In a "frank" discussion with U.S. Ambassador John Rood in 2006, then Prime Minister Perry Christie revealed that he had taken a hands-off approach to the country's foreign affairs policies, according to a confidential U.S. Embassy cable obtained by The Nassau Guardian through WikiLeaks.
Christie was responding to Ambassador Rood's concerns over The Bahamas' voting record in the United Nations and limited multilateral cooperation with the U.S. at the U.N., according to the cable.
"In response to the Ambassador's concerns, Christie distanced himself from Minister (Fred) Mitchell's handling of Bahamian policy, saying
'foreign policy is driven by Fred (Mitchell) and the MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs), without involvement of my office'," the cable reads.
"Christie, who expressed surprise that The Bahamas was less in agreement with the U.S. than Barbados and Jamaica, conveyed genuine disappointment with Mitchell's handling of these U.N. issues. He said he would consider greater involvement in foreign policy decisions and suggested that he may ask for key international human rights votes to come before Cabinet for consideration."
The August 24 meeting was on the occasion of Christie's birthday. During that meeting, Rood also expressed appreciation for the outstanding partnerships between The Bahamas and the United States, praising the U.S.-Bahamian bilateral relationship, according to the cable.
But Rood expressed concern that "our shared values were not always reflected in common approaches to international problems in the United Nations, where the Department's most recent U.N. Voting Patterns report noted that The Bahamas ranks 29th of 33 countries in the Western Hemisphere on important votes to the U.S," the cable reads.
In a separate cable, a U.S. diplomat noted, "Prime Minister Christie has not been engaged on U.N. and international issues. Sometimes criticized for failing to attend international events, Christie is content to allow Foreign Minister Mitchell to oversee Bahamian foreign policy.
"Mitchell's relationship with PM Christie remains strong, though he is not in Christie's inner circle and there is no personal bond between them. Christie appears to trust Mitchell's formulation and handling of foreign policy. Though Christie has been privately critical of Mitchell on occasion, Mitchell has significant ability to influence The Bahamas's stance on U.N. and other foreign policy matters."
Ambassador Rood reminded Christie of his government's past advocacy against apartheid and encouraged Christie to use The Bahamas' U.N. vote to stand up for its own values and democratic principles elsewhere in the world, according to the August cable.
"The Ambassador suggested that the declining U.N. compatibility figures highlighted a need for closer dialogue on these issues between The Bahamas and the United States," the cable said.
The cable noted that Mitchell subsequently told the Ambassador that Christie had requested an analysis of The Bahamas' recent U.N. votes.
 
Concern over Bahamas Uncensored website
 
In that same meeting, Ambassador Rood also expressed to Christie his concern about what he described as the anti-U.S. viewpoints conveyed in the "Bahamas Uncensored website formerly administered by Fred Mitchell and which is seen by the Bahamian public and media as still largely under his editorial control", according to the cable.
Christie told the Ambassador that he doubted Mitchell was still directly involved in the site, but acknowledged that the perception of his continued involvement could contribute to perceptions of problems in the bilateral relationship, the cable reads.
In a "Note" the cable added: " The website (bahamasuncensored.com) is written in Mitchell's rhetorical style with MFA (Ministry of Foreign Affairs) inside information and knowledge that no journalist would have access to."
In another cable, a U.S. diplomat writes: "The private Fred Mitchell is on display in a website previously titled 'Fred Mitchell Uncensored' and now nominally edited by a third-party and named 'Bahamas Uncensored'. In the Bahamian political circles, it is assumed that the foreign minister retains editorial control over the website. Mitchell hides behind the website and makes more petulant and more candid commentary than he normally would in public."
Mitchell has repeatedly stated that he is no longer associated with the website.
Four days after Ambassador Rood met with Christie, Mitchell also met with the Ambassador to express his concern about an Op-Ed released by Rood that called for closer cooperation between the U.S. and The Bahamas in the U.N. that appeared in The Nassau Guardian earlier that month, a U.S. diplomat wrote in a separate cable.
In the wake of the op-ed local media and opposition figures criticized Mitchell's handling of the country's foreign policy, and he requested a meeting with the Ambassador to discuss his concerns about the op-ed and the perceptions it had generated, according to the cable.
"Mitchell, who is sensitive to media criticism, is facing a difficult fight in his coming reelection bid. He said that he felt that the op-ed contradicted recent public statements by the Ambassador about the closeness of the bilateral relationship. He said the press had sought to spin the op-ed as a sign of U.S. support for the Free National Movement," the U.S. diplomat wrote.
"The Ambassador made it clear the U.S. had no intention to pick sides in the election. Both parties were friends. He challenged Mitchell's perception of the op-ed, suggesting he was reacting to the media's spin rather than the substance of the piece itself. The op-ed had detailed a broad range of partnerships between our countries, had maintained a positive, constructive tone, and concluded that the relationship was 'second to none'."
The Ambassador, according to the cable, explained to Mitchell that promoting human rights was a vital element of U.S. policy and one he took seriously. He pointed out that the U.S. and The Bahamas shared the same values, but the U.N. voting record does not reflect that compatibility.
Mitchell insisted that it was the policy of The Bahamas to "stay out" and "abstain on matters of controversy", and his goal was to maintain a "low profile" in such matters.
"The Permanent Secretary noted that The Bahamas often 'abstains with a reason'. When pressed to defend specific votes, Mitchell acknowledged that he generally did not know the specific wording of the resolutions in question, according to the cable.
In a direct contradiction to what Christie told the Ambassador days earlier, according to the cable, Mitchell "somewhat disingenuously insisted that his role in shaping the government's response on these matters was limited -- that he merely 'took advice' from his ministry and conveyed the decision of the Cabinet".
"He claimed that he had inherited a policy to abstain on voting on country specific resolutions," according to the cable.
In the 'Comment' section at the end of the cable, the U.S. diplomat wrote: "Mitchell has been taking a beating in the local media in the past few months for his handling of the U.S. relationship and perceived closeness to Cuba, highlighted by the mid-July opening of a new Embassy in Havana.
"Although no election date has been set and they could be held as far off as May 2007, the parties are on election footing and will seek to use any perception of difference for political advantage."
The Ambassador reassured Mitchell that he was sensitive to election politics, but made it clear that while the relationship is 'second-to-none', the Embassy would continue to speak up on issues of concern, reads the cable.
"Mitchell's statement that The Bahamas abstains from the country specific resolutions in the United Nations flies in the face of their voting record," said the cable.
 
 
 
 

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian