Caribbean News Now!

By Dr J. Edsel Edmunds

I refer to the article by Sir Ronald Sanders which has been published in our regional press. Reference was made to the need for Caribbean countries to pool and share physical space as well as resources for effective representation in capitals.

Dr Joseph E. Edmunds is the former Ambassador of St Lucia to the UN, OAS, and US. He is currently Consultant and Senior Advisor to The Edmunds Group International, LLC (www.theedmundsgroup.com)

I wish to draw to the attention of Sir Ronald that over a decade ago I was mandated by the prime ministers of St Lucia and St Vincent and the Grenadines to locate a suitable building which would house the embassies of the OECS countries in Washington. After inspecting over ten buildings, I recommended to the OECS Secretariat, through the said prime ministers, that we purchase a building which was being vacated by the government of Finland.

With the assistance of embassy staff, a legal advisor, negotiations with the embassy of Finland, the guidance of the US Department of Foreign Missions and the concurrence of the OECS ambassadors in Washington, the OECS governments accepted my recommendation.

Today the OECS governments (with the exception of Grenada, which was well established in its own building) now own a structure in Washington, referred to as The OECS Building where one can see five flags flying in front of a building housing the embassies of Dominica, St Vincent and the Grenadines, St Kitts and Nevis, St Lucia, and Antigua and Barbuda.

The cost savings, although not audited, is estimated at well over one million dollars since its establishment. For example, instead of having five separate conference rooms, the building is equipped with one large conference room which accommodates regional and international meetings, there is one reception area, and maintenance costs are shared by the five embassies. I understand that there is discussion about moving as a result of space limitations and the age of the infrastructure. I am nevertheless pleased to learn that such a move is contemplated as an OECS initiative.

The idea behind this arrangement was to facilitate easy dialogue related to OECS and Caribbean issues and to share and agree upon issues related to common interests, and where agreed upon to report as a group to regional headquarters. In the early stages of the building a reference library was established and computerized linkages were contemplated with the OAS Secretariat, OECS headquarters as well as CARICOM.

The shared values and common objectives mentioned by Sir Ronald were envisioned by our OECS Heads and Ambassadors in Washington. I was pleased to lead this initiative.

It is interesting to note that upon the establishment of the OECS Building, the Central American embassies were looking at our initiative as a model for their joint embassies. To my knowledge, a CARICOM arrangement comparable to the above was never mandated by our heads of government. Nevertheless, CARICOM ambassadors meet from time to time at their respective embassies and coordinate activities and positions on different issues based upon the mandates of respective governments.

Unlike Latin America, Caribbean ambassadors are accredited to both the White House and the OAS, making it difficult for them to cover in depth matters related to US trade and commerce as regard policy and application as they affect our region. Most times there is little representation on those issues and the Caribbean becomes reactive rather than proactive on those issues. This brings to light, the question of the inadequate CARICOM and OECS representation on trade and commerce and the need for investment promotion as regards US /Caribbean interests.

It is noteworthy that Latin American, Asian and African countries are well represented in this regard by their agencies and also engage professional services and advisors to support their respective embassy and country efforts.

Reads: 5421


Tweet

Ian Francis, Toronto,Ontario:

Dear Dr J. Edsel Edmunds

I have read your response to a recent article written by Ambassador Sanders about the sharing of diplomatic resources.

I am indeed grateful for the information you shared about the OECS sharing initiatives in Washington. I must commend you for the initiative as I have no doubt that such an achievement was done while you served as St.Lucia's Ambassador to the United States and the OAS.I would also like to express thanks to former Prime Ministers Compton and Mitchell for supporting this initiative. Sadly to say, while you were successful with your recommendations to the OECS at the time, you should not lose sight that the OECS Secretariat has changed from listening to the Heads and is now engaged in the process of manipulating our Heads.

Certainly, Mitchell and Compton showed extremely strong leadership and they were respected by Lewis, Compton and others.

The Grenada situation is well known, while you have failed to recognize the vision of the Bishop government and in particular, Ambassador Williams for purchasing the Washington Chancery that flies the Grenada Flag, it was an extremely good decision and it is my understanding that this building cost has sky rocketed in the Washington Real Estate Market.

I am somewhat alarmed that you were not able to indicate a credible and authenticated cost sharing. One would have thought that before the initiative was implemented, a cost sharing analysis should have been conducted. Given the current global financial decline, I think the OECS nations should thread cautiously about acquiring larger space. While this might be necessary, I am positive and certain that these OECS Missions have not broadened their diplomatic initiatives in the US.I can only assume that in recent years, many of our OECS governments have been dishing out additional political favors that have in fact resulted in posting more diplomatic crowding. This is where I think the overcrowding is coming from.

What is considered as effective dialogue on OECS, Caribbean issues and common interests? My understanding is that the United States Embassy in Bridgetown with the Castries Secretariat are regularly engaged in this exercise. In addition, outside of the Caribbean Basin Security Initiatives (CBSI), there is not a lot going on between OECS and United States Affairs. Given the fast pace in the information era, we might very well find that the OECS will have to re-strategize the much touted reference library..

The sharing of common diplomatic and consular facilities among member OECS States is a step in the right direction. It seem to be working well in Washington and can be modelled in Toronto. However, it might not be possible in Ottawa , London and New York. The OECS does not have a diplomatic presence in Ottawa. In addition, Trinidad owns it own Chancery and it is very doubtful whether Jamaica, Guyana and Barbados and Guyana will likely get into such an arrangement. The New York situation seem to be a bit different. Most OECS members maintain a UN Permanent Mission to which the Commonwealth Secretariat has been meeting the rental cost. It is understood that some member states have taken a joy ride to hide their consular personnel into this arrangement to minimize cost. If I am incorrect, I stand to be corrected. I am also curious to find out why the Caribbean governments made the dumb decision to sell the West Indian Student Centre which once housed many Caribbean diplomatic missions in London.

Finally, I think there are some deeply troubling questions as to how OECS Nations perceive their diplomatic presence in Washington. Here are my suggestions.

 Individual OECS member states have diplomatic relations with the US. They are not accredited to the White House. Their primary link is with the State Department and it is time that they stop the dreaming hoping to get a lunch or breakfast invitation to the White House. If President Obama is successful in next month's election, he will see our OECS/Caricom leaders at the next Summit of the Americas.
 OECS governments must urgently review their diplomatic and consular strategy in the United States .All consulates in New York should directly fall under the OECS/US accredited Ambassador. There must be a concerted effort to build new states and municipal engagement that would enhance sustainable efforts between the OECS and diverse players in the United States.
 OECS nations must abandon the thought that the United States Government seem to be the only instrument or vehicle to uplift the region's socio-economic situation. Effective trade, tourism and educational collaboration will be achieved when competent consular representatives are appointed in targeted US States, they are properly oriented about government needs and aspirations.
 Concurrent diplomatic representation between the OAs and the US Government should continue. Contrary to the belief that so much is going on at the OAS for OECS governments, this might not be the case. The OAS has strong offices throughout the OECS and a brief email tend to take care of important business.
 OECS diplomatic representatives in Washington are not heavy hitters. This is why they are often accorded the low level treatment at the State Department. This is not likely to improve.
 The seriousness and relevance of OECS diplomatic personnel in Washington can only be realized when home governments clearly carve out a niche to understand what is being done/ How can it be achieved? What is required to achieve success?