By Sir Shridath Ramphal
It was here in St George’s 95 years ago that T.A. Marryshow flew from the masthead of his pioneering newspaper The West Indian the banner: The West Indies Must Be Westindian. And on that banner Westindian was symbolically one joined-up word – from the very first issue on 1 January 1915. In the slogan was a double entendre. To be West Indian was both the goal of self-determination attained and the strategy of unity for reaching and sustaining it.
Of course the goal of freedom kept changing its form as the world changed: internal self-government in the pre-war years; formal independence in the post-war years; the reality of freedom in the era of globalization; overcoming smallness in a world of giants. But the strategy of regional unity, the strategy of oneness, would not change, at least not nominally: we called it by different names and pursued it by different forms -- always with variable success: federation; integration, the OECS, CARIFTA, CARICOM, the CSME, the CCJ. It is that ‘variable success’ that today begs the question: Is The West Indies West Indian? Nearly 100 years after Marryshow asserted that we must be, are we yet? Worse still, are we less so than we once were?
Times changed in the nineteen twenties and thirties – between the ‘world wars’. The external economic and political environments changed; and the internal environments changed – social, political and most of all demographic. Local control began to pass to the hands of local creoles, mainly professionals, later trade unionists, and for a while the new political class saw value in a strategy of regional unity. Maryshow’s slogan ‘the West Indies must be West Indian’ was evocative of it; and for two generations, West Indian ‘unity’ was a progressive political credo.
It was a strategy that was to reach its apogee in the Federation of The West Indies: due to become independent in mid-1962. It is often forgotten that the ‘the’ in the name of the new nation was consciously spelt with a capital ‘T’ – The West Indies - an insistence on the oneness of the federated region. But, by then, that was verbal insistence against a contrary reality, already re-emerging. The new political elites for whom ‘unity’ offered a pathway to political power through ‘independence’ had found by the 1960s that that pathway was opening up regardless.
In the event, regional unity was no longer a pre-condition to ‘local control’. Hence, Norman Manley’s deal with McLeod and the referendum in Jamaica; and Eric Williams’ self-indulgent arithmetic that ‘1’ from ‘10’ left ‘0’; even ‘the agony of the eight’ that ended the dream. Despite the rhetorical passion that had characterized the latter years of the ‘federal movement’ the imperishable impulse for ‘local control’ had revived, and the separatist instincts of a controlling social and political elite had prevailed. Within four months of the dispersion of the Federation (on the same day in May 1962 that it was to become a single independent member state of the Commonwealth) Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago became so separately. We can act with speed when we really want to!
But objective realities are not blown away by winds of narrow ambition, Independence on a separate basis had secured ‘local control’; but the old nemesis of colonialism was replaced by the new suzerainty of globalization. Independence, particularly for Caribbean micro states, was not enough to deliver Elysium. ‘Unity’ no sooner discarded was back in vogue; but less a matter of the heart than of the head.
In an interdependent world which in the name of liberalization made no distinctions between rich and poor, big and small, regional unity was compulsive. West Indian states -- for all their new flags and anthems -- needed each other for survival; ‘unity’ was the only protective kit they could afford. Only three years after the rending ‘referendum’ came the first tentative steps to ‘unity’ in 1965 with CARIFTA; ‘tentative’, because the old obsession with ‘local control’ continued to trump oneness – certainly in Cabinet Rooms; but in some privileged drawing rooms too; though less so in village markets and urban street corners.
Despite the new external compulsions, therefore, the pursuit of even economic unity, which publics largely accepted, has been a passage of attrition. It has taken us from 1965 to 2010 -- 45 years -- to crawl through CARIFTA and CARICOM, through the fractured promises of Chaguaramas and Grand Anse, and through innumerable pious Declarations and Affirmations and Commitments. The roll call of unfulfilled pledges and promises and unimplemented decisions is so staggering that in 2011 a cul de sac looms.
At Grand Anse in 1989, West Indian political leaders declared that “inspired by the spirit of co-operation and solidarity among us (we) are moved by the need to work expeditiously together to deepen the integration process and strengthen the Caribbean Community in all of its dimensions” They agreed a specific work programme ‘to be implemented over the next four years’ with primacy given “towards the establishment, in the shortest possible time of a single market and economy”. That was 22 years ago. The West Indian Commission (also established at Grand Anse) confidently charted the way, declaring it a ‘Time for Action’. West Indian technicians took their leaders to the brink with the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas. But there was no action – no political action, no political will to act. In twenty-two years, nothing decisive has happened to fulfill the dream of Grand Anse. Over those two decades the West Indies has drawn steadily away from being West Indian.
Not surprisingly, when Heads of Government meet in Grenada later this month it will be at a moment of widespread public disbelief that the professed goal of a ‘Single Market and Economy’ will ever be attained, or even that their political leaders are any longer “inspired by the spirit of co-operation and solidarity” or “moved by the need to work expeditiously together to deepen the integration process and strengthen the Caribbean Community in all its dimensions” - as they proclaimed at Grand Anse in 1989.
Words alone are never enough, except to deceive. As Paul Southwell used to remind us in Shakespearian allusion: “Words, words, words; promises, promises, promises; tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow”. Nothing’s changed. In the acknowledged quest for survival (including political survival) the old urge for ‘local control’ by those in control has not matured to provide real space for the ‘unity’ we say we need. Like 19th century colonists we strive to keep our rocks in our pockets – despite the enhanced logic of pooling our resources, and the enlarged danger of ‘state capture’ by unelected groups and external forces while we dally.
The West Indies cannot be West Indian if West Indian affairs, regional matters, are not the unwritten premise of every Government’s agenda; not occasionally, but always; not as ad hoc problems, but as the basic environment of policy. It is not so now. How many Caribbean leaders have mentioned CARICOM in their New Year messages this year? Only the Prime Minister of Grenada in his capacity as the new Chairman of CARICOM. For most West Indian Governments Caribbean integration is a thing apart, not a vital organ of national life.
It seems that only when it is fatally damaged or withers away will Cabinet agendas change.
But let us remember, a civilization cannot survive save on a curve that goes upward, whatever the blips in between; to go downward, whatever the occasional glimpses of glory, is to end ingloriously. Caribbean civilization is not an exception. It is now as it was 95 years ago with Marryshow: The West Indies must be West Indian.
As current Chairman of CARICOM Prime Minister Tillman Thomas has rightly called for the West Indian people to be better informed and more intimately engaged in the regional project. CARICOM is essentially about people; about West Indian people; but, in truth, they have been too remote from its being. They are its heartbeat; but in the small states that we all are Governments tend to occupy the entire space of governance. They control the bloodstream of the integration process and when anemia threatens, as it does now, it is an infusion of people power that is needed to resuscitate CARICOM.
The foregoing is an extract from the Eleventh Sir Archibald Nedd Memorial Lecture delivered by Sir Shridath Ramphal in Grenada on 28 January 2011.
February 8, 2011
Is The West Indies West Indian? (Part 2)
Is The West Indies West Indian? (Part 3)
caribbeannewsnow
Google Ads
Showing posts with label CARIFTA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CARIFTA. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
Saturday, June 5, 2010
Greek tragedy, Caricom, economic lessons for Jamaica
By Franklin Johnston
It is time for a mature discussion on Caricom and Jamaica and the EU/Greece crisis can guide us. Caricom is Jamaica's most costly overseas project. What do you know about it? Federation morphed into CARIFTA, now Caricom/CSME. I am "Carisceptic", as it hasn't delivered economic growth and I don't think it can. Jamaica is a global brand. Caricom is not, and for growth we must help our own first!
T&T is right to favour its industry and not give away its LNG. If we give away our bauxite, so be it. We need to chart our own growth path as they do. The Cabinet, PSOJ, UWI, Opposition must come clean. If Caricom is a device to draw down EU and other benefits, fine, but we need more to grow. Caricom has no traction here; most don't know it, the new HQ in Guyana does not affect us and as we are all "British" it is culture neutral.
Caricom is secretive. Where are its accounts? We work, sell and go on vacation north, so an oil spill off Louisiana concerns us, not in the Eastern Caribbean (EC). Caricom is of the cognoscenti; an elite club, those who make up the glitterati at its cocktail parties and banquets; workers have no part in it.
We need an independent inquiry. What can Caricom do for our economy? It went from common market to "single economy". What does this mean? Cabinet must publish full Caricom accounts, staff, expenditure, source of funds, etc. It cost us "a bag" since 1968 - for what? Now, with the shift from regionalisation to globalisation and WTO, is it relevant to our economic growth? No more speculation, we need answers!
What does Greece/EU teach us about Jamaica/CSME? We love Britain and our ex-slave, ex-colonial English-speaking brethren, but Caricom cannot just idolise "Britishness". The EC is not a destination of choice for us and the hostility at Air Jamaica's sale to T&T speaks volumes! Love at long distance is doomed as we are intimate with those close by! Notice, even our men go to Cuba, not the EC, to find wives and mistresses? Very French!
Caricom is our intergenerational project, but it does not work for us. The reason?
The preconditions to economic union are not met in our case. Consider the following:
*The EC is far from us and thousands of sea miles form a barrier to trade, travel, intimacy as they did for the Caribs and Columbus. English heritage is our only link with the EC.
*The union of several small, poor, distant island states with no major natural resource or intellectual property base cannot benefit our economy. CSME is politics, not economics!
*Our large population relative to the size of Caricom (ours is equal to the combined islands), our chronic poverty and failure to be sustainable in our heyday of bauxite and export preferences give our partners no confidence, and though rich, they are too small to support us. Let's now compare some common EU and CSME goals:
*Free movement for work, play and study. This works for Greece but not for us. Greeks can travel in the EU cheaply by air, car or on foot. Only UWI, government officials and the rich can travel in Caricom. Workers from poor members go to rich EU states to find jobs. Our workers are not allowed into the EC to seek employment.
*Common currency. If CSME had a common "cari" our debt would hurt all members. The euro is inflexible, so Greece can't devalue to help itself as it would hurt the eurozone. But the EU has mobilised US$1 trillion to help it. What does Caricom do to help us? Nada! One euro buys little in the north, but a lot in the south, so UK citizens live or work in Greece for the good weather and cheap living. Life is cheaper in the EC but we are not allowed to live there. Britain is not in the euro, but gives billions of pounds to save it as Greece's demand keeps UK factories open. Does T&T, our "trade gorgon", do this for us? No siree!
*Free trade. Caricom trade just makes us owe the EC more. Greece gets subsidy for farms and industry from the EU. In our distress do we get Caricom subsidy? No!
*Integration, fiscal, monetary discipline. The EU rides its members hard. They have to be prudent and balance their budgets. In the EU crackdown on Greece, they require cuts in spending, wages; higher taxes and oversight - it's done; budgets may soon be sent to the EU for approval and banks to pay a levy to fund bailouts. Germans cuss Greece as "lazy freeloaders" and Greeks cuss the EU and Germany as "Nazi", but Greece submits as the subsidies are good! Would we send our budget to Guyana for approval? No way!
The non-economic benefits of Caricom are modest and not unique. Check this:
*Our knowledge-based goals as CCJ can be had without union, some from "English" Canada, or India. We can get weather, legal services etc, based on treaty or payment.
*We all need new friends. EU masons, waiters, etc, work in Greece, the UK, and make friends - this is not so in Caricom. Only our officials and the rich have friends in Caricom!
*Our neighbours offer richer cultures than Anglocentric Caricom. Why not embrace all - French, British and Spanish? Let's unite with our close neighbours and enjoy their opera and ballet, then save up for that costly once-in-a-lifetime trip to T&T carnival!
*We share an ocean, geology, tectonic, climatic, security and air space with Haiti, DR, Puerto Rico, Cuba and our growth, environment and security future is with them. Will Caricom protect us from thousands of miles away? UWI has the EC and UTech must build joint campuses in Cuba, Haiti, DR; exchange students; train multilingual technologists, professionals, managers for job opportunities in the global economy.
We have Usain, Asafa and Bob but the EC states have Kim, Viv, Ato, Rihanna, Armatrading, some Nobel laureates and surpluses - Caricom works for them. Only growth and jobs can save us, so we need to do things differently. Do we focus on a distant market of 3m in Caricom or the 30m market of our close neighbours? A "no-brainer!" Stay conscious!
Alert: To raise standards, top UK universities may no longer admit students who resit A-levels and qualifying exams. One-one coco won't do, so if you got the subjects, but not at the first sitting, then apply to a second-rate university. UWI and UTech, please note!
Dr Franklin Johnston is an international project manager with Teape-Johnston Consultants, currently on assignment in the UK
franklinjohnston@hotmail.com
June 04, 2010
jamaicaobserver
It is time for a mature discussion on Caricom and Jamaica and the EU/Greece crisis can guide us. Caricom is Jamaica's most costly overseas project. What do you know about it? Federation morphed into CARIFTA, now Caricom/CSME. I am "Carisceptic", as it hasn't delivered economic growth and I don't think it can. Jamaica is a global brand. Caricom is not, and for growth we must help our own first!
T&T is right to favour its industry and not give away its LNG. If we give away our bauxite, so be it. We need to chart our own growth path as they do. The Cabinet, PSOJ, UWI, Opposition must come clean. If Caricom is a device to draw down EU and other benefits, fine, but we need more to grow. Caricom has no traction here; most don't know it, the new HQ in Guyana does not affect us and as we are all "British" it is culture neutral.
Caricom is secretive. Where are its accounts? We work, sell and go on vacation north, so an oil spill off Louisiana concerns us, not in the Eastern Caribbean (EC). Caricom is of the cognoscenti; an elite club, those who make up the glitterati at its cocktail parties and banquets; workers have no part in it.
We need an independent inquiry. What can Caricom do for our economy? It went from common market to "single economy". What does this mean? Cabinet must publish full Caricom accounts, staff, expenditure, source of funds, etc. It cost us "a bag" since 1968 - for what? Now, with the shift from regionalisation to globalisation and WTO, is it relevant to our economic growth? No more speculation, we need answers!
What does Greece/EU teach us about Jamaica/CSME? We love Britain and our ex-slave, ex-colonial English-speaking brethren, but Caricom cannot just idolise "Britishness". The EC is not a destination of choice for us and the hostility at Air Jamaica's sale to T&T speaks volumes! Love at long distance is doomed as we are intimate with those close by! Notice, even our men go to Cuba, not the EC, to find wives and mistresses? Very French!
Caricom is our intergenerational project, but it does not work for us. The reason?
The preconditions to economic union are not met in our case. Consider the following:
*The EC is far from us and thousands of sea miles form a barrier to trade, travel, intimacy as they did for the Caribs and Columbus. English heritage is our only link with the EC.
*The union of several small, poor, distant island states with no major natural resource or intellectual property base cannot benefit our economy. CSME is politics, not economics!
*Our large population relative to the size of Caricom (ours is equal to the combined islands), our chronic poverty and failure to be sustainable in our heyday of bauxite and export preferences give our partners no confidence, and though rich, they are too small to support us. Let's now compare some common EU and CSME goals:
*Free movement for work, play and study. This works for Greece but not for us. Greeks can travel in the EU cheaply by air, car or on foot. Only UWI, government officials and the rich can travel in Caricom. Workers from poor members go to rich EU states to find jobs. Our workers are not allowed into the EC to seek employment.
*Common currency. If CSME had a common "cari" our debt would hurt all members. The euro is inflexible, so Greece can't devalue to help itself as it would hurt the eurozone. But the EU has mobilised US$1 trillion to help it. What does Caricom do to help us? Nada! One euro buys little in the north, but a lot in the south, so UK citizens live or work in Greece for the good weather and cheap living. Life is cheaper in the EC but we are not allowed to live there. Britain is not in the euro, but gives billions of pounds to save it as Greece's demand keeps UK factories open. Does T&T, our "trade gorgon", do this for us? No siree!
*Free trade. Caricom trade just makes us owe the EC more. Greece gets subsidy for farms and industry from the EU. In our distress do we get Caricom subsidy? No!
*Integration, fiscal, monetary discipline. The EU rides its members hard. They have to be prudent and balance their budgets. In the EU crackdown on Greece, they require cuts in spending, wages; higher taxes and oversight - it's done; budgets may soon be sent to the EU for approval and banks to pay a levy to fund bailouts. Germans cuss Greece as "lazy freeloaders" and Greeks cuss the EU and Germany as "Nazi", but Greece submits as the subsidies are good! Would we send our budget to Guyana for approval? No way!
The non-economic benefits of Caricom are modest and not unique. Check this:
*Our knowledge-based goals as CCJ can be had without union, some from "English" Canada, or India. We can get weather, legal services etc, based on treaty or payment.
*We all need new friends. EU masons, waiters, etc, work in Greece, the UK, and make friends - this is not so in Caricom. Only our officials and the rich have friends in Caricom!
*Our neighbours offer richer cultures than Anglocentric Caricom. Why not embrace all - French, British and Spanish? Let's unite with our close neighbours and enjoy their opera and ballet, then save up for that costly once-in-a-lifetime trip to T&T carnival!
*We share an ocean, geology, tectonic, climatic, security and air space with Haiti, DR, Puerto Rico, Cuba and our growth, environment and security future is with them. Will Caricom protect us from thousands of miles away? UWI has the EC and UTech must build joint campuses in Cuba, Haiti, DR; exchange students; train multilingual technologists, professionals, managers for job opportunities in the global economy.
We have Usain, Asafa and Bob but the EC states have Kim, Viv, Ato, Rihanna, Armatrading, some Nobel laureates and surpluses - Caricom works for them. Only growth and jobs can save us, so we need to do things differently. Do we focus on a distant market of 3m in Caricom or the 30m market of our close neighbours? A "no-brainer!" Stay conscious!
Alert: To raise standards, top UK universities may no longer admit students who resit A-levels and qualifying exams. One-one coco won't do, so if you got the subjects, but not at the first sitting, then apply to a second-rate university. UWI and UTech, please note!
Dr Franklin Johnston is an international project manager with Teape-Johnston Consultants, currently on assignment in the UK
franklinjohnston@hotmail.com
June 04, 2010
jamaicaobserver
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Careless with CARICOM - Part 1
Sir Shridath Ramphal:
As ‘West Indians’, as ‘Caribbean people’, we face a basic contradiction of oneness and otherness, a basic paradox of kinship and alienation. Much of our history is the interplay of these contrarieties. But they are not of equal weight. The very notion of being West Indian speaks of identity, of oneness. That identity is the product of centuries of living together and is itself a triumph over the divisive geography of an archipelago which speaks to otherness. Today, CARICOM and all it connotes, is the hallmark of that triumph, and it is well to remember the processes which forged it – lest we forget, and lose it.
Throughout history our geo-political region has known that it is a kinship in and around an enclosing Sea. But, through most of that time it suited local elites – from white planters, through successor merchant groups, to establishment colonials - to keep the Sea as a convenient boundary against encroachment on their ‘local control’. Political aspirants in our region jostled for their Governor’s ear, not each other’s arm.
Times changed in the nineteen twenties and thirties – between the ‘world wars’. The external economic and political environments changed; and the internal environments changed – social, political and most of all demographic. Local control began to pass to the hands of local creoles, mainly professionals, later trade unionists, and for a while the new political class saw value in a strategy of regional unity. Maryshaw’s slogan ‘the West Indies must be West Indian’ carried at the masthead of his crusading newspaper was evocative. For two generations, West Indian ‘unity’ was a progressive political credo.
It was a strategy that was to reach its apogee in the Federation of The West Indies: due to become Independent in mid-1962. It is often forgotten that the ‘the’ in the name of the new nation was consciously spelt with a capital ‘T’ – The West Indies - an insistence on the oneness of the federated region. But, by then, that was verbal insistence against a contrary reality, already re-emerging. The new political elites for whom ‘unity’ offered a pathway to political power through ‘independence’ had found by the 1960s that that pathway was opening up regardless.
Regional unity was no longer a pre-condition to ‘local control’. Hence, the referendum in Jamaica; and Trinidad’s arithmetic that ‘1’ from ‘10’ left ‘0’; even ‘the agony of the eight’. The century old impulse for ‘local control’ had prevailed, and the separatist instincts of a dividing sea had resumed ascendancy.
But, as in the nineteen twenties and thirties, so in the sixties and seventies – the environment changed against separatism. Independence on a separate basis had secured ‘local control’; but the old nemesis of colonialism was replaced by the new suzerainty of globalization. Independence, particularly for Caribbean micro states, was not enough to deliver Elysium. ‘Unity’ no sooner discarded was back in vogue; but less a matter of the heart than of the head.
In an interdependent world which in the name of liberalization made no distinctions between rich and poor, big and small, regional unity was compulsive. Caribbean states needed each other for survival; ‘unity’ was the only protective kit they could afford. Only three years after the rending ‘referendum’ came the first tentative steps to ‘unity’ in 1965 with CARIFTA; ‘tentative’, because the old obsession with ‘local control’ continued to trump oneness – certainly in Cabinet Rooms; but in drawing rooms too; though less so at street corners.
Despite the new external compulsions the pursuit of even economic unity, which publics largely accepted, has been a passage of attrition. It has taken us from 1965 to 2010 - 45 years – to crawl through CARIFTA and CARICOM, through the fractured promises of Chaguaramas and Grand Anse, and through innumerable Declarations and Affirmations and Commitments Not surprisingly, we have reached a moment of widespread public disbelief that our professed goal of a ‘Single Market and Economy’ will ever be attained.
In the acknowledged quest for survival, the old urge for ‘local control’ has not matured to provide real space for the ‘unity’ we say we need. Like 19th century colonists we still struggle to keep our rocks in our pockets – despite the enhanced logic of pooling our resources and the enlarged danger of ‘state capture’ by unelected groups and external forces if we do not.
In the 21st century, despite all we know in our minds of the brutality of the global environment and the need for collective action to survive it, the isolationist claims of ‘local control’ still smother the demands of unity of purpose and action. It is puzzling that it should be so; for we have assuredly made large gains in what ‘unity’ most demands – ‘identity’.
There may be exceptions; but does not every citizen of every CARICOM country regard himself or herself as a Caribbean person – not first and foremost, of course, but after his or her national ’ identity - a member of the society we call ‘West Indian’. There may be grouses, even anger, at not being treated ‘properly’ – especially at immigration counters – but that is because as ‘West Indians’ we expect to be treated better. Our anger hinges not on the absence of identity but on its assumed reality; on the conviction that our common identity is not a garb we wear outside but shed when we come home.
Just recently, we lost one of the Caribbean’s most illustrious sons – an ‘incandescent eagle’ I called him. The whole Caribbean mourned him. And West Indian diasporas – not just Jamaican – mourned Rex Nettleford as a Caribbean person. We groan together when West Indian cricket grovels; and jump together when it triumphs. What is all this but identity?
It is not an identity crisis that we face. We know we are a family. But our family values are less sturdy than they should be – those values that should move regional unity from rhetoric to reality; should make integration an intuitive process and the CSME a natural bonding. Until we live by these values so that all the family prospers, we degrade that identity.
We are also failing to fulfill the promise we once held out of being a light in the darkness of the developing world. Our regionalism inspired many in the South who also aspired to strength through unity. We have all but withdrawn from these roles, and in some areas like the EPA with Europe we have forsaken our brothers in the South.
Recently, the former President of Tanzania, Ben Mkapa, who was our brother in arms in the North-South arena, was warning Africa against the same EPA of which we have made Europe such a gift. We have lost solidarity not only with ourselves, but collectively with our brothers in the developing world.
And, perhaps, therein lies the ‘rub’. Were we making a reality of our own regional unity we would not be false to ourselves and to others who look to us for a vision of the future. Instead, we are losing our way both at home and abroad.
(Part 2 to follow)
(Sir Shridath has held the positions of Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Chairman of the West Indian Commission and Chief Negotiator in the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery)
May 4, 2010
Careless with CARICOM - Part 2
caribbeannetnews
As ‘West Indians’, as ‘Caribbean people’, we face a basic contradiction of oneness and otherness, a basic paradox of kinship and alienation. Much of our history is the interplay of these contrarieties. But they are not of equal weight. The very notion of being West Indian speaks of identity, of oneness. That identity is the product of centuries of living together and is itself a triumph over the divisive geography of an archipelago which speaks to otherness. Today, CARICOM and all it connotes, is the hallmark of that triumph, and it is well to remember the processes which forged it – lest we forget, and lose it.
Throughout history our geo-political region has known that it is a kinship in and around an enclosing Sea. But, through most of that time it suited local elites – from white planters, through successor merchant groups, to establishment colonials - to keep the Sea as a convenient boundary against encroachment on their ‘local control’. Political aspirants in our region jostled for their Governor’s ear, not each other’s arm.
Times changed in the nineteen twenties and thirties – between the ‘world wars’. The external economic and political environments changed; and the internal environments changed – social, political and most of all demographic. Local control began to pass to the hands of local creoles, mainly professionals, later trade unionists, and for a while the new political class saw value in a strategy of regional unity. Maryshaw’s slogan ‘the West Indies must be West Indian’ carried at the masthead of his crusading newspaper was evocative. For two generations, West Indian ‘unity’ was a progressive political credo.
It was a strategy that was to reach its apogee in the Federation of The West Indies: due to become Independent in mid-1962. It is often forgotten that the ‘the’ in the name of the new nation was consciously spelt with a capital ‘T’ – The West Indies - an insistence on the oneness of the federated region. But, by then, that was verbal insistence against a contrary reality, already re-emerging. The new political elites for whom ‘unity’ offered a pathway to political power through ‘independence’ had found by the 1960s that that pathway was opening up regardless.
Regional unity was no longer a pre-condition to ‘local control’. Hence, the referendum in Jamaica; and Trinidad’s arithmetic that ‘1’ from ‘10’ left ‘0’; even ‘the agony of the eight’. The century old impulse for ‘local control’ had prevailed, and the separatist instincts of a dividing sea had resumed ascendancy.
But, as in the nineteen twenties and thirties, so in the sixties and seventies – the environment changed against separatism. Independence on a separate basis had secured ‘local control’; but the old nemesis of colonialism was replaced by the new suzerainty of globalization. Independence, particularly for Caribbean micro states, was not enough to deliver Elysium. ‘Unity’ no sooner discarded was back in vogue; but less a matter of the heart than of the head.
In an interdependent world which in the name of liberalization made no distinctions between rich and poor, big and small, regional unity was compulsive. Caribbean states needed each other for survival; ‘unity’ was the only protective kit they could afford. Only three years after the rending ‘referendum’ came the first tentative steps to ‘unity’ in 1965 with CARIFTA; ‘tentative’, because the old obsession with ‘local control’ continued to trump oneness – certainly in Cabinet Rooms; but in drawing rooms too; though less so at street corners.
Despite the new external compulsions the pursuit of even economic unity, which publics largely accepted, has been a passage of attrition. It has taken us from 1965 to 2010 - 45 years – to crawl through CARIFTA and CARICOM, through the fractured promises of Chaguaramas and Grand Anse, and through innumerable Declarations and Affirmations and Commitments Not surprisingly, we have reached a moment of widespread public disbelief that our professed goal of a ‘Single Market and Economy’ will ever be attained.
In the acknowledged quest for survival, the old urge for ‘local control’ has not matured to provide real space for the ‘unity’ we say we need. Like 19th century colonists we still struggle to keep our rocks in our pockets – despite the enhanced logic of pooling our resources and the enlarged danger of ‘state capture’ by unelected groups and external forces if we do not.
In the 21st century, despite all we know in our minds of the brutality of the global environment and the need for collective action to survive it, the isolationist claims of ‘local control’ still smother the demands of unity of purpose and action. It is puzzling that it should be so; for we have assuredly made large gains in what ‘unity’ most demands – ‘identity’.
There may be exceptions; but does not every citizen of every CARICOM country regard himself or herself as a Caribbean person – not first and foremost, of course, but after his or her national ’ identity - a member of the society we call ‘West Indian’. There may be grouses, even anger, at not being treated ‘properly’ – especially at immigration counters – but that is because as ‘West Indians’ we expect to be treated better. Our anger hinges not on the absence of identity but on its assumed reality; on the conviction that our common identity is not a garb we wear outside but shed when we come home.
Just recently, we lost one of the Caribbean’s most illustrious sons – an ‘incandescent eagle’ I called him. The whole Caribbean mourned him. And West Indian diasporas – not just Jamaican – mourned Rex Nettleford as a Caribbean person. We groan together when West Indian cricket grovels; and jump together when it triumphs. What is all this but identity?
It is not an identity crisis that we face. We know we are a family. But our family values are less sturdy than they should be – those values that should move regional unity from rhetoric to reality; should make integration an intuitive process and the CSME a natural bonding. Until we live by these values so that all the family prospers, we degrade that identity.
We are also failing to fulfill the promise we once held out of being a light in the darkness of the developing world. Our regionalism inspired many in the South who also aspired to strength through unity. We have all but withdrawn from these roles, and in some areas like the EPA with Europe we have forsaken our brothers in the South.
Recently, the former President of Tanzania, Ben Mkapa, who was our brother in arms in the North-South arena, was warning Africa against the same EPA of which we have made Europe such a gift. We have lost solidarity not only with ourselves, but collectively with our brothers in the developing world.
And, perhaps, therein lies the ‘rub’. Were we making a reality of our own regional unity we would not be false to ourselves and to others who look to us for a vision of the future. Instead, we are losing our way both at home and abroad.
(Part 2 to follow)
(Sir Shridath has held the positions of Commonwealth Secretary-General, Chancellor of the University of the West Indies, Chairman of the West Indian Commission and Chief Negotiator in the Caribbean Regional Negotiating Machinery)
May 4, 2010
Careless with CARICOM - Part 2
caribbeannetnews
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)