A few days ago, at the opening of the US Embassy’s consular office in Montego Bay, the point was made that the great northern power considers Jamaica a friend.

Not a word would the American officials let slip about any possible impact that Prime Minister Bruce Golding’s handling of the extradition request for his friend, Mr Christopher ‘Dudus’ Coke, might have on the relationship between both countries.

No, it was all about the positives.

According to Vice-Consul David Stone, some 120,000 visas are issued per year, way more than the number of visas that are cancelled.

This, coupled with the fact that the Embassy has spent a pretty penny on infrastructure within the past three years, is, according to Embassy officials, indicative of their intentions to maintain strong relations with Jamaica.

We have no reason to doubt them.

After all, Mr Stone’s explanation that the small number of visas that are cancelled on a yearly basis are done so for reasons that are personal and unique to the individuals, is perfectly plausible.

But it would be nothing short of simplistic to twin the local presence of the US with the supposition that the ‘Dudus’ issue is one that we can afford to sustain in its current format.

Never mind the broad smiles and assurances of the Americans. They know, as do we, that there is more than one way to skin a cat.

There’s no need to close down embassies or pull out of Jamaica over this issue. We are, after all, talking about one man… 33, counting Mr Golding and his team.

And when it eventually gets around to election time, credibility is going to be critical to any prospective administration. But notice how deliberately that commodity is draining away from the Golding administration.

The latest leak — Mr Golding’s parliamentary assertion that his Government had no relationship with the US law firm Manatt, Phelps & Phillips in relation to the ‘Dudus’ issue — is getting bigger and bigger as if by design.

No undiplomatic venting, no inappropriate scenes, just a systematic unveiling of information that raises serious challenges to much of what is coming out of the Government’s mouth.

Take the most recent notice of amendment filed by the law firm with the US Department of Justice to the effect that it “ceased activities on behalf of the Jamaican Government through Harold CW Brady of the Brady & Company law firm as of February 8, 2010”. Clearly, somebody has been lying through their teeth on this one.

Now, according to the latest development, the Government is planning to ask the courts to declare whether or not Justice Minister Ms Dorothy Lightbourne’s decision not to sign the US extradition request for Mr Coke, who is wanted on drug- and gun-running charges, is correct.

What on earth will all of this boil down to?

Does it mean that if the courts say Ms Lightbourne was right, the issue will be resolved, that this mess will just go away? If that’s the case, what took the Government so long?

On the other hand, what will the position be if the courts say Ms Lightbourne was wrong? Will the Government sign the request?

If neither of these outcomes will materialise as a result of the court’s decision, then what is the objective of these proposed proceedings?

If it is to add intrigue to this spectacle, it is certainly working.