Maroc - NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - 17/Sep 10:42

When ministers play statesmen

How freelance diplomacy won’t keep Trinidad safe THE EDITOR: Phillip Edward Alexander’s recent 2,000-word statement on Venezuela is less foreign policy analysis than a performance. It is a housing minister holding forth as if he were secretary of state, weaving history, geopolitics and military doctrine into a narrative that is as self-assured as it is ill-considered. The issue here is not that Alexander has opinions. Every citizen is entitled to those. The problem is that a junior minister in housing decided to issue what reads like a government doctrine on national security, foreign affairs, and even American military policy – without any sign of co-ordination from the Foreign Ministry, the National Security Council, or the Prime Minister herself. That matters because in government words are never just words. When a minister speaks, the world listens for signals of official policy. What Alexander delivered was a freewheeling endorsement of American naval intervention, a confident invocation of the Monroe Doctrine, and a narrative that reduces complex bilateral relations with Venezuela to a story of gang suppression and border control. It was not just undisciplined – it was dangerous. Foreign policy cannot be improvised like a construction project. Alexander’s method is simple: identify a problem, deploy force, collect a result. That might work for fixing drains or housing sites. International relations demand something else entirely – legal frameworks, diplomatic channels, calibrated intelligence, an understanding of trade, migration and energy flows. None of these feature in his analysis. The bigger issue is institutional. When ministers freelance commentary on matters outside their remit, it signals either that the government has lost control of its own communication or that it is willing to tolerate rogue interventions. Neither is reassuring. To be clear, there has been some response. Dr Kirk Meighoo, the government’s communications voice, did release a short, angry statement on September 16 rebuking Venezuelan threats. But that looked reactive rather than co-ordinated, as though the administration was scrambling after Alexander’s words had already entered public debate. Timing is not cosmetic – it is substance. In diplomacy, who speaks, when they speak, and how they frame a situation can either steady tensions or inflame them. Alexander’s contribution risked the latter. His insistence that any Venezuelan strike on Trinidad would trigger American intervention under the Monroe Doctrine is exactly the kind of language that escalates disputes rather than calms them. This has consequences beyond politics. Investors watch signals of stability. Energy negotiations with Venezuela – essential for regional gas projects – depend on predictability and trust. When a housing minister doubles as a freelance foreign policy strategist, what message does that send to regional partners? That TT cannot control its own government lines. That is more than embarrassment. It erodes credibility, and credibility is the currency small states need most. Democratic accountability also suffers. Citizens deserve to know who speaks for them on matters of national security. If one minister proclaims doctrine while actual security officials remain muted, how can the public measure performance or hold leaders to account? That confusion is not strength – it is the early sign of institutional collapse. Yes, threats from Venezuela are real. Trinidad’s prime minister must defend sovereignty. But defence requires clarity, co-ordination and a working chain of command, not junior ministers playing statesman with social media manifestos. If the government wishes to restore confidence, it should do three things. First, make it clear that only designated officials speak on matters of foreign policy. Second, publish factual, measured accounts of actions taken so the public can judge. Third, stop elevating partisan chest-thumping into national policy. Alexander may have set out to sound like a general. What he revealed instead is a government where bluster substitutes for discipline and amateur theatrics for statecraft. That should concern every citizen, because small nations cannot afford message chaos when stability is already at risk. MICHAEL DHANNY via e-mail The post When ministers play statesmen appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.