In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

3 Introduction This work explores the impact of global transformation upon the independence experience of St. Lucia, which attained its independence in the immediate post– Bretton Woods order in which a global framework had emerged that afforded little space for a radical shift in the internal role of the state in the postindependence period. Consequently, the concept of “limited sovereignty” became the defining feature of St. Lucia’s understanding of the possibilities of independence (Thorndike 1979a, 603; Lewis 1993, 118–119). In this work, the concept of neoliberal globalization is associated, in line with the perspectives of David Harvey (2005) and William Robinson (2008), with the economic and political transformations resulting from the erosion of key features of the postwar Bretton Woods “embedded neoliberal” order in the early to mid-1970s. While I am not suggesting that the Bretton Woods order was established with the advancement of postcolonial sovereignty as its main aim, I do argue that these global transformations have rendered unworkable many of the assumptions and strategies upon which the national self-determination project had been pursued in the Caribbean in the post-1945 period. I propose that globalization holds far wider implications for the internal sovereignty of the weak, postcolonial Caribbean states than it does for the longer established, more powerful states in the world system. For the powerful states, “the real issue is not sovereignty, but the relative autonomy of the state and the limit to its actions” (Bogues 1994, 8). For the newly decolonized states of the Caribbean, however, these global transformations hold implications for the assumptions of independence itself, because they have eroded the conditions that shaped the strategies through which independence was pursued. Further, the historical openness of Caribbean societies and their dependence upon the global economic system (Clapham 1996, 245) exacerbate their vulnerabilities. While the notion of “limited sovereignty” had been pervasive in several Caribbean states before and after the collapse of the West Indies Federation in 1962 (Thorndike 1979a), the process of globalization calls for a reexamination of the assumptions of sovereign statehood in light of its impact on the pursuit of sovereignty and national self-determination. Introduction 4 Specifically, it is important to isolate the impact of the shift—from the embedded neoliberalism of the postwar Keynesian order to the period of hegemonic neoliberalism from the 1980s and beyond—on the postcolonial state and its decolonization. This shift has seen a wholesale redefinition of the role of the state from a guarantor and protector of national economic and political interests, to a facilitator of transnational capital. Robinson (2008) identifies this post-1980s period of global neoliberalism as being marked by four key developments , all of which have impacted upon the shift in the role of the independent state from its anticolonial genesis. These include: 1. A new capital labor relation based on deregulation and “flexibization” of labor. 2. A new round of extensive and intensive expansion . . . through the reincorporation of major areas of the former Third and Second worlds into the world capitalist economy. . . . 3. The creation of a global legal and regulatory structure to facilitate what were emerging globalized circuits of accumulation, including the creation of the World Trade Organization. 4. The imposition of the neoliberal model on countries throughout the Third world, and also the First and former Second worlds, involving structural adjustment programs that created the conditions for the free operation of capital within and across borders and the harmonization of accumulation conditions worldwide (ibid., 16). This work pursues the analysis of this new neoliberal global order with the specific focus on its impact on the historical experience of decolonization and independence in St. Lucia. I identify key episodes in the historical and contemporary experience of St. Lucia in which globalization can be seen to have affected the theoretical assumptions and practical expressions of national sovereignty. In these periods, conflicts over the meanings and expectations of independence, the character of the St. Lucian state in its role as domestic and international actor , and the degree of internal economic and political reform undertaken are particularly acute. These conflicts provide the basis for the analytical interpretations of the impact of globalization on the independence experience. Central to this analysis is the tension in the role of the state as a facilitator of domestic aspirations, on the one hand, and as a conduit for global economic adjustment, on the other. As a result, the national development project in St. Lucia vacillates between conformist and antisystemic notions, and between economic considerations...

Share