[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 152 (2006), Part 2]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 1784-1785]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




          IN RECOGNITION OF GRENADA'S 32 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, February 14, 2006

  Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize Grenada's 32 years 
of independence and to enter into the Record an article published by 
Caribnews chronicling historic challenges faced by the country. I 
congratulate Grenadians in their native country, the United States and 
abroad on their perseverance to celebrate how far their great nation 
has come. Thirty-two years ago, on a momentous February 7, the 
beautiful country of Grenada achieved its independence from Great 
Britain.
  Since its independence, Grenada--comprised of the islands of Grenada, 
Carriacou and Petit Martihas--has continued to flourish as a nation. As 
the first of the Windward and Leeward islands to declare its 
independence, Grenada obtained its autonomy under the Grenada United 
Labour Party government of late Prime Minister Sir Eric Matthew Gairy. 
Since the early days of independence, Grenada has struggled to find its 
voice. Despite violent power struggles and a U.S.-led invasion, the 
people of Grenada have overcome strife in order to forge ahead with 
their parliamentary democracy.
  Today, Grenada stands as a spectacular island with lush mountains, 
crystal waterfalls, golden beaches and fragrant spice trees that give 
the island its epithet ``Isle of Spice''. It is also a vital trade 
partner, with significant global exports such as nutmeg, mace, cocoa, 
bananas, vegetables, and fish. But most importantly what is treasured 
most by Americans is not Grenada's landscape or exports but the 
Grenadians, who we regard with much esteem as our friends.
  Thirty-two years ago this month, Grenada did not only put into motion 
independence, but national development and progress as well. Mr. 
Speaker, please join me in wishing Grenada continued political and 
social advancement on this very special day marking their 32nd 
anniversary of self-rule.

                   [From the Caribnews, Feb. 7, 2006]

                        Grenada Will Rise Again

                        (By Michael D. Roberts)

       For the Caribbean island nation of Grenada, Carriacou and 
     Petite Martinique the devastation wrought by two powerful 
     hurricanes has turned back what progress was being made under 
     the Keith Mitchell Administration. And the undulating nature 
     of activities of national development has also been a major 
     challenge even before Hurricanes Ivan and Emily.
       It has been like constantly taking three steps forward and 
     one backwards in an eerie dance led by the caprices of the 
     international global market and the negative effects of run-
     away capitalism. Indeed, the much touted benefits of market 
     globali-
     zation have served up its own peculiar and erratic brand of 
     progress now and stagnation then. Grenada, Carriacou and 
     Petite Martinique now finds itself in serious economic 
     straights brought on by brutal and devastating ``acts of 
     God.''
       Indeed, these past 32 years have been challenging ones for 
     the 120 square mile tri-island Caribbean nation. And as the 
     nation of some 90,000 people plunge into the uncertainties of 
     a brand new and rapidly redefined world stage, new challenges 
     lie ahead in less than ideal socio-economic circumstances. 
     For one thing the jury is still out on the gains and 
     achievements of the Grenadian economy, since 1984, as it 
     relates to the improvement of the quality of life of all the 
     people. If the mainspring of Grenadian progress, since its 
     independence from Britain on February 7, 1974, is the 
     country's command over the forces of production, then its 
     history to date is one of sporadic and uneven development 
     mixed with episodes of retrogression.
       From the dominance of British-imposed slavery and 
     colonialism Grenada painfully moved towards full political 
     independence during the militant epoch of the 1960s and 
     1970s. Granted independence under less than favorable 
     conditions the country took charge of its own destiny 
     replacing the colonial master with local elected officials 
     whose experience in governance was learned from and at 
     institutions set up by their former masters. In this context 
     therefore Grenadian structural forms of today--government, 
     parliament and judiciary--were and are a caricature of 
     British Westminster democracy that has failed to adequately 
     provide for institutions and instruments of equality within 
     the society.
       It was these spawned social, political and economic 
     disparities that let to the rise and eventual fall of the 
     regime of Sir Eric Matthew Gairy [from 1950 to 1979] and the 
     subsequent triumph--and demise--of the Grenada

[[Page 1785]]

     Revolution (1979-1983). During the 29-year Gairy Regime, 
     Grenada exhibited limited growth and development, with 
     perhaps the sole measure of its progress being the new-found 
     political consciousness of a hitherto cowed and oppressed 
     people.
       It was Gairy who bucked the ruling status quo of an 
     alliance in the towns of a mulatto upper class, a growing 
     merchant stratum, and a landed British gentry, oftentimes 
     absent from the island. But what started as a populist 
     movement and progressive anti-colonial struggle degenerated 
     into home-gown depostism by the early 1970s as Sir Eric 
     cemented a strangle hold on all parts of Grenadian society.
       With each year since indepedence--granted during serious 
     internal unrest and political turmoil--the Gairy Regime 
     became more and more oppressive, and it was out of these 
     socio-economic and political conditions that the Grenada 
     Revolution of March 13, 1979 materialized. This break in the 
     evolutionary chain of political and economic development 
     ushered in a brief period of unprecedented economic growth 
     and development. The basis for this was the ruling New Jewel 
     Movement's suspension of the stultifying and archaic British-
     model constitution, an economic program of planned 
     development based on three pillars--the public, private and 
     cooperative sectors--a grass-roots type of participatory 
     democracy, and an overall policy of national development 
     based along non-capitalist lines.
       But successful though the Revolution was, in economic and 
     political terms, it quickly imploded, self-destructed due to 
     a combination of immaturity, intolerance to dissenting view, 
     and a failure to understand that the political and 
     ideological direction of the Revolution did not sit well with 
     a people long accustomed, or conditioned to accepting the 
     flawed Westminster model of democratic development as the 
     only way. The one-man one vote position was therefore central 
     to the core of the Grenadian view of democratic rule.
       Still, even the most strident detractors of the Grenada 
     Revolution would agree that the period 1979-1983 saw 
     unparalleled economic growth and development that has not 
     been equaled or duplicated up to this day. In fact it is safe 
     to conclude that the reversal of the gains of the Grenada 
     Revolution, that began with the interim Government of 1983, 
     and continued with the election of the old Herbert Blaize New 
     National Party (NNP) in 1984, ushered in the modern period of 
     Grenadian retrogression.
       Kathy McAfee in her celebrated book ``Storm Signals--
     Structural Adjustment and Development Alternatives in the 
     Caribbean'' (Oxfam America 1991), in a chapter entitled 
     ``Grenada: Development by Conquest,'' argues that ``by the 
     fall of 1988, after five years of US stewardship, almost none 
     of the developmental goals set by the US had been met. 
     Grenada was deeper in debt than at any time in the nation's 
     past. AID-sponsored efforts to balance the government's 
     budget had failed. The country's tax system, after being 
     thoroughly re-designed by US consultants, had largely 
     collapsed. AID was withholding promised grants to Grenada's 
     government in an effort to force it to comply with structural 
     adjustment conditionalities.'' McAfee says that unemployment 
     was at an all-time high, some 30 percent, and agricultural 
     productivity continued its long-term decline, while Grenada's 
     manufacturing sector remained small and stagnant.
       In 2006 nobody disagrees that agriculture, Grenada's 
     economic backbone, is in serious trouble and that production 
     for export has taken a big hit. Moreover, the World Trade 
     Organization (WTO) ruling removing the protected status for 
     Caribbean bananas in the European market has caused more 
     headaches for the country. Added to this by the year 2000 the 
     task of completely destroying all the hard-won gains of the 
     people during the Grenada Revolution was now completed.
       Here are a few examples of some of the structures and other 
     economic and social programs that are now extinct that have 
     set Grenada back for many years. The National Transportation 
     Service (NTS) is no more, the Marketing and National 
     Importing Board (MNIB) is a shell of its former self. Post-
     Revolutionary governments allowed about six (6) fully 
     equipped modern fishing trawlers to rot and sink to the 
     bottom of the St. George's sea rather than utilize them. 
     Grenada no longer exports eggplants and other crops to 
     European markets; the country's agro-processing plant that 
     canned fruit juices for export under the Revolution is no 
     more, as is the fish processing plant that began to produce 
     dry salted fish for export. The coffee processing plant in 
     Grenville is now extinct. Only the Grenada International 
     Airport remains because this structure, woefully under-
     utllized, cannot be easily physically dismantled.
       But what solution did these post 1983 govenments propose 
     for Grenada's socio-economic developmnent? The answer for 
     many of them was privatization. This process continues today. 
     According to a leading expert on privatization in the 
     Caribbean, Jamaica's Richard L. Bernal, with the overthrow of 
     the Maurice Bishop Government in 1983, the new Government in 
     Grenada committed itself to privatization. ``By 1992, in 
     response to a weak fiscal situation, Grenada had begun a 
     ``self-imposed'' three-year structural adjustment program in 
     which privatization of State Owned Enterprises was an 
     integral component. In that year, 90 percent of the shares of 
     the National Commercial Bank were sold, with the majority 
     shares going to the Republic Bank of Trinidad and Tobago, and 
     10 percent to Grenadians and others from the Eastern 
     Caribbean,'' [``Privatization in the English-speaking 
     Caribbean: An Assessment''] (the Center for Strategic and 
     International Studies) October 22, 1999].
       In the same publication, Bernal noted that ``. . . rapid 
     and extensive divestment without a proper framework can lead 
     to disastrous results . . . It is also important to ensure 
     that there is a proper context in which privatization can 
     take place. A competent executing agency with a qualified 
     staff is needed, together with the appropriate regulatory 
     framework and the necessary safety nets to protect displaced 
     workers.''
       So me of these ``disastrous results'' have visited Grenada 
     since the start of the program, in particular the perception 
     by the public that governments have been just selling off, 
     national assets to raise money. Indeed, there is little to 
     show for privatization. There are also sound arguments that 
     while privatization brings a bag of mixed blessings, in the 
     Grenada context there was and is no competent and experienced 
     monitoring authority to oversee the divestment of state 
     assets. The upshot is that as a panacea for Grenada's 
     economic ills the jury is still out on the privatization 
     program.
       And yet the ruling New National Party (NNP) government led 
     by Dr. Keith Mitchell cannot be slighted for not 
     demonstrating some measure of boldness when it comes to 
     policy decisions and hard political issues. Buffeted and 
     hindered by a hostile world economic climate the Government 
     has tried to push the Grenadian economy forward with an 
     admixture of privatization, international aid (hitherto to 
     2004 mostly from Taiwan), re-focussing on tourism, and 
     physical infrastructural development. This program will be 
     one of the key challenges to the government in the coming 
     years as Hurricanes Ivan and Emily was almost responsible for 
     putting the Grenada government into receivership.
       Overall, if one was to characterize the progress and 
     development of Grenada, Carriacou and Petite Martinique these 
     past 32 years, one would have to conclude that it has been a 
     period of turbulence mixed with brief periods of respite, 
     tranquility and development. These past 32 years have seen 
     every form of political upheaval and some of the ugliest 
     forms of repression and brutality. It is a history that has 
     divided Grenadians and continues to drive a fundamental wedge 
     in any movement towards national unity and reconciliation.
       For example: the events of October 19, 1983 that saw the 
     execution of popular Prime Minister Maurice Bishop and some 
     members of his Cabinet, that led to the subsequent invasion 
     on Grenada on October 25, 1983, is still the salt in the 
     wound for most Grenadians. There is no closure as yet and 
     this will be yet another challenge going forward.
       But if unity has been illusive thus far, and economic 
     problems further aggravate and create political alliances and 
     divisions, then any commentary on the merits, achievements, 
     and future of Grenada's independence would lead one to the 
     conclusion that independence is a pipe dream. Right? Wrong. 
     While economic independence is not yet a reality, political 
     independence is a fact of life in Grenada. Indeed, without 
     wanting to sound cynical, the mistakes made during the 32 
     years of Grenadian independence were made by the, Grenadian 
     people and their leaders. And nobody ever said that national 
     development, progress and independence would be a cakewalk.
       In fact, national development is painful, especially so for 
     a small, agriculturally dependent nation that will never 
     reach critical mass. But these pains are necessary if the 
     country must move forward because the school of hard knocks 
     is where experience is gained, and is perhaps the best 
     teacher on the issue of progress and retrogression--the twin 
     sisters of development. And Grenada's small size is both a 
     blessing and a curse. Its size makes for presumably an easier 
     and more efficient governmental structure and management. 
     With fiscal prudence popular shared services can reach the 
     vast majority of the people and greatly improve the quality 
     of life.

                          ____________________