Caricom rift exposes deep flaws
The back and forth between the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and the Caribbean Community (Caricom) reveals why the regional body has fallen short of its mandate since the Treaty of Chaguaramas was signed in 1973.The current dispute is rooted in ambiguous communications, authority unbacked by clear directives, and political egos battling over nationalistic goals. What makes the disagreement over the reappointment of Caricom Secretary-General Dr Carla Barnett especially maddening is that the solution is straightforward.
To start with, the T&T Government has made its position clear: (1) it supports Caricom and does not intend to exit the organisation; (2) the Government’s objections are confined to the operations of the secretariat; (3) T&T will not be participating in any Caricom meetings until documents pertaining to the agenda are provided; and (4) T&T does not support the reappointment of Dr Barnett.Caricom is yet to respond but, in a letter to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Caricom chairman Dr Terrance Drew basically said all the issues raised by her administration were unfounded. Dr Drew wrote: “all member states were duly informed of the programme of events and the draft agenda of the meeting, including which agenda items were programmed to be taken in plenary session, in caucus, and in the retreat of heads only”. He then went on to say the conference had two specific agenda items—“geopolitical developments” and “financing and governance of the Community”.Supposedly, the latter included the reappointment of Dr Barnett. But, as Foreign and Caricom Affairs Minister Sean Sobers, in a letter to Dr Drew dated April 9, 2026, noted, “the matter of the reappointment of the Secretary-General is of grave importance and should be openly and transparently discussed by all Heads of Government, not a select few, at an appropriately scheduled meeting with a pellucid agenda”.
Minister Sobers then went on to undiplomatically describe the reappointment as “surreptitious, corrupted and flawed”. At the same time, it is passing strange that the Caricom chairman, despite knowing the crux of the T&T Government’s objections, should have made no reference to the agenda specifically including this item.This can be interpreted in two ways. Either Caricom is lax in how it communicates with its member governments, or the agenda was deliberately vague because the secretariat was well aware that Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar did not approve of Dr Barnett.How Caricom responds next will reveal which interpretation is more probable. The secretariat can decide to flex its limited muscle by taking a bureaucratic and legalistic path. This will hinge on the proper meaning of Articles 11, 24 and 28 of the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas which, respectively, deal with the designation of representatives of the Heads of Government, the appointment of the Secretary-General, and voting in a conference.
Or, the secretariat can agree to convene an emergency meeting of the heads to decide on Dr Barnett’s reappointment. Since regional unity is the raison d’être of Caricom, that seems the best way forward.