CARICOM needs to learn from the EU example

The tone of Caricom’s 50th Heads of Government Meeting suggested that there is an urgency for greater integration. So far, the US has blown up 43 boats in the Caribbean Sea, killing 151 persons, including three St Lucians obliterated in SVG’s waters. These summary executions, along

with the US abduction of Venezuelan President Maduro were completely outside the rule of law. How can we deal with a hegemonic bully brandishing a nuclear club? But let’s look at the 50th HOG Meeting in more detail.

With the US’ Marco Rubio present, the St Kitts PM Dr. Terrence Drew noted that the world would be a poorer place without the Caribbean; no Sir Arthur Lewis, no Derek Walcott, no Garifuna, no Usain Bolt, no Steel Pan. Suriname’s President Dr. Jennifer Geerlings-Simons

reminded all of the vast energy reserves that members of Caricom possess in the Caribbean

continental shelf. But the comments of two other Caribbean prime ministers were riveting.

Firstly, Trinidadian Kamla Persad-Bissessar, who was tight-lipped with her citizens about her military accord with the US, completely side-stepped the question of legality for the killings in Caribbean waters. She heaped praises on President Trump and Secretary Rubio for their high-

tech executions and delivered scathing remarks on Caricom member states’ presumed partisan conduct and some members’ attempts to de-stabilize her government. Then PM

Persad-Bissessar launched into Cuba and discounting all the educational and medical help we owe that country, broadly painted it just as an alien socialist regime. All while acknowledging the presence of very rich Middle Eastern Representatives from countries whose democratic

record could hardly bear scrutiny. Secondly, the Jamaican PM Andrew Holness, before the watchful guests most eloquently articulated Caricom was clear in not being a political union.

There is no supranational body to make decisions binding upon member states and that is not a weakness but the hallmark of sovereignty. The immediate past Caricom chairman, saw this as freedom for members to react to identified pressures,purely as individual states.This individualism was not diversity but distributed problem-solving. Dr. Holness admitted the power of one voice but subjected that to the haphazard recognition of that power. It was

excellent brinkmanship for a man walking a tight-rope between two dominating world powers-

one military, one economic.These comments from the mouths of two of the big four Caribbean states that had signed the Treaty of Chaguaramas in 1973 to establish Caricom. The

same two states whose withdrawal had flopped the West Indies Federation in 1962. Those in

Washington, who had written to individual member states to take in unwanted third party deportees must have been delighted with the alarming potential for justifiable disunity this exposed. What is abundantly clear is PM Persad-Bissessar’s new rapprochement with Uncle Sam. In this she cited the powerlessness of members’ police and military to help her; what is

the role and developmental path of the Regional Security Forces? It cannot just be to harass Rasta Farmers and parade costly exercises. Beside her, PM Holness seemingly offered a couched rationale, an “ idealized narrative ” for his decision to start a new courtship of China.These utterances do not bode well for the trust that Caricom unity needs. I would admit that only the Trinidadian PM’s comment I find blatantly hypocritical but her mind-set is wholly

subsumed under the Jamaican PM’s rubric. SVG’s PM Dr. Godwin Friday pleaded with Caricom members to “ quicken the pace”, but speed may be dependent on negotiating the deep

significance contained in PM Holness’ unassuming words. A look at the younger European Union (1992) compared to the older Caricom Community (1973) may help in shedding some light on Dr Holness’ pronouncement.

CAST SOVEREIGNTY UPON WATERS AND …

The EU’s single market mobility, its eurozone monetary union and shared legal framework go way beyond Caricom’s. But that European Community is special. It is not a political union but it has supranational bodies, the lack of which in Caricom, PM Holness was so careful to defend.

The European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Courts of Justice are

EU institutions whose decisions are binding upon all members. Since its creation in 2006, our Caribbean Court of Justice has yet to be fully accepted by members. The EU’s secondary arms like the European Council and the Council of the European Union act as voices for EU member

governments and is where they exercise control on the framing of foreign policy. Commitment and hard work are unavoidable but it brought success; since inception, only Britain has exited the EU, leaving 27. What has breathed life into the EU’s supranational bodies is that each

member gave up a piece of its own sovereignty to empower the decisions of these bodies to be legally binding on all. Is this fact the pivotal reason for the EU’s success and can its absence be the brake in Caricom’s slow pace forward? The region may be prepared to accept foreign

miscreants from the US yet Trinidad told the Meeting of Heads that it cannot now commit to free movement for Caricom nationals. When will they be ready? Sovereignty is political and personal and without a government, sovereignty reverts to the individual society to do as

each one pleases. Both PM Holness and PM Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s administration legitimately govern all only because their citizens share their sovereignty by voting. They deny

themselves a little to empower something that more efficiently makes choices for the benefit

of all . But there seems much in the way before these Prime Ministers champion extending that principle to Caricom. To foster greater integration, the Treaty of Chaguaramas was revised in 2002 but as cray-fish baskets are designed to let water out, is Caricom continuing to be so structured that it lets effective unity slip away through its cracks? Where the similarities

in common domestic outlook are greater than the difference in external challenges presented, to unify in a binding way seems naturally advantageous.

DANGER AND OPPORTUNITY

One of Caricom’s stated aims is to effectively enhance member’s dealings with 3rd states and

entities of any kind and this relates to one of its four pillars—regional security. Haiti is a Caricom member. Cuba, a consistent friend, is not; still, no Caribbean state has done more to

topple apartheid than Cuba. Both are now in dire straits. Yet the US has forced Jamaica to refrain from sending needed gas to the Cuban people. Simply, when members do not have a binding unity, they are easier to pick off and penalize. Europe’s North Atlantic Treaty says “

touch one and you touch all “ making it more difficult to punish an individual member and thus safer for all.

Trump is not an American aberration. The US has always been driven by the need for power, using some of the world’s worst despots when it suits US interests. Trump’s leaving will not change much. But we can diplomatically leverage that interest. The 200 year old Munroe

Doctrine whereby the US wants exclusivity in the West, is dead, though authority figures like

Trump are trying brute force to re-vitalize it. But China, Russia and Brazil are here to stay.

Some of WW II’s bloodiest battles between the US and Japan were fought over small pacific islands which had assumed great strategic to both combatants. Similarly, the present world stage of several competing great nations increases our strategic value. Our islands are close to international trade routes and are geopolitically right in America’s backyard. Knowing our trump cards and speaking with one voice can only make our actions count for more.

Caricom needs to carefully examine the EU example and see how our political and economic power can be blended while still preserving individual characteristics. In not appraising opportunities for better self-preservation, Caribbean States may be in danger of falling into

orbit as satellites obeying forces that subjugate our sovereignty and development.

S J Wyllie.