The name of the revered James Ronald Webster, Anguilla’s Revolutionary Leader, who is fondly referred to as the “Father of the Nation”, was remembered and celebrated on Wednesday this week, March 2, his 90th birthday – a national holiday in his honour. An elderly, dignified, humble and ailing gentleman and statesman, he is still the recipient of much love, respect and admiration from all and sundry for the lionheartedness, determination, stubbornness, and endurance, with which he led Anguilla, ‘the mouse that roared’, and got the attention of the world to its agonising plight.
His calm but courageous words: “We will not accept no for an answer” – whether at solution-seeking meetings in Anguilla, at the Barbados Conference, at White Hall in London or at the United Nations, as he fought for freedom and self-determination for Anguilla – still resonate in the ears of those familiar with the challenging and dark days the island faced back then. Webster even took the battle for Anguilla’s freedom to the shores of St. Kitts in an invasion attack; threatened to ignite “the first West Indies War”; and spoke about possessing gunboats capable of blowing a frigate out of the water. Call some of it bluff, if you may. But the wiry, light-stepping and grassroots politician was dead serious about protecting the future of what was an impoverished and neglected Anguilla, with a crying need for liberty and dignity.
Up to a couple of years ago, when he decided to retire “peacefully in meditation and communion with God who led him through the revolution”, the Father of the Nation made his last appeal for the future of Anguilla. He called for a government-supported referendum towards independence for Anguilla which he saw as a crowning achievement for its long political and constitutional struggle. Needless to say, we still appear to be a considerable distance from that desired goal and so self-determination to that extent has not been achieved. Further, as an Overseas Territory, Britain has not prepared us for the eventuality of nationhood. Instead, we find ourselves in a state of subjugation and with our elected representatives bereft of real power and responsibility. This is obviously not what Ronald Webster envisioned for Anguilla and its leadership. One wonders how he would have reacted today to the pressures and hindrances facing the island. For all intents and purposes, he would still have blurted out with his characteristic clinched jaws: “We will not accept no for an answer”. It is such a courageous stance we need to take these days.
There are many questions which now challenge Anguilla, its leadership and people. We still want to know when the 2016 Budget, and the Banking Bills, will be approved instead of hearing about this and that fortnight which has not brought the expected outcome; and when the banking sector will return to normal so that there can be investment and financial confidence in Anguilla. Then there are some new questions popping up. They include: What happens to Anguilla and the other Overseas Territories if, in the next few months, by June 23, the United Kingdom, by referendum, pulls out of the European Union? What happens to the European Passports and ease of travel and residence which so many of our people now have? Will we lose those privileges? What happens to the well-needed grants and technical support we receive annually from the European Union through the membership of the UK, and so on? There is not a word about these questions or any discussion about them with the Overseas Territories. Is this a good or respectful manner in which to treat trusting territories? Or, as Anguilla’s Chief Minister, Mr. Victor Banks, summed it up: “Are they saying it is not our business”? Certainly, without answers to such burning questions, there will be much confusion, conjecture and worry.
It is not clear how a Member State, like Britain, would be affected if it were to leave the European Union, but it is known that any member can withdraw under the EU Treaty in accordance with its own constitutional requirements. No state has ever done so, but Greenland, part of the Danish Realm, voted to leave the EU’s predecessor – the European Economic Community (EEC) in 1985; and Algeria did so following independence in 1962 – having been part of France until then. Conversely, the UK is not part of any country. It is, by itself, a sovereign Member State of the EU but possessing 14 far-flung territories in the Caribbean, North and South Atlantic, South Pacific and the Indian Ocean. The question remains how will they all fare if the UK withdraws from the EU? Will they be better off seeking independence?
As for Anguilla, the ball may be in our court to hasten our new advanced constitution just in case it becomes necessary to take a step towards independence sooner than later. We have been acquainted with seeking self-determination before – as our 1967 Revolution portrays – lest we forget. Ronald Webster may not be around, but someday a courageous and shrewd leader may emerge from among our citizenry to lead us to the so-called Promised Land.
