BY JOSE ALEMAN

In print | November 1, 2007

In recent days, the debate around the Puerto Rican status issue has been featured in several local and national newspapers. A new bill, H.R. 900, has been approved in the House Committee on Natural Resources proposing a referendum in 2009 that allows Puerto Ricans to choose between the current “commonwealth” status or a permanent, non-territorial status option. The debate, however, is alien to the majority of the American people, and some even consider it irrelevant or think of it as an exclusively local issue with little repercussion for national or international affairs. This approach to the Puerto Rican status issue is mistaken, for in this debate more than meets the eye is at stake.

The way Puerto Rican political parties have dealt with the issue has contributed to perception of deadlock and irrelevance prevalent abroad. Until recently, there were only three political parties on the island. The New Progressive Party supports statehood, the Puerto Rican Independence Party seeks independence, and the Popular Democratic Party supports the current status or a more “autonomous” variation. The recently registered Puerto Ricans for Puerto Rico Party is the only party that supports no single solution, but rather advocates a sustainable development agenda and the depolitization of the issue. Its innovative platform is a testament of how the debate around the Puerto Rican status issue, not the status issue itself, has been the major obstacle to the island’s welfare.

Yes, the solution of the status issue is necessary for Puerto Rico’s full development, but the extreme emphasis on its solution has even reversed some of the necessary development achieved under the current status. If US and Puerto Rican leaders want the island to move out of the deadlock, they should either depoliticize the issue and focus on the island’s welfare, or work with Congress towards a resolution.

The neglect of the issue, however, would be a disservice to the Puerto Rican people. Puerto Ricans deserve better than a status that grants them US citizenship but denies them the right to full representation in Congress. They deserve better than a status that preserves their national culture but thwarts their sovereignty by excluding the island from membership in important international bodies such as the UN. In this context, a referendum that allows them to reject the colonial status in which they live would be a step forward towards the fulfillment of Puerto Rico’s right to self-determination under UN resolution 1514. This would also let Puerto Rican parties know that the time has come to work for the island’s development, and not for the realization of a particular status option.

In addition, the resolution of the status issue would send a message to the developing world that the US is willing to support its development while respecting national sovereignty. It could appease anti-Americanism in Latin America, promote integration and cooperation and contribute to our ideological war against the enemies of the open society. Inaction, however, could eventually provoke anti-Americanism on the island and further its economy’s fall into bankruptcy.

Puerto Rico is at a crossroads. If Congress solves the status issue once and for all, Puerto Rico could move forward towards its full political, economic and social development. This is unlikely, given the lack of political will on the Hill. But even if the status issue remains unresolved, the current impasse between the opposing political parties must end before it takes its toll on the island’s welfare. Depolitization, though equally unlikely, could break the deadlock. Either way, let us hope that necessity will press for change before Puerto Rico’s democratic experiment falls apart.

« RETURN TO OPINIONS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »