Caricom reset

In view of the increasingly serious challenges facing the Caribbean economically and socially, it is in the interest of all the member states of the Caribbean Community (Caricom) to recognise that it was in cognisance of the need for collective action to confront such challenges, that the institution was launched in 1973. Specific commitments, which between states are embodied in institutions – in this case Caricom – were made by the founding fathers and these were accepted by the later members.
In its latest formulation, the objectives of Caricom were described as: to improve standards of living and work; the full employment of labour and other factors of production; accelerated, coordinated, and sustained economic development and convergence; expansion of trade and economic relations with third states; enhanced levels of international competitiveness; organisation for increased production and productivity; achievement of a greater measure of economic leverage; effectiveness of member states in dealing with third states, groups of states, and entities of any description; and the enhanced coordination of member states’ foreign economic policies and enhanced functional cooperation.
But impressive offices and grand meetings and laudable goals are not the test of whether international institutions are successful. The test is whether member countries are ready to make genuine commitments to each other and that means in the end whether they are prepared to follow the rules embodied in the institution to deliver the stated objectives.
Without that, the institution lacks any real purpose and this is why today, on the cusp of its 40th anniversary, Caricom is on “pause”. Caricom needs a “reset”. To defend the need for a Caribbean institution dedicated to integration, as the means to accomplishing the objectives of Caricom is not to defend any specific institution – defined as a set of rules that must be followed by the organisation. These must be judged – and reformed or discarded – on their merits.
But as the world changes, the institutions sometimes do not keep in step with those changes and this is the problem with Caricom. However, the organisations, defined as the personnel in place to work within the rules to deliver the objectives, almost invariably become set in their ways. They develop an inertia that needs to be overcome to make them more attuned to the new world that the institution must cope with.
The challenge for us is to find a role for Caricom, relevant to present circumstances, and to decide on the operational capabilities and instruments which that role requires. Holding meetings and issuing communiqués are not enough. It is worth noting the nature of the challenge. The specific commitments made in 1973 may no longer be relevant. And this is why many Caribbean citizens feel Caricom is useless. Failure to reform the institution will condemn it to irrelevance and obscurity. But nothing would be more damaging to our prospects of joining the developed world alike than the abandonment of further integration.
But piecemeal reforms are unlikely to work. Caricom should focus on those specific areas where we need to tackle problems collectively. We will then have to ensure that the commitments the member countries enter into are clear. The job of institutions is to support those commitments. In many cases, like an umpire, their job will be to uphold them. That will only be possible if the players – countries – are very clear about the agreed rules of the game. Without that, any further design is pointless.
We will then have to provide Caricom with the necessary tools to umpire the commitments of nation states. For instance, we cannot put off not appointing a governing council with the authority and responsibility to implement the necessary changes. If this generation fails,d then the work of those who were “present at the creation” will have been undone. It is our duty to re-create the institutional framework that we inherited.
Caricom cannot be allowed to simply muddle on.