Letters from Portugal: Economic Warfare

It has now turned into something like watching some perverse medieval torture, where the victim screams for mercy, and yet the tormentor keeps turning the screws, ever so slowly.

A couple of days ago, Moody’s, a credit rating agency based in the US, downgraded Portugal's rating by four notches to ‘junk’ status Ba2, while simultaneously indicating the possibility of a further downgrade. Those following the crisis in the Portuguese economy would know that the financial crisis in the country has been precipitated by similar ominous ratings that the credit rating agencies have handed out to Portugal in the recent past. This time round however, this particular credit rating has come in the wake of the newly elected government having committed to severe budgetary actions after accepting the bailout offered by the ‘troika’ consisting European Union, the IMF and the European Central Bank. The new government has raised taxes substantially, opened new areas for taxation, is contemplating the sale of public assets, and at least prior to election the current Prime Minister of the country, Pedro Passos Coelho, indicated his willingness to liberalize the Portuguese economy to a degree beyond that demanded by the troika. To downgrade the Portuguese rating further therefore, apparently based on an extrapolation from the Greek case, rather than any actual performance (or lack of it) by the Portuguese State or economy, seems particularly cruel, vindictive and unjust, and hardly professional.

Living in Portugal, I am very often asked why I moved to Portugal. The current situation in Portugal presents another reason why the temporary shift across the seas was a good idea. While the location offers a different perspective, one gains not only an intellectual learning, but is placed in an entirely different emotional position. Living in Portugal at the current moment, opens one up to the emotional trauma, the humiliation that is experienced by a nation, that while already tightening its belt, is being held hostage by financial institutions that are not only unaccountable, but in effect operate as contemporary buccaneers.

There are some, both in Goa and in other parts of the world, who will see the current situation as the just desserts of Portuguese incompetence, or some perverse form of post-colonial pay back. To see the situation in this manner however, is to miss the point entirely. The Portuguese case forces us to contemplate the rather significant issue of who exactly is making the decisions in today’s world, and the lack of effective control that governments may have over these rather unaccountable financial institutions. Not just Portugal, but the EU itself seems to have little grip on this small club of credit rating agencies. Living in the country as it deals with this unaccountability, forces a shift from the merely intellectual understanding of the issue, to the extent of the horror that accompanies such a turn of events. The slashing of the credit rating will possibly increase the interest rates that the Portuguese will have to pay to raise money, but it will also force a greater sale of the country’s assets to private parties. What this move will possibly result in therefore, is the hollowing out of the State, making it a playground for private and most probably transnational capital, geared entirely to its own interests. Given the manner in which India has been able to bounce back from the financial crisis that has lain Europe and North America low, we may not see the immediate need to address the lawlessness in the international system, but it would be in our interests, to address it now, rather than later. Learning from our own subcontinental history, we should know that when Mohammad Shah Rangeela dismissed the Afghani threat to the empire saying ‘Hunooz Dilli door ast’, it was already too late to save the Empire from the marauders. Lisbon, may not in fact be too far from Delhi.

(A version of this post was first published in O Heraldo, 10 July 2011)

The Politics of Apologies: Portugal, Slavery and the Politics of the World Order

I get extremely agitated when Portuguese academics express the need to apologize for, and attempt to undo the damage done during the colonial period, especially that of the slave trade that was conducted in part by them. It is not that there is no need to recognize that this slave trade, and other heinous practices under colonialism took place. There is such a need. An example of this need for recognition is the rather disingenuous manner in which in the course of a competition searching for the 7 wonders of the Portuguese architectural world, the history of slavery linked to a number of Portuguese architectural marvels was omitted. But this recognition does not necessarily imply the need for an apology. Even if it does, the fact of apology carries its own baggage; baggage that can further complicate relations between the colonizer and the formerly colonized.

When Portugal apologizes for slavery, it does not do so on a blank slate. It does this on a slate that is already loaded with a large variety of meanings. For example, it is understood that slavery was the slavery of ‘black’ people. Further, it is understood that this slavery was conducted by ‘white’ people. Thus when we apologize for slavery, we apologize not only as Portuguese, but as ‘white’ people who did grievous injury to ‘black’ people. What this apology does therefore, is to re-inscribe race back into international relations. It makes some people (not all) from the African continent black, and the people in continental Europe white.

This easy equation between white and black is also deeply problematic because the historical situation is not so cut and dry. When Portugal engaged in slavery, it was not only white people who were conducting this trade. The trade flourished also because there were other groups from the African continent (‘black’ and otherwise) who participated in this trade. Not just those in the African continent though; the slave trade was profitable also for a number of Goan families, whose current fortunes are built in part by their participation in the slave trade. For the Portuguese to ignore this complexity and shoulder the entire blame for the slave trade is sweet, but it results in another patently colonial act. It casts the (‘white’) Portuguese as responsible and the others (‘Black’ and African) as not. Classic colonialism rested on the distinction between the all-knowing, responsible, adult White, and the child-like, irresponsible, coloured native.

None of this is to suggest that the Portuguese are wickedly manipulating statements to re-inscribe a racial dimension to post-colonial relations. On the contrary, the urge to apologize comes from the more conscientious segments of Portuguese society, who are appalled by attempts to forget or ignore the barbarities committed in colonial times. However what they fail to realize is that given that the postcolonial world is already configured by certain practices established by the dominant powers of the world, their apology only goes to further complicate and worsen postcolonial relations.

What might these practices established by dominant global players be? Take for example the fact that when we speak of slavery we very often only speak of and imagine slavery in the Atlantic Ocean circuit (i.e. toward the Americas). The slave trade in the Indian Ocean is completely erased. Further it is imagined that only Africans were enslaved. Historians of Goa will know that there was also a slave trade in Chinese and peoples from the Far East. And yet one but rarely hears of this trade.

The reason for this bias is owing to the Anglo-American leadership of the debate. This stress leads to the whole imaginary that is created particularly for the US based Afro-American, that the continent of Africa is ‘Home’. There is the specific imagination of these Afro-descendants in the Americas as the African ‘Diaspora’. Some time ago, in the sixties and the seventies, the whole idea of a return to Africa, that was quite fashionable among Afro-American activists. The experiences of those who ‘returned’ were disastrous. The idea however still has some resonance. This longevity can be explained by the similarity of this construction with other racist and nationalist imaginations. It feeds from and in turn supports the whole idea of the State of Israel and the right of Jews to return to a land (that is imagined as originally being theirs). It buttresses the whole idea of Muslims in India being invaders and hence eternal outsiders to the country. The slave discourse that the Portuguese unwittingly enter into when they wish to apologize is loaded with such ideas. And to be sure, there would be some in Portugal, who would like to see Portugal as a ‘white’ space, with the Blacks knowing for sure that Africa is their space, to which they are more than welcome to return to.

As I stated before, there is a need for us to not ignore or forget the cruelties of colonialism. However this whole business of apologies seems to generate as many problems as it does benefits. For one it is similar to the whole idea of righting historical wrongs. When one tries to do that, one invariably gets into a larger mess than one started with in the first place. Have a look at the wars in the Balkans, the Basque demand, the Hindutva demand. Secondly, the apologies generate as indicated above a whole new system of relations between peoples and countries. The recognition of culpability generates the demand by African (and other Third World countries) for Western developmental aid. Once again, though we recognize that Western European and Northern American wealth is built on colonial exploitation, we should recognize that the demand for aid is not so innocent. It is the demand not of the masses of people of the African and Asian nations, but of their elites. The developmental aid that comes in on the backs of the recognition of responsibility is used to cushion these elites, and to push projects that invariably hurt the poor and the marginal of these countries. Finally, the politics of apologies push certain populations in the formerly colonized spaces into tight (and dangerous) corners. In the context where some segments blame Goan Catholics for the real and imagined attacks on Hindus during the pre-Republican Portuguese regime, does this politics of apology not further condemn the Goan Catholic?

The field of postcolonial relations is a mine-field. In the case of Portugal, which does not share the history of dominant world powers, the field is even more fraught with dangers. A case of damned if you do, damned if you don’t. There are for sure however, ways in which we can recognize the sorrows of the past, not ignore them, and then go on to build relations that do not depend on apologies, especially when they involve the creation of further complications in our already troubled world. This route involves recognition of the combination of local and overseas elites in colonial domination. The route involves a refusal to allow any actions that would reinscribe racism and clientalism of formerly colonized States into international relations. The route involves getting on with our lives and not getting caught up in nationalist politics.

(Published in the Gomantak Times, 14 Oct 2009)