Nothing else may have that effect, but Basdeo Panday, the former minister of Trinidad and Tobago, is seemingly easily intoxicated by words - his own. He shoots them off with staggering irrationality and unconcern for their broader political consequence and effect.

That, unfortunately, is our considered and inescapable conclusion, especially after Mr Panday's remarks about Sunday's putsch in Honduras against the elected president, Manuel Zelaya, an action that has echoes of Jean-Bertrand Aristide's removal from Haiti in 2004 when Mr Aristide claimed to have been kidnapped. In this case, though, Washington has insisted, with far greater credibility than in the Aristide case, that it had nothing to do with events in Tegucigalpa.

Across the Caribbean, including in Jamaica, political leaders, in and out of government, have condemned the Honduran coup. They hope that it does not mark a regression to the anachronistic tendencies of Latin America's oligarchic past: a call to the Cuadillo.

Slow removal

Mr Panday doesn't perceive it that way. He seems to see inspiration in the forcible, albeit bloodless, removal of Mr Zelaya - for wanting to hold a referendum to gauge public opinion on whether presidents should be eligible for re-election beyond a single four-year term - for those in Trinidad and Tobago who believe, or claim to believe, that they operate in a narrow political space.

Mr Panday, according to the Trinidad Guardian newspaper, said: "I have been saying that when you block the democratic channels for change, people are going to resort to violence. What has happened in Honduras is worrying for Trinidad."

Those words not only cause us worry, but are, for Trinidad and Tobago, with its politics of ethnicity, grave cause for concern - on at least two fronts.

Indeed, Mr Panday may be crying wolf in an environment where, if the opposition leader is honest, the democratic avenues are wide open. And then there is history.

In 1970, in the event Mr Panday has forgotten, two young army officers, Rex La Salle and Rafique Shah led a rebellion that badly shook Eric Williams' government. Two decades later, Abu Bakr's Muslimeen staged an eventually defeated coup, in which several persons were killed and many others injured, including then prime minister, Mr A.N.R. Robinson.

Cynical and callous

This is the kind of political behaviour that any democratic leader should want to starve of nourishment. Mr Panday's remarks, in that context, especially his statement that the Honduran coup was not something for him "to condone or not condone" is, to say the least, cynical and callous.

Indeed, Caribbean governments as well as others in the hemisphere must, as they have done, make it clear that they will not countenance the overthrow of democratically elected leaders and constitutional rule. And they must stand fixed in this position, especially when the coupists can demonstrate neither moral nor ethical foundation for their behaviour.

In this regard, the early signal from the Obama administration against the pretenders in Tegucigalpa is welcome. Hopefully, there will be no wavering or obfuscation.

In the meantime, we hope that Mr Panday, having had an opportunity to reflect, will offer a far more sober view on events in Honduras and politics in his own country.

The opinions on this page, except for the above, do not necessarily reflect the views of The Gleaner. To respond to a Gleaner editorial, email us: editor@gleanerjm.com or fax: 922-6223. Responses should be no longer than 400 words. Not all responses will be published.