Foreign Policy Options for CARICOM: An Analytical Review

• Author: Prof. Stephen Vasciannie
• Pages: 35-88

35

Foreign Policy Options for CARICOM

One of the main objectives of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)

concerns the harmonization of foreign policy positions of the diverse countries

that are members of the regional grouping. Thus, since the formation of

CARICOM, it has been assumed that this foreign policy harmonization would

enhance the national potential of individual member States in matters

pertaining to economics and politics, and facilitate the transmission of

Caribbean perspectives in various international fora. On preliminary

examination, these basic objectives have been satisfied to some extent: thus,

in some areas, and particularly with respect to trade matters, CARICOM

has presented fairly uniform positions, while in others, the broad perspectives

of individual CARICOM States reflect a certain similarity of approach.

At the same time, however, there are arguably ways in which greater

uniformity and consistency may be achieved, and so, an open question pertains

to whether CARICOM should adopt new mechanisms to enhance the

harmonization of its foreign policy positions. But this, of course, presupposes

that greater uniformity and consistency would necessarily be a positive

development. Also, still on the assumption that greater harmonisation may

be virtuous, there is a need to examine the particular constraints that exist in

this area.

Another general issue concerns the particular foreign policy positions

that CARICOM States have advanced in recent years. Given the exigencies

of international relations, it may be that particular initiatives have been

undertaken by CARICOM States without full regard to their long term foreign

policy implications. This kind of assessment is not easily undertaken by

FOREIGN POLICY OPTIONS FOR

CARICOM: An Analytical Review

Professor Stephen Vasciannie

44

44

4

36 CARICOM Options: Towards Full Integration Into the World Economy

persons directly involved in the policy-making process at the day-to-day

level, not least because of the sharp time constraints on decision-making

such persons often face.

In view of the foregoing, the present discussion on foreign policy options

for CARICOM States is prepared for consideration by member States of the

organization. It takes a broad perspective on the different elements that

influence foreign policy formulation in CARICOM States as a group.

Simultaneously, it examines certain prevailing viewpoints and policy options

in respect of a particular subset of issues, namely, (a) trade and investment,

(b) human rights, (c) environmental concerns, (d) the law of the sea, (e)

illegal drug exportation and transshipment, (f) immigration matters, (g)

development assistance, and (h) security concerns. Clearly, the discussion

which follows is not meant to be exhaustive; rather, it seeks to identify some

of the main threads of analysis that will have some bearing on the future of

foreign policy formulation among CARICOM States.

The Broad Context

Discussions concerning policy options for CARICOM States are replete

with references to the historical, geopolitical, and economic constraints faced

by the member countries of the regional grouping. Thus, by way of example,

most CARICOM member States share a common history of plantation slavery,

colonial exploitation and imperial control, historical forces which have left

distinct cultural and institutional difficulties in particular societies, and, even

today, continue to limit the economic and social potential. Among other

things, the historical legacy has also been partly responsible for the general

orientation of foreign policy initiatives in the present era; consequently, trading

and investment relations, migration patterns, development assistance and

security concerns all bear testimony to the fact that our traditional friendships

have remained largely within the sphere of influence of the Anglo-American

environment. At this juncture, the point is not so much whether the traditional

alignment of most CARICOM States within the sphere of Anglo-American

relations in necessarily a negative feature of our postcolonial societies. Instead,

it is the simple acknowledgment of a fact. In recent years, to be sure, there

have been efforts to enhance relations between CARICOM States and their

neighbours in South and Central America, with increased contact through

common membership of the Association of Caribbean States and by other

means; the reality, however, is that, with respect to economic cooperation,

37

Foreign Policy Options for CARICOM

and international relations more generally, historical connections still prevail

over other sources of influence.

The imperatives of history have also helped to explain the restricted

degrees of freedom faced by most CARICOM States since independence. In

particular, the colonial nexus has inclined us to continue trading relationships

with Britain and Europe which may owe more to history than to economics.

For example, since the 1970s, most CARICOM member States have been

active partners in the coalition of African, Caribbean and Pacific States which

seeks preferential treatment in trade matters with developed countries of

Europe, first through the Lomé scheme in its various manifestations and now

under the Cotonou agreement. Today, as it has become increasingly evident

that Lomé-type preferences are inconsistent with the dogma of free trade

stridently advanced by the United States in particular, we remain party to

efforts in defence of preferences for bananas, sugar and other exports. This

is an understandable position, for the shift in assumptions about the most

efficient rules for trading relations has come about in relatively short order,

and thus gives rise to an argument in favour of transitional arrangements for

countries adjusting to the dominant approach. For present purposes, though,

the point is simply that historically determined arrangements, including

preferences, have kept CARICOM States locked into a durable relationship

of dependency with Europe.

Of course, this is not to minimize the impact of geopolitical considerations

on the broad orientation of foreign policy approaches among CARICOM

States. On the contrary, the external affairs of almost all member States of

the regional grouping have been shaped substantially by the combined

geographical realities of small size and location within the multinational

archipelago stretching from the elongated arm of Cuba to the northern shores

of the South American landmass. Specifically, small size (which also applies

to the case of Guyana) has imposed considerable constraints on individual

CARICOM States, not least in respect of market size, economies of scale and

political power in the international arena. Yet, though this point has exercised

much influence on academic perceptions of Caribbean foreign relations, it

probably should not be overstated. Technical innovations, and especially

developments in the area of information processing in the last two decades,

have opened up new vistas for small States, so that possibilities in service

industries such as tourism, specialist manufacturing, insurance and banking,

information technology and so forth, have become viable options for all

States with appropriate levels of education, expertise and dedication.