Government of Saint Lucia

Go to Homepage


[Site Map]

[Contact Us]

Search this Site

Remarks delivered by Hon. Dr. Kenny D. Anthony, Prime Minister of Saint Lucia Seminar on “Alliance of Civilizations”

horizontal rule

Governor General
Prime Minister
The Cabinet
The Senate
House of Assembly
Overseas Missions
The Constitution
The Staff Orders

National Television Network
Watch NTN Live

Saint Lucia Gazette
Press Releases
About Saint Lucia
Frequently Asked Questions
Web Links
Government Directory
Browse by Agency
Site Help


Remarks delivered by Hon. Dr. Kenny D. Anthony,
Prime Minister of Saint Lucia
Seminar on “Alliance of Civilizations”
September 25, 2006

Most Hon. P.J Patterson,

Parliamentary Colleagues,
H.E. Rafael Dezcallar – Under Secretary of State for Foreign Policy, in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Spain
Secretary General of CARICOM, Mr. Edwin Carrington
Hon. Derek Walcott, Noble Laureate
Ladies and Gentlemen


It is a great pleasure for me to officially open this Caribbean Seminar on the “Alliance of Civilizations”. This idea for an “Alliance of Civilizations” was first mooted in September 2004 by José Luís Rodríguez Zapatero, Spanish Prime Minister, at a meeting of the United Nations General Assembly. The United Nations Secretary-General, Kofi Annan, later adopted the idea and has been working feverishly to develop the practical aspects of “The Alliance”. Thus, when Caricom Heads met their Spanish counterpart at the CARICOM –Spain Summit in May of this year, I committed the Government of Saint Lucia to jointly host with the Government of Spain and the Caribbean Community Secretariat, this Caribbean Seminar on the “Alliance of Civilisations”.

I agreed that Saint Lucia would host the Seminar on the basis that the Caribbean can make a valuable and meaningful contribution to the subject, and bring our own perspectives and experience to bear on the issues that face us.


The events of September 11th 2001 left the world in shock. Everyone has tried to make sense of the tragedy that claimed nearly 3000 innocent civilian lives. Of course, in times of crisis, commentators and analysts engage in a frantic search for explanations and answers. Some have found the answer in the work of the political scientist, Samuel Huntington. The Huntington thesis is simple and attractive. In 1993, whilst the Cold War was thawing out, Samuel Huntington wrote in the journal of Foreign Affairs:

"It is my hypothesis that the fundamental source of conflict in this new world will not be primarily ideological or primarily economic. The great divisions among humankind and the dominating source of conflict will be cultural. Nation states will remain the most powerful actors in world affairs, but the principal conflicts of global politics will occur between nations and groups of different civilizations. The Clash of Civilizations will dominate global politics. The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future."

Given that the perpetrators of the events of 9-11 attacked symbols of “the West”, and the religion of the hijackers’ was Islam, many immediately defined the attack as a “Clash of Civilizations”. Those who espouse that view draw the battle lines as one between “the West” and Islam. Huntington’s thesis has been given life and credibility.

This has now led many persons to take it for granted that the central problem in the world today is the conflict between Islam and the West, with the Middle East serving as the epicentre. Perhaps the best example of this misconception is in US Secretary of State, Condolezza Rice’s formal letter to the Spanish Foreign Minister declaring the United States’ intention to collaborate with the proposal of “The Alliance of Civilizations” in the hope that the initiative would help to promote “democratic reforms, peace, and stability in the Near East.”

Amidst all of this, however, some countries are preoccupied with seeking their own definition and identity. Their issue is simple: Can they too be defined as “a civilization”.

A late 19th Century American lawyer and orator, Robert Ingersoll, said that a “True civilization is where every man gives to every other every right that he claims for himself”. The search for definition must neither be lost or suffused because of the preoccupations with the current global issues.


This concept “Clash of Civilizations” is misplaced. Unfortunately, the concept of has shaped international politics and influenced the foreign policies of major state actors. It has served as a device for generating antagonism between friend and enemy; constructing friend and enemy, “us and them”, in cultural and religious terms and has defined the nature of the coming wars. Writers such as Mark Juergensmyer in his book “The New Cold War: Religious Nationalism Confronts the Secular State” (1993) and Robert Kaplan, “The Coming Anarchy” (2000), provides academic cover.

Notwithstanding the insights which the “Clash of Civilizations” paradigm may have encouraged, its weaknesses too are apparent. There is escalating anxiety and hostility to the policies and politics of the “Clash of Civilizations” around the world, irrespective of whether those politics and policies are expressed in religious or secular discourse. The absolute corrosive nature of those policies is increasingly apparent; Abu Grhaib, Guantanomo, loss of various civil liberties …


“The Alliance of Civilizations” aims to promote dialogue. It eschews confrontation. It is a more useful way to combat international terrorism and the risks of a large-scale confrontation. It is politically astute to speak of the “Alliance of Civilizations” rather than the “Clash of Civilizations”. The latter seem to invite permanent conflict, permanent instability and permanent hostility.

However, if the Alliance of Civilizations fails to recognize and address the political and economic inequalities around the world, its effects on broader communal, societal, or international practices and relations will remain muted.

“The Alliance” must provide an opportunity to promote actions to balance the world’s economic inequalities and foster commercial and economic exchanges of mutual interest within a context of respectful cultural dialogue. It must ensure that it delivers a just and positive outcome for all nations, without regard to size, natural resource endowment, geographical location or cultural history.


You may well ask “How can the Caribbean inform the issues the Alliance shall deal with, particularly when small countries such as exists in the region are constantly exposed to the unfairness and lack of interest in our well-being and, indeed, survival?” At the political level, the voices of small states are rarely permitted to influence the debates on changes to the international political order, the reform of the United Nations or the shaping of relevant principles for international co-existence.

Rex Nettleford provided an answer to the earlier question in 1994, when he said:

“As a microcosm not only of the Americas but also of Planet Earth the Caribbean is a laboratory for all the tensions (creative and disintegrative) of the human condition we have come to know these past five hundred years and as they shall continue to show themselves in the next century.” (1994)

It has always been a challenge to define our human condition, spirit and ethos. When James Anthony Froude, a History Professor at Oxford (1888) said that the Caribbean populations were incapable of making progress “except under European laws, European education, and European authority”, it was the Trinidadian J.J. Thomas in “Froudacity” who exposed him, describing Froude as a “conjuror of inconceivable fables”.

Unquestionably, the Caribbean’s experience with colonialism and its myth of a civilizing mission has equipped the region to mediate in matters of civilizational alliances. After-all, Nettleford has already told us that the Caribbean is the “melody of Europe and the rhythm of Africa”, whilst Walcott accounts for the other partners in our Caribbean alliance, when in “The Antilles: Fragments of Epic Memory”, his Nobel Lecture, he declared to the world that “I am only one-eighth the writer I might have been had I contained all the fragmented languages of Trinidad”.

Our experience with colonialism has taught us that the most powerful tool which was used by the colonizer was his claim to be bringing the fruits of progress and modernity to the subject peoples. In colonial logic, people who were different were inferior and therefore had to be made similar - and hence equal - by civilizing them. However, once this equality had been attained, the very basis for colonial rule would vanish.

However, the colonized were made to be invisible and were not official subjects in the international community. The violence perpetrated against them in the name of colonial rule has been seldom scrutinized, understood and repudiated.


I am absolutely delighted that this seminar brings together intellectuals, politicians and policy makers. Our artists and intellectuals can speak for our civilization in a way that politicians cannot. What Bob Marley, Derek Walcott, Neipaul, Sparrow has done in defining our civilization cannot be imitated by any politician, now or possibly in the future.

I hope that this seminar will play its part in preventing the Alliance of Civilizations to become, as some have cautioned, “a well-intentioned expression of a series of more or less reasonable ideas and positive theoretical principles”.

Finally, I would like to take the opportunity to welcome all of you to this Seminar, and to wish you a most fruitful discourse. For all the visitors to “Helen of the West” I hope that you create the time to sample and enjoy the warmth of our people.

I thank you.


horizontal rule

Home ] Up ] Office of the Prime Minister Site Map ] [Site Help]

© 2012 Government Information Service. All rights reserved.

Read our privacy guidelines.