A Petition

Above, a clipping from Libération (Feb 18) with pictures taken of barricades in Pointe-à-Pitre.

If I haven't written about politics since the first days of the strike, it is not because things have settled down. Indeed, the strike eventually lasted a total of 44 days, bringing the entire island to a complete standstill, and its economic and political leaders to its knees. It also resulted in one unfortunate death: a strike leader shot dead by armed youths in a dangerous housing project. The agreement, signed by Elie Domota and the Prefect Nicolas Desforges at the end of the strike, would be named after the strike leader, Jacques Bino. Officially, with the signing of this agreement, the strike was over. But the movement continues. LKP continues to put pressure on MEDEF, the business union, and other large companies who have yet to sign the agreement. LKP also moves to ensure that the conditions of agreement are applied. And so, it goes on.

I have not written about this mainly because I do not feel qualified. There are so many details, so many circumstances which make the politics here difficult to understand. More importantly, though, I admit that I am rather sick of it all. I could barely put up with one week of strike; I was lucky enough to have been away for the majority of it. Guadeloupe is far from being my country, and these are not my people. This is not my fight. I'd rather write about things that interest me, things that are closer to my heart.

Left, Elie Domota and the LKP take over the General Council chamber (FranceAntilles).

However, yesterday a petition was published in France-Antilles which drew my interest. The petition was entitled, Soutenons les luttes sociales mais défendons les principes démocratiques, We support social battles but defend democratic principles. It was written in response to LKP having taken over the opening meeting of the General Council last Thursday. I felt compelled to write about it because I share the opinions expressed in the petition. The tactics used by this movement have far too much in common with those used by common thugs. It is reassuring to know that Guadeloupeans are not ready to sacrifice principles for what is, essentially, monetary gain.

Below, a quick translation of the petition:

We support social battles but defend democratic principles
Something very serious happened on Thursday May 7th in Basse-Terre, something that we, Guadeloupean citizens, cannot tolerate and which must be brought to light.

The President of the General Council, Jacques Gillot, had decided to assemble the elected officials of Guadeloupe and numerous players of civil society, including Elie Domota and LKP. As stated in the invitation sent to all parties, Mr. Gillot was hoping “to give the floor to the citizens,” inviting them to “build a Guadeloupean societal project together” – words which seemed to take into account criticisms often made against elected officials. The President of the General Council stated that a method would be drawn up together. He added that he was seeking a more ‘participatory’ democracy.

We, the signatories of this declaration, do not all agree with the political alternatives of Presidents Gillot and Lurel. However, whatever one might think of the appropriateness of such an assembly – of its political, even politician, aims – we are fervent in our solemn affirmation that the democratically elected political representatives of the Guadeloupean people have every right to draw up, as they intend, their political strategy. To refuse them this right is to undermine the democratic liberties of the Guadeloupean people. And yet, this is exactly what has happened in Basse-Terre: an act whose fundamental nature consisted of refusing elected officials the right to exercise their mandate. But this was subtle. It was subtle because this act disguised itself to avoid being correctly identified. It was an attack on democracy which resembled an insurrection. The disguise? A particular use of time and order: acting before the opening of the assembly and pretending to put the chamber in order (a supposed symbolic occupation) to escape suspicion of undemocratic actions. This tumultuous occupation, with intimidation of administrative personnel and the moving of chairs and equipment necessary for the organization of the meeting constituted a de facto exclusion of the participants. A normal debate being all but impossible under such conditions, the cancellation of the Assembly by the President of the General Council was unavoidable.

LKP is playing with fire on a powder keg. Invading the General Council, the emblematic place for the exercise of democracy since the abolition of slavery, and declaring a "notice" to elected officials, definitely constitutes a reconsideration of the electoral legitimacy. We can only bring attention to the ambiguity of the term notice: a warning or a threat?

The leaders of LKP justify themselves by declaring that they are the people, that it is the streets that govern and admit that they want to replace representative democracy by direct democracy under the pretext that the former is “out of order.” Even if suffrage alone does not constitute a democracy –certainly insufficient - it is a prerequisite and necessary. The leading question that we pose to LKP: What right? The defense of workers should in no case be detrimental to democracy. When LKP decides to invade the General Council under the pretext that democracy is “out of order,” LKP grant themselves a right with which the sovereign people have not entrusted them. This is a use of might. Believing that the representative democracy is “out of order” is an opinion. We can share that opinion or not. Invading the General Council is an act that calls for qualification. Committing the act in authorizing oneself his opinion only is dangerous to democracy. Carelessly confusing the mob with the people, pretending to represent the people without mediation or any collectively drawn and approved process, this is what seems to us very serious. LKP's notebook of demands is not the Constitution of Guadeloupe.

Many of us supported the social demands expressed by LKP, and today still, the main demands of workers are legitimate. However, with this unfortunate event in Basse-Terre, a social and societal demand supported by the majority of Guadeloupeans has become a political posture of the LKP. This posturing plays with the fundamental principles of democracy and we, Guadeloupean citizens concerned about the positive evolution of our country, whatever our individual political choices, are united in declaring that this game is dangerous. It constitutes a veiled reconsideration of these democratic principles.

Therefore, a firm clarification is necessary. It is all the more necessary because this reconsideration, disguised, was put forward in the chamber of the General Council. We declare ourselves to be profoundly attached to the democratic principles that must structure public life, the exercise of citizenship, all things for which our ancestors fought. Not only do these principles alone allow for a constructive and peaceful debate at the heart of Guadeloupean society, but more importantly, the very survival of that society.

For us, democracy is as much the freedom to express all opinions – including minority opinions –, public debate, political representation expressed by the vote (what is called representative democracy), as the right to demonstrate our dissatisfaction in the street. But social power legitimately demonstrated in the street – however successful – that can positively reinforce the political choice of elected officials, cannot take the place of political power, unless, of course, the conditions of a democratic political life are not fulfilled, which is not the case in Guadeloupe today. Otherwise, we enter into a rationale where the charismatic authority of the leader or the group overcomes that of common law.

In conclusion, even if we recognize the right of LKP to further its demands, without a doubt legitimate, we firmly condemn his double pretentions:

1. his pretension to portray himself and only himself as the people, all people, and thus to speak in its name;
2. his pretension in holding power coming directly from the street, thus disqualifying political representation and consequently denying the legitimacy of the vote.

These two pretensions are heavy with all the excesses, including those that would turn us towards the deadly cycle of violence and civil war or serious confrontations between Guadeloupeans. Is this in the interest of Guadeloupe? Most certainly no!

Because we support the social battles while being firm on the fundamental principles of democracy in our country, we are want urgently to shed light on the gravity of the events of Basse-Terre.

Guadeloupe Makes The Economist

I brought back with me an entire stack of Economists that were sitting unread on a shelf. They've lost their news-worthy value, perhaps, but remain incredibly informative. I am currently on last week's issue (No. 8619), and came across an article describing the strike in Guadeloupe. Is it wrong to feel slightly proud that my new home has made a major English-language publication?

Apparently, Guadeloupe, along with Martinque, also made this week's issue (No. 8620) as well. The article focuses on the fear of contagion: that social unrest will spread from the overseas départements and infect the whole of France.

Nothing like a month-long strike fraught with racial and social divide to put you on the map!

Day 8

It is day eight of general strikes. The real negotiations begun yesterday, and despite the excess of hot air, the discussions are supposedly moving along at a good clip. Still, it does not seem likely that the strike will end this week.

It must be understood that in France, people have the right to strike. And they do. Often. But, it seems to me that there is an entirely different dimension to strikes in Guadeloupe that is absent in those that take place in France métropolitain.

It is a dimension that is immediately noticeable. For one, there is racialization (1) of the conflict. The UGTG often frames the conflict as one between Blacks and Whites, despite the fact that the grand majority of people representing the State - including the President of the Regional Council, and those forming the Association of Mayors - are Antillais. It is clear that the history of slavery and colonization are important factors in explaining why strikes in Guadeloupe are different than in France métropolitain. "The Guadeloupean community was born from conflict, from one of its particularly atrocious forms that is colonization. The colonial reality was consistently marked by conflicts - often violent and bloody - at every level (2). In this context, the strike is not simply a conflict over economic interests, but an extension of the initial conflict that is colonization.

It is no wonder, then, that this movement condones its more agressive, or even violent, elements. Still, academic justifications are far from reality. I find it somewhat scandalous that Elie Domota, the spokesman for Liyannaj, has not condemned the violence (and indeed, has said that it was natural).

To be perfectly honest, the entire thing is extremely draining. I don't mean physically, even though we have been rationing since the beginning of the strike. But the low murmuring of violence... and to be held hostage by a foreign history, its burdens, pain, recriminations, hate, bitterness...there is a strong urge to flee.

And I do flee...I leave tomorrow morning for the United States. But I am very nervous that we will run into trouble on the road. There may be roadblocks, and there have been reports of violence at roadblocks. M. assures me that we will have no trouble, but that's just man talk. I am hoping for the best.








(1) ra⋅cial⋅ize/ˈreɪʃəˌlaɪz/
–verb (used with object), -ized, -iz⋅ing.

1. to impose a racial interpretation on; place in a racial context.
2. to perceive, view, or experience in a racial context.
3. to categorize or differentiate on the basis of race.

Taken from "racialization." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 28 Jan. 2009. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racialization>.

(2) "La communauté guadeloupéene est née du conflit, de l'une de ses formes particulièrement atroce qu'est la colonisation. La réalité coloniale a éte en permanence émaillée de conflits de tous ordres, souvent violents et sanglants."
Georges Combe, L'explosion conflictuelle. De la signification des conflits sociaux, Etudes Guadeloupéenes, No.5, février 1992.

Grève!

The exclamation point is actually unnecessary. The strikes were hardly unexpected, and we're already in the sixth day of strikes. I've been meaning to write a post about it, but the enormity of the entire thing is daunting. Rather more complicated than writing about pastries!

Last Tuesday was the official beginning of the strike. The movement is being led by l'Union Générale des Travailleurs de Guadeloupe, or more commonly known as UGTG, a powerful workers union that is known for its strong-arm tactics. The UGTG has assembled other unions and associations to form Liyannaj kont pwofitasyon (association against profit). There are a total of 120 demands, categorized under the headings of standard of living, education, professional training, employment, union rights and liberties, public services, production, development and infrastructure, creole culture, and profit-busting.

As you can imagine, the demands are varied. Certain demands seem entirely reasonable, such as the demand for compliance with labor law that obliges companies of a certain size to hire workers with disabilities. Others seem like very good ideas, such as the creation of a inter-Caribbean organization for fishing, even if their proposal by strike seems misguided. But the demands are often incoherent: there are demands that only the national government could redress (increase in minimum wage), that seem to be at odds with each other (priority to Guadeloupeans for hiring vs. end exploitation of foreign workers).

The UGTG uses incredibly aggressive language. Before negotiations even began, the strikers threatened they were ready to do whatever was necessary to get results. They often fall back on a very popular discourse, recalling Guadeloupe's history of slavery and colonialism. The UGTG also uses incredibly aggressive tactics. Strikers have 'invited' stores to close their doors in show of solidarity, where it is understood that non-compliance will result in physical reprisals. This does not simply apply to small shops in the city, but even the largest two commercial centers (think: an entire mall) have closed to avoid conflict.

Concurrent to the general strike led by UGTG, the proprietors of gas stations have shut off their pumps since last Monday. They are protesting the arrival of a dozen new gas stations with self-service pumps (currently, all gas stations are full service).

This is actually the second major strike since my arrival in Guadeloupe. However, that strike was vastly different. The strike was led not by worker's unions, but by the owners of transportation companies, who were demonstrating against the high price of gas. They had their employees block all major roads, and life and business came to a halt on the entire island for 4 days.

An initial meeting was had on Saturday, after 4 days of back and forth, with no results; at 11:30pm, UGTG left the table en masse. This afternoon, discussions will continue, with the sole goal of forming workgroups to breakdown and discuss the 124 demands. The meeting was scheduled for 4:00, and as of 4:40, and UGTG is still no where in sight. It seems unlikely that the strike will end any time soon.

I spent the whole day watching the inauguration online and now I am pooped. But thank God for live streaming video! Similar to election night, the inauguration was covered on TV, but commentary was provided by French journalists, and the speeches were dubbed. And I really want to hear the words from the man himself.

In other news media, the inauguration made the front page of the three major French newspapers:

Libération, a center-left daily;




















Le Figaro, a center right daily;




















And Le Monde, the French equivalent of The New York Times where the inauguration shares the front page with the bank bail-outs.



















Obama's inauguration made the front page of France-Antilles as well:

In Guadeloupe;




















In Martinique;




















And in Guyane. Though its relegated to the small box on the right. While I realize that this is the inauguration of the American president, and not the French president, I wonder what made the Guyanese editors decide that some leaky pipes should be the top story?














Watching the inauguration is obviously not the same thing as being there. I am sure that if I were back in New York, I could at least share my enthusiasm with other fellow citizens. As it is, it was just me and my laptop. But, I was still so happy to see it, and seeing the enormous crowds of fellow citizens so absolutely thrilled...it gives me great joy. I didn't need to be there to feel that.

Americans Tourists in Guadeloupe

While doing some internet research this morning, I came across this review in the NYtimes. The writer compares the Guadeloupe to what it was 15 years ago, noting the major changes that the island has undergone in those ensuing years. Its a very different perspective, one that carries odd assumptions (the writer is astonished not to hear a word of English spoken during his two-week stay - why would he? The island is French), and a bit of misplaced nostalgia (the writer laments the rise of local cuisine at the detriment of classic French cuisine). The review was published 4 1/2 years ago, but it is actually still an accurate depiction of tourism on the island: the inconvenient flight connections, the mad driving. At the end of the article, one is certainly not convinced about choosing Guadeloupe as a vacation destination.

While I can neither claim a long nor profound acquaintance with the Guadeloupe, I certainly saw the substantial barriers to American tourists and wrote about it here and here. So it was no surprise that I also found incredibly negative reviews of the island from American tourists:

"Stay Home, Unless You Speak Fluent French: Walking on the "beach" next to our "resort" turned into a nightmare for us when a local accosted us, asking us if we were American and calling us criminals and generally ranting about all the problems of the world and how American criminals were at the center of them. Honestly my wife and I felt a bit out of place even before this, with all but a few people on the island treating us in a courteous manner. We honestly did our best to communicate and to act politely, and in my opinion did not stand out really compared to any of the mostly French tourist that happened to be around. Stares from the locals were quite disconcerting, and after the beach incident we decided to leave...Apparently American standards of sanitation are very high...All in all from the information we gathered regarding Guadeloupe we learned very little that is current and or timely. The resentment toward Americans is obvious, the populated areas are dirty, and somewhat unseemly. The flora and fauna are absolutely beautiful, and I'm sure that this island is world class as far as its beauty. Too bad the rest of the island is not."

"Go Someplace Else!!!!:
Pros: Beautiful island
Cons: They hate Americans!!!
The Bottom Line: Travel to a more pleasant island where the locals are a bit more friendly."

Both reviews were taken from epinions.com. To be fair, these 2 reviews were the only completely negative reviews out of 9. But, to be fair, the other 7 repeated many of the same complaints. I imagine also that the strong anti-American sentiment was related to the time period (both reviews were written in May 2003, which marked the end of the Iraq invasion and the beginning of the occupation), and that American tourists would find attitudes much altered (read my posts about Barack Obama).

What I can say is that Guadeloupe should never be the destination of choice for (White) tourists seeking to (re)live the good 'ol colonial days. Nor should it ever be for those simply looking for Caribbean sun and surf served with rum cocktails. There are far better (and cheaper) destinations that meet the (arguably high) expectations of Americans. Those Americans who would venture here should be interested in the life and culture of this island that I try to describe here - the politics, the music, the food, etc. - with, of course, a bit of sun, surf, and rum thrown in.

Island Origins

Above, Lilian Thuram on the left, Teddy Riner on the right.

The Tuesday edition of FranceAntilles featured as its leading article what its editors considered the top 10 things Guadeloupe has going for it in a time of economic uncertainty. High on that list was its athletes. While there is quite a long list of high performance atheletes originating from Guadeloupe, two stand out from the rest.

Lilian Thuram was born in Pointe-à-Pitre on January 1st 1973. Thuram is considered by some to be "one of the most successful footballers in the history of the game" (1). He made a name for himself as a dynamic and incredibly performant defender in some of the best soccer clubs in Europe, including Juventus and FC Barcelona. In addition, having been selected 142 times to play for the French national team, he holds the record for France's most capped player. Though his greatest exploit maybe his participation in the 1998 World Cup, where France won 3-0 against Brazil, the favorite. Thuram retired this past summer upon the discovery of a malformation of the heart.

Teddy Riner was also born in Pointe-à-Pitre on April 7th 1989. Riner is a judoka who has exploded into the judo world. He began wonderfully by becoming Junior World Champion in 2006 and in 2008. He made vice champion of France in 2007, and champion the following year. He brought home a bronze during the Olympics in Beijing. For the 2007 World Championships, he won the gold medal for his category (100kg+). His most recent exploit was becoming the youngest judoka to win the gold medal in the 2008 World Championships (all categories). He is 19 years old.

The claim that they are Guadeloupean is an exercise in semantics. While both were indeed born in Guadeloupe, both moved to France métropole soon after. Time actually spent on the island amounts to infancy and school vacations. But If Thuram and Riner are accepted as Guadeloupean by Guadeloupeans themselves, it is perhaps a testament to both their success and their popularity; Guadeloupeans are not always so welcoming. Indeed, those like Thuram and Riner are given a name here: they are called négropolitains. There doesn't seem to be an exact definition: the term négropolitain can define people like Thuram and Riner, that is, those who were born in the Antilles, but raised in France métropole. Or, the term can apply specifically to Antillais who have lived for many years in métropole and who have returned to the West Indies. Or, it can apply to the offspring of Antillais in France. What is clear is that it is usually used in a pejorative sense.

I'm sure no one has ever called Thuram or Riner négropolitains. For winners like Thuram and Riner, there must be some unwritten understanding that if you succeed fabulously, you'll always be welcome.

(1) Soccernews.com

The Love Continues

The weekend edition of France Antilles had a two-page spread featuring high-profile politicians, administrators, and others, who had been asked to share their thoughts about the past year, and their hopes for Guadeloupe for 2009. Every single person mentioned the election of Barack Obama to the presidency. That his victory in the presidential elections marked their impressions of 2008 is not surprising. What is surprising is the importance that they all ascribed to his election to Guadeloupe.

Victorin Lurel
President of the Regional Council
"The election of Barack Obama is an event in the history of the world. Obama is in the process of taking down a very old curse. Its an event with historic impact. That the strongest power in the world is led by an African descendant, it's exceptional..." (1)

Jeanny Marc
Deputy and Mayor of Deshaies
"The happy event occurred on the world scale with the election of Barack Obama: the first Black president of the United States, the most powerful country in the world. This election carries strong a symbol: solidarity, fraternity, engagement. It foreshadows the world as a panetary village. As a supporter of world peace, this election gave rise in me much hope. (2)

Jacques Gillot
Senator and President of the General Council
"Hope, all the same, with the emergence of unifying symbols showing that work, courage, and competence allow you to overcome all obstacles, from the historic victory of Barack Obama..." (3)

Eric Jalton
Deputy and Mayor of Abymes
"The election of Barack Obama is also a great victory for humanity. I admit that I would not have bet on a mixed-race president in the United States in 2008. Its a huge event and therefore we should not lose hope in the ability of one another to transcend obstacles, divides, racial prejudices. Its a strong sign for all racial, social, cultural, religious minorities. We can, from now on, reach very high level positions." (4)

Jalton's comments really exemplify the optimism that Guadeloupeans have about the future of French politics. As I wrote in my previous post about Barack Obama in Guadeloupe, most - if not all - French people would readily admit that the election of a minority to the highest office of power in France is an impossibility. But, as I also noted, attitudes between Guadeloupeans and French in the métropole, differ. Whereas in Guadeloupe, Obama's victory brought hope, in France métropole, the French seemed to be reminded far more of the challenges still to be overcome.

In 2007, at the beginning of the presidential primaries, Francois Durpaire, a researcher at the Center for Research of North American History (Centre de recherches d'histoire nord-américaine), published a book about Barack Obama, titled l'Amérique de Barack Obama (5). Durpaire entitles his conclusion as 'Obama, symbol for visible minorities in France' writing, "This enthousiasm translates as much into a infatuation for Obama the candidate, as the frustration of a section of the French population who do not recognize themselves in its political system" (6). Durpaire interviews Rama Yade, the Secretary of State for Human Rights, to reflect on Obama's election (7). She is far less hopeful than Guadeloupeans:

"Barack Obama is for me the American dream, this American dream that regularly appears from no where and makes what America what it is...Its beautiful. But its also sad because I cannot help but think of France. Many people say that my nomination to the government as Secretary of State is historic. A such a slow pace, how much time will it take for France to have a Black person at the doors of the presidency?"(8)

Perhaps it is because in Guadeloupe, the people live in close proximity to its history of slavery. One can only be hopeful, ever optimistic, with such a past.


(1) "L'élection de Barack Obama est aussi une grande victoire pour l'humanité. J'avoue que je n'aurais jamais parié, en 2008, sur un président métis aux États-Unis. C'est un grand événement et donc on ne doit pas désespérer de la capacité des uns et des autres à transcender des obstacles, clivages, préjugés raciaux. C'est un signal fort pour toutes les minorités raciales, sociales, culturelles, religieuses. On peut désormais accéder à des postes très élèvés."

(2) "L'événement heureux s'est déroulé sur le plan mondial avec l'élection de Barack Obama : le premier président noir des États-Unis, le pays le plus puissant du monde. Cette élection est porteuse de symbole très forts : la solidarité, la fraternité, l'engagement. Elle préfigure le monde comme un village planétaire. En tant que militante de la paix dans le monde, cette élection a fait naître chez moi beaucoup d'espoir."

(3) "Espérance, tout de même, avec l'émergence de symboles fédérateurs démontrant que le travail, le courage, et la compétence permettent de surmonter tous les obstacles, au travers de la victoire historique de Barack Obama ..."

(4) "L'élection de Barack Obama est un événement dans l'histoire du monde. Obama est en train de faire tomber une très vielle malédiction. C'est un événement de portée historique. Que la première puissance du monde soit dirigée par un desendent d'Africain, c'est exceptionnel..."

(5)
Durpaire, François and Olivier Richomme. L'Amérique de Barack Obama. Paris: Demopolis, 2007.
ISBN 978-2-35457-040-8


(6) "Cet enthousiasme traduit autant l'engouement que suscite le candidat Obama que la frustration d'une partie de la population française qui ne se reconnaît pas dans son système politique." 184

(7) Rade, a French citizen of Senegalese origins, is one of the few minorities who holds a position in the French government. She was appointed by Nicolas Sarkozy.

(8) "Barack Obama est pour moi un rêve américain, ce rêve américain qui régulièrement surgit de nulle part et fait que l'Amérique est ce qu'elle est...C'est beau. Mais c'est triste aussi car je ne peux m'empêcher de penser à la France. Beaucoup disent que ma nomination au Gouvernement comme secrétaire d'État est historique. À ce rhythme si lent, combien de temps faudra-t-il pour que la France ait un Noir aux portes d'Élysée ?"182

La Guadeloupe d'en-France

In addition to reading the literature from the French West Indies, I've started to read some non-fiction.

Recently, I finished reading La Guadeloupe d'en-France by Robert Valérius (1). Its a book I picked up at the bookstore in Basseterre, after having asked the bookseller to recommend me something about life and culture in Guadeloupe. The book is actually far more limited in scope, analyzing specifically Guadeloupe's relationship with France, and only from mid-1940's to present. At 153 pages, there simply isn't enough pages for Valérius to discuss or analyze thoroughly; still, for someone who knows nothing about the relationship between Guadeloupe and France, this is probably all I can handle right now.

Valérius describes what is essentially a torrid love-affair between Guadeloupe and France. His book begins with the law of 1946, which transforms Guadeloupe the colony into Guadeloupe the département, making it a 'state' of France. Guadeloupeans looked upon the change in statute with hope and pride. There was hope that the new relationship with France would vastly improve living standards through economic and social intervention. And there was pride to fully assimilate as French and to become French citizens.

Problems arose when the law of 1946 does not meet the expectations of Guadeloupeans. Guadeloupeans, had, perhaps, set themselves up for disappointment. Valérius writes, "Guadeloupeans were forced to recognize that the law of 1946 had not, with a wave of the magic wand, transformed a underdeveloped country into a developed country" (2) But, part of that disappointment stemmed from the uneven application of the law. Ten years after departmentalization, considerable differences persisted between the rights of and the services due a French métropole citizen and a Guadeloupean. Additionally, neither the economic aid, nor the increase in demand for Guadeloupean exports was ever realized. Finally, Guadeloupeans lost considerable control over their own affairs in becoming a département by ceding power to the Prefecture.

This leads to the popular support amongst Guadeloupeans for a review of the law of 1946. In turn, these discussions eventually demand justification for Guadeloupe's very relationship with France. Several groups and movements arise, each supporting similar and/or opposing goals. Certain groups wanted simply the full and complete application of the law of 1946. Others wanted an altogether different statute for Guadeloupe. Still others wanted independence.

Valérius then launches into an analysis of why the second two groups fail to transform Guadeloupe into a sub-entity other than département, or as a nation. Indeed, to read his analysis is to understand that these movements were doomed to failure. I won't repeat all his arguments here, but they are largely related to the identity of Guadeloupe, and that that identity - past, present, and future - rejects an existence untethered to France.

I would make a few critiques of the book: The book could probably be improved by more rigorous editing. The organization and chaptering of the book are not readily apparent, and at times the same ideas seem to make appearances - however brief - whenever they please. Valérius also sprinkles his text liberally with abbreviations of various political groups; most go undiscussed, so seems like the sort of filler students use to pad word count. Valérius also seems to be writing specifically for a Guadeloupean audience. (This may be intentional.) At times, the events of such-and-such date, nor the consequences of such-and-such event are not made explicit. This can leave the reader a bit bewildered.

Nevertheless, the topic is fascinating. To know the history behind the relationship between Guadeloupe and France is to understand local society, culture and politics at a much deeper level.

For example, chlordecone was a pesticide heavily used on banana plantations in the French Antilles. The scandal is that, despite being banned for use in the US in 1976, the chemical was not banned in France until 1990. In addition, banana growers here requested and received a derogation and were allowed to continue using the substance for three more years. Chlordecone is carcinogenic and believed to be the cause of high cancer and infertility rate in Guadeloupe. Of course, this was about money. Without chlordecone, banana growers would have faced huge increases in production costs. Bananas produced here were already facing stiff competition from bananas produced in Africa, where labor costs were far lower. Did France turn a blind eye to the health of its overseas citizens simply for money? The answer is not so simple. France was faced with an increasingly popular independence movement (complete with extremist and violent groups) which drew its power from general dissatisfaction with decreasing living standards. Had France followed the United States in banning chlordecone, the economy of Guadeloupe - which was at the time almost completely dependent on banana production - would have suffered a serious blow. This may have tipped the scale and given the independence movement what it needed to lead a successful campaign.

Obviously, the story ends with Guadeloupe and France together, living happily ever after. Or not. Valérius ends with what is essentially a list of social and political challenges that face Guadeloupe. Most seem entirely unrelated to France. It would seem then, that Valérius is making the argument that perhaps France was, and also is, not the problem.

Believe it or not, the book made great beach reading. I am hoping to find similar books.

(1)
Valérius, Robert. La Guadeloupe d'en-France. Pointe-à-Pitre: Éditions Jasor, 2005.
ISBN 2-912594-51-0



(2) "Les Guadeloupéens étaient forcés de reconnaître que la loi de 1946 n'avait pas transformé, d'un coup de baguette magique, un pay sous-développé en pays développé" p29

My first experience with local interest in Barack Obama was when I saw a good-sized photo of the man posted on the wall of the local library in September. In fact, there were two photos - one on each side of the room. Alongside the photo of the Senator from Illinois was a one page bio. It might be important to note that there was no photos, nor any bios of the Senator from Arizona.

As the day of the election drew near, it became clear that Obamamania hadn't just hit the local librarian; a lot of Guadeloupeens were highly interested in Obama. The city of Lamentin (near Pointe-à-Pitre) organized un nuit blanche pour un président noir (literally, a white night for a black president. Nuit blanche means an all-nighter). Basse-Terre, the capital of Guadeloupe, assembled some giant screens to project election night coverage in the main square in front of city hall.

Like most newspapers around the world, Obama made the front page of the local newspaper, France Antilles, the morning after. Interest has not waned, as articles featuring the President-elect have appeared daily since.

Guadeloupeens, of course, aren't alone in their interest. The world watched the American elections with baited breath, and celebrated his victory. That a black man could be elected leader of the most powerful nation in the world, and by a white majority, is of particular interest to countries with large minority populations. France spent the days following the elections discussing, theorizing, contemplating whether or not something similar could happen in their country right now. The universal answer is no. The NYTimes published a piece about this, and described how minorities felt about Obama's victory.

The situation in Guadeloupe is somewhat different than in France métropole. Here, 90% of the population is black (1). What does that mean? That means that, unlike in metropolitan France, the grand majority of the upper class, the professional class are black. The intelligentisa and the educated class are black. Politicians and administration - at every level - are black. Why does that matter? It matters because power rests in the hands of blacks, and the idea of a black person in a leadership position is not so alien. It matters because financial, educational, political mobility exist here. Does the particular situation in Guadeloupe change the odds of a minority becoming President of France. No, of course not. But it does mean that perceptions of Guadeloupeens are different from those of minorities in France métropole.



(1) Population and Demographics of Guadeloupe