HE Washington, DC-based Council on Hemispheric Affairs (COHA) describes itself as an independent, non-profit, non-partisan research and information organisation that monitors political, economic and diplomatic issues affecting the Western Hemisphere.

But as regards its latest position paper on the prospect of Bermudian Independence (published in full in the - , March 17), I must say I have severe doubts about the think-tank's claim to be "non-partisan". For I seem to detect a distinct anti-Independence slant running through the length of its report on the question of Bermudian sovereignty.

Although even some of the world's most well respected and influential think-tanks claim to be non-partisan, they sometimes pursue particular agendas. Sometimes it's a case of providing a government or agency that pays its bills with information that is shaped to fit that particular government or agency's policies.

And a think-tank may have other, private clients, business lobbies, for instance, or local pressure groups, who help to finance their research. That research can then be tailored to dovetail with a lobby or pressure group's outlook.

In the Bermuda context, it would not come as a surprise to me to learn that anti-Independence elements in this country had contributed to COHA. I am not saying they paid this group to come up with a decidedly anti-Independence report ? but I am saying such a scenario is not entirely beyond the realm of possibility.

I could dismiss the findings of this organisation out of hand. Being an American outfit, I think it is a bit rich for them to lecture me, a Bermudian who supports Independence for my country, and say that it is not in my best interests to pursue sovereignty at this time and under this Government.

And, of course, there's a deep irony at work here given the United States fought for its Independence and was the first country in this hemisphere to win sovereignty from Britain, the common historical overlord of the former 13 North American colonies and Bermuda.

However, that would be the easy way out and I am not going to take that path, for I am well aware of the nature of the struggle for Bermudian Independence. It is a struggle for the Bermudian mind.

This struggle does not involve guns and street fighting. I have an intellect and a pen and these are the weapons Independence supporters must used in their quest for the creation of an Independent Bermudian micro-nation. So I am going to catalogue and challenge some of the anti-Independence findings that appear in the latest COHA report.

To begin with the report claims that Premier Alex Scott is ignoring the wishes of 15,000 Bermudians who signed the recent petition calling for a referendum to settle the question of Bermudian Independence.

I maintain that this initiative is, in fact, a cover for an anti-Independence movement in this country. And the bottom line is that no matter how many signatures they collect, the organisers of Bermudians For Referendum are not the duly elected Government of this country.

If they don't like the current policy with respect to Independence, then they should either join a political grouping that represents their views or they can start their own political party and put their concerns directly to the people of Bermuda. They are trying to fight this issue from the sidelines: if they feel so passionate about the matter, why aren't they in the trenches?

Secondly, COHA's argument that Premier Scott is embarking on a quest for Bermudian Independence "by any means necessary" is false. There is no pro-Independence movement here with guns to our heads to force the issue.

As I have stated, when it comes to Independence this is a struggle for the minds of Bermudians. However, there have always been elements in this country who do not want to see any public discussion on the issue ? and I maintain that is where the real anti-democratic sentiments reside.

COHA's claim that the path to sovereignty is dependent on reaching a critical mass of public support makes me wonder which case studies they can bring forward to support that supposition. One could ask the question which comes first ? the chicken or the egg? In many anti-colonial struggles there has always been a period of activation (or politicisation) during which the people must be persuaded that this is the path which they must follow.

More than 200 years after the event, we still hear much about the long and bloody struggle for Independence in America. But the War of Independence was not just a straight fight between Americans and the British. It was also a civil war ? for not all British settlers supported the idea of American Independence. In fact, after 1776 thousands of Loyalists ended up retreating to Canada, where the British presence remained.

In Kenya, which endured a long and bloody struggle for Independence in the 1950s, there was also conflict between Africans who supported the British presence and Africans who demanded Independence.

struggle centred around the Kikuyu people, the largest tribal grouping in Kenya. Their support was almost equally divided between the British and the Mau Mau freedom fighters. In fact, during the liberation struggle the Mau Mau killed more Africans than they did British troops and/or British settlers.

There was no question of a critical mass developing of its own volition there: the Mau Mau started their Independence struggle as a small group and had to fight long and hard to win over support for their movement. When it comes to Bermuda and the question of Independence, we have yet to really enter a period of activation / politicisation ? and such a period represents a legitimate stage in the growth of any democratic society. The question of size is not a barrier to Bermuda becoming an Independent state. There are smaller countries than Bermuda with smaller economies that have already taken the path to statehood. These days the economic viability of a country does not necessarily depend on whether it has natural resources under its soil to sell on the world market, nor on its manufacturing base.

Just look around you at the International Business community that is currently based in Bermuda and which is growing by the day. In the book Pulitzer Prize-winning foreign correspondent Thomas Friedman goes to great pains to point out that in an era of instantaneous communications, being small need not be a hindrance to any country's economic and social development.

Bermuda has attracted foreign economic interests here not as a result of being a British Overseas Territory but because we have created the infrastructure that allows International Business to operate here.

, as I have said before, Bermuda is a country with legitimate national aspirations and interests and not someone else's corporate industrial park. International Business benefits handsomely from operating in Bermuda; Bermuda profits handsomely from hosting these companies.

It's a mutually beneficial relationship ? but that does not mean foreign tycoons should have a disproportionate say in how Bermuda's future unfolds.

On the question of national defence for Bermuda, which COHA alludes to, I ask the question: Who is going to attack us? The Spanish because they may have a centuries-old historical claim that they landed here first? Or even the Portuguese, who may have an equal claim to the territory of Bermuda? Get real. Bermuda is unlikely to top anyone's hit list.

Bermuda is an island. It doesn't share borders with any other countries. And often it's border disputes that lead to wars. For instance, Belize in Central America has a long-running border dispute with neighbouring Guatemala.

The Guatemalans claim large areas of Belize and the British routinely sent troops there to forestall an invasion. But the dispute was ultimately settled and Belize became Independent and the British withdrew their troops. Given Bermuda's isolation, I ask again: Who is going to attack Bermuda? Even the question of support for and opposition to Independence being split along racial lines may no longer hold water, even in the face of what the polls state.

Last year, when they the Debating Society held an island-wide competition in the schools on the question of Independence for Bermuda, a predominantly white, all-girls school, took the position of being in favour of Independence for Bermuda, while predominantly black Berkeley took the anti-Independence stance.

The girls school won hands down. I was proud of them (and not just because they cited some of the arguments that have appeared in my column to back up their position). From that day on, I have been convinced that while we may never win over their parents, the children will accept the idea of an Independent Bermudian nation.

I reject the anti-Independence opinions of the COHA report for I continue to see in my mind's eye the day the flag of an Independent Bermudian nation will fly over these isles ? finally ending that great argument about the nature of who has the right to be called Bermudian.