
Descendants of slave owners and enslaved people in the Caribbean call for reparations at the UN
The great-great-grandson of 19th-century British Prime Minister William Gladstone said he was horrified to learn seven years ago that his ancestors were slave owners in Jamaica and Guyana.
And former BBC journalist Laura Trevelyan said she learned after records of Britain's Slave Compensation Commission were put online in 2013 that one of her ancestors, Sir John Trevelyan, owned sugar cane plantations in Grenada and about 1,000 enslaved people.
They spoke at a meeting at U.N. headquarters in New York this past week where, for the first time, descendants of slave owners and enslaved people in former British colonies in the Caribbean sat at the same table with diplomats and experts from those nations discussing the contentious issue of reparations.
'This was a historic event,' said Trevelyan, who moderated the meeting on the sidelines of the U.N. Permanent Forum on People of African Descent's weeklong session.
From about the year 1500, millions of West Africans were sent to work mainly on plantations in the Caribbean and the Americas, including the southern United States. U.N. human rights chief Volker Türk told the forum that an estimated 25 million to 30 million Africans were uprooted for the purpose of slavery.
Few nations have apologized for their role in slavery, and reparations have been the subject of much debate.
The Geneva-based Human Rights Council has called for global action for years, including reparations, apologies and educational reforms to make amends for racism against people of African descent. The 15-nation Caribbean Community, known as CARICOM, has a 10-point plan for reparatory justice, starting with demands for European countries where enslaved people were kept and traded to issue formal apologies.
Türk noted a European Union statement in 2023 profoundly regretting the 'untold suffering' caused by the trans-Atlantic slave trade and the African Union's designation of 2025 as the 'Year of Justice for Africans and People of African Descent Through Reparations.'
At the meeting of descendants of enslaved people and slave owners on Tuesday, Trevelyan spoke of her family's decision to apologize to Grenada and to make a contribution of 100,000 British pounds (about $133,000) toward education in the Caribbean island nation.
Going to Grenada with family and apologizing 'wasn't exactly smooth sailing,' said Trevelyan, who left the BBC and has become a campaigner for reparations. There were protests by one group that thought the apology was inadequate and the money not enough.
Also at the meeting was Aidee Walker, who said she was shocked when a DNA test revealed she was not only predominantly Scots-Irish but also part Nigerian, then discovered that her great-great-great-grandfather, who moved to New Zealand, was the son of a slave owner in Jamaica named John Malcolm and an African housekeeper.
Walker and her sister, Kate Thomas, said when they found out they felt they had to do something.
Thomas said she discovered what Trevelyan was doing and got in touch with Verene Shepherd, a professor emeritus and vice chair of the CARICOM reparations commission, who encouraged the sisters to start with the apology.
Charles Gladstone, meanwhile, said he felt 'a profound sense of guilt' after learning that former Prime Minister Gladstone's father owned estates with enslaved people — and that a great deal of his privileged life 'was essentially connected to this criminal past.'
He said he apologized to Guyana and Jamaica and will try to do something 'to make the world a better place.'
While Britain's role in abolishing slavery in 1833 is widely taught, Gladstone said, its involvement in the trade 'has been completely buried.' The history must be told, he said, because "the evils of this crime against humanity are not historical, they're felt very, very profoundly today.'
Britain's deputy U.N. ambassador, James Kariuki, attended the meeting but did not speak. The British Mission, asked for a comment, sent a statement from Development Minister Anneliese Dodds to Parliament on Feb. 25 saying she and Prime Minister Keir Starmer have been 'absolutely clear that we will not be making cash transfers and payments to the Caribbean.'
Gladstone said supporters of reparations must keep working together. If thousands of families like his stand up and say, "'We would like to do something about this,' then there is a chance that the government in Britain could do something more substantial," he said.
Thomas agreed. 'If we can get the numbers, then that could influence institutions and governments to act,' she said. 'It's a really great start to what I think will be a lifelong journey."
Shepherd, who taught at the University of the West Indies, said there have not been many apologies and, while some Europeans express remorse or regret for slavery, 'no one is talking about reparations.'
Arley Gill, chairman of Grenada's National Reparations Commission, said, however, he sees positive movement toward reparative justice globally and believes 'we are on a good path to ensure these crimes against humanity are being recognized by the colonial powers.'
Antigua's U.N. ambassador, Walton Webson, who is chair of the Caribbean ambassadors' caucus, ended the meeting by saying, 'We have reached the point where speaking of reparations is no longer taboo.'
Now, he said, it's time to put reparations 'on the lips of every child, every person' and start to take action.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Wales Online
an hour ago
- Wales Online
Violence erupts for third night in UK town as rioters set leisure centre on fire
Violence erupts for third night in UK town as rioters set leisure centre on fire Homes have been evacuated and a leisure centre housing migrants has been set alight A third night of civil unrest has unfolded in Ballymena, NI (Image: Getty Images ) A third night of violence has ensued in a UK town in what has been described as "anti-immigration riots." Videos circulating online show a number of projectiles being launched at police in Ballymena, Northern Ireland, including petrol bombs and fireworks in another night of rioting which has seen violence, arrests and a number of people injured. The riots began on Monday after two teenage boys appeared in court accused of attempted rape. They had confirmed their names and ages through a Romanian interpreter and denied the charges against them. By Monday afternoon, a social media post advertising a planned protest at 7.30pm that evening had been widely circulated and despite it being planned as peaceful, violent attacks were launched on places known to house migrants. Since then there have been three nights of violence and vandalism with people reportedly afraid to leave their homes, multiple arrests and dozens of police officers injured. On Wednesday masked youths attacked Larne Leisure Centre by smashing windows and setting fires. They are believed to have targeted the building after social media posts had suggested that those moved out of Ballymena homes were being housed there. Article continues below It is understood that there was no one inside the Leisure Centre during the attack. Emergency services created blockades with vehicles and a water cannon was also used in an effort to disperse the crowds that gathered close to Clonavon Terrace. Police used water jets to disperse the crowds (Image: Getty Images ) DUP politician Gordon Lyons posted a message to Facebook on Wednesday: "A number of individuals were temporarily moved to Larne Lesiure Centre... following disturbances in Ballymena. "It has now been confirmed to us by the PSNI and Council that all these individuals are in the care of the Housing Executive and have been moved out of Larne. "Protesting is of course a legitimate right but violence is not and I would encourage everyone to remain peaceful." The Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has condemned the 'mindless attacks which has been described by senior police officers as "racist thuggery." Article continues below Some Ballymena residents have put British and Irish flags in their windows so that their homes are not targeted. Many locals have said they are too afraid to leave their homes.


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Why isn't the BBC telling us what caused the Ballymena riots?
Does anyone know what's actually happening in Ballymena, in Northern Ireland? If you've just been following the news on the BBC, it's actually quite hard to work out what has led to the violence which has injured at least 32 police officers. The initial news bulletins told us that there rioting youths were protesting about a sexual attack on a girl and that two teenage boys were in custody facing charges. My first thought – reverting to the Troubles – was that there was a sectarian element to the whole thing. But we also learned that the police condemned the riots as racist thuggery; so, not sectarianism, it seems, but something to do with race. A few further details came to light yesterday. We found out that the rioters were still rioting. A local MP popped up on the news to say that people were unsettled by the number of immigrants in the area. And the BBC informed us that the 14-year-old youths – who deny sexual assault – confirmed their names and ages through a Romanian interpreter at Coleraine Magistrates' Court. But these glimmers of information still offered little clarity. Wouldn't it be easier and simpler if the BBC just said that two Romanian boys living in the area are accused of an offence? Instead, we're left to make informed guesses ourselves about what's actually going on. The coverage of events in Ballymena brings to mind that of the Southport murders last July. There were allegations that the murderer was an asylum seeker; these allegations were promptly dismissed as 'fake news' or misinformation. The BBC's reporters told us that the attacker was born in Britain and living in Southport. We know now, of course, that he is Axel Rudakubana, whose Rwandan parents came here after the genocide. That fact – that his parents were from Rwanda – wasn't irrelevant to the case; their son was, it seems, obsessed with the genocide and indeed with extreme violence of all sorts. Trying to pretend that he was just some random local wasn't helpful; people inevitably came to their own conclusions. If you've just been following the news on the BBC, it's quite hard to work out what is happening The Dublin riots in 2023 happened after an Algerian was charged with stabbing a school assistant and three children, seriously injuring a five-year-old girl. But the authorities – and the news – carefully glossed over the bad-taste question of the background of the alleged attacker; social media inevitably filled the vacuum, which is precisely why the riots had an anti-immigrant aspect. Riad Bouchaker is yet to stand trial and denies the charges. Won't state broadcasters ever learn that not telling us things isn't helpful? People work things out for themselves. And if they're not told clearly by the BBC, or whoever, what the background is of the alleged perpetrators in these cases, well, the public is going to arrive at its own conclusions. This was what I did, only amplified by social media, and presumably what the Ballymena rioters have done. The sense that elements of a story are being kept from us for our own good – that is, lest people get angry about it – only adds to the idea that we're not really grown up enough to be trusted with the truth. It's not a great way to calm things down, you know.


Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Could Donald Trump scrap Aukus?
America's policy undersecretary of defence, Elbridge Colby, is one of the brightest brains in Donald Trump's administration. Having served in the first Trump presidency, Colby has an outstanding reputation as a defence and strategic thinker. He is also, however, very much aligned with Trump's America First thinking in respect of foreign policy, and the United States' relationship with her allies. That would be a strategic disaster for Australia and Britain In tasking Colby on Wednesday with reviewing the Aukus nuclear submarine-centred strategic partnership between the US, the UK and Australia, the president sends a clear message to Britain and Australia: Aukus is part of his inheritance from Joe Biden, and its future therefore is far from assured. In a media statement, the Pentagon said: 'The department is reviewing Aukus as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the president's America First agenda. As (Defense) Secretary (Pete) Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our service members, that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defence, and that the defence industrial base is meeting our needs. This review will ensure the initiative meets these common sense, America First criteria.' Colby himself has been ambivalent about Aukus ever since it was established by Biden, and then Australian and British prime ministers, Scott Morrison and Rishi Sunak, in 2021. Addressing a Policy Exchange forum last year, Colby said he was 'quite sceptical' about the Aukus pact, and questioned its viability and ultimate benefits. In a more recent interview with the Australian newspaper, Colby said Aukus's Pillar 1 – the nuclear submarine programme under which Australia would purchase several Virginia-class boats, pending the acquisition of new generation UK-Australian Acute-class submarines – is 'very problematic'. He did say, however, that Pillar 2 – the sharing of military intelligence and technical know-how between the partners – 'is great, no problem'. Colby's long-standing concern is the US's ability to take on China if it ever comes to conflict in the Asia-Pacific, especially over Taiwan. 'How are we supposed to give away nuclear attack submarines in the years of the window of potential conflict with China?' he told the Australian. 'A nuclear attack submarine is the most important asset for a western Pacific fight, for Taiwan, conventionally. But we don't have enough, and we're not going to have enough.' If this is the starting position for Colby's review, its scepticism contradicts the steadfast commitment to Aukus from the current Australian and British Labour governments. Indeed, Britain's latest Strategic Defence Review places high priority on the Aukus partnership as an integral element of British strategic and force planning. Given Colby's previous form on Aukus, the review may well recommend scaling back or discontinuing the nuclear submarine Aukus pillar. But that would be a strategic disaster for Australia and Britain, let alone for Colby's own strategic vision, outlined in his 2021 book, of an 'anti-hegemonic coalition to contain the military ambitions of China', in which he specifically envisioned Australia. Arguably, it doesn't matter which country mans the attack nuclear submarines assigned to the Asia-Pacific theatre, as long as the boats are there. But will Colby see it that way? In Australia, however, the administration's announcement immediately set a cat amongst the pigeons. Currently, Australia spends just over two per cent of GDP on defence, and the Trump administration, including Colby, is pressuring on Australia to do far more. This month, Hegseth, told his Australian counterpart that Australia should be committing at least 3.5 per cent of GDP to ensure not just Aukus, but that her fighting personnel and ageing military hardware are fit for purpose and contributing commensurately to the Western alliance. After his face-to-face meeting with Hegseth, Australian defence minister Richard Marles seemed open to the suggestion. His prime minister, Anthony Albanese, is not. In his first major media appearance since his thumping election win a month ago, Albanese was asked whether the US could renege on supplying nuclear submarines to Australia if spending is deemed inadequate. 'Well, I think Australia should decide on what we spend on Australia's defence. Simple as that', Albanese replied. It hasn't escaped notice here that the Pentagon announced its Aukus review less than 48 hours after Albanese made his declaration, and just days before the Australian prime minister is expected to have his first personal meeting with Trump at the G7 Leaders' Summit in Canada. That meeting, carrying the risk of a public Trump rebuke, surely will be dreaded by Albanese. Dealing with the Americans' insistence on a near-doubling of Australia's defence investment is politically diabolical for Albanese. He has just won re-election on a manifesto promising huge additional social investments, especially in Australia's version of the NHS and a fiscally ravenous National Disability Insurance Scheme. Albanese must keep his left-wing support base onside by expanding already huge public investments and subsidies in pursuing his government's ideological Net Zero and 100 per cent renewable energy goals. All that on top of a burgeoning national debt. To achieve Nato's GDP defence spending target of 3 per cent, let alone Hegseth's 3.5, something has to give. Albanese cannot deliver both massive social spending and vast defence outlays: to keep the Americans happy, and justify the continuation of both Aukus pillars, he will need to either prove himself a Bismarck-calibre statesman, or risk electoral wrath if he retreats on his domestic spending promises, and cuts existing programmes across his government, to afford adequate defence spending headroom. Australia needs America to be a strong ally in our troubled region, but the United States needs steadfast allies like Australia and Britain. Now the administration's scepticism about Aukus's value to the US is officially on the table, with a review entrusted to its biggest Aukus sceptic in Elbridge Colby, Australia and Britain must justify why all aspects of the partnership are a worthwhile investment with them, as America's partners, committed to playing their part in full. How well they do it will be a measure of their political and diplomatic competence.