By HAYDEN BOYCE

President George W. Bush's recent decision to handpick Caribbean leaders for a breakfast meeting in New York was a classic example of the callous disregard which the United States has for the Caribbean.

For reasons not yet made public, Mr. Bush had a breakfast meeting in New York with The Bahamas' Prime Minister Perry Christie, Grenada's Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell, St Lucia's Prime Minister Dr. Kenny Anthony and Guyana's President Bharrat Jagdeo.

Barbados, Trinidad and Tobago, Haiti, St. Vincent and Dominica were not invited, while Jamaica's Prime Minister P.J. Patterson was asked to attend but declined the invitation, citing previously scheduled engagements.

Patterson's action has drawn highly commendable reaction among members of the Caribbean diaspora in New York and diplomats at the United Nations who objected strongly to the way the meeting was arranged.

There has long been a tradition that at international meetings, foreign leaders hold talks with groups, as opposed to a select few. This certainly has been the case with Canada and Britain.

Highly improper

While President Bush is at liberty to extend invitations to whoever he desires, surely good sense and fairness should have dictated that it was nothing but highly improper and undesirable to choose a few leaders. CARICOM should have at least been allowed to choose its own delegation.

Although the reason for the handpicking has not been forthcoming, it is known that some Caribbean countries, including some that were excluded, have been at odds with the United States with respect to the International Criminal Court (ICC).

President Bush has also provoked a controversy in the European Union by demanding that every country sign a special waiver to exempt American citizens and soldiers from the ICC's jurisdiction.

If Caribbean countries are uneasy with certain aspects of the ICC, it is their fundamental right to state their objections and to deal with it in ways which they perceive to be in their best interests. They should never be penalized for taking a moral and principled stance.

Selective decision

However, President Bush's latest action in relation to the Caribbean leaves a lingering suspicion that as far as the US is concerned might will still always be right and that America will use the system to achieve its own ends regardless of the results.

President Bush's selective decision is, in my view, a clear indication that the US is seeking to assert a new form of imperialism on the Caribbean. It also brings into sharp focus, perhaps now more than ever, that there is really no clearly defined US policy towards the Caribbean.

No country, no matter how powerful, has the right to impose its will upon others. Indeed, the US should be in the vanguard of vigorously promoting the principles of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, respect for sovereignty, and the right to self-determination.

Yet, America's foreign policy, not only towards the Caribbean, seems to be predicated principally on the basis that 'you are either for us or against us'.

Successive US administrations have seemed intent on defining the choices that every nation makes and in their dealings with the Caribbean on certain issues they have often moved from asking nations to assist the US to demanding that they follow the rules that America has defined.

Blacklisting

This was amply represented in the Ship Rider Agreement a few years ago and in more recent times, the position which the US assumed with respect to the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development's (OECD) black-listing of several Caribbean countries whose economies were heavily dependent on the financial services sector.

The irony is that despite the damage which some of its policies continue to create on the region, the US has been calling on the Caribbean to be a willing partner in the fight against money laundering, illegal drugs and terrorism.

That is why I believe that in choosing to meet only a few Caribbean leaders, President Bush failed to seize what should have been a defining moment in US/Caribbean relations.

There is no doubt that those leaders who were chosen were been able to articulate positions on behalf of their respective countries as well as CARICOM. But time was limited and the home drum usually beats first.

Even so, there was no clear indication from anything President Bush said after the meeting which suggested that the US will now take a different approach to Caribbean affairs than it did before. This is not the way it should be.

A good listener

Despite the geographical proximity between the US and the Caribbean, their strong historical links and the supportive role which America wants us to play in fighting terrorism, illegal drugs, money laundering and illegal immigration, US policies towards this region, apart from the failed Caribbean Basin Initiative (CBI) and occasional grants, have generally been erratic, expedient, country-specific. For obvious reasons, in recent times we have seen a pre-occupation with Cuba and Haiti. Since the end of the Cold War there has no genuine and sustained interest in other Caribbean countries.

No matter what some people in Washington may say, very few of America's Caribbean policies have really worked to the distinct advantage of the region over the years.

As far as many people and leaders in the Caribbean are concerned, the US has always been a good listener and a spectacular maker of promises.

Not even The Bahamas, which is regarded in the wider Caribbean as an extension of Florida, has been a real beneficiary of any US policies.

President Bush therefore should have used the opportunity in New York as one in which he was seen to be embarking on a new course while taking corrective action to undo the damages which some US policies have unleashed on the people of the Caribbean.

Moreover, the Caribbean should now be invited, not directed, to work closely with the US on defining common purposes and forging a stronger alliance.

What President Bush and indeed future administrations should do is frame choices and policies for the Caribbean that can be embraced with dignity and without in anyway compromising sovereignty.

If the US wants the Caribbean to be a willing partner in the fight against terrorism, money laundering, illegal drugs and illegal immigration, there must be a fundamental reform it how it deals with the region on matters that may be of lesser importance to America but crucial to us.

Fragile economies

The US must, of necessity, consider the impact of its decisions, particularly as they affect countries that have small, vulnerable and fragile economies.

Above all, it should understand the correlation between economic prosperity in Caribbean countries including social, health, cultural and environmental issues and the fight against the scourges of drugs, poverty, terrorism and money laundering.

No one is asking for, or advocating, handouts. But the changing characteristics of globalisation, with terrorists, drug pushers and illegal immigrants knowing no boundaries and respecting no laws, have necessitated that the Caribbean as well as the US redefine the boundaries of our alliances.

Successful foreign policy is about building bridges to other people and cultures and helping to create a new climate of tolerance and international understanding.

In its Caribbean relations, the US should respect our differences and as well as our principles of sovereignty, territorial integrity and the rule of international law. Regardless of size, all countries must have the comfort of these irrevocable principles and be secure in the confidence that the conduct of nations will be guided by them.

Now more than ever, the Caribbean must stand firm and recognise that in a very real sense, the US is in dire need of the region's cooperation.

Far too many times in international fora, the Caribbean fails to capitalize on what little leverage it possesses. The meeting with Mr. Bush was one such instance.

Our leaders and our people must therefore have the courage and assertiveness to insist that they will not passively adhere to theoretical doctrines and dictates, but that they will do what is morally right and what serves their best interest.

In international relations, the Caribbean should be guided by the words of the late Errol Walton Barrow, former prime minister of Barbados, who stated unequivocally that we will be friends of all and satellites of none.

Posted: Thursday October 16, 2003