What went wrong with Haiti?
WHENEVER I think of Haiti, I am often reminded of that famous National Family Planning commercial featuring Judy Smith, the maths brains from primary school who never lived up to her great childhood promise.
The commercial suggests that Smith, a gifted child, had made bad choices in her life (having too many children) and had to suffer the consequences of her actions. Anyone familiar with the history of Haiti will perhaps note that this is where the rupture between the metaphor and the reality occurs, since by most reasonable measures (at least by current standards) Haiti made the right choice in ridding itself of the shackles of slavery and establishing itself as a beacon for liberation struggles across the region and the world. What then went so terribly wrong?
The answer seems to lie in timing. Haiti was too far ahead of its time and has been paying an enormous price for its decision to expel the French from the island of Hispaniola. The plight of Haiti is the price of genius. Haiti has suffered the curse of the first mover (bearing the burden of the pioneer who makes the way clear for others to follow) a condition described in some parts of the Caribbean as “cutting track to mek monkey run”.
Haiti is still paying the debt for its freedom and we owe it to ourselves to help them shoulder this burden.
If there is one benefit I could identify from this enormous tragedy it would be the increased awareness of the historic role Haiti played in our own struggles of liberation. It is a story that is not often told. So many of us inhabit a world of the eternal present — unmindful of the past and indifferent to the future — a space devoid of obligations and oblivious of consequences spawning environmental degradation and human misery. It is the product of a morally bankrupt solipsism which contemplates nothing beyond our own immediate gratification and sees everything in the service of our self-absorption.
For too long, we have ignored Haiti. We found eloquent comfort in our ignorance and specious justification in our prejudice. It was convenient for us to deem Haiti as an object of our bemusement, caught in the warp of its voodoo- induced stupor.
Journalist extraordinaire John Maxwell, to his eternal credit, never failed to remind us of the seeming eternal struggles of the Haitian people with the persistent eloquence for which he is renowned. Haiti could never hope for a more devoted friend. Sadly, very few of us listened to John, preferring to subscribe to variations of the idiotic philosophy espoused by that disgrace to the gospel called Pat Robertson. No one paused to reflect on the historical crimes committed against this Western portion of Hispaniola and how this contributed to its penury. Now the truth is being told. It is time to right the wrongs. The French and the Americans have much to do by way of atonement and we must not acquiesce to its postponement. We owe it to our history and posterity to make Haiti rise to the rich promise that seemed its destiny.
Watching bits of the Hope For Haiti telethon, spearheaded by actor George Clooney, I could not help noting the Jamaican prominence in the songs chosen by the performers. One Haitian artiste chose the plaintive melodies of Many Rivers to Cross to convey the immense pain and suffering of her resilient people. Then came Wyclef Jean, who has never failed to privilege his Haitian and Caribbean roots in his stellar career as a singer, musician, producer, songwriter and philanthropist. Jean chose Rivers of Babylon, a psalm set to the haunting rhythms of Jamaican music, to begin his tribute to his native land. He segued into the sound of compas, the indigenous music of Haiti, and watching him move one could not tell if he were a native of Port of Spain, Kingston or Port-au-Prince. He was simply a Caribbean man of whom we should be justly proud.
It was fitting to see Prime Minister Bruce Golding and Leader of the Opposition Portia Simpson Miller joining forces as part of the earliest overseas mission to Haiti. If only we could display such solidarity in tackling the enormous challenges which confront us at home.
By most accounts, Jamaica should get some much-needed economic wiggle room with the conclusion of the Jamaica Debt Exchange programme, which sees the holders of Jamaican Government paper taking a cut in the rates they had originally negotiated. Anyone with even a rudimentary understanding of economics would have been able to determine that a business model predicated on simply putting money on Government paper and hoping to prosper from a high interest rate regime was unsustainable. I wrote repeatedly in these columns that Government would not be able to continue paying high interest rates to its lenders if the economy lacked a productive base. It was only a matter of time before there would be a correction. The sad fact is most banks had become smug and fat, gorging themselves on these Government paper while paying insufficient attention to the needs of the productive sectors of the economy. The Jamaican bankers had become risk-averse, not unlike their American counterparts who became intoxicated with CDOs (Collateralised Debt Obligations).
The American banks did not want to bear the risks of customers defaulting on their loans and so they bundled these debts and sold them off. Jamaican banks were trying to minimise the risks of customer defaults by investing in Government paper while earning themselves enormous profits. Now that these Jamaican banks are experiencing a cut in their earnings from their investments in Government paper they will have no choice but to pay attention to the needs of their core business, which is to provide financing and good service to their customers in the productive sectors of the economy. For too long the banks have ignored the producers of real wealth, to the detriment of the society.
Having a reduction in our debt obligations is certainly welcome. Yet it is certainly one thing to get the room to manoeuvre, how we use the space provided is another matter. I have criticised successive administrations for their failure to harness the enormous potential of our cultural industries. My cries seem to have largely fallen on deaf ears. I have been advocating for the longest while that venture funding is the most appropriate vehicle for unleashing creativity in our economy. This, of course, would have to be coupled with increased levels of training. Where would the funds to seed this come from? May I suggest the floating of a diasporic bond issue? Then, of course, there is the development assistance provisions in the EPA (the Economic Partnership Agreement signed between Cariforum countries and the European Union). Through the developmental provision in the EPA, Jamaica and other Cariforum countries are able to access generous financial assistance to make various sectors of their economy more competitive.
clyde.mckenzie@gmail.com