"SEND ME OFF IN A BLAZE OF GLORY"

The Political Pandroa's Box that has brought confusion, acrimony and all manner of strife within the United National congress (UNC) in the past is ready to be opened again. And the same manner of venom and uninformed opinion that characterized the last episode of blood-letting is making the rounds again.

Jack Warner, whose money and political savvy, took the party out of intensive care just before the last election and with Basdeo Panday made a stunning comeback, is the centre of attention these days. Warner has tried to effect change within the party of which he is deputy leader, without much success. He is also lobbying for unity.

In a television interview last month he laid out his concerns about what he felt was stagnation within the UNC and a reluctance to embrace change. He called for internal elections and for the party to work on uniting the opposition. His assessment was that the party has not kept pace with the changes needed to compete in the 21st century. The UNC risks becoming irrelevant if it did not embrace change, Warner cautioned.

Having read the entire transcript of that interview, I find nothing offensive in his statements. His opinions were based on his experience within the governing structure and it was clear that he was neither seeking office nor suggesting that his leader, Basdeo Panday, should go. He even reiterated his admiration for the man whom he described as the best politician in the region.

However he was very clear that there are some elements who are holding back progress and suggested that Panday should be using his experience and political acumen to guide the party forward and into the 21st century.

But suddenly the man who single-handedly pulled the UNC out of the deep depression caused by internal bickering and the fracturing following the last internal election has become the UNC's latest neemekharam. Internet chat groups are now littered with baseless accusations ranging from ingratitude to political opportunism.

Much of what is making the rounds sounds so familiar, almost like they have come from a single template of hate and vilification. There seems to be no end to the name-calling and partisan posturing.

And the real tragedy of it all is that the two men at the centre of this contrived political battle are not at war with each other. Both men want the same thing: a better, stronger UNC ready to confront the political challenges that face the country today. And both have said on numerous occasions that the only way to wrest power from the governing People's National movement (PNM) of Patrick Manning is to unite the opposition.

There is a difference of opinion between them on how to get there and the pace at which the change needs to happen. Warner believes things are moving too slowly and he feels internal elections would settle the leadership issue so the party can move on.

Panday is not convinced about that and has said the national executive put the internal election on hold until after the Local Government Election which is due around the middle of 2009.

But unless I missed something, I have not heard Warner call for Panday to step down or announce his intention to challenge Panday for the leadership of the party.

Panday has said repeatedly that he is no longer able to carry the torch. In the last election he announced to tens of thousands of supporters that the 2007 general election would be his last. "Send me off in a blaze of glory" he told supporters as he pleaded for a mandate to govern.

SO what then is the problem?

If Panday, by his own admission and statements, has stated clearly that he is no longer interested in running then any member of the party has the right to run for the leadership, including Jack Warner or other high-profile members like Ramesh L. Maharaj, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Roodal Moonilal, Vasant Bharath, Mickela Panday and Kelvin Ramnath to name a few.

The problem is this: everyone wants change and nobody but Warner feels comfortable seeking it unless Panday himself demands it. And even when Panday seeks it, few are willing to make it happen.

That is the cancer that has eaten into the UNC over and over again. And unless it is rooted out it will emerge again and again and eventually deal the party a fatal blow. And those who say Panday is the problem have it wrong. Some people in the UNC feel that they cannot have an opinion that conflicts with Panday's and to hold an opposing view is somehow disloyal to "the chief".

But anyone who knows "the chief" also knows that he is always ready to listen to constructive ideas and ready to consider workable ideas. What he detests is whining and negativism. That's why he and Warner brought together an alliance for the last general election. While the pundits were writing an unflattering epitaph for Panday and the UNC Panday and Warner demonstrated that the party was the most powerful opposition force and that as a team they could command tremendous support.

Panday is a pragmatist and understands politics better than any politicians in Trinidad and Tobago today. He has done his duty ten times over and people should let the man have the retirement he has earned, that he craves and deserves. But they won't let him have it because his commanding presence gives them comfort.

Following the 2002 general election he made it clear that he was leaving; he even appointed a team from within the parliamentary caucus to deal with the transition and his retirement. I know because I was present at that meeting as a member of the national executive. But nobody on that team was prepared to even discuss the change that Panday was seeking. And nobody was willing to stand up and lead. People preferred to remain stuck in their comfort zones and later even announced publicly that no such transition team was ever appointed.

Panday anointed Winston Dookeran who became UNC leader and Panday became chairman of the party. There was every reason for it to work, but it didn't.

Dookeran was immediately hijacked by certain dissident UNC elements and those who merely wanted to "steal" the UNC constituency. Panday fought back. Warner walked away from Dookeran's side and worked with Panday to create the UNC-Alliance, which they led to a convincing victory on November 5, 2007, in spite of the new Congress of the People (COPY) led by Dookeran.

People who are trying to drive a wedge today between Panday and Warner are neither ignorant of the history of the party and the relationship both men share nor just committed to creating political mayhem; they have their private agendas, which do not include the vision of both men.

Both Panday and Warner know that Panday will not ride away into the sunset. Panday remains today a most powerful fixture in the national political landscape and must help guide the UNC or a new united political movement born out of the UNC.

Warner wants that too and understands Panday's role; all he's asking is for things to move a little more swiftly, for the party to re-brand itself in a manner that is acceptable to the nation as a viable alternative to the PNM. And he's asking for the UNC to keep its "big tent" open to embrace all those who want political change.

There is no conflict between the two men. They share the same values, the same dreams for Trinidad and Tobago and the same concerns for the nation. And they both know that a political party is built through hard work and dedication; it is not a commodity that can be traded or handed over.

In the end the people always decide. But the people who must ultimately decide must know the truth and that, unfortunately has become the latest casualty in this partisan propaganda
campaign that is doing no one any good.

And the greatest losers are the citizens who continue to look for hope and find none.