on re­la­tions be­tween T&To and the Unit­ed States of Amer­i­ca (USA) have the po­ten­tial grave­ly to dam­age our coun­try.

We re­spect­ful­ly, but firm­ly, be­lieve that there are sev­er­al con­sid­er­a­tions, which re­quire sober as­sess­ment, way above the in­ces­sant noise of par­ti­san par­ty pol­i­tics and the undiplo­mat­ic lan­guage of the Min­is­ter of Na­tion­al Se­cu­ri­ty, Stu­art Young MP.

Many of us say we are a sov­er­eign coun­try and can take our own de­ci­sions. That is cor­rect. But the USA too is a sov­er­eign coun­try, and can take its own de­ci­sions. It has been ap­ply­ing sanc­tions to Venezuela, and has made it clear that it will al­so ap­ply sanc­tions to those coun­tries, all equal­ly sov­er­eign, which vi­o­late its Venezuela sanc­tions. Giv­en the po­lit­i­cal cli­mate in Wash­ing­ton, that is a pol­i­cy po­si­tion which can­not be ig­nored.

Is T&T pre­pared to face sanc­tions, es­pe­cial­ly at this time of eco­nom­ic dif­fi­cul­ty?

Can we, in turn, im­pose sanc­tions on the USA, as, for ex­am­ple, Chi­na can? But if re­la­tions be­tween T&T and the USA are as pos­i­tive and strong as gov­ern­ment spokesper­sons (Min­is­ter Young among them) say they are, should there not be qui­et dis­cus­sions be­tween the two par­ties?

We strong­ly rec­om­mend that such dis­cus­sions be ini­ti­at­ed with a view to reach­ing mu­tu­al­ly sat­is­fac­to­ry so­lu­tions, which re­spect our sov­er­eign­ty and our for­eign pol­i­cy po­si­tions.

On a with­out prej­u­dice ba­sis, the rel­e­vance and ap­pli­ca­tion of the Rio Treaty to T&T, about which a num­ber of ex­perts have reser­va­tions, should fig­ure promi­nent­ly in such dis­cus­sions.

In or­der to fa­cil­i­tate the pro­posed dis­cus­sions, we fur­ther rec­om­mend an im­me­di­ate ces­sa­tion of the mega­phone diplo­ma­cy that seems now to be in vogue.

We have tak­en note of the calls for the res­ig­na­tion or dis­missal of Min­is­ter Young and we are in­deed dis­turbed by the re­cent con­tro­ver­sies in which he has placed him­self. None of this is good for T&T.

Hav­ing ex­am­ined the state­ments of Min­is­ter Young be­fore and af­ter the US Am­bas­sador’s state­ment of Tues­day last, we can­not avoid this com­ment: While Min­is­ter Young is pedan­ti­cal­ly in­sist­ing that the Am­bas­sador did not use the word “breach”, if the Am­bas­sador spoke of the “con­sis­ten­cy” of the Venezue­lan Vice-Pres­i­dent’s vis­it with T&T’s oblig­a­tions un­der the Rio Treaty, what oth­er than a breach could he pos­si­bly have meant?

Where was the mis­con­struc­tion?


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored