The ghosts of Federation, Island Chauvinism, and Territorialisation have continually haunted integration initiatives, which the Region has embarked upon since time immemorial. It has been no different with the implementation of the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME). The CSME has faced the many sceptics and critics, who view this move towards greater Caribbean cooperation and integration has a conspiracy in the erosion of state sovereignty and state nationalism.

Sovereignty is one of the central concepts in national, regional, and international politics. It can be said to be one of the concepts, which makes politics possible. Definitions have travelled through centuries. Historically perceptions have evolved considerably, theorizing on the subject being done by philosophers such as Bodin, Hobbes, Locke and Montesquieu. Each of whom had his own opinions on what constitutes sovereignty or makes a state sovereign. Bodin defined a state as "a lawful government of several households, and of their common possessions with sovereign power." He went on to define sovereignty as "supreme power over citizens and subjects unrestrained by law." The Hobbesian perspective on sovereignty is of the view that emphasis and sovereign power should be located in the state and not the king. These are merely two examples of the historical perception of sovereignty.

Sovereignty defined today by the Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics is "the claim to be the ultimate political authority, subject to no higher power as regards the making and enforcing of political decisions." Sovereignty is an important possession of any nation. It is essential that countries feel that they are in charge; in total control of their affairs, within their boundaries. Sovereignty helps one to appreciate what makes a state a state, and it is a defining characteristic of statehood. It also helps to establish rights and duties. Sovereignty also implies that states are entitled to non-interference in their affairs. The supreme authority is the state and it is believed that the state is subject to no external limitations.

Stephen Krasner in his book Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy has offered that there are at least four different ways by which one can use the term sovereignty. They are international/legal sovereignty, westphalian sovereignty, domestic sovereignty and interdependence sovereignty. These are the various categories into which sovereignty can be placed and countries examined according to Krasner. For him, international/legal sovereignty refers to "the practices associated with mutual recognition, usually between territorial entities that have formal juridical independence." Westphalian sovereignty refers to "the political organization based on the exclusion of external actors from authority structures within a given territory." Domestic sovereignty involves the "formal organization of political authorities to exercise effective control within the borders of their own polity." Finally, there is interdependence sovereignty, which addresses "the ability of public authorities to regulate the flow of information, ideas, goods, people, pollutants, or capital across the borders of their state." Krasner points out that, states can, but do not necessarily possess sovereignty in all it manifestations. There are also times when the exercise of one kind of sovereignty can undermine another. Westphalian sovereignty can be undermined by international legal sovereignty when rulers of a state enter into agreements that recognise external authority structures. A state can also possess international legal sovereignty, westphalian, and established domestic authority structures and still have very limited ability to regulate cross-border flows. All this begs a question though, as to whether sovereignty is ever wholly attained.

It can be believed that due to such limitations states may never achieve full sovereignty unless they are capable of efficiently and effectively exercising and executing full control of their sovereign rights. Sovereignty then remains a "theoretical fiction."

Caribbean people everywhere lament the fact that the Single Market and all its components and obligations are poised to shred the tapestry of national sovereignty. However, most Caribbean States today are signatories to many international arrangements. We are members of the World Trade Organization (WTO), the African Caribbean and Pacific - European Union Relationship (ACP-EU) and we are seeking to become members of the Free Trade Area of the Americas. We act in compliance with OECD (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development) ultimatums, provisions of the MAI (Multilateral Agreement on Investment) agreements and other rules of international institutions. Prime Minister Owen Arthur of Barbados also makes the point that, "Caricom Countries surrendered much of their national sovereignty to the international financial institutions in the 1980s. Further by signing on the WTO treaty in 1994, we have ceded considerable sovereignty to a supranational institution operating a 'rule-based' system, an institution over which we have considerably less influence than the organs of our own Community."

In an environment, which is skewed to hegemonic rule the membership of most international organizations and arrangements amounts to a definite erosion of the sovereignty of small states, since the forces which dominate and pervade this world's system of international trade, relations, and politics, are purely self-interest minded and such interest will forever contradict with the interest of smaller, developing states, which will have to struggle to stay alive within the system, and maintain what amount of sovereignty that they can.

Therefore, given the challenges and obstacles, which plague the theoretical notions of sovereignty, it should be accepted that there is a need for a re-evaluation of the concept of sovereignty. The whole concept of national sovereignty needs to be redefined as increasingly its constraints and relativity are being realized. These are evident and can be clearly seen through the strengthening of the WTO and the establishment of the FTAA. If this can be recognizes at these levels, what about regionally. It is important that we change the way in which we view this concept of sovereignty, in order for the Region to negotiate from a position of greater strength within the WTO, FTAA, and in other similar negotiations. It is at this point that the CSME becomes most relevant and shows itself to be a right path, and a viable option in the Region's journey towards achieving sustainable development.

The CSME provides for the Region an avenue whereby the sovereignty of states can be conceptualized in alternative ways. No longer can we stand upon the pillars that each sovereign state is/and should be isolated from the other, and entitled to non-interference in their affairs that the state is subject to no external limitations. The traditional concepts upon which sovereignty once depended no longer exist, or one can say never existed. Globalization has resulted in the subordination of Caribbean people to external powers. The Single Market allows the Region a greater voice in the international arena a position that has been achieved through the strengthening of regional institutions and regional sovereignty.

Though many would like to believe that the provisions of the Revised Treaty of Chaguramas have diminished the power of the nation-state, this is not so. The CSME reinforces the Caribbean position - the Antiguan and Barbudan position in the global environment. In actuality it endows us with greater sovereign rights, as a unified region, in the international sphere.

Through the CSME the way has been cleared for greater self-determination by Caricom Nationals. It has afforded citizens of the Region more opportunities for improved working conditions, benefits and job opportunities that result from free movement of labour and business investment among Caribbean countries; young people will benefit from more opportunities to travel, study, and work throughout the region; and businesses will have access to new markets, new workers and the best knowledge and technology from across the Caribbean, making them more productive and helping them to succeed. It has also been noted that, "The CSME also represents the most effective means by which the individual economies of the region can be successfully integrated into the proposed new Hemispheric economy and the evolving global economic system. It also portends a new relationship between the ordinary Caribbean man and woman and enterprises to the regional economic system, in the form of new rights of establishment of enterprise, greater economic mobility and choice, and the exposure to the new systems of competition among themselves through which, hopefully, they can lift themselves to world class standards." (Arthur, 2004)

These opportunities are as a result of nation-states of the Caribbean realizing that sovereignty is by no means absolute. The Caribbean Community has embarked upon a re-thinking of national sovereignty, manifested in the Caricom Single Market and Economy. The need for sovereignty to be conceptualised to suit the era in which it is set is being met by this initiative. The international institutions and agreements have already eroded so much of our sovereignty. It is up to us as Caribbean Nationals to support this move towards greater regional sovereignty, and the sustained growth and development that will redound to our Caribbean Civilisation. It is to our benefit to support the regional institutions and arrangements, which seek to offer each Nation-state a visible place in the international arena where their self-interest can be heard.

Submitted by
Kariyma Baltimore
Research Officer
Antigua and Barbuda CSME Unit
Ministry of Finance and the Economy