The Tribune

DESPITE the sadness of the occasion, how inspiring it was to be present at the funeral service for Sir Godfrey Kelly in Christ Church Cathedral on Friday. A large congregation remembered and paid solemn tribute to a great Bahamian who had touched the lives of so many of his compatriots over the period of his own long life and who will be so widely missed.

The service was attended by the Governor General, the Chief Justice, the Minister of Foreign Affairs, the Leader of the Opposition and three former Prime Ministers together with his extended family and a host of friends and colleagues – all observing coronavirus social distancing rules in a packed Cathedral.

So much has been written this past week about the life and times of Sir Godfrey that there is no need to repeat once again the full list of his impressive accomplishments which are well known. But what does bear reiterating, I think, is the extraordinary breadth of his interests and activities and the diversity of his achievements and contribution to the success of his country -- including its commercial development and the well-being of his fellow citizens, not least as Minister of Education. The evidence is well documented of his commitment to helping others, not just in his capacity as a politician but in so many other ways as well, including his involvement in charity.

He excelled in so many different fields during his long and productive life. He was a scholar and renowned lawyer with a brilliant probing mind, a politician and statesman, a four-time Olympian representing The Bahamas in sailing, a philanthropist, a mentor, adviser and friend to many and a loving family man. We learnt at his service – if I heard correctly – that his mantra was to “gather and scatter”. How well he obviously succeeded in doing just that as a legendary person of such vast accomplishment and with his customary gentlemanly demeanour.

On a personal note, it was interesting to learn stories of his famous travels around Europe in his student days with a group of friends of whom only Hubert Hauck now survives. Godfrey conscientiously kept a diary of their derring-do as impecunious students. A few years ago he allowed me to read his daily notations which are now a precious document for the families of those close and faithful friends to preserve. They make a splendidly enjoyable read!

Over the past week, there have been reports and letters in the local press about the supposed lack of public recognition of Godfrey Kelly’s massive contribution to his country and his place in Bahamian history. So I have taken an opportunity to re-read that interesting book entitled “A Modern Perspective of The UBP” by award-winning journalist Fred Sturrup which was published in 2008.

In it, the author states clearly and unequivocally that the purpose of his book was “primarily to balance the political history in the Commonwealth of The Bahamas. For the benefit of a nation and generations to come it is imperative that our history is accurately recorded. The United Bahamian Party had its failings but there was much that was good about its governance”. He concludes that the UBP “engineered great prosperity in the land” and “ushered in a powerful tourist thrust that became a landmark industry in the country and in the region” and that today’s economic stability of the country arose largely from that.

I found this book revealing and fascinating. It seems to reinforce indirectly the importance and effectiveness of the enlightened work of people like Sir Godfrey Kelly at a time when the country was still socially divided. Many surely owe him a considerable debt. He was clearly an exceptional man of great distinction and achievement – truly “A Man for All Seasons.”

WARNING OF WORST CONFLICT IN EUROPE SINCE 1945

As the danger of a Russian invasion of Ukraine increases by the day, the situation has become so serious that it is hard to ignore the latest developments even at the cost of repetition after writing about the issue in last week’s column. It seems that President Biden is alone in saying he is convinced that Russian leader Vladimir Putin has already made up his mind to invade. But, while uncertainty persists in the worsening crisis and the warnings to Putin of a strong NATO reaction are becoming starker, how interesting and fortuitous it is that in the midst of it all the annual Munich Security Conference should have taken place from 18 to 20 February. Not since the Cold War has this conference been convened in such dire circumstances at a time of heightened risk, with international relations in a more complex and dangerous state than ever.

Founded in 1963, the Munich Security Conference has for the past five decades become the world’s leading forum for discussion of international security policy – and it is claimed to have made a major contribution over the years to global dialogue on the issue. In February each year, it brings together senior decision-makers from around the world and is an important venue for policy-makers, experts and trans-Atlantic leaders to participate in tackling the most pressing security problems of the day. This year it is being held against a backdrop of an ongoing pandemic and increasingly sophisticated cyberattacks as well as the hideous tensions over Ukraine.

In a stellar line-up last week, the Munich conference was attended by more than thirty heads of state or government and top representatives of international organisations like the UN and NATO secretaries-general. But one notable absentee was the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, who declined to come.

The US delegation was led by Vice President Harris. She was accompanied by a notably large number of bipartisan members of the US Congress who, reportedly, were speaking with one voice about the US’s commitment to support its allies in respecting the territorial integrity of countries and rejecting any notion that existing borders should be allowed to be changed by force. So the determination of the US and its allies to uphold international rules and norms is clear, with the Vice President in her keynote speech giving an assurance that the US would stand together with its NATO allies, thus demonstrating strength and unity in face of Russian aggression over Ukraine.

As a fellow countryman, I admit to vicarious pleasure in watching the powerful and inspiring address at the Munich conference over the weekend by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson. It was a bravura performance on the world stage by a political leader who is, of course, beset currently by domestic political problems.

He spoke tellingly about the need for collective security and unity of purpose by Western leaders to stand up for freedom and democracy in the world and not allow aggression to pay. Ukraine’s sovereignty and independence should not be allowed to be imperilled and it must be defended.

Mr Johnson went on to say that, even if attacked, this nation of more than 40 million could not be subjugated for ever -- except perhaps in the east of the country where Russian-backed rebels already held sway over large areas. Britain was in this for the long haul, he added, as a part of NATO which had an obligation to protect its member states but was a peaceful and defensive alliance from which Russia had nothing to fear. But, ironically, its aggressive actions had put NATO on high alert with increased numbers of troops and armaments in the region, and presumably this was an outcome Putin was trying to avoid. He therefore urged the Russian leader to focus on the likely huge loss of life on both sides – including those of young Russian soldiers -- as a result of an invasion which would be fiercely opposed. He should de-escalate the crisis by pulling back his forces and pursuing a peaceful diplomatic solution while that was still possible even at such a late hour. Pretexts to justify an invasion like setting off a series of explosions and evacuating those in the east of the country because of a threatened NATO attack were ludicrous.

Meanwhile, British Foreign Secretary, Liz Truss, has warned separately that, if Putin gets away with attacking Ukraine, there is a danger that he will then go after the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. But, at the time of writing, there is hopeful news of a possible Biden/Putin summit meeting to address the crisis.

HUNGARY AND POLAND AT ODDS WITH EU

A significant development last week which could affect the long-term future of the European Union has received little international media attention. This was a ruling by the European Court of Justice against Hungary and Poland who had challenged an EU law that makes funding from Brussels to EU member states conditional on the maintenance of democratic standards. The ECJ determined that complying with the rule of law was a condition of enjoying membership of the EU and that funding could be slashed to countries which flouted the required standards.

Reportedly, both Hungary and Poland have been accused by the EU of breaches of the rule of law in their countries while backsliding on democratic standards in recent years and failing to meet the values they signed up to when they acceded to EU membership. Specifically, both have faced criticism over allegations of eroding judicial and media independence. They have been investigated for undermining the independence of the courts and media – with Poland being ordered to shut down a “disciplinary chamber” for judges and Hungary also being accused of curbing the rights of minorities.

These issues have become a running sore between Brussels and both Hungary and Poland who see the EU’s actions as unwarranted interference; as Hungary claims, too, that the bloc is seeking to influence the left-wing in the country’s upcoming elections.

Poland has been under fire from the EU after its Constitutional Tribunal ruled last year that some parts of the EU Treaties and elements of EU law were incompatible with the Polish constitution and that they were subordinate to it. This is, of course, serious because it challenges one of the key principles of European integration -- the supremacy of EU law which overrides national legislation throughout the 27-member bloc.

The dispute seems to go to the heart of EU values and the extent to which member states can be forced to follow them and obey EU law while still protecting their sovereignty and capacity for independent policy-making consistent with their membership of the bloc. Poland’s deputy justice minister is quoted as saying that the ECJ decision is “blackmail aimed to deprive us of our right to self-determination” – and that “this is the end of the EU as we know it. We must protect Polish sovereignty”.

The issue of the primacy of EU laws over its member states’ domestic statutes remains controversial. But rules agreed in Brussels are applied equally across the bloc and it will be interesting to watch how this challenge to a core principle develops. Some say it could even lead to both countries withdrawing from the EU – and that would be a severe blow to the bloc’s policy of continuing progress to “an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe”.