Public Policy and Ethnic Conflict Regulation: Trinidad and Tobago

Abstract

In most multi-ethnic states, the mode of regulating communal strife varies over time ranging from periods of oppression to moments of accommodation. Cultural pluralism tends to throw up persistent problems in establishing stable inter-sectional coexistence. Peaceful accommodative practices appear to be rare events and when they do occur they tend to be of relatively short duration. Generally, from the evidence, it is clear that the most prevalent policies and practices that states apply in coping with ethnonationalist challenges point to domination and repression (Gurr, 1994; Horowitz, 1985; Premdas, 1993; Young, 1976). Sometimes drastic measures are employed to destroy ‘once and for all’ deep ethno-cultural divisions through assimilation, genocide, population expulsion or partition (Isaacs, 1963). As a general rule, these modes of ethnic conflict management tend to be counterproductive. Multi-ethnicity and cultural diversity persist and rarely can they be entirely erased or suppressed. Efforts are frequently undertaken aimed at achieving or avoiding dominance, or at times, directed at discovering satisfactory modes of sharing the same territory, government and resources. It is rare, however, for one mode of inter-sectional regulation to be permanently entrenched.