Noble: Does visit of divisive Modi align with ‘every creed and race find an equal place’?

As Trinbagonians, we have an aspiration expressed in the phrase ‘all ah we is one family’. Lord Nelson, as a Tobago son, articulated it in song:

Family! /Mama tell me since a baby/Doh pass people just so when you in Tobago/ Doh play proudy, tell dem howdy/ Ah say, What’s the reason Mammy?/ Is then she tell me.

She say,/ All ah we is one family, all ah we is one family/ All ah we is one family, all ah we is one family..

Sadly, those days are gone. The days when our mothers always had some food in the pot for whoever might drop in. The days when we could roam the neighbourhood and eat at whichever home we landed at a meal time.

Instead, we are faced with not even knowing our neighbours because we retreat into our homes as quickly as possible. We regard each other with suspicion in what should be ‘neutral’ places, such as gas stations or supermarket carparks.

David Rudder, like a good angel on our shoulders, whispers: how we vote is not how we party. But even that unity appears to be under threat. Or is it?

Vaniesa Baksh reminds us of the outcry of the former Barbadian Minister of Social Transformation against the selection of Keiron Pollard as captain of Barbados’ T20 cricket team:

“I feel it is fundamentally and psychologically wrong. It affects the psyche of some Barbadians…”

Did the Government of the day understand what the presence of Narendra Modi meant to the psyche of some Trinidadians? How was this to be processed with all the unfolding drama in our lives?

What was the thinking applied in what appeared to be a last-minute hustle (three days’ notice)? Modi was en route to Brazil to attend the Brics Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

Did someone say: “As you passing, drop in nah!”

Are our political leaders utterly ignorant of the history of racial tensions in our country? Or did they decide, like Shamfa Cudjoe famously said: “we in charge now”? Did arrogance trump the reality on the ground?

Are our leaders serious?

In her 2025 victory speech, Mrs Kamla Persad-Bissessar promised:

“My role as your newly-elected prime minister is simple: it is to love you and to do everything possible to make you and your loved ones happy. It is time we set Trinidad and Tobago on a right path, where we cease to govern to simply win the next general election and instead govern to create wealth and opportunities for seven generations into the future.

“In these circumstances, we must do better; we must be more innovative, we must create meaningful opportunities, and do right by all people so that we all, united as a nation, can step boldly into the future with confidence.

“I know that we have to be strategic, we have to be inclusive, we have to be dedicated, and we have to be focused on becoming the best versions of ourselves.”

How did this visit further the cause of inclusion? Is our nation healing after the elections?

Our two main ethnic groups, Africans and Indians, have a similar yet distinct historical background. They had two different trajectories based on the treatment proffered by the colonial planters. Yet, they managed to work out a way to live together. During the period before and after World War II, Indian and African workers collaborated in their struggles.

With the coming of the Federation, the Indians were fearful of the regional black majority. This fear was encouraged by some of the white colonial elite. The fear held by the white colonial elite preceded Dr Eric Williams’ election in 1956.

The racial tensions, expressed in political behaviour, were a reflection of economic realities. Who would be in charge of the country’s resources?

Yet, poverty was the fate of many in both dominant groups. Large pockets of poverty, unemployment, and income inequality are not new problems—they persist as a result of the country’s economic structural issues.

“The unfortunate reality was that political party alignment in Trinidad and Tobago was becoming more racialised precisely when the emerging nation’s challenges were decidedly more complex.” (Palmer, 2006, p 264)

The role of trade unionists in this potent mix is well-established. In December 1961, Clyde Phil, an OWTU activist, was the chairman of the Opposition party. He supported Ashford Sinanan, who won a by-election for the Trinidad Legislative Council.

He hailed Sinanan as the ‘Saviour’ come back to harass Williams.” (Ramchand, 2006, p 269) Hooligans, allegedly PNM supporters, disrupted the victory rally.

The Throne Speech for the new Parliament took three days of debate. Lionel F Seukeran’s speech is worth reading. (ibid, pp 271- 278)

Many of the issues raised bear a striking parallel to today’s events, including negotiating in a global space, such as with our neighbour, Venezuela, and the management of the equivalent of our present-day Community-Based Environmental Protection and Enhancement Programme (CEPEP).

Seukeran wryly noted: “We enjoyed ourselves. Although we battled with passion, we maintained decorum through it all.” (Ibid, p 279)

This relationship almost hit the rocks when the country’s delegation went to Marlborough House to discuss Independence. After widely distributed copies of the Draft Independence Constitution of 1962 and a three-day public forum at Queen’s Hall, the Independence Conference opened in London.

Seukeran reports that the Indian Association, which charged discrimination and advocated for jobs and political representation proportionate to their number (33.5%) (Ibid, p 289), went to London and persuaded Dr Rudranath Capildeo to include their views in the discussion.

Seukeran, Tajmool Hosein and Peter Farquhar objected to this inclusion and rescued the talks. (Ibid, pp 291-292)

Mrs Bissessar appeared to understand the nuances of this delicate balancing act. In 2014, she said: “Our nation was built out of some of the greatest civilisations in the world, and in history—India, Africa, China, the Middle East, Europe.

“But we have no Mother Europe, Mother India, Mother Africa, or Mother China. We only have our beloved Mother Trinidad and Tobago. There are, however, our Great Grandmothers India, Africa, Europe, China, and the Middle East.

“These ancestors brought their songs, dances, food, and philosophies, and fused them into the cultural identity that Trinidad and Tobago has today.”

How was this reflected in this week’s events?

For Mother’s Day 2024, Mrs Bissessar eloquently described her mother’s situation. She recounted: “In the Indian caste system, Ma would have been categorised in the lowest caste. In the Western class system, she would also have been categorised in the lowest class, the underclass.

“In that time, women like Ma were objects of derision, ridicule, scorn, viewed as lower than the white line on the road, who could barely read or write, destined for an existence of marginalisation, humiliation and nothingness.”

What benefit would women like her mother, Rita Persad, gain from the recent two-day saga?

Brown and Black single parents are still suffering. How does this visit change their trajectory of “an existence of marginalisation, humiliation and nothingness”? Has this stopover shown this administration to be thoughtful and caring to that constituency of marginalised women?

Are we being strategic in hosting this visit? Has the Cabinet figured out a plan to manage the parlous state of the country’s finances and its complex future?

Is this visit another distraction from the complex issues that should occupy the minds of those who are in charge of our future?

Remember, we have been down this road with India before. Modi is en route to side meetings at the Brics Summit, including one with President Lula da Silva to discuss Brazil-India cooperation.

Where do we reasonably expect to be on the totem pole of India’s priorities? Or will we be used as a bridge into Caricom—a mere knob on the international chess board?

If cynicism were to prevail, the question to be asked is: what is the significance of this trip to our Prime Minister, Mrs Bissessar? Should we assume that the whole affair was to play to the traditional base of the UNC?

We cannot for a moment pretend that Prime Minister Modi saw a genuine slice of Trinidad. Modi was clear: “We are part of one family!” Who was the we?

The former High Commissioner to Trinidad had some interesting insights about this trip. (Click HERE to watch the video.)

Prime Minister Modi is interested in ‘soft power’ at the same time that the US is not. There is a shift in geopolitical dynamics in the Global South. Can Mrs Bissessar assume the role as Michael Manley did?

The plea by the Muslim community is instructive. This community appear to be more aware than the Christian community of Modi and his stances.

Unfortunately, the Christian community remained silent. The evangelical wing, probably, is mimicking their US evangelical counterparts. Our local Catholic community appear unaware of the intervention made by their Indian counterparts in meeting with Modi.

Maybe the estimated 70,000 Christians displaced and roughly 400 churches destroyed in India are somebody else’s business?

Did anyone in the Foreign Affairs Ministry read this Amnesty International report?

“Over the past 10 years, the Government of Narendra Modi has repeatedly trampled on dissent and discriminated against religious minorities. There is also not a single Muslim in his new Cabinet, while laws such as the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA), which was passed during his previous term, effectively sanctioned religious discrimination.

“When Narendra Modi was sworn in as Prime Minister in 2019, he said his Government would support all people and offer development for all through consensus—‘sabka ka saath, sabka vikaas’.

“But this turned out to be a failed promise, which did not lead to an improvement in human rights in the country.”

Hello, Saddam?

The Modi gift is reckless for a country like ours. Modi was presented a replica of the Ram Mandir, which was built in the city of Ayodhya, in India’s northern Uttar Pradesh state.

For Hindus, the site marks the birthplace of Lord Ram, one of the most revered deities in the Hindu faith.

India’s Muslims also revere the site for having once housed the 16th-century Babri Mosque, a monument of faith for Indian Muslims that stood on the site for centuries before it was razed by a Hindu nationalist mob in 1992. Sectarian riots ensued, killing some 2,000 people. Does this represent us?

Michael Kugelman, the director of the South Asia Institute at the Wilson Centre in Washington, is quoted as saying:

“The Ram Mandir revolves around some of the most divisive issues for religion and society in contemporary India. The temple consecration is papering over incredibly traumatic and heavily contested events in India’s history.”

Rana Ayyub, one of India’s most famous journalists and a renowned thorn in the side of Modi’s BJP, added: “His entire career has been based on Ayodhya because he realised early on that the only way to become a favourite of the masses is to endear them through the Ram Temple movement.

“This is the ultimate moment of Modi as a Hindu nationalist leader, and this is the ultimate moment of creating the Indian Muslim as a second-class citizen.”

Does this align with ‘every creed and race find an equal place’?

When will our national interests take precedence? When will our leaders seek national unity? Is Trinidad and Tobago simply a donkey to ride to gain profit?

Who will care for our family?