CARICOM’s less than emphatic support for Guyana in its ongoing struggle against Venezuela’s unjust attack on our territorial integrity has again brought into focus the viability and survival of that regional body.Since the Federation of 1958-62, the Anglophone Caribbean has struggled to balance the imperatives of regional integration with the sub-nationalism that has rapidly grown since independence. In this regard, we are in no way different from other groupings which have attempted to integrate.
While integration may be politically and economically necessary, its viability is ultimately determined by the capacity of the countries involved to marry national interests to these regional imperatives.

Given our common experiences of enslavement and other forms of colonialism, and given our cultural similarities, many have contended that regionalism should be an almost natural inclination for us. While that observation has some merit, it does ignore our simultaneous cultural diversity — a diversity in sameness.

But even if one allows for a high degree of cultural sameness, the same cannot be said for politics. Whether or not we admit it, the fact is that we have developed separate political identities, which in turn has served to obstruct a robust regional integration.

Like any political phenomenon, regional integration is situational. On some issues we have been able to reach consensus much quicker than on others; but, in the final analysis, the intensity of our integration has been influenced in no small way by our individual ability to withstand pressures from powerful countries with whom we have bilateral economic and political relations. That pressure is two-way-direct: pressure from the powerful country, and self-induced pressure aimed at protecting economic benefits.

This is where CARICOM’s full-throttled solidarity for Guyana becomes problematic. Over the last couple of decades, a new group of countries have developed economic relations with the Caribbean — China, Taiwan, Venezuela and Brazil. These relations have, for the most part, been characterised by much-needed economic aid to our countries. Unfortunately, this has been our lot since independence; we are post-plantation societies caught in the dependency syndrome, replete with the begging bowl habit.

Ironically, many of our scholars and policy people have contended that regional integration offers us perhaps the best route out of that dependency.
So where do we go from here? Venezuela has been able to use its relatively formidable economic power to buy political influence. That’s the way of international relations. Although our leaders would never say it publicly, and maybe should never so do, they must have been surprised that their colleagues were not emphatic in their support of our cause. After all, despite our internal political challenges, Guyana has never faltered in its support of regional causes.

Having said that, we should not be seen to be undermining the regional movement; it is too vital to our survival as a Caribbean civilisation. There is a brighter light in the OECS sub-regional body where the solidarity seems to be more robust. Perhaps we should try to emulate some of what is happening there. In the meantime, Guyana must continue to quietly push our regional colleagues to make them see that it is possible to better balance national interests with regional obligations.