CARICOM and the Venezuelan claim on Guyana

Can CARICOM survive for the next 30 years? I doubt it. The zeitgeist that brought Carifta (which later became Caricom) into existence is dead. It died when the eighties were over. Its death was hastened by the global influence of Reaganite power.

We start with the global physiology that made the birth of Carifta a success. Colonialism and the western powers’ suppression of legitimate nationalist aspirations in the Third World (for example, French brutalities in Algeria and the big powers’ support for apartheid) engendered immense encouragement for countries with similar histories, cultures and geographies to move closer together politically and in terms of economic arrangements.

The prospect of the British West Indies becoming an integration movement was logical and natural. The islands and Guyana were almost identical in historical, sociological and anthropological evolution.

Contrary to the popular view in scholarship that the anti-colonial leaders in these territories were driven exclusively by market economics that led to Carifesta; there were other factors at work. There was the emotional drive that as contiguous territories, they should form themselves into a closer culturally knitted family. In other words, colonial domination made these leaders think in terms of family bonding.

When the closer bond came in the form of Carifesta, Caribbean oneness was a natural theme that held the Anglo-phone Caribbean together. But the world was changing. Colonialism was long gone. European countries sought closer cooperation.

OPEC used its monopoly to get more money for its oil. Ronald Reagan pressed on in his confrontation with the USSR. Emerging was the shape of a new world order that was quite different from the sixties when Caribbean countries got their Independence. The dénouement was the end of the Cold War and the rise of neo-liberal globalism.

The post-1990 Caribbean was different in two major ways. The new leaders were not the inheritors of the ideas of the Caricom founding fathers. These were people who weren’t brought up with the symbol of Caribbean oneness. The globalized world they were living in imposed a desperate search for survival.

Which country or which region of the world can provide income for their small economies would be welcomed. This explains the presence of Taiwanese aid to OECS islands.

The irony of Caricom in the 21st century is that the present leaders have rejected the very raison d’etrê of the integration movement. Caricom is supposed to be the unity of small states who when they act together, derive greater economic protection and economic benefits both in the Caribbean itself and in the world.

But Caricom states no longer accept this underlying purpose of Caricom. For many Caricom states, Caricom is too small an economic region, and its individual economies are too small to offer economic survival to each other in a cruel, globalized world. It is every man for himself. With this type of conceptual approach to the survival of small states, Caricom has lost its unifying symbol. Here is where Petro-Caribe comes in.

If any travel writer should spend time in Guyana and the islands, they would find it hard to detect an emotional embrace among Caribbean people for their neighbours. If you ask a Canadian where Canada’s destiny lies, he/she would say in a close relationship with the US.

If you ask any German where do Germany’s future lies, he/she would say inside Europe. If you ask any French citizen if he/she is a proud European, they would say yes. There isn’t an island in Caricom, including Guyana whose citizens would say they believe in Caribbean integration and see their Caricom neighbours as one Caribbean people. Jamaica has the least interest in Caricom and would gladly leave it. Trinidad sees the OECS as trading partners that hardly interest them. Barbados does not need Caricom. It is happy with who and what it has always been.

Guyana will not get more than a pleasant protocol stance from Caricom leaders over Venezuelan barbarity. For the leaders of Caricom, Venezuela and Guyana are two countries that have a border problem that they must work out. They will not see the Venezuelan claim as the bullying act against one of its historic Caribbean brothers.

Caricom leaders will not jeopardize Petro-Caribe benefits for Guyana, because Caricom’s present crop of leaders does not see the conflict as an attack on a Caricom sister-state. Current Caricom leaders do not practice the concept of Caricom sisterhood. That was sixty years ago when Caribbean islands and Guyana were kissing cousins.

There isn’t much trade that takes place among Caricom members and the trend will continue. There is a creeping feeling among Caribbean people that West Indies cricket is dead and Caricom is dying.