Foreign policy in CARICOM – principled or transactional
RECENTLY, IN Jamaica, the matter of the direction of the country’s foreign policy has been raised again and in the context of actions by other CARICOM member states. There is the view that Jamaica is losing its standing in foreign policy, both in the region and in the international community. Foreign policy is important for Jamaica and its CARICOM partners, which are small, open economies impacted by developments in the international community.
I have written on foreign policy in CARICOM in previous articles. Among them, I reference my articles in April 2019 on ‘CARICOM foreign policy coordination – Idealism vs realism’ and, in January 2020, on ‘Foreign policy in CARICOM: pursuing national development benefits’. CARICOM member states, acting through the Council for Foreign and Community Relations (COFCOR), are called upon to coordinate foreign policy positions. In my article of April 2019, I pointed out that in Article 6 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, it states that one of the objectives of the Community is “enhanced coordination of Member States’ foreign and economic policies”. Further, Article 16.3 states that COFCOR is required to “establish measures to coordinate t he foreign policies of Member States …. and seek to ensure, as far as practicable, the adoption of Community positions on major hemispheric and international issues”.
In my article of January 2020, I pointed out that CARICOM countries, as mainly small island developing states seeking national development benefits, find themselves facing a world order in transition. These countries want to maintain their ‘friendly’ relationship with major global and regional powers competing for influence, while themselves remaining unscathed. This manoeuvre requires diplomatic agility and strategic creativity, especially in the multilateral arena. A mainly self-interest approach could squander regional advantages. CARICOM members had t o come to terms with the current complexities of the world i n considering their future.
Foreign policy is again in the news due to the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza, the VenezuelaGuyana controversy, and the signing of the EU-OACPS Samoa Agreement. A question being posed is whether the foreign policy being executed, not just in Jamaica, but among other CARICOM member states, is principled or transactional.
PRINCIPLED FOREIGN POLICY
The new opposition spokesperson on foreign and regional affairs has said that the People’s National Party wants to return Jamaica to taking a principled stand on foreign policy issues. Principled foreign policy means that the national policy is values-based, i.e., the focus is on such fundamental principles in i nternational relations as the sovereign equality of states; the principle of nonintervention in internal affairs; the prohibition of the threat or use of force; peaceful settlement of international disputes; the duty to cooperate; the principle of good faith; self-determination of peoples; respect for human rights; and the prevention of significant environmental harm. Therefore, foreign policy has a moral base. It places emphasis on multilateralism, on building alliances, and takes the longerterm view. This is the more idealistic approach.
TRANSACTIONAL FOREIGN POLICY
Transactional foreign policy places greater emphasis on acquiring benefits in the national interest through development of the domestic economy, such as seeking development assistance for projects, debt relief, concessionary financing, investments for job creation and earning income, and improving foreign trade. The aim is to advance economic development as soon as possible, which involves lobbying and setting aside principles, if required. The principled approach may take too long to gain economic benefits, or may gain none at all. In the CARICOM region, the time frame would be within each five-year election cycle. The focus would be on developing beneficial bilateral relations.
Multilateral relations would be less important.
It is felt that as small, developing, middle-income countries, much of foreign policy in the CARICOM region has been transactional disguised as pragmatic. I can think of actions which have been taken by some CARICOM member states, such as support for Taiwan (Chinese Taipei), while others have supported the ‘one China’ policy, recognising the People’s Republic of China; supporting Japan in the I nternational Whaling Commission, among others. Jamaica is now seen as joining the camp of the transaction practitioners.
STRIKING A BALANCE
The truth of the matter, though, is that as small, middle-income and island developing states, without power and influence, the countries of CARICOM have to strike a balance in foreign policy between principle and transaction, which some may want to call pragmatism or realism. So the foreign policy which Jamaica should be aiming to practise should be ‘principled pragmatism’, as national development interests must feature. That foreign policy position must be well informed (including background), meaning that issues are fully understood, implications properly considered (weighing pros and cons), and there is a clear strategy for execution. I do not think that a country or the region needs to speak on every issue, and especially not because others are doing so. It must be clear to partners that some positions are not negotiable and will not be compromised.
This matter of foreign policy formulation and execution needs much wider consideration and discussion, both at the national and regional levels. It is not just black and white, but has various shades of grey, especially in the current regional, hemispheric and global political and economic scenario.