There are some important lessons to be drawn from Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s historic election to the post of political leader of the United National Congress (UNC) in Trinidad and Tobago. Already, there has been a mass of analysis, opinion and commentary emanating from Trinidad but perhaps it is the unofficial doyen of political scientists there, Professor Selwyn Ryan, who provides us with most food for thought when he argues, in last Sunday’s Trinidad Express, that Mrs Persad-Bissessar’s elevation has “dynamited the politics of the country” and dispelled certain myths.
The first myth to be exploded, according to Prof Ryan, was that “patriarchy was alive and still deeply entrenched in the Indian community.” Why this thesis should only be applied to “the Indian community” in Trinidad and Tobago is anyone’s guess, for Prof Ryan could well have said that the myth was applicable to other ethnic groups. Or he might have applied the myth to all Caribbean tribes. For although we have had the examples of Eugenia Charles in Dominica, Janet Jagan in Guyana and Portia Simpson-Miller in Jamaica, politics in the region has been dominated by men, with women generally relegated to a supporting role.
To be fair to Prof Ryan, he does make the point that all of Trinidad and Tobago may now be ready for a female prime minister. Indeed, even though the UNC election was an internal matter, with only some 15,000 party members voting, which could hardly be regarded as a national election, Prof Ryan considers the upheaval of the old order in the UNC a vote for change, an anti-incumbent vote as it were, that could conceivably sweep the nation.
What is indisputable is that Mrs Persad-Bissessar is the first woman in Trinidad and Tobago to lead a major political party and she has done so, moreover, by showing strength of character and grace in the macho (read ‘dirty’) politics of that country. It is no wonder that women’s rights activists are hailing her victory as a triumph of gender.
The second myth was that of ‘maximum leaders’ who would always prevail. Ms Persad-Bissessar and the UNC membership have clearly shown that Basdeo Panday was well past his sell-by date, even though, as founder-leader of the UNC and wrecker of many a challenger’s political career, he might have considered himself, in his hubris, invincible. But this hitherto immoveable object has met an irresistible force in the will of the people and the first real test of the new leader’s mettle is to interpret this will for Mr Panday’s benefit and to negotiate a graceful departure for the man who made the UNC.
The lesson is clear: there are no longer any sacred cows. The sun is setting on leaders, who, by reason of ethnic support or tribalism, believe themselves to be untouchable and immoveable. In the case of Mr Panday’s defeat, Ms Persad-Bissessar has also contributed to blowing away the perception that the members of the UNC, in the main rural East Indians, are uneducated, sheep-like followers of the maximum leader.
Of course, as many have pointed out, it is richly ironic that it is Mr Panday who must be credited with the courageous and progressive decision to allow the UNC leadership to be decided by a popular vote within the party, rather than the preferred practice across the Caribbean of having a small number of delegates electing the leader in a system open to manipulation, if not outright rigging. Perhaps, again, it was Mr Panday’s hubris that prevented him from contemplating the possibility of losing. But as Prof Ryan puts it, “Term limits apply whether they are constitutionally mandated or not.” And the most important lesson is that democracy, on the basis of ‘one man [or woman], one vote,’ can really work and can effect change.
What will now be the impact of this sea change in the practice of democracy in Trinidad and Tobago and the rest of the Caribbean? Will parties like the People’s National Movement (PNM), beset by its own internal tensions, and others in the region bite the bullet and embrace democracy in its most elemental form? Or will they circle the wagons yet again, now that they have witnessed the power of the people?
The ruling PNM had better be prepared for a tough campaign ahead, if it is to resist Ms Persad-Bissessar’s clear strategy to forge a national platform with Winston Dookeran’s Congress of the People, other smaller non-parliamentary parties and civic groups, espousing policies that address the core concerns of all the people, to present a truly national, united movement for change. Already parallels are being drawn with the ‘One Love’ experience of 1986, but, as Prof Ryan and others have also pointed out, there are lessons to be learnt from the rise and fall of the National Alliance for Reconstruction.
Interestingly enough, Prof Ryan had written about “the politics of post-charismatic leadership” in the Express, back on December 27, 2009, arguing that only Tubal Uriah Butler, Dr Eric Williams and Mr Panday himself qualified as charismatic leaders “in the classic sense” in Trinidad and Tobago. He may have been premature in that judgment, as Ms Persad-Bissessar may prove to be the embodiment of a new form of charisma – one that will appeal to a modern public of younger, better educated and more knowledgeable voters. It is still early days for Ms Persad-Bissessar and she obviously has her work cut out for her. But she could yet end up completely rewriting the political texts of Trinidad and Tobago and the Caribbean.
