Bahamians in general and Grand Bahamians in particular have more than ample reasons to be concerned about the growing possibility that the United States Government may decide to close its pre-clearance customs operations at Freeport International Airport.
If recent public statements attributed to U.S. Ambassador to The Bahamas John Rood are correct, that likelihood has gone beyond the possibility stage and could very well become a reality as early as next year.
Ambassador Rood, in an article published in The Tribune earlier this week, indicated that the fate of the U.S. pre-clearance facilities in Freeport could depend on the outcome of a meeting next week between U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and foreign ministers from the Caribbean Community, including Bahamas Foreign Minister Fred Mitchell.
“I think that will be an issue that really we’ll know a lot more about when the U.S. Secretary and the Minister have had a chance to discuss it,” Ambassador Rood told The Tribune’s reporter, adding that the embassy has “been briefing the secretary and answering numerous follow-up questions relating to the pre-clearance facility, and I think that is being looked at.”
The ambassador raised two specific issues that could be factors in his government’s decision, one being security concerns and the other, the high cost of rental accommodations for U.S. Customs officials living in Grand Bahama, who in some cases have to pay as much as $5,000 a month for the rental of a home. And although security at Freeport airport has improved, the Ambassador was quoted as saying that just by the nature of it being in another country “it is not as secure as being in our own country.” He also cited the reduced number of flights into Freeport over the past three years.
Reading between the lines, one could easily have reached the conclusion that Ambassador Rood was providing the cushion to soften the blow when the decision to close the Freeport facility is actually made.
Ambassador Rood has been an excellent representative of his country here in The Bahamas, and because he is the quintessential diplomat, it would have been uncharacteristic of him to suggest that another reason why the United States may indeed decide to shut down the Freeport pre-clearance facility is to send a strong message to the current Government of The Bahamas that it is not at all pleased with its foreign policy with regard to communist Cuba.
The participation of The Bahamas’ delegation, headed by Foreign Affairs Minister Fred Mitchell, in the recent Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) Summit held in Cuba ﾖ in my view ﾖ did not win any points for The Bahamas with political leaders in The United States. It would not surprise me one bit if Secretary of State Rice makes this point as diplomatically as she possibly can to Mitchell during next week’s meeting.
Indeed, Rice is one of the most strident critics of Cuba’s oppressive policies in the administration of President George Bush. According to information gleaned from the Internet, she has chaired the Commission for Assistance to a Free Cuba, which was formed in 2003 to “explore ways the U.S. can help hasten and ease a democratic transition in Cuba.” Moreover, Rice was quoted as saying that the message the commission wishes to send is that “after 46 years of cruel dictatorship, now is the time for change in Cuba.”
Certainly, Foreign Minister Mitchell has made it abundantly clear by his actions that he does not share Rice’s point of view in this regard. In fact, the importance that Mitchell has placed on establishing stronger ties with Cuba and The Bahamas’ participation in the recent NAM Summit underscores this opinion.
Frankly, one question that Mitchell or possibly the Prime Minister himself needs to provide an answer for is this: Exactly what benefits do The Bahamas derive from being a member of NAM?
According to information provided on the Internet, NAM is an international organization of over 100 states which consider themselves not formally aligned with or against any major power bloc. The purpose of the organization, as stated in the Havana Declaration of 1979, is to ensure “the national independence, sovereignty, territorial integrity and security of non-aligned countries in their struggle against imperialism, colonialism, neo-colonialism, apartheid, racism, Zionism, and all forms of foreign aggression, occupation, domination, interference or hegemony as well as against great power and bloc politics.”
Important members of NAM mentioned in the information on the Internet “have included India, Egypt, Indonesia, Pakistan, Cuba, South Africa, Iran, Malaysia, Yugoslavia, and, for a time, the People’s Republic of China.”
Obviously, the fact that Cuba, during the Cold War, was closely aligned with the Soviet Union undermines the stated purpose of the organization and in essence strongly indicates that individual countries are inclined to make decisions that are in their best interest, no matter what organizations they may belong to.
In the case of The Bahamas, we are a small country, with a population of around 320,000, whose economy is based mainly on tourism, so exactly how does NAM help us in this regard? If anything, I would think that since more than 70 percent of our tourists come from the United States, if we are going to be aligned with any country, it should be the United States.
Yet Mitchell continues to administer our foreign policy, presumably with the consent of the Cabinet, as if we are a much larger country that needs to be concerned about our security and protecting our “territorial integrity.” Given our close geographic proximity to the United States and the fact that we have long been a friendly neighbour of that world superpower, our security is virtually assured and by extension likewise our territorial integrity.
Frankly, I think we put ourselves more in harm’s way by establishing closer ties with Cuba, not in terms of any possible military action from another country, but rather with regard to endangering the economic benefits that we get from being closely aligned with the United States that are responsible for Bahamians enjoying the third highest standard of living in this hemisphere, behind the United States and Canada.
So let’s stop kidding ourselves by pretending that membership in NAM makes us more important than we really are in the world of nations. Of course, we are a sovereign nation and this gives us the right to determine our own destiny. But responsible leadership of this country surely must take under consideration the fact that the success we enjoy economically as an independent nation is primarily because of our geographic position and our close friendship with the United States.
This being the case, it is not in the best interest of this country for Prime Minister Perry Christie to continue to allow his foreign minister to pursue a foreign policy that jeopardizes our treasured friendship with our giant neighbour to the North. Hopefully, the Prime Minister will realize this fact in time to save the U.S. pre-clearance facility in Freeport.
By: Oswald T. Brown, Editor and General Manager of The Freeport News
