Tweet

CARICOM AT A CROSSROADS: St. Kitts–Nevis PM and CARICOM Chair Says Trinidad and Tobago Not Complicit in Maduro Extraction as Regional Fault Lines Deepen

By Times Caribbean | Geopolitics & Regional Affairs

The Caribbean Community is navigating one of its most delicate diplomatic moments in decades, and at the centre of the storm stands Dr. Terrance Drew, Prime Minister of St. Kitts and Nevis and current Chair of CARICOM.

Following the United States–led operation that resulted in the arrest of Venezuela’s ousted president Nicolás Maduro on January 3, regional tensions have intensified—particularly around the role, real or perceived, of Trinidad and Tobago.

Speculation swirled across diplomatic and media circles that Port of Spain may have been complicit, or at least quietly aligned, with Washington’s operation—an action reportedly linked to drug interdiction but widely interpreted as a de facto regime-change manoeuvre.

Dr. Drew has now moved decisively to shut down those claims.

“No Such Question Has Arisen”

In an exclusive interview with Guardian Media, Drew stated unequivocally that there is no suggestion within CARICOM that Trinidad and Tobago played any role in Maduro’s detention.

“I can say that that has not been a question that has arisen for discussion among the bloc,” Drew said, adding that Trinidad and Tobago remains “an important CARICOM member” and is facing no accusations from fellow states.

The intervention is significant. Trinidad and Tobago has found itself increasingly isolated after publicly praising the United States military action in the Southern Caribbean and Venezuela—an endorsement that alarmed international relations experts and unsettled smaller Caribbean states historically wary of great-power interventionism.

The ‘Unreliable Partner’ Shockwave

The controversy sharpened dramatically when Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, described CARICOM as an “unreliable partner.” The remark reverberated across the region, exposing long-simmering frustrations over trade imbalances, political influence, and strategic alignment.

Her words drew swift rebuke from Gaston Browne, who publicly argued that Trinidad and Tobago has benefited disproportionately from CARICOM trade arrangements, a sentiment quietly shared among several smaller economies.

Against this backdrop, whispers of a fractured bloc—and even a “Brexit-style” CARICOM rupture—began circulating.

Drew: CARICOM Is Bruised, Not Broken

Drew dismissed any notion of an imminent breakup.

“Am I worried that there’s a country… who at this time would want to pull out? I am not privy to that information, and I frankly don’t think so,” he said.

While conceding that CARICOM is imperfect, Drew urged regional leaders to recognize its often unseen economic, institutional, and diplomatic benefits, cautioning against emotional or reactionary politics.

“Sometimes we benefit and we don’t even recognise that we are benefiting from CARICOM.”

A Cautious Response Under Fire

CARICOM’s official response to reports of Maduro’s arrest further revealed the bloc’s internal balancing act. The CARICOM Bureau—comprising Jamaica, St. Kitts and Nevis, and Saint Lucia—convened an urgent meeting and issued a statement reaffirming:

• Respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity
• Commitment to international law and multilateralism
• The importance of human dignity
• Support for peaceful dialogue and diplomatic solutions

Notably absent, however, was any explicit declaration that the US operation violated international law—a restraint that drew sharp criticism from Ralph Gonsalves, now opposition leader in St. Vincent and the Grenadines.

“It reaffirmed principles… but it stopped short of making a judgement that this particular act was a violation of international law,” Gonsalves said, calling the response inadequate.

Consensus Over Confrontation

Drew defended the statement as the product of CARICOM’s consensus-based governance model.

“I am not the prime minister of CARICOM… I am the Chair… who coordinates and helps to reach consensus,” he said.
“And therefore, that statement is a statement that was reached by consensus. And I stand by it.”

The defence underscores a central tension within the bloc: unity often demands ambiguity, particularly when member states hold sharply divergent geopolitical instincts.

US Power, Venezuelan Oil, and Caribbean Anxiety

Maduro’s capture has been widely interpreted as part of a broader US push for regime change—despite Donald Trump framing Washington’s interest as rooted in Venezuela’s vast oil reserves.

Asked whether CARICOM is concerned about US interference in elections or internal affairs, Drew said the issue has not formally arisen at the regional level—but reaffirmed two core principles:

• CARICOM supports democratic governance
• CARICOM adheres strictly to non-interference

This duality reflects the bloc’s enduring challenge: promoting democratic norms while avoiding alignment with external power plays that echo the Caribbean’s colonial past.

A Moment of Reckoning

What emerges is a region standing at a strategic crossroads. Trinidad and Tobago’s blunt rhetoric, the United States’ muscular interventionism, and CARICOM’s cautious diplomacy have exposed deep structural tensions—between large and small economies, pragmatism and principle, sovereignty and survival.

Yet, as Drew insists, this moment need not signal collapse.

Instead, it may force CARICOM to confront long-avoided questions about equity, leadership, consensus, and geopolitical alignment in an increasingly volatile world.

For now, the Chair’s message is clear: there is no accusation, no rupture, and no exit—only a bruised but still standing Caribbean Community trying to hold its centre as global forces pull hard at its seams.