Of WikiLeaks & sovereignty
Published:Saturday | June 11, 2011 | 12:00 AM
THE EDITOR, Sir:
Towards the end of 2010, the word on everyone's lips was 'WikiLeaks'. WikiLeaks maintains that it has an objective of "exposing oppressive regimes ... and ... be of assistance to people of all regions who wish to reveal unethical behaviour in their governments and corporations". It bears without argument that the Jamaican political sphere is without transparency and accountability - the very constituent of good governance. The existence of both conditions contributes to an effective, efficient and equitable management in public and private institutions.
Since WikiLeaks unveiled its large cache of diplomatic cables on private conversations between members of the political arena and United States diplomats, everyone was suddenly aware of the 'facts' rippling through one scandal after the next. We have heard about numerous unguarded comments and revelations regarding critiques and praises about Jamaica's policies and governments; the Manatt-Dudus saga; handling of various political scandals and the governance structure of both political parties.
revelations
One might argue that the revelations were not revelations after all, but at least the printing of the cables placed the ethics of Jamaica's governance to the forefront. As such, numerous Jamaican people have expressed gratitude to WikiLeaks for unearthing what they have dubbed political corruption and manoeuvring between both the Jamaica Labour Party and the People's National Party.
On the other hand, underlying many of these issues is the fundamental question of what the WikiLeaks affair reveals about the changing map of influence and power in a world that continues to be influenced by the pre-eminence of the United States and its "imperial overstretch". What the WikiLeaks disclosures have, therefore, brought into question is that of Jamaica's sovereignty and our inherent strength to govern ourselves.
The question relating to the propriety of the Jamaican politicians seeking guidance on domestic and legislative matters - some as minute as party internal affairs - is of deep concern. Dr Paul Ashley, on a recent appearance on TVJ's 'Profile', expressed similar concerns, in addition to that of foreign policy and foreign relations.
The year 1962 must now be of greater significance as Jamaica seeks to govern its own affairs without interference and 'guidance' from external powers.
I am, etc.,
MICKEL JACKSON