Tyranny of the Premier

June 14, 2009

Dear Sir,

I, like many Bermudians, am not opposed to receiving the former Guantánamo detainees on humanitarian grounds. Bermuda has always opened its arms to foreign nationals; an explosion of our population would lend credence to this. The primary anger of the Bermuda populace is based on the manner in which this "operation" took place — by stealth. While many may view our status as an Overseas Territory of Great Britain unthinkable, it is a status that the people of this country have chosen to accept freely and willingly, and our expectation is that others, and more specifically our own elected Government, honour and treat our 'free choice' with respect.

For the Premier of this country to decide to bring detainees to the shores of Bermuda without even consulting with his own Cabinet is an untenable act, and he should resign. The British aside, this is a slap in the face of the people of our country who, in essence, will bear the responsibility of a singular act by a single man. He is considered "first among equals", not first, in the internal governance of our land. To have not even consulted with his Cabinet leaves us breathless. He has unilaterally acted like the same dictators from which he has now freed the Chinese.

But what of our citizens; what of our rights to human dignity and respect? And in the end, if extraordinary events have us confronted by China, to whom shall we turn? Do we now point to the British as he is currently doing after the fact, and remind them they are responsible for our external affairs and security? The same British whom he just ignored when making the decision that has placed us in this predicament? Or perhaps the Americans who've off loaded their debacle on to us. That would be a hope, as even years after the closing of the bases they've not agreed to a coast guard between our country and theirs that would offer both some semblance of security? How foolish and politically immature we look.

Our country is not a political football to be used at the whim of the Premier for his personal ambition to gain favour with the President of the United States, or in his effort to be seen as a player on the international scene. His response to questions as to why he has done such a thing is to say that he knew it was good when President Obama called him to tell him it was the right thing to do. Excuse me; as much as I respect President Obama, he is not my President and has no vested interest in my country's well being. The last time I looked, the honourable President of the United States was doing everything within his power to ensure the people of the US were safe, secure, healthy, wealthy and wise. The people of Bermuda deserve no less from our Premier. Rather than attending our 'homeland' (thought I'd use words he can relate to), his actions in this matter scream of the disdain he holds both for his Cabinet and for the people of our beloved country. I certainly can identify with the detainees who wished to escape the tyranny of their country; I too wish to escape the tyranny of mine.

RESIGN, DR. BROWN

Warwick

We're not coming back

June 13, 2009

Dear Sir,

We have been frequent visitors to your beautiful island since 1981. No more. You have allowed our liberal President to infect your island with these people, nobody else wanted them. We will spread the word to all our friends who I am certain will agree to travel elsewhere. How stupid was your government to accept this group. You will realise the folly of this action. Kindly convey our sentiments and utter disappointment to parliament.

FORMER VISITOR

New Jersey

A new Machiavelli

June 11, 2009

Dear Sir,

Congratulations are due to Dr. Brown for one of the more audacious power plays in recent history. The arrangement brokered between Bermuda and the U.S. concerning four Uighur Chinese former Guantánamo bay detainees is one designed alienate Britain and ultimately press the case for Bermudian independence in a very public, very international way. That this comes at a time when Dr. Brown's own political future is in doubt should only remind both parties of what a canny politician he is. From all appearances, Dr. Brown has attempted to frame the issue as one of immigration and therefore one within the ambit of his government. Perhaps, but there is undoubtedly more to it than that; any intelligent observer will wonder the extent of the as yet unknown quid pro quo with America that will form part of the deal. Even if it is an immigration matter as Dr. Brown claims, it is an immigration matter with a marked international dimension that extends beyond Bermudian sovereignty: China has demanded the return of these men.

Whether Dr. Brown likes it or not, that makes the question of these men's status an international issue and, under our current governance framework, makes their status the responsibility of Britain. By pre-empting British involvement, Dr. Brown has created no small problem for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Does Britain effectively retract the right to reside in Bermuda now that the men are settled on the island? Not only does this risk an international humanitarian outcry, but it risks repudiating an agreement made between Dr. Brown and the US. Who would be most embarrassed by this move?

My money is on Britain. If the UK forces these men to relocate it could easily be portrayed (given the right rhetoric) as act of paternalistic imperialism, a strong armed attempt to assert Britain's dominion over Bermuda. This is especially the case because any British involvement at this point looks like deliberate interference in a matter that (seemingly) both sides — Bermuda and the US — have worked through to their mutual satisfaction. As it stands, the UK risks appearing as the diplomatic equivalent of a grumpy old curmudgeon by asserting its influence in a situation when the other parties concerned would prefer to leave things as they are.

Whether or not Dr. Brown acted lawfully is no longer the point; politics will have moved on from questions of legality. What matters now is how this plays out: does the UK come off as the bad guy, the stickler for regulations that forces these men back to Guantánamo or (possibly worse) to China by invalidating the agreement between the US and Bermuda? If so, then despite the actual outcome of this debacle, Dr. Brown will have won no small political victory. He will have shown the world that his cries for independence have apparent validity. Machiavelli would be proud.

EDWARD RANCE

Oxford, UK

Change in policy

June 12, 2009

Dear Sir,

Following the fortuitous turn of events of last week, I have informed my American wife that a foreign spouse of a Bermudian no longer needs to wait ten long years to obtain status. Unfortunately, I have not been able to convince her that part of that process involves a minor detention at the gulag at Guantánamo Bay. She believes my sending her there carries some sort of ulterior motive and is reluctant to go. Please advise.

KEES VAN BEELEN

New York City

Looking for a job

June 11, 2009

Dear Sir,

Why are we resettling four Chinese Muslim detainees from the Guantánamo Bay detention facility? Bermuda is far too small for this nonsense, and surely the US government must realise this.

I'm a Bermudian who's been out of work for four months after being made redundant, and I can't find a job. I suppose these guys will get jobs, houses and be taught to say good morning! Maybe Doc Hollywood will put them up in his mansion.

JC SIMPSON

St. David's

Is Bermuda safer?

June 11, 2009

Dear Sir,

In your story about the resettlement of the four Guantánamo detainees (RG online 11 June 2009) it was reported that: US Attorney General Eric Holder said in a written statement: "By helping accomplish the President's objective of closing Guantánamo, the transfer of these detainees will make America safer... " So why does resettling them in Bermuda not have any impact? Considering Bermuda's track record of striving to ensure that no expat settles permanently on the island, one wonders what Bermuda is getting out of this deal.

EX-EXPAT

Toronto, Canada

A dumping ground

June 11, 2009

Dear Sir,

Will government be supplying low cost housing and paying for it? What are their qualifications and what kind of jobs are they eligible for? Not that we are having a problem with blue collar jobs for Bermudians and white collar layoffs due to the recession. Who will be supporting them until they get settled? I hope not the Bermudian tax dollars.

I am concerned for the fairness of this situation when the US and UK could support these people far better than our small Island that has housing and job issues to deal with for its own people. Remember these men have families, do you think they may want to bring them to Bermuda when they get their status? Is Bermuda going to be a dumping ground for other countries' mistakes? I think we have opened a can of worms gentleman.

A CONCERNED BERMUDIAN VOICE

City of Hamilton

How long for status?

June 11, 2009

Dear Sir,

Once again, Dr. Brown has shown his complete ignorance and disregard for the Governor of Bermuda, as well as the people of Bermuda! Whether or not these detainees are innocent or not, consultation should have been made with Governor Sir Richard Gozney before any decision was made, as we are a British-ruled Colony ... not "Independent Island, all hail King Ewart!". I read that they also get status ... is this immediate or will they have to apply over and over and over again before they finally get it, like so many Bermudians have had to? Thanks Premier Brown, you again shine bright on your pedestal of power!

SHOCKED AND OUTRAGED

Pembroke

Bad publicity

June 14, 2009

Dear Sir,

To satisfy my curiosity about the interest that the US has in this subject I just Googled "Bermuda Terrorists". There are already 162,000 entries. Few of them are complimentary about Bermuda. How to wreck Bermuda in one easy lesson!

READER

Paget