The modern Caribbean can arguably trace its origin to the Treaty of Chaguaramas of 1973. From its inception, the call has been for the Caribbean to be a zone of peace, free from foreign intervention and foreign military domination. Rather, the Caribbean should be determined by its people, and not by external forces — economic, cultural or military. The aspiration of the region, its guiding mantra, is that of the zone of peace — that of diplomatic resolution of issues and a fundamental opposition to imperialism of any form.

The destiny of the Caribbean must be forged only by the people of the Caribbean, free of pressure or interference from imperialist entities, be it European powers or the United States. The Caribbean was formed largely as a result of imperialist conquest — of the genocide and enslavement of the Indigenous people and the enslavement of Africans, as well as indentured servitude of poor Europeans (prisoners of war, especially the Irish and Scots) and Asians (most prominently seen today in Trinidad and Guyana). In fact, one could argue that modern capitalism was largely forged in the crucible of the Caribbean, as was the concept of Whiteness — both of which have found their most mature form in the US today.

Perhaps more than any other region of the world, the lessons of the past haunt our region, and inform principled opposition to imperialism and racism. We know from our histories the threat they pose, as well as the importance of collective action and solidarity to assert the principles of human dignity and sovereignty. We ignore those lessons at our peril, and reproduce the horrors of the past if we fail to act collectively.

Just as the Caribbean helped give birth to the horrors of empire, today it holds the potential to demonstrate to the world the hope of a better future, that a better world is possible. Despite the revenge that imperial powers sought against Haiti for daring to resist, for daring to assert the independence of its people and the vision of a better world — of liberty, equality and fraternity — the example of Haiti still serves as a guide for us today. It remains fundamentally at the heart of the Caribbean, despite its struggles against French and US imperialism, right through to the US puppet regime of Duvalier and the interference by the West against the vision of Aristide — the consequences of such which are very much evident today.

The opposition to imperialism in the region does not mean no interaction with other powers. It simply means that such interaction should be based on mutual respect, principled commitment to international law, and fundamentally based on the twin concepts of human dignity and the dignity of the peoples of the Caribbean. There is scope for diplomacy and collaboration, as long as any such partnerships are based on dignity and respect. But what diplomacy and partnership is possible in the face of wanton breaches of international law, of extrajudicial murders of Caribbean people, of the “might makes right” logic of empire?

The gunship diplomacy of the US today, along with its threats of economic violence against Caribbean people, is fundamentally contrary to mutual respect.

I recognise the difference of might between the US — a nuclear-armed superpower whose military spending is greater than the next nine greatest military powers combined — despite the hysteria of American propaganda used to justify every greater military expenditure. China ($314 billion) and Russia’s ($145 billion) combined military funding doesn’t even come to half of the US’s at $997 billion.

This does not mean the region should simply shrug its shoulders like Bahamian national security minister Wayne Munroe suggests when he says, “What can we do to restrict them [US] in finding what they say is in their national interest?”

That is the language of anticipatory obedience, of surrender, of submission to empire. Of course, the combined powers of the Caribbean are no match for the US. However, that does not mean the region should simply roll over. Rather, the region should speak clearly: that the Caribbean is a zone of peace, one of international law and respect for human dignity. We should resist, with whatever tools we have diplomatically, to make clear that the age of empire in the Caribbean is over. We are no one’s backyard.

The defence of the Caribbean as a zone of peace must fundamentally be a grassroots movement. This is important in sending both a message and encouragement to Caribbean leadership about the importance of standing strong for the principles that have guided the region since the era of national liberation — albeit some, like Bermuda, remain colonies. It is important to let the US know that they are on the wrong side of history, and in doing so also offer our solidarity to those in the US resisting against authoritarianism there. There is scope for all of us, either in independent states or still colonies, to take action.

In practical terms, this means calling for the dismantling of all foreign military bases in the region, and a ban on setting up new ones. It means calling for an end to all acts of economic, political and military aggression against countries in the region, including indirect and covert activities aimed at destabilising governments. It means banning the use of mercenaries in the region, and banning the recruitment and training of mercenaries, too. It means furthering the decolonisation of the region, politically, economically and culturally. It means calling for non-interference and non-intervention in the internal affairs of the region and respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity. It means an end to military manoeuvres in the region. It means a review of the various ship-rider programmes that undermine the sovereignty of the region.

Timothy Snyder, in his book On Tyranny has articulated the risk of anticipatory obedience, and how it can manifest itself. His warnings were particularly for the citizens of the US, as well for its corporations. His warnings equally apply at the geopolitical level, and especially as regards our region today — one need only exchange imperialism for authoritarianism — and it is worth quoting his words as a message to the region:

“Do not obey in advance. Most of the power of authoritarianism is freely given. In times like these, individuals think ahead about what a more repressive government will want, and then offer themselves without being asked. A citizen who adapts in this way is teaching power what it can do.”

Or, as Bob Marley warned us:

Give them an inch, they take a yard

Give them a yard, they take a mile.

• Jonathan Starling is a socialist writer with an MSc in Ecological Economics from the University of Edinburgh and an MSc in Urban and Regional Planning from Heriot-Watt University