By Sir Ronald Sanders
The Caribbean is living through a moment of rising geopolitical tension. As the United States intensifies pressure on the Maduro government in Venezuela, the ripples reach CARICOM shores fast. None of these countries chose this confrontation, yet each of them is forced to navigate its consequences.
This is nothing new. Small states always live at the edge of power. But recent events have exposed, with painful clarity, how thin the shield of individual sovereignty becomes when the pressure of great-power politics mounts.
Community Tested by High Politics
CARICOM has long described itself as a “Community of Sovereign States.” It is a noble phrase, suggesting unity grounded in mutual cooperation. Yet this crisis has shown how fragile that unity becomes when confronted with high politics—especially politics involving the United States, a country on which many CARICOM economies depend.
In mid-October, CARICOM Heads of Government reaffirmed the region’s doctrine: the Caribbean must remain a Zone of Peace; disputes must be resolved by dialogue; and sovereignty and territorial integrity must be upheld in international law. But the ink was barely dry when divisions surfaced.
Trinidad and Tobago reserved its position and later distanced itself from the collective statement. Guyana—facing a territorial claim and military posture from Venezuela that have overshadowed it for sixty-three years—welcomed the U.S. presence as a deterrent. Some governments stayed silent. A few reiterated the need for de-escalation and respect for law.
Within days CARICOM’s supposed unity became a patchwork of national interests. The Zone of Peace became less a shared principle than a slogan of interpretation.
The Peril of Fragmentation
This fragmentation should alarm all CARICOM peoples. Small states cannot endure as isolated fragments; they last only as part of something larger. When the small divide, the strong decide. And if the Caribbean cannot speak with one voice in defence of law, others will speak for it in the language of might.
Our region must confront a truth that is uncomfortable but unavoidable: sovereignty for the small is both precious and precarious. It is precious because it affirms the moral equality of nations, giving each—no matter its size—a rightful place in the international system. Yet it is precarious because true sovereignty depends on the capacity to exercise it—a capacity no CARICOM state truly possesses.
Global politics operates through hierarchy. Five countries wield veto power at the UN Security Council. Wealthy shareholders dominate multilateral institutions. Trade outcomes favour power, not fairness. Climate diplomacy leaves the smallest states, like Sisyphus, pushing a boulder up a mountain—fighting for compensation for destruction caused by others.
Small Caribbean nations live these realities every day. Economic fragility, limited defence resources, reliance on external markets, and exposure to natural disasters narrow the practical meaning of sovereignty.
The Case for Collective Strength
Yet because of these vulnerabilities, sovereignty matters more—not less. It is the shield that prevents small nations from being swept away by the currents of power. But a shield is useful only if wielded with strength—and no small state has that strength alone.
Sovereignty must be asserted individually but exercised collectively. That is the heart of the Caribbean project and its most persistent challenge.
Too often, governments allow external relationships to influence internal decision-making. Too often, they anticipate what a powerful partner wants and act accordingly—even when doing so weakens the regional collective. Sovereignty cannot survive if continuously surrendered through self-censorship.
The remedy is not uniformity of views. It is consistency of process. Debate within the family. Decisions jointly reached and collectively maintained. For if we cannot resolve differences among ourselves, we invite outsiders to define the region’s positions.
Law as the Discipline of Power
Power will always shape the international landscape. Small states cannot pretend otherwise. But law moderates its sharpest edges. International law does not abolish power politics, but it disciplines it. It transforms might into obligation; it turns coercion into an act that must justify itself. Courts, tribunals, and international forums allow the small to confront the large using reason and norms—not force.
A Region at a Crossroads
This is where the Caribbean countries stand today: geopolitical pressures demand coherence, but domestic calculations often pull them apart. CARICOM has come far, but not far enough, in building a political community capable of withstanding global storms.
Caribbean governments must continue to affirm that law applies as much to the powerful as to the powerless. They should resist any order that tries to turn might into right. And they must ensure the region does not slip back into patterns where external powers pick off states one by one.
The real work of Caribbean integration today is existential. It is about ensuring that sovereignty is strengthened by community. If they stand together—on principle, on dignity, and on the sovereign equality promised in the UN Charter—then even in a world of rising geopolitical storms, the Caribbean will not merely endure. It will shape its own course.
Give to get: Working together with the reality of power
These concepts need not collide; they can be reconciled if we accept that both the mighty and the small must be persuaded—through reason and reciprocity—to accept limits on autonomy out of enlightened self-interest.
The old doctrines of absolute sovereignty, and the old formulas of development and aid, must give way. All countries—including small ones—must learn to give in order to get. Only then can we build an international order in which cooperation is a two-way street—anchored in human rights and humanitarian law, giving small states a chance not only to survive but to prosper. But no single CARICOM country, nor a partial group, can negotiate such a strategy. All must do it together.
This commentary is based on my 2025 Distinguished Lecture of the Organisation of Caribbean Bar Associations, available here:
https://www.sirronaldsanders.com/Docs/FINAL%20Text%20of%20%20OCCBA%20Lecture%2025%20November%202025.pdf
(The author is the Ambassador of Antigua and Barbuda to the United States and the OAS, and Dean of the OAS Ambassadors accredited to the OAS. Responses and previous commentaries: www.sirronaldsanders.com)
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
Well said
To be an enemy of America is dangerous, but to be a friend is fatal” was said by former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger. The full quote is often cited as: “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal”.
Who said it: Henry Kissinger.
The Quote: “It may be dangerous to be America’s enemy, but to be America’s friend is fatal.”
Context: The quote implies that while the U.S. might be a tough adversary, its alliances can also lead to destructive outcomes for its partners. Kissinger reportedly used it in a 1968 context regarding Vietnam policy.
Sir. Doctor Ronald Sanders the above as you can see were the words of America’s finest diplomat ever. Henry Kissinger. If he were in England or in Antigua and Barbuda he would have earned the title Sir. During his time we looked up to the USA for leadership and diplomacy. Not lately. America has turned out to be nothing but a rough nation. A Big Bully. One that shows that might is right. As they refuse to settle a trade dispute which Antigua won at the WTO arbitration. And there is no way for this small nation to force them to settle. For America Sovereignty is just a word, it only means as long as I agree to whatever it is you are doing. When I don’t agree I will place sanctions on you and if that doesn’t help I will seize all your assets where ever they are. And I will confiscate all assets from those I think are assisting you. Antigua and Barbuda has longtime maintained that we are friends of all and enemy of none. But I’m afraid that the day will come when America will put us under so much pressure that we will either become an enemy of them or the country they want us to have as our enemy. Because the USA policy now is that you cannot be a friend of their enemy and also their friend. So when it comes to Cuba and now Venezuela and soon to come China, they will demand that we chose side. No neutrality. Now you are a diplomat and has to use diplomatic language to get your point across. But unity of the Caribbean is long gone. The only unity is in the OECS. When Trinidad found oil, they told the rest of the Caribbean that they are not the ATM of the Caribbean. Their economy boomed as no other. Now Chavez came on the scene and decided that Venezuela’s wealth should be shared with all of the Caribbean and South-America. And he started ALBA. It was a blessing during Covid for many small Islands that lacked to finances to purchase oil the most important commodity that fuels any economy. Cuba is now literally in darkness every day. Because Venezuela is blocked from giving them any fuel. They should have transferred long time to renewable energy. Now its Guyana’s time. They have struck the Black Gold. And they also are keeping their new found wealth for themselves. No sharing with the friends and neighbors. But they are inviting friends to purchase goods from them and to come and farm land in Guyana. All this is good for Guyana not for them. if Guyana need farmers they can offer land to farmers in Europe who feel displaced by the European Agriculture policies. Lots of white South African Farmers are losing their lands. Perhaps they are interested in coming to Guyana to do their trade.
I see the PM is working with the Guyanese PM to establish a trade route from Guyana to Antigua. Caricom has now for decades said they will invest in a shipping line to do just that. Well little OECS could not even keep LIAT 1974 flying. It took the brain and wisdom of our PM to find a partner in Nigeria who was willing to put their monies in this venture. What is it that we cannot see that we need to support the services needed by our people if we claim to be a unitary economic space. And it is easy to decide each countries contribution based on its economy and population. And the private sector should be subsidized for providing this service.
Anyway Sir Dr. Ronald Sanders, I think you are doing a great job as a diplomat, but the powers are to big to fight diplomatically. And they have put diplomacy out the windows. As you even said. Might is Right.
@less we forget: I can see that you have forgotten that is the same ALP and Gaston killed LIAT when Stanford had his airlines flying Puerto Rico route that even decimated the American eagle flights, LIAT had that early morning flight to Puerto Rico and back in the evening that helped business people and mechanics and trade men to run go for emergency parts, but Gaston in complicity with Lester influence the LIAT board members to sell out that schedule and then Standford fall and eagle departed and LIAT go bankrupt, now the the tax payers are paying thousands weekly to keep this airline going, and regardless of where it flies it ain’t entering the American market, even this same ron saunders is part and parcel of our destruction.
Comments are closed.