SIDS in 2014

In his grand sweep of 16th century Mediterranean history, French historian Braudel (1972: 154) had claimed that “the great problem” of the islands, never or only partly solved, was how to live off their own resources: soil, orchards, flocks, fish stocks; and “if that was not possible, to look outwards’ (ibid.). In spite of the mantra of sustainable development, islands fare best economically when they lure revenue from elsewhere, and the performance of their politicians often appraised by how well they manage to secure such largesse. Those small island territories that have, for some reason, been obliged to live off their own resources would have morphed themselves as plantation (and often largely monocrop) economies, providing non-essential goods to the kitchens of the West; but without the economies of scale of larger continental competitors, this business model has been shown to fail without those protectionist policies whose heyday is a thing of the past.

If this extra-territorial turn is the key to small island survival, then sovereignty may reduce its legitimate appeal and the chances of success of its resort. This then is a strong case for non-sovereignty: a political economy that secures autonomy but maintains the vital lifelines with larger, richer economies and their labour markets. And these links are especially significant in a post 9/11 context where the option to migrate is increasingly fraught by the regulations of the receiving countries, wary of heightened security concerns, stagnant economic growth and rising xenophobia. This approach may not sound like a ‘development’ strategy; but it has been, in its own right, a sustainable one. Today, vulnerability, resilience, dogged perseverance, and clever opportunism are best played out in a scenario where decolonization does not equal disengagement.

Godfrey Baldacchino