It's a hobby keeping certain global events on my radar screen meticulously treading events as they unfold. It includes various wars, i.e. the Middle East and looming Asian conflicts, and shifts among economies of scale reinventing approaches as the global economy decelerates dangerously to a halt.
Even at the national or global level, there's the usual delay in the timely resolution of issues as differences emerge between and among technocrats, professional politicians, policymakers, and private industries. But experts have followed the competing conflict in hopes of drawing some happy medium for everyone's benefit, a Leviathan task beyond my comprehension.
Ours is much simpler: Leadership Vacuum!
I've trailed my time with this administration to understand what discouraged it from its fully capable leadership turned completely apathetic in recent years. Why did it trash “wealth and jobs creation?”
Was it the loss on immigration and minimum wage to the feds? Is it its inability to strike a synergistic and constructive working relationship with both the feds and local legislature? Were these discouraging issues sufficient to employ apathy when these isles are drowning in fiscal trauma the direct result being a listless economy?
How sad the apathy that has blurred a once clear prism of what needs to be done. It has a palpable understanding that something is very wrong. It equally knows that the challenge centers on the prognosis that significant change for the better would be slow or bleak as opportunities deteriorate. The apparent complete abandon violates traditional resiliency to stay the course of adversity come hell or high water. It took comfort in political pandering over leadership.
Certainly, I can understand and appreciate the complexity of economic issues especially for a resource poor archipelago. But did leadership take proactive role in pushing bold and constructive policy measures with the legislature to ease the exodus of foreign capital? If so, what were those measures and did you push it with a sense of humility? Or did you encourage the guys and gals with feather ruffling arrogance to go “drink milk?”
Yes, it is an inherently difficult task navigating policy changes in a bleak economy while simultaneously trying to understand the nature of the beast that constantly shifts colors. Did you probe the depth of your perception and the urgency for bold policies on economic growth and stability with a sense of urgency? Have you any plans to reboot or revive a moribund economy?
Kernel of truth
But this difficulty is the very challenge of leadership. Leaving it to complete abandon turns into a crucial obstacle that feeds suspicion and distrust among governance. Didn't you see this as a consequence of dismissive arrogance?
“Claims that our leadership, institutions, analyses, or policy instruments are inadequate to the task at hand surely contain a kernel of truth,” writes Michael Spence, a Nobel laureate in economics, professor of economics at New York University's Stern School of Business and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution.
“But the deeper problem is a breakdown in precisely such values and goals-that is, a weakening of social cohesion. Restoring it will require analysts, policymakers, business leaders, and civil-society groups to clarify causes, share blame for mistakes, pursue flexible solutions in which costs are shared equitably, and, most important, explain that hard problems cannot be solved overnight”.
Abandonment triggers leadership vacuum that spreads into dystopia-meaning, where nothing works-to each his own as we collectively quiz our fate in the sea of despair. “How sad the wind, our sails are torn.”
The trashing of trust
“Leaders don't fly with the flock; they fly alone.” Indeed, we handed our future to incumbent leadership hoping that through their diligence and dedication we would see brighter days ahead.
It started out bullish and energetic determined to lead and make these isles an archipelago of pride and prosperity for our people. Somehow though it lost its magic and promise to what's right. Leadership has disintegrated into apathy and lack of Christian values leaving governance in complete abandon.
Today we no longer could look upstairs for leadership. The hill has morphed into a hub of “do-nothings” found in abundance, leadership so scarce. And so the simple folks quiz if this is the end of a very whimsical journey by this administration and is apathy its crowned achievement? How do we navigate the rough seas of fiscal calamity when the navigator is too busy partying and drinking wine when we're right smack in the seas of bankruptcy?
Former legislator Kandidu Taman recently quipped over Isla' 63 (KUAM Radio) that the NMI is under, in his words, “supervised sovereignty.” Really? Now let's dissect exactly what the newly coined beast is all about.
Obviously this view or personal coinage is completely off-mark. It opens the door for one to begin spouting off all the wrong information to undeserving innocent folks. In short, I think it's called intellectual dishonesty with a theme from a nursery song, Three Blind Mice.
In simple terms, you either have it (sovereignty) or you don't. There's no hybrid to the concept nor does it allow for room to compromise its political or legal definition. Again, either you are a sovereign country or you're not.
Furthermore, the NMI surrendered sovereignty under Section One of the Covenant Agreement. The agreement came into effect in July of 1975. As such, it's political subservience under the U.S. I think the confusion lies in mix up of sovereignty and local self-government. The two concepts are oceans apart.
The NMI is still far removed from attaining political maturity. We have yet to demonstrate that we can emplace measures designed to strengthen our democratic institutions. Be that as it may, the democratic process often entails a long and arduous journey.
Eventually, though our people would work up the resolve to meet their responsibilities as U.S. citizens and take the bull by the horn to reset the course of history.