We failed to see it during Basdeo Panday's tenure as Prime Minister. We did not see it during Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s first term as Prime Minister, nor during her ten years as Opposition Leader. In fact, we saw quite the opposite.
What we are witnessing in her current term gives us no reason to believe that the leopard has shed its spots. We do not hold our breath that the party would miraculously and uncharacteristically acquire, far less demonstrate, the patriotic mindset and political will to put country before party.
It has never done so in its entire existence because such a framework appears to be neither politically nor culturally instinctive to its leadership. This was made unequivocally clear when a former senior member of the (UNC's) People's Partnership administration once declared: "I am Indian first, UNC second, and a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, third."
If further confirmation of this "party before country" mindset were needed, it came straight from the horse's mouth on March 21, 2022, when UNC insiders calling for party reform advocated putting country before party, were publicly told by Ms. Persad-Bissessar to "GO TO HELL."
Her exact rebuff, in reference to the call by Vasant Bharath, was unvarnished: “He say, 'Support country before party.' Well, go to hell! Go to hell, because if you cannot be loyal to your party, how are you going to be loyal to your country?”
When national citizenship is relegated to a distant third place behind ethnicity and party allegiance, and national patriotism is actively consigned to hell, Trinidad and Tobago ceases to be a shared homeland to be protected on the global stage. It becomes merely a partisan prize to be captured by any means necessary—even if it means "mashing up" the country.
In a robust democracy, fierce political rivalry is expected, and the pursuit of power is rarely gentle. But no matter how brutal the political battle, a country's sovereignty is sacrosanct. It must remain intact, far above the battlefield.
When we contrast the UNC's documented history - of fabricating issues to justify inviting external interference in our domestic affairs - with the PNM's historical modus operandi - of waging its political warfare strictly within our sovereign borders - the UNC falls short by a long shot from being considered a truly national party. It remains 'the indian party', in spite of Black window dressing
Apologists and sympathetic political analysts often attempt to excuse this divergence by painting the PNM as the historical "insider" and the UNC as the perpetual "outsider." They argue that appealing to external bodies like multilateral banks or foreign governments is a necessary strategy for the UNC to find a neutral arbiter. But this academic excuse does not withstand scrutiny. No amount of historical rationalizing or political justification changes the net result: the PNM keeps its fights within the national family, while the UNC is entirely willing to puncture the nation’s tires on the global highway, derail it journey to progress, just to regain control of the steering wheel from the PNM.
Therefore, notwithstanding the inclusion of the word "National" in the names of both parties, it can be easily and justifiably be dismissed as a misnomer in the case of the UNC.
There is nothing "national" about the UNC's politics, nothing protective about its indifference to the country's international reputation, and nothing patriotic about its repeated betrayal of the national interest. This brings up the critical issue of voter accountability, and the extent to which the unpatriotic mindset of the UNC's leadership is reflective of the mindset of its core ethnic support base.
Political parties don’t drop from the sky; both the PNM and the UNC are products of the very crowds that back them. Their political tactics exist only because their core supporters explicitly give them a green light to behave the way they do. PNM supporters have historically demonstrated a readiness to hold their leadership to account and remove the party from office if it falls short of expectations. This base possesses no qualms about punishing the party - either by swinging their votes to alternative coalitions or withholding their participation entirely by staying home. This performance-based standard definitively showed itself in the historic, decisive electoral shifts of 1986, 1995, 2010, and most recently, 2025.
The UNC support base, on the other hand, grants its leadership absolute immunity from the consequences of its sins. They endorse and accept the party's scorched-earth, "destroy it all" approach to retain or regain power, fully cognizant of the damaging consequences such an approach holds for the country's sovereignty, economy, and international standing.
This raises valid questions about the patriotism of those who repeatedly vote for that policy, election after election. It shows in no uncertain terms - in fact, it removes all doubt - as to the collective mindset of that support base and their true 'loyalty' to Trinidad and Tobago.
To what extent that exact mindset is represented in the nation's armed forces and protective services should be a cause for profound concern to the PNM, its African support base, and the wider 'non Indian' national community.
If tribal/political allegiance takes precedence over country loyalty within the very armed forces sworn to defend the state, "Crapaud smoke we pipe".
Our Blog Opinions Are 100% human-written. They Are Not AI-Generated Or AI Refined. AI Input Is Limited To Historical Research & Data. Click Here For AI Detection