Dear Sir,

Is someone trying to gaslight the Caricom issue? I ask, as a careful reading of an opinion in Tuesday’s Royal Gazette would reveal an assumption that does not withstand scrutiny: that Bermuda’s full membership would dilute its standing with the US.

In reality, evidence from global diplomacy suggests the opposite. That is, strategic multilateral engagements often strengthen, rather than weaken, a country’s bilateral relationships, even if Bermuda is not considered a country by the UN.

First, the recent decision by the US Department of State to pause immigrant visa processing for certain countries is an administrative and security-based measure, not a wholesale judgment on economic credibility or governance.

At present, it does not apply to non-immigrant travel, nor does it signal economic or financial sanctions. To interpret this policy as a “downgrading” of Caricom states risks overstating its significance and misreading the US’s pragmatic approach to regional relations.

Second, Bermuda’s value to the US is rooted in structural and tax realities that Caricom membership cannot erase: its world-class regulatory regime, reinsurance market and role in global finance. These are not fragile advantages dependent on political isolation. Trinidad & Tobago, Guyana and Suriname demonstrate that the US is fully capable of maintaining differentiated relationships within Caricom based on concrete and/or suspicious interests.

Membership does not impose collective punishment nor does it erase national distinctions. Though a collective, Caricom members are sovereign nations, and their international policies reflect their own individual interests.

Third, full Caricom membership would expand Bermuda’s strategic leverage. Acting within a co-ordinated Caribbean bloc enhances bargaining power on climate resilience, financial regulation, labour mobility and disaster response — areas where small states acting alone are structurally disadvantaged.

Support should not be about financial reciprocity — what is Bermuda gaining? At a time of geopolitical volatility, insulation through isolation is far riskier than influence through partnership. If not for Caricom, those Chinese-built vessels would not be visiting Bermuda.

Finally, perception cuts both ways. Remaining outside Caricom risks portraying Bermuda as detached from its region, while still benefiting from its historical and cultural ties. Full membership signals confidence, leadership and regional responsibility, not ideological impulse and a colonial mindset.

Based on the US’s posture, the real strategic question, therefore, is not whether Caricom weakens Bermuda’s position, but whether Bermuda can afford to forgo the collective strength and diplomatic reach that full membership would provide in an increasingly uncertain global order.

SAM BRANGMAN JR.

Warwick