Puerto Rico’s political status not an issue of self-determination

“As I would not be a slave, so I would not be a master.  This expresses my idea of democracy.  Whatever differs from this, to the extent of the difference, is no democracy.” – Abraham Lincoln

The United States of America is not only a democracy, it is a Constitutional democracy.  That distinction means that, in our country, fundamental aspects of citizen’s lives, unlike elective office, are not subject to majority vote.  Accordingly, the problem of the political status of Puerto Rico should not be considered an issue of self-determination, as if it were any democratic process.  Instead, it belongs in the realm of the more fundamental issues of civil rights that, in our nation, are not subject to majority rule.  Slavery is a metaphor that helps to illustrate that point.

To begin the abolition of slavery in the United States, on January 1, 1863, Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation.  To undertake that action, Lincoln did not seek the slaves’ opinion.  In 1865, when the 13th Amendment was finally approved to effectively end slavery throughout the nation, the slaves did not enjoy the right to vote.  Therefore, they had no effective say in the decision.

Why didn’t Lincoln seek the slaves’ opinion before liberating them?  Why was the 13^th Amendment approved without giving the slaves a say in the process?  In part, because a relationship in which one person controls another is so contrary to the most basic human rights that it is unacceptable even if it resulted out of consent.  In other words, the termination of slavery was never an issue of self-determination.  Slavery simply was terminated.

Colonialism, whereby one country controls the sovereignty of another territory, is the political equivalent of slavery.  Yet, Puerto Rico is a colony of the United States.  That colonial status was solidified as a result of some early twentieth century Supreme Court jurisprudence (“insular cases”) that invented the concept of “unincorporated territories” which, like the doctrine of “separate but equal” in the United States and “apartheid” in South Africa, emanated out of racism.

Contrary to the case of slavery, every president and congress person asked about the problem of the political status of Puerto Rico, with few exceptions, tends to answer that they are willing to support whatever Puerto Ricans decide, framing the issue as one of self-determination.  That usually is meant to include the current status as a permissible option.

Holding a vote that includes the current colonial status as an option is practically the same as asking Puerto Ricans if we wished to remain a colony of the United States or if we preferred to change.  Back in the time of Lincoln, this would have been the equivalent of offering the slaves the unthinkable choice between slavery or freedom, a choice never posed to the slaves.

To be true to the human rights traditions of our country, the solution to the problem of the political status of Puerto Rico must meet three conditions.  First, it must emanate from the United States government.  Waiting for Puerto Ricans to reach a consensus solution is not consistent with the historic responsibility of the United States in the matter.  Second, it must be implemented immediately, since a violation of human rights cannot be sustained for a prolonged period of time.  Third, although that solution should not be contingent on a vote by Puerto Ricans, it should not preclude it either.  One way to solve the problem and meet these three conditions would be for Congress to approve legislation decreeing, in addition to the appropriate transition processes, the following:

Puerto Rico is hereby declared a free and independent country, and all ties between the government of Puerto Rico and the government of the United States of America are hereby severed, effective January 1, 2021, unless the people of Puerto Rico request admission as a State of the Union before such date, in which case Puerto Rico will be so admitted.

That language provides a definitive solution for the problem of the political status of Puerto Rico, independence, without requiring further action and complying with the historic responsibility of the United States in the matter.  Puerto Ricans can always talk to the United States government, like many independent countries, regarding the kind of mutual relationships or agreements they would like to entertain.  At the same time, that language opens the door for Puerto Ricans to request admission as a state, making it clear that, if requested, that admission would be granted.  This advanced admission, to take place only if requested, would recognize that Puerto Ricans, by their actions and contributions as United States citizens, have earned it.

Slavery demeans the slaves and their owners.  As the slave owner in this case, the United States has the obligation to liberate Puerto Ricans.  The United States cannot portray itself as a beacon of freedom and human rights as long as it keeps Puerto Rico as the “oldest colony in the world”.  Once liberated, Puerto Ricans will be able to choose what form we want that freedom to take:  independence or statehood.

Colón-De-Armas is a professor of Finance at the Graduate School of Business,University of Puerto Rico.