Retired politicians don’t always make good envoys
A certain prime minister of Jamaica, who shall be nameless, is reported to have said that it is not important who is appointed ambassador because he had a telephone.
Although this is patently absurd, it has become an axiom of an approach to foreign policy by succeeding governments since the 1970s. Most unfortunately, it has been practised with disastrous results in the capitals of some of the countries that are most important to Jamaica, namely Washington, DC; London; and Ottawa.
It is important to stress that we are not pointing the finger at any of our current cadre of ambassadors, even though in some cases we do not know enough about their credentials.
The late Michael Manley pioneered this course with a will in Ottawa and pursued it in earnest in London as palliative to persons being removed from his Cabinet. Hence began the practice of ambassadorial appointments as a pension plan for politicians past their prime or indeed, some who never attained prime status.
This dumping policy is not received well in foreign capitals because the “host” country knows what is being passed off and is insulted. The fog that engulfed United States-Jamaica relations has not yet cleared in Washington, DC.
Ambassadorial postings cannot be a pension plan for retirees or for politicians with other infirmities such as health problems. Even undistinguished backbenchers have become ambassadors if they are willing to accept less attractive postings. We have seen some who acceded to the diplomatic life without any aptitude, and even when they do not perform they are retained or offered another prestigious posting.
Some of these appointees regard their positions as a reward for work already done and do not exert themselves, to the detriment of Jamaica. Their verbal incontinence is an embarrassment to their country and their sartorial eccentricities a source of derision among their countrymen in the Diaspora. These retirees have not even been aware of their shortcomings while “enjoying” the privileges. They conflate the ceremonial with the cerebral and confuse the deference given to the office with respect for their person.
They are disparaged in dispatches to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs by their own staff who file demeaning reports critiquing their conduct and work ethic, disregard for proper procedure and an ignorance of protocol.
We by no means want to rule out able and energetic persons who were or are politicians from serving as ambassadors and high commissioners. We fully appreciate that Jamaica has benefited immensely from the excellent service of people like Mr Derick Heaven and Mr Dudley Thompson. These were exceptions. Neither gentleman was at the time seeking a ministerial post or in need of a pension, but accepted the draft at personal sacrifice to help their country in challenging postings.
We are looking to Prime Minister Bruce Golding to put a stop to these types of appointments and to refrain from rewarding or condoning failure with inappropriate appointments. One bad term does not deserve another. There must be some other form of pension or local sinecure for retired politicians. Jamaica will not be taken seriously or get on any country’s foreign policy agenda if we do not have effective representations.
The persons appointed as ambassadors/high commissioners, especially in Washington, DC; London; Ottawa; and at the United Nations, must be suitably qualified persons who could include competent politicians but not those in need of a pension.