Abstract:
This thesis compares the foreign economic poUcy dimension of the
development strategies adopted by the governments of two Commonwealth
caribbean countries: The Hardey government In Jamaica, and the· Williams
government in Trlnidad and T ooago,
The foreign economic policIes adopted by these governments
appeared, on the surface~ to be markedly dissimilar. The Jamakan strategv
on the one hand, emphasised self-reliance and national autonomy; and
featured the espousal of radical oonaHgnment together with attempts to
re-deftne the terms of the Islands externaa economIc relaUoos. The
Trinidadian strategy 00 the other hand, featured Uberal
externaUy-oriented growth poUctes, and close relatjoos with Western
governments and financial institutions. Th1s study attempts to identify
the explanatory factors that account for the apparent dlssimUarUy 1n the
foreign economic policies of these two govemnents.
The study is based on a comparison of how the structural bases of an
underdeveloped ecooomYg and the foreign penetration and vulnerabUUy to
external pressures asSOCiated wUh dependence, shape and influence
foreign economic poUcy strategy. The framework views fore1gn ecooom1c
strategy as an adaptive response on the part of the decision makers of a
state to the coostralnts and opportunities provided by a particular
situation. The · situat i 00' in this case being the events, conditions,
structures and processes, associated wUh dependente and
underdevelopment.
The results indicate that the similarities and dissimHarities in the
foreign economic policies of the governments of Jamaica and Trinidad
were a reflecUon of the simHarities and dissimilarities in their
respective situations. The conclusion derived suggests that If the foreign
pol1cy field as an arena of choice, Is indeed one of opportunities and
constraints for each and every state, then poHcy makers of smaU, weak,
hlghW penetrated and vulnerable states enter thlS arena with constraints
outweighing opportunities. This places effective limits 00 their decisional
latitude and the range of policy options avaUable. Policy makers thus have
to decide critical issues with few estabUshed precedents, in the face of
domestic social and political cleavages, as wen as serious foreign
pressures. This is a reflection not only of the trappings of dependence, but
also of the Umned capabilities arising from the sman size of the state,
and the Impact of the resource-gap In an underdeveloped economy.
The Trinidadian strategy 1s UlustraUve of a development strategy
made viable through a combination of a fortuitous circumstance, a
confluence of the interests of influential groups» and accurate perception
on the part of poUcy makers. These factors enabled policy makers to
minimise some of the constraints of dependence. The faUure of Manlets
strategy on the other hand, 15 iHustraUve of the problems involved tn the
adoption of poUcles that work against the interest of internal and external
political and economic forces. It is also tUustraUve of the consequences
of the faUure 00 the part of policy makers to clarify goals, and to
reconcile the values of rapid economic growth with increased
self-reliance and national autonomy. These values tend to be mutuany
Incompatible given the existing patterns of relations in the jnternational
economy.
