This is at its most apparent when it comes to the relationship between the US and China. The recent visit by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to Beijing leaves little doubt that the US has quietly recognised that it is ceasing to be the world’s sole superpower. In a series of statements, Mrs Clinton implied that the US saw China as an equal and that it was now for the two nations to work together to agree global strategic and economic objectives.
Her remarks represented more than just a change in tone between a Republican and Democratic administration. She all but made clear that without China − the biggest buyer of US Treasury bonds – the US economy would fail. “We are,” she said, “truly going to rise or fall together.”
During her visit she sought to identify a basis for achieving a consensus with the nation that in the last decade has become the engine for global growth.
Later in a press conference with Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, Mrs Clinton used language that suggested that the future dialogue between the US and China would proceed on the basis of equity. In noting that that it was essential that the United States and China had a positive and cooperative relationship, both countries, she said, “must now lead in designing and implementing a global response to stabilize the world’s economy. She also spoke about Chinese engagement in the preparation for the April 2 summit of G-20 leaders, co-operation in respect of climate change and security issues.
Bracketing the US and China together Mrs Clinton told journalists: “The United States and China face formidable global challenges. The US is committed to pursuing a positive, cooperative relationship with China, one that we believe is important for the future peace, progress, and prosperity for both countries and for the world.”
China was more circumspect, but coming at a time of unprecedented economic crisis, the visit and the accompanying remarks suggest the dawn of a new reality about the United States’ place in the world.
Change too will come in Europe’s world position and outlook. The potential for serious economic turmoil in much of Central and Eastern Europe, and the rapid contraction of the Irish and United Kingdom economies, suggest a period of inter-European uncertainty, division, instability and weakness followed by a reassessment of political and development priorities. Russia’s presently all-embracing international view too may fade as its economy struggles to overcome the severe economic shocks it is presently experiencing.
All of this is happening as India, Brazil and other former developing nations become wealthier and their views more central to global decision-making and to reviving the global economy. It is also occurring as the huge sovereign wealth funds of the Middle and Far East consider which nation’s industries, bonds and currencies they wish to invest in.
The economic crisis is in many senses a watershed for the world in much the same way as Britain’s indebtedness at the end of the Second World War signalled the end of empire and its global power leaving Russia and the US the victors.
These are developments that the Caribbean is largely unprepared for. They suggest that within a decade the region, or more probably individual nations or sub-Cariforum groupings, will require a very different order of priority in their external relationships. It also indicates the region will receive significantly less in the way of development assistance from traditional partners and will have to find new ways to position itself in the Americas and in the world that sets aside history.
For instance, the United Kingdom’s interest in the Caribbean has been attenuating for some time. It is moving from a broad region-wide interest in trade and investment, security and development assistance, towards a policy more likely to focus on long-term stability through minimalist programmes that support specific nations; encourage private-sector led growth; and helps defend national and regional security, while supporting internationally Caribbean interests.
In contrast Spain’s direct role is strengthening. Speaking about this recently when he visited Trinidad and Jamaica, Spanish King Juan Carlos could not have been more specific. Seemingly unencumbered by Spain’s colonial past in the hemisphere, he spoke with confidence about his nation’s historic ties with the Americas. He illustrated his nation’s high recent levels of investment in the energy and tourism sectors in the Caribbean, and about the way in which his government and the private sector were working in close partnership to support regional development.
He also hinted at a desire for closer co-operation in the area of security and defence and welcomed closer links between the hispanic and anglophone Caribbean. Above all he suggested Spain had time for the Caribbean.
Notwithstanding, just days later far more significant discussions occurred that will in the longer term diversify and rebalance hemispheric relations with the wider world. Jamaica, Mexico, Colombia, Venezuela, Brazil were visited by Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping, while Argentina, Ecuador, Barbados and Bahamas received Chinese Vice Premier Hui Liangyu. The visits followed one in November by Chinas President Hu Jintao to Cuba. These, their timing and the levels at which they took place demonstrate China’s intent to fully engage in carefully differentiated ways in the hemisphere.
So far missing is a new US hemispheric perspective. This is expected to be revealed when President Obama addresses the Summit of the Americas in Trinidad in April. It is likely to focus on a new and more open relationship with the hemisphere that is non-prescriptive: one that is driven by economic rather than political concerns. It is also likely to stress the importance of economic development, the developmental role of nations like Brazil, the importance of security, and may possibly indicate a basis for a slow engagement with Cuba.
Some Caribbean nations have looked over the horizon and had already recognised before the present economic crisis the need to reposition their foreign and foreign trade policy, change the location of their diplomatic representation and adjust their investment profile. Others, however, still appear locked into the past or have adopted a kind of foreign policy based on mendacity.
The world is changing: so too should the Caribbean.
Previous columns can be found at www.caribbean-council.org
