 |
 |
 |
|
June 2015 |
However, in each country there seems to be a complete ignorance of similar problems in the proximal and distal region. There have been several reports in the newspapers recently assessing – either directly or indirectly – the state of the Caribbean union. The lack of a regional response to the issues of crime and violence underscore the parlous nature of the union. Cricket and The UWI have often been touted as the last remaining symbols of regional unity, but the title West Indies may now be anachronistic, given the current preferred generic referencing of the region as the Caribbean. Names and labels are important, especially in this age of branding, and the concept of the West Indies throws up many unresolved dilemmas. Should we be a West Indies as separate from a Caribbean or as a constituent part of the larger Caribbean? What is this larger Caribbean and what does its geographic existence mean? What of those countries that remain politically aligned as colonies to European countries, as applies to the French and Dutch Caribbean? Gabriel García Márquez, the late Colombian author, opined that the Caribbean extends into Central America and indeed the southern United States by virtue of the common historical experiences. Guyana, of course, is on the South American continent but has traditionally been embraced as part of the West Indies and by extension, the Caribbean. Understanding the meaning of the two terms and the need to clarify their meaning and relevance seems to be a priority for the leadership of the region. The duality of names may be contributing to an implicit identity crisis. Names are important in the assumption of purpose, and creating a platform for belonging, becoming and representation. We have assumed multiple names for the groupings in the Caribbean, perhaps because of our fractured histories and the multiple colonizers that shaped this migrant Caribbean world. The English-speaking Caribbean has been commonly called the West Indies. The origin of this name lies in the misleading geography of Columbus and the inability of his successors to come to terms with the reality of this part of the world. The health of the regional project continues to be severely compromised and I would suggest that one of the reasons for this is a lack of definitional clarity in our own minds. CARICOM seems to have failed to engender a sense of regional unity, purpose and commonality of destiny. The issue of leadership is perhaps best reflected in the ongoing debate about the best model of management for West Indies cricket. The role and value of cricket and its administration in the region are also in continuous review, as dissatisfaction about the administrative management, including its structure continues to fester. Yet one radio commentator suggested that the recent victory over England in the final Test match of the recently concluded series would do wonders for the psyche of the Caribbean citizen. Leadership that seeks the benefit of all and does not seek to recreate the old divisions in order to maintain its hold on power is a desperate need. The exercise of leadership in the Caribbean née West Indian enterprise of The UWI has also come under historical and contemporary scrutiny. Since the banning of Walter Rodney by the administration of The UWI Mona Campus in 1969 and the perceived lack of an intellectual ideology generating scholarship related to the generation and preservation of regional identity, The UWI’s role in the clarification of the nature and purpose of the Caribbean union remains unclear. The CARICOM leadership has not fared any better since Black Stalin’s landmark song, as the response to the Maurice Bishop-led coup in Grenada and the subsequent events culminating in the US invasion after the collapse of the coup’s leadership was confused and inconsistent at best. There has been no detailed academic or regional analysis of that coup or indeed, the two attempted coups in Trinidad in 1970 and 1990. Several other regional issues have not been sufficiently explored to examine the effects on our consciousness. The Dudus extradition in Jamaica, the financial implosion of CLICO, the denial of entry of CARICOM nationals to CARICOM countries, the exegesis of Haitians from the Dominican Republic, the growing presence and influence of China in the region, the lack of regional consensus about the Caribbean Court of Justice among others, all demand detailed and insightful analysis. Would it not be more effective to develop and adopt one regional solution than multiple island ones? Perhaps this process should have begun with the reasons for the failure of the West Indian Federation that has seemed to haunt our efforts to unite under a common banner of regional interdependence. The recent struggle to establish a common protocol and affordable carrier system for facilitating movement between the islands continues to inform the immigration challenges that islanders face in travelling from one Caribbean island to another. From Shanique Myrie to Yasin Abu Bakr, the questions seem to have no consistent answers. Identity becomes critical to the formation and elaboration of the questions that we need to ask, and our confidence in the answers. There are so few genuine regional institutions, and they continue to be mired in covert and subtle expressions of one-upmanship and lack of an explicit regional purpose and philosophy. These institutions are becoming increasingly anomalous if not anachronistic. They require unity of purpose and unity of effort if they are to survive and prosper. ‘No set ah money, could form a unity The deceptive trap that money and funding are the solutions to our problems continues to misdirect attention. Paying people well does not guarantee consistent commitment if they are not consumed by the desire to perform at their representative best. If what they are representing is self only, individualism will breed selfishness and eventually triumph over community. It is worth interrogating the idea that a working model of Caribbean unity is the best means to deal with the pressing problems facing the region. The upsurge of crime and violence across the region is a direct consequence of the unbridled materialism and authoritarianism that has infiltrated and overtaken our societies. There is more negation than affirmation, particularly in the appreciation of our human resources. The question of negation or affirmation, what to reject, what to seek, what is the value of Caribbean unity? The role of alliances in the expression of identity, the issues of language and of course, the historical trajectories that have seen the USA, itself an amalgam of states, replace Britain as our greatest cultural colonizer. A large component of the hegemony enjoyed by the USA has been derived from the vast human and physical resource diversity contained within its borders. New York, Florida, California and Texas are further apart in culture and character than any of the West Indian islands yet they are held together by a constitution that recognizes the value of being together. What does our lack of unity convey about the Caribbean psyche? Is it fragmented and unable to create a solid foundation? Lacking in foundation? Will it always be rudderless and therefore unable to be molded as a purposeful entity? These are the questions that must be answered to determine the future of the region and whether we will some day become a net importer of talent and brain instead of a net exporter. Professor Gerard Hutchinson is Head of Psychiatry at the Department of Clinical Medical Sciences, The UWI, Faculty of Medical Sciences. |
The question of the ideological and psychological identity of the Caribbean continues to be one that should be easily answered but remains largely unconsidered. Economic, cultural and psychosocial problems – not least crime and violence – where the Caribbean leads the world alongside Central America, demand a regional response in order to prevent a return to a complete loss of independence and some form of colonization; if we are not there already.