David Jessop
IN MAY 2004, the European Union (EU) grew from a grouping of 15 to 25 member states. In 2008, Romania and Bulgaria will join the E.U. It is also possible but hugely controversial that at some future date, Turkey may become a member.
For the Caribbean, what this means is that it must tear up its map of Europe. Until quite recently even in a Europe of 15, four nations that know the region intimately the United Kingdom, Spain, the Netherlands and France could sometimes exercise a positive influence. But today, Europe has become an entity in which almost any issue that relates to the Caribbean now evinces either questions from the majority of member states or disinterest.
Nowhere is this more apparent than when talking to the permanent representations (embassies) of the new member states in Brussels. Able young diplomats listen politely, but point out that in their capitals, ministers have enough to concern them in taking forward their own economic, trade or agricultural agenda. They note they have no reason to focus on a region that they see as being remote in every sense.
They observe that some Caribbean nations are larger than them in terms of population. They point to figures that show that the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of the Bahamas, Barbados, Antigua, Trinidad and St Kitts is not hugely dissimilar to that of Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, Latvia and Hungary.
They speak about their own financial problems and their concerns about the EU budget and the fact that for the most part they are recipients of European funds to support their development.
They refer to their own development programmes that focus largely on nations in Central Asia, South East Asia, Africa and the Middle East.
NO INFLUENCE
What this means for the Caribbean is that up to 19 of the 25 EU member states now have little if any interest in the region. Only Malta and Cyprus among the new member states might be said to have a common understanding of Commonwealth nations.
If this is correct, it suggests that under the EU's weighted voting system, only 105 of the member states 321 votes in council could be said to relate to nations that have some understanding of the Caribbean. And that is before recognising that a shared history or a presence in the region rarely equates to unified support.
ALARMING
When it comes to the European Parliament, the situation is even more alarming.
Recent votes suggest that the complex matrix of political parties, nationality and vested interest on issues such as the maintenance of EU agricultural subsidies, may place the total number of members of the European Parliament with a positive interest in development issues that affect the region at no more than 150 of a total of 732 members.
These are not abstract issues. Very soon, the council and the Parliament will have to take a
co-decision on a recommendation from the European Commission on the amount of money that will be available to support the restructuring of the
Caribbean sugar sector.
They will also in a matter of months have to consider a new communication (policy paper)
that will determine the future
way in which Europe will relate politically, economically and in development terms to the region. The Council and Parliament will also be intimately involved in debating the final shape of the economic partnership agreement that is to be put in place by 2008 between Europe and the Caribbean.
This is to say nothing of the regular and ongoing private meetings between various groupings of member states on matters of interest to the region, such as security or financial services, or hearings or committee meetings of the Parliament or the council that determine broader trade or budgetary policy.
What all of this suggests is that if the Caribbean has the energy or interest in achieving a positive outcome from a long-term relationship with Europe, it needs to re-position itself.
One possible answer seems to lie in trying to build on existing linkages. Trade between Europe's new member states and the Caribbean is growing, albeit slowly. After disaggregating imports and exports of ships which seriously skew the raw data, Eurostat figures show that in 2004 total Caribbean exports to Europe's 10 new member states stood at ¤38.04m while imports into the Caribbean from the same nations amounted to ¤115.28m.
LONG-TERM POTENTIALS
Another interesting figure relates to tourism flows. Here World Tourism Organisation numbers suggest that, as some of the new member states become wealthier, their outbound tourism is beginning to increase.
Based on spend per head, Slovakia, Cyprus and Malta may have a potential for Caribbean tourism. But, based on absolute numbers travelling, Hungary, the Czech Republic and, to a lesser extent, Poland may offer in the longer term new markets in which to sell the Caribbean as a destination, if that is, airlift can be created.
In much of Eastern Europe, the Caribbean is still regarded as 'exotic'. This may offer new opportunities for sales of foodstuffs, rum and cultural exports such as music.
As far as investment flows are concerned, these are almost non-existent, but statistics suggest that the Czech Republic, Slovenia and Poland are beginning to flex their muscles by moving capital into other EU member states.
All of which suggests that improving relations with Europe's new member states will be a long and time consuming task, not least because diplomatic relations are almost without exception conducted on a non-resident and honorary consul basis.
Despite this, the EU as a whole is still the largest provider of development assistance to the Caribbean, is a major trading and investment partner, a vital source of visitors for the tourism sector and a significant contributor to regional security.
What is urgently required is a long-term and consistent strategy that determines how best to relate to the unfamiliar: a Europe of 25 or more nations.
David Jessop is the director
of the Caribbean Council
and can be contacted at david.jessop@caribbean-council.org.
