13 billion barrels of oil offshore Barbados
@Castled
the energy authorities in trinidad have known that barbados and grenada are sitting on very significant hydrocarbon deposits for quite some time. Trinidad signed a MOU with barbados in august of 2019 with regards to energy and unitization agreement facilitating the joint expolration and commercialization of any cross border gas initiatives. That was signed in 2020. i don't know what's up with it now but hopefully its still on the table
@Jumpstart
60yrs late. Green Energy revo... Good to have energy self -sufficiency and earn income from energy exports but like large parts of Africa the Caribbean is coming on stream late.
@Castled (Che)
Che do you have any clue about what you have posted?
That is a politicians dream column. It's far from being a reality.
Barbados, for years, the government has positioned the island as the global moral conscience of climate action. Prime Minister Mia Mottley has used international platforms to demand that wealthy nations abandon fossil fuels to save sinking small island states. Yet, by opening up the country's offshore zones to auction ultra-deepwater blocks, the administration has revealed a glaring policy shift. Dangling seismic data that points to an estimated 13 billion barrels of oil, the state is making a high-stakes gamble driven less by ideological evolution and more by acute financial anxiety.
This sudden pivot into the fossil fuel arena highlights the immense structural cracks in the domestic economy. While the government frequently celebrates lowering its staggering public debt from a historic peak of nearly 179 percent of gross domestic product in 2018, the reality remains perilous. Barbados still shoulders a massive public debt-to-GDP ratio hovering between 93 and 95 percent. Maintaining the heavy fiscal surpluses demanded by external lenders forces deep cuts into the public sphere. For the average Barbadian, this economic strain is already felt at the supermarket and the gas pump through crippling import inflation.
However, the collateral damage of this pursuit hits closest to home for local citizens. By inviting global oil majors to submit pre-qualification bids before the September deadline, the government is gambling the daily livelihoods of its people. An ultra-deepwater blowout would be an immediate death sentence for the island's domestic economy. Unlike diversified producers, Barbados’s economic lifeblood relies entirely on the pristine marine environment that local fishermen rely on for their catch and hotel workers depend on for their wages. A single major oil spill would decimate the local blue economy, eliminate thousands of hospitality jobs overnight, and trigger an instantaneous, unrecoverable economic collapse that ordinary citizens would bear the brunt of.
Ultimately, seismic maps offer an unproven, speculative guess, not a guarantee of safety or wealth. If the upcoming negotiations fail or the resulting exploratory wells prove dry, the administration will have permanently compromised its global moral authority for zero financial return, leaving locals to deal with the fallout.
Sarge
@sgtdjones
guyana was doing the same thing for decades. cheddi jaggan spoke at many environmental conferences in his final years as president and bharat jagdeo was awarded "> the United Nations Champions of the Earth prize in 2010, 5 years before guyana found a drop of oil. this is depite the fact that the exploration license with Exxon Mobil was signed in 1999 under Jagan's widow, Janet Jagan, who became president after his passing
Our region is poor due in great part to colonial exploitation. Hence, it would be foolhardy not to explore the potential/benefits of every resource even those with great risks and time limits due to rapidly changing technology
....................
Colonialism laid the uneven foundations of the modern world, but it did not dictate the final architecture. .To deny the brutality of British colonialism in the Caribbean would be an exercise in historical illiteracy. The region was forged in the fires of chattel slavery and systemic extraction. The British built plantation economies designed to enrich London, leaving behind fragmented societies and vast inequality.
But Singapore was also a British colony, subjected to the same imperial bureaucracy, racial stratification, and economic exploitation.
For decades, Caribbean politics has focused on grievances stemming from British colonialism, which are seen as barriers to progress. In contrast, Singapore, despite its severe geographical disadvantages post-1965, transformed its colonial inheritance into pragmatic governance. While Trinidad and Tobago and Jamaica relied on natural resources without fostering economic diversification, thus suffering from inefficiencies, Singapore prioritized structural reform and foreign investment.
Both regions faced colonial exploitation, but Singapore's leaders decoupled their past from contemporary governance, enabling substantial progress. In the Caribbean, political narratives deflect accountability for economic mismanagement, resulting in stagnation, while Singapore's focus on meritocracy and anti-corruption demonstrates that overcoming a colonial legacy is possible. Ultimately, the Caribbean’s failures stem not from lack of potential but from a refusal to embrace the necessary reforms.
The critical difference lies in how post-independence leaders handled that inheritance
The Caribbean, sitting on fertile soil and rivers of oil, chose to build a monument to its past grievances, and now wonders why it is still standing in the shadow of history.
Sarge
They need to do their research before committing to anything .the last few months the bim government has taken on some divisive economic projects
And this is bound to be the most divisive project of all so far that has real Consequences for the future of the country good and bad.
@sgtdjones
The oft recited false equivalency of Singapore is tiring. They had no slavery nor imported indentured population that replaced slavery. No history of labor struggle and trade union history akin to ours. That made it easier for a dictator to set work rules and wages without social contract. As Kigame is doing now he presented himself as a benevolent leader. How does the exploited wealth of the Caribbean compare to that from Singapore( only India is comparable/exceeds really). Regarding shipping, only Jamaica's port compares but again labor laws and geography gave Singapore the advantage. Making that comparitave argument is parroting.
@Brerzerk
Before making broad statements you should check history....
Yes, Singapore actually did have slavery during its early days under British rule.When Sir Stamford Raffles set up Singapore as a British East India Company trading post back in 1819, he officially banned the slave trade on the island. But despite his rules, various forms of legal, underground, and rebranded slavery kept thriving under British administration for decades.Local authorities bypassed bans by classifying enslaved people as "indentured labourers" or debt-bonded workers
Ottawa Citizen Newspaper.
@sgtdjones
Singapore became A British Colony in 1819. There was no Chattel Slavery in Singapore under British rule! Prior to British colonisation the indigenous people practiced 'debt slavery's,prisoner of war slavery and forced labor of subjects for royalty. How was Singapore as a colony negatively impacted as a slave colony? The Caribbean had colonial slavery for 400yrs. Britain outlawed slavery in Singapore in 1819 when they stole it. That is just 19-23yrs before Britain abolished slavery in all their colonies.
@Brerzerk
nothing in Singapore's history resembled even remotely slavery and indentureship. not to mention Lee Kwan Yew was able to run a dictatorship without any sort of censure. the leader of the communist party was the world's longest political prisoner until de chick from Myanmar surpassed his record. i couldn't imagine manley or seaga, or Basdeo Panday and Patrick Manning locking up each other and not facing sanctions over the death of democracy. Singapore is a lovely example of so called western intellectuals, who don't know the history and specifics of both the third world and Singapore and dangling a carrot in front of us.
..................As I noted you are clueless about Singapore...
They had no slavery nor imported indentured population that replaced slavery. No history of labor struggle and trade union history akin to ours.
Singapore had a history of slavery. It existed both before and during the early decades of British colonial rule, spanning from the 14th century until it was progressively suppressed in the mid-to-late 19th century.
Reference:Oxford Press
There was no Chattel Slavery in Singapore under British rule!
Yes, Singapore did have absolute chattel slavery. During the pre-colonial era and the early years of the British trading post, humans were legally treated as commodities, personal property (chattel) that could be bought, sold, inherited, and used as collateral.
Chattel slavery in early Singapore differed from the large-scale plantation-based chattel slavery seen in the Americas, operating instead within a distinct regional framework
Abdullah describes encountering groups of captives from specific regions, such as Mandar and Manggarai, being sold for around 30 to 40 dollars each. The driver boasted of hundreds more newly arrived in the harbour, as detailed in Hikayat Abdullah
Reference:The Autobiography of Abdullah 1843
For decades, the dominant political narrative across the Caribbean has been one of grievance: that the structural scars of British colonialism are an insurmountable barrier to progress. But when held up against the mirror of Singapore, this argument transforms from a historical explanation into a political shield. The divergence between these nations was not determined by their colonial past, but by what their leaders chose to do with the future.
Singapore was also a British colony, subjected to the same imperial bureaucracy, racial stratification, and economic exploitation.
The critical difference lies in how post-independence leaders handled that inheritance.Colonialism laid the uneven foundations of the modern world, but it did not dictate the final architecture. The Caribbean, sitting on fertile soil and rivers of oil, chose to build a monument to its past grievances, and now wonders why it is still standing in the shadow of history.
Bye ..have a good day.
Sarge
@Jumpstart
Yes, Singapore had both indentureship and slavery. While chattel slavery was the dominant form of human bondage in Singapore's pre-colonial and early colonial years (roughly 14th century to the 1840s).
When the British banned outright chattel slavery, colonial plantation owners and merchants transitioned directly to indentureship to maintain a massive, cheap workforce.
Indentured and bound Indian labourers first arrived in Singapore in 1825.
The First Arrival: On April 18, 1825, the first batch of 80 Indian convicts arrived from Madras (now Chennai) on the ship Horatio, followed a week later by 122 convicts from Bengal.The Work: Because Singapore lacked a local workforce to build a city out of the jungle, these convicts were placed in heavy iron chains and put to work. They cleared swamps and built Singapore’s foundational infrastructure, including major roads, the Tanjong Pagar docks, and landmarks like St. Andrew’s Cathedral and the Istana (the presidential palace)
Reference:The Autobiography of Abdullah 1843