As this is being written, the fifth Summit of the Americas is about to begin in Trinidad. Although this hemispheric event had as its theme, ‘Promoting Human Prosperity, Energy Security and Environmental Sustainability,’ it is already clear from conversations with some of those attending, that they expect its outcome to reflect new hemispheric and global realities.
When the conference agenda was first conceived in early 2008 the global financial crisis had not taken hold; the US administration was dominated by individuals who still saw the hemisphere through the optic of the Cold War; Brazil, India and China were outside the G7, the small group of economically powerful nations trying to direct the global economy; the US had not accepted the need to accommodate the rising global power of China; and the so called ‘Washington consensus’ on economic liberalism was the prevailing philosophy.
Astonishingly, all this has changed in the last nine months. A US President who believes in dialogue, multilateralism and mutual respect has arrived in the White House; the global economic system has experienced a near collapse; the Washington consensus has been pronounced dead; the G7 has all but been replaced by a G20 that includes Brazil and other emerging economies; the US has indicated that it regards China as an equal; and China has made clear, albeit with some reticence, that it will play a global role that in part embraces a clearly stated policy towards Latin America and the Caribbean.
Much more importantly for the hemisphere, these events have coincided with something fundamental: a now unstoppable change in the balance of power in the Americas.
Over the last decade US influence and its will to dominate has declined; broadly left of centre governments are now the norm in Latin America and the Caribbean; Brazil has emerged as an alternative pole in the Americas to the US; the Rio process has a life of its own; Venezuela has become the single largest provider of development assistance to the Caribbean and Central America through its PetroCaribe development programme; hemispheric integration is taking place without the US; new south-driven security systems are under discussion; and there is a sense that the Organisation of American States must genuinely be an organisation of equal sovereignties.
It is for all these reasons that when the Trinidad summit is over history could well see it as marking an historic turning point of importance for every single person in the Americas. While its outcome will only be visible over time, it will be the tone rather than the substance, and the personal interaction which promises to alter irrevocably relationships within the hemisphere and create a new and more equitable basis for dialogue between the US and its southern neighbours.
This is not to suggest that it will set aside US influence or power, or resolve philosophical differences with Venezuela, Cuba and others, but rather to suggest that in both its preparation and outcome it is likely to mark a move away from a hemisphere dominated by Washington’s desire to exercise control, to an American continent in which the concerns and policies of the South have much greater weight and can be considered in the context of a genuine partnership with the US and Canada.
In all of this the Caribbean’s position remains uncertain. Still dreaming about integration but unable to achieve this functionally within the time-scales in which the hemisphere or the world is changing, the region is in danger of isolating itself, being subsumed by alternative relationships as pragmatism drives some Caricom states towards new partners, or simply being left behind.
As matters stand, the larger economies of the western Caribbean, Jamaica, Cuba and the Dominican Republic are starting to look at ways to develop much stronger economic ties; Trinidad and the nations of the OECS are investigating closer engagement; Trinidad is keen to relate more closely to Latin America and the US; the OECS itself is building its own integration movement; there are signs that Guyana and Suriname see advantage in a deeper relationship with Brazil; and more broadly there is a new emphasis on south-south co-operation through the Rio group. There is also a growing sense in academia and parts of the Caribbean business community that the region should turn its back on freer trade with Europe, Canada and the US.
These trends may well accelerate if as seems to be the case Cuba will allow new US policy initiatives to develop, thereby causing trade and investment flows and tourism to begin to move towards Cuba and its larger neighbour economies in the western Caribbean. Indeed if there were ever to be a significant change in the US trade relationship with Cuba it is hard to predict the impact on much of the anglophone Caribbean unless the US adopted a significantly new trade approach to the region as a whole.
In an opinion piece appearing in the US and Latin American newspapers before the summit − but only in the Trinidad Express in the Caribbean − President Obama, using new inclusive language for the United States, made clear his belief that there are new possibilities and a new approach towards the whole of the Americas:
‘The U.S.-Cuba relationship is one example of a debate in the Americas that is too often dragged back to the 20th century. To confront our economic crisis, we don’t need a debate about whether to have a rigid, state-run economy or unbridled and unregulated capitalism − we need pragmatic and responsible action that advances our common prosperity. To combat lawlessness and violence, we don’t need a debate about whether to blame right-wing paramilitaries or left-wing insurgents − we need practical cooperation to expand our common security… This Summit offers the opportunity of a new beginning. Advancing prosperity, security and liberty for the people of the Americas depends upon 21st century partnerships, freed from the posturing of the past.”
These are important words for the Americas as a whole and the Caribbean in particular.
Previous columns can be found at www.caribbean-council.org
