A recent decision by the United States to implement partial visa restrictions and pause certain immigrant visa issuances to multiple nations, including Caribbean states Antigua and Barbuda and Dominica, has revealed significant fragmentation within the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Rather than presenting a unified front, regional responses degenerated into domestic political point-scoring and silence, exposing a critical weakness in collective diplomacy.
The US action stems from two primary domestic concerns, not diplomatic retaliation. First, data indicating that a substantial percentage of immigrant households from these nations eventually utilize public assistance programs aligns with the Trump administration’s policy emphasizing immigrant financial self-sufficiency. Second, the issue of visa overstayers illegally influencing congressional representation and federal funding allocations is a potent political matter within a polarized America.
Statistics underscore the policy’s actuarial basis. Among CARICOM nations, the percentage of immigrant households receiving public assistance is notably high: Dominica (45.1%), Antigua and Barbuda (41.9%), St. Lucia (41.7%), Guyana (41.7%), Belize (41.8%), Grenada (40.7%), St. Kitts and Nevis (39.1%), St. Vincent and the Grenadines (38.1%), Trinidad and Tobago (37.1%), Jamaica (36.7%), The Bahamas (34.0%), and Barbados (33.9%).
The specific restriction on B-1/B-2 visitor visas for Antigua and Barbuda and Dominica relates to concerns over visa overstaying, unlawful residence, and unpaid use of public services, particularly healthcare. This intersects with Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programs, where US authorities seek enhanced biometric verification to mitigate identity concealment risks, not to delegitimize the programs themselves.
The sovereign right of any nation to control its borders is undeniable, a principle every CARICOM state exercises itself. The core failure lies in the Caribbean’s reaction: a lack of coordinated position, factual clarification, or collective insistence on distinguishing lawful travelers from illegal overstayers. This fragmentation resulted in 11 of 14 independent CARICOM states ultimately being affected, demonstrating that unilateralism offers no protection.
The path forward requires abandoning outrage and internal recrimination. CARICOM must develop a common framework for US engagement, separating individual public charge assessments from national reputation and addressing biometric concerns through collective, technically sound solutions. Cooperation should be transparent, voluntary, and capped. For small states, sovereignty is defended not by silence or opportunism, but by coherence, discipline, and the courage to speak with one unified voice.