Kamla warns Coast of Arms change a sensitive topicIt can stir up ethnic rivalry

Senior Reporter

akash.samaroo@cnc3.co.tt

Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar believes that while some of the history behind Christopher Columbus has to be revisited, Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley’s promise to remove his ships from this country’s Coat of Arms needs to be carefully thought out.

This is because she believes if not handled properly, it can ignite racial tensions in Trinidad and Tobago.

In a statement yesterday addressing the plan to remove the Niña, Pinta and Santa Maria from the national emblem and replace them with the steelpan, Persad-Bissessar acknowledged that Columbus was wrongfully celebrated for some time.

However, she said she is of the belief that “sanitising history, truth, and free speech in the modern era of wokeness, virtue signalling, and cancel culture will only promote ignorance and foster the repetition of evil acts in the future that can be preventable.”

Persad-Bissessar said erasing history by removing symbols will not improve or change citizens’ understanding of history, adding that, “the nation’s true history should be taught in our schools, one that provides the good and bad of all our historical figures.”

“The truth of our past and present is bitter and harsh and should not be manipulated to serve any singular agenda. Instead, it should be used to enlighten successive generations so they will not repeat the mistakes and misdeeds of the past,” Persad-Bissessar said.

However, Persad-Bissessar said people are not recognising what she believes to be the PM’s intention to use painful historical events for general election campaigning.

She said Dr Rowley is following the playbook of former politicians to use the threat of the “White Man” and “Colonialism” to deflect from this country’s internal issues.

“Many people are engrossed in debating the changes to the Coat of Arms and the many possible practical effects of such change.

This entire political conversation, starting with the proposed changes to the Coat of Arms, is a tinderbox that can be ignited when emotions run high and ignorant, unscrupulous persons begin gaslighting the population,” she said.

“This is how ethnic rivalries, societal strife, and hate are stirred up in a primarily peaceful multicultural society like ours, which can then devolve into violence and destroy our societal peace. We have seen this all over the world before.”

She added, “These emotionally sensitive issues should not be misused as political propaganda for any electoral success, as it makes a mockery of the brutal suffering of our ancestors.”

Moreover, the Opposition Leader said such issues should be dealt with by independent committees of suitably qualified historians, social science intellectuals and legal personnel in a neutral, objective, and non-political manner.

Mixed reactions to plan

At least one historian is not in favour of removing Columbus’ ships from the Coat of Arms, but if they must go, Dr Jerome Teelucksingh believes another instrument should be added along with the steelpan.

“Yes, we use the steelpan, but couldn’t we have used the tassa also? Couldn’t we also put the tassa on the Coat of Arms? I know we have one national instrument, but is it possible in the future? Some groups will be discontented and say I am biased, but is it possible to have two national instruments? The tassa and the steelpan?” he asked.

The history lecturer attached to the University of the West Indies, St Augustine, said it should be considered because this is a society that is supposed to be inclusive, diverse and multi-ethnic.

“So yes, we are proud of the steelpan but there is also another instrument that represents the Indo-Trinidadian presence and culture,” he said.

Dr Teelucksingh acknowledged that the tassa was not invented in this country but argued, “it is part of the culture, and we play it at national events, throughout the year, so we can’t say we invented the tassa, but it is something we might want to consider.”

He believes the decision to change the Coat of Arms should also be put to the people via a national referendum.

Personally, however, he disagrees with the removal of Columbus’ ships.

“I am not okay with it, and the reason is the next generation, and future generations will have a distorted version of their past. The students in the primary schools will not know about the people who came to Trinidad and started this momentum that resulted in slavery and indentureship. We are not telling anyone to worship these three ships, but their names should be taught in school,” he said.

But the First Peoples community is in full support of Dr Rowley’s promise.

Chief Eric Lewis agreed the three ships were historically inaccurate, as Columbus encountered Trinidad with only two of them.

“For us, it means Columbus is not the pivotal point, and that history does not begin with that Columbian era. Before Columbus came the Indigenous people were here, so that is a good start for us as a country, that Columbus’ voyage is not the main epitome of this country’s history,” Chief Lewis explained.

He said the First Peoples are content with the steelpan replacing the ships, as he believes they are already properly represented by the three hummingbirds on the Coat of Arms.

Chief Lewis also thinks the costs associated with the change should not be the focus of discussion.

“I know people are complaining about the cost to change it, I’ve been seeing people say there are more important things to focus on, but at the same time we really need to stand as a republic to map our own history and our own course,” he said.

Guardian Media sent questions to Communications Minister Simon De Nobriega on the costs associated with the changeover and who received the contract to change the design. However, the minister could not yet provide those details.

The Prime Minister indicated that it will take over a six-month period to facilitate changes to stationery and other official documents.

Meanwhile, the Caribbean Freedom Project (CFP) believes this is a great victory not only for itself but the Emancipation Support Committee, the Black Power Movement and others who wanted radical transformation post-independence.

CFP director Shakaba Kambon said, “People like Dr Brinsley Samaroo, who just passed away, who was working with us closely, people like Ivan Laughlin, Makandal Daaga, my father Khafra Kambon, Clive Nunes, the calypsonians, the panmen, this is a victory for all those who wanted more from independence.”

Kambon said while consultation is important for such changes, the CFP has no issue with how the PM went about with this announcement.

“In the case of the Coat of Arms, we believe it is the right of any leader across the Caribbean community, when they find something that is so egregious, we are talking about a symbol that celebrates the invasion and occupation of the Caribbean and one of the greatest crimes against humanity the world has ever seen, when a leader of a country encounters that or comes into that information that we provided of course, it is their right and duty to act immediately upon that information,” Kambon said.

Asked for a comment on Dr Teelucksingh’s stance on the matter, Kambon said the historian tends to flip-flop on these issues.

The post Kamla warns Coast of Arms change a sensitive topicIt can stir up ethnic rivalry first appeared on CNC3.