Robert BuddanCARIBBEAN COUNTRIES are under pressure by the Bush Administration to back its illegal war against Iraq or, at least, to keep silent about it. Its NAFTA partners, Canada and Mexico are also against the war and not even they are sure to escape the wrath of the United States.
Canada's prime minister and George Bush have not spoken to each other for over a month. Jean Chretien cancelled a trip to the United States last week and Bush might not visit Canada as planned in May. Relations between the two countries are at an all-time low.
Mexico took up the chairmanship of the Security Council on April 1 which now puts it in an even more sensitive position than it was before. Bush and his Secretary of Defence, Donald Rumsfeld, have been cold-shouldering Mexican President Vicente Fox and his Foreign Minister over the past weeks. This comes after well-publicised close relations between Bush and Fox before. Mexico objects to the U.S.-British violation of international law but, more pertinently, says that the American policy of "regime change" could be used to apply to any state. Indeed, the U.S. has practised this policy of regime change in the Caribbean for many years against Cuba, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Guyana, Grenada and Jamaica under the guise of anti-communism.
Canada and Mexico are America's most important trading partners. If the U.S. can take a tough stand against them, it can do the same to any other country. We will have a clearer picture of the U.S.'s state of mind towards the region in September when a likely hemispheric summit will take place in Mexico. For the time being, we note that Turkey is a close ally of the U.S. The U.S. has already reduced aid to Turkey from US$6 billion to US$1 billion after Turkey refused to allow U.S. troops permission to use its territory to invade Iraq. The U.S. said Turkey made a "very, very big mistake." We will see what spiteful policy the U.S. has in store for the Caribbean.
BUSH'S FOREIGN POLICY
Bush has identified democracy, security and markets as his priorities for the region. These will be promoted in the framework of the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) and through bilateralism. One can expect bilateral treatment for Cuba and Haiti, two potential hot spots in the Caribbean. Bush Snr. had said that had he been president, America would not have restored Aristide to power. He was quite comfortable with the military regime in Haiti.
The U.S. can use a number of issues to carry out regime change in the region. It doesn't have to have the evidence: terrorism, absence of democracy, drug trafficking, and money laundering can all be used against the region. It is already forcing Jamaica to pass an anti-terrorism act.
Regime change would not have to come through military invasion. The U.S. can hurt a country like Jamaica in many ways. Economic sanctions over non-co-operation on narcotics; regime change against Chavez could end the Manley oil Accord with Venezuela; and violence by Jamaicans could be construed as
terrorism.
MILITARY ENCIRCLEMENT
In the meantime, the U.S. has been strengthening its military encirclement of the region. The Southern Command (South COM) is the unit responsible for American military oversight of Latin America and the Caribbean. The U.S. has military bases in the Americas to protect oil and other resources, to punish countries that it labels drug transit countries, and to provide surveillance of migrants under the guise of security.
Puerto Rico is the location of the main military base. But bases also exist in Ecuador, Aruba, Curacao, Honduras, Colombia, El Salvador and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Some 17 radar stations monitor land, air and sea in the region. The Americans have more military personnel than civilian personnel in the region, a sure sign that it is willing to use force over diplomacy to settle regional problems.
The U.S. wants carte blanche rights for its military personnel immunity from war crimes; freedom from inspection of prisons and detention centres that might reveal cases of torture, and the right to regime change on the basis of the pre-emptive use of force. It has already laid the groundwork for these at the UN/international level. The U.S. wants to rule above the law and without transparency and accountability.
Terrorism and drug control are used to justify the increased militarisation of American foreign policy. Militarisation will take priority over diplomacy and economic relations. Its main policy is 'engagement' maintaining contact between the U.S. military and other militaries in the region, mainly in the form of training. United States military assistance now exceeds economic assistance. Non-military foreign aid budgets have fallen. While the IMF and World Bank are the visible players, the military is the invisible player waiting to strike as the next regime change requires.
Democracy is combined with security policy. The U.S. says that in order to promote democracy it must promote security. This means professionalising the security forces and strengthening regional security co-operation agreements. It trains armies in mountain warfare techniques, riot control, infiltration training, and simulating combat situations. In the paranoid American political system, increased budgets for military spending are easier to obtain from Congress and are easier to spend without Congressional oversight compared to other forms of aid.
THE FTAA
Markets are a part of the package. In 1994, the first Summit of the Americas held up Mexico as the model of neo-liberal reforms. Ten days after the Summit, the Mexican crisis broke. It spread to East Asia, Russia, Brazil and Argentina. Brazil is now having second thoughts about the FTAA preferring Latin American integration first. This was the position Michael Manley took many years ago which led to the formation of the Association of Caribbean States. Bush is intent on carrying out the FTAA regime that his father was keen on.
Critical to this is currency control. America wants its currency to be the main currency of the FTAA. Countries that want to use the U.S. dollar as their currency will fall into this trap. The war with Iraq and the FTAA/EU arrangements are contests over which currency the US dollar or the euro will become the world's leading currency. Iraq began selling oil to Europe in euros rather than American dollars. Such trade strengthens the euro over the dollar and has helped the American trade deficit to rise to crisis proportions. Logically, Europe is against America's grab for Iraqi oil and regime change in Iraq.
The FTAA will become a currency garrison on which the U.S. dollar will base its control over the Americas since it has lost currency control over Europe. And just as the military will have greater rights than local citizens in conducting military operations (being immune from war crimes, etc.), the American investor, under the FTAA, will have more rights than Caribbean states and nationals over investment practices.
CARIBBEAN REALISM
This picture might appear alarmist to those who have held to a romantic "Big Brother" view of American policy towards the Caribbean. But America's policy is a global one and it will not be hindered by small countries that have little to offer the U.S. The Clinton administration was on the verge of imposing financial sanctions against Jamaica in 1996. It was dissatisfied with Jamaica's co-operation on narcotics.
In 1996, Jamaica had a confrontation with the U.S. over the Shiprider Agreement. America tried to override Jamaica's sovereignty to pursue drug traffickers. This crisis prompted a Caribbean summit in Barbados with Bill Clinton in 1997. The sanctions were averted.
In 1998, another controversy arose when the U.S. and Europe blacklisted certain Caribbean countries deemed to be encouraging tax evasion through their off-shore financial activities. They threatened economic sanctions. The off-shore economies were accused, again in a high-handed manner, of encouraging money laundering. The real concern was the loss of tax dollars that these tax-free havens were providing for American and European companies. The banana war with the Caribbean also showed lack of sensitivity to the special concerns of the small economies of the region. The U.S. was once again willing to unilaterally impose sanctions against Europe even before the WTO made its decision in this "banana war".
The war against Iraq and our own experience with the U.S. must make us realistic about our foreign policy. As the U.S. competes with Europe for world dominance, it seeks to lock Latin America and the Caribbean into a hemispheric garrison. Its security policy towards the region aims at policing the region to make sure that FTAA-friendly regimes are in place. The foreign policy of Jamaica and the Caribbean must keep an open door to Europe and the Non-Aligned countries as a balancing act against American dictates. The war against Iraq is a glimpse of the worst case scenario that could inflict the Caribbean in the future.
Robert Buddan lectures in the Department of Govern
ment, UWI, Mona. E-mail: rbuddan@uwimona.edu.jm
