IT IS the sovereign right of every independent nation to establish diplomatic relations and do business with any other member state of the global community.

At the same time, when countries are part of an economic or political grouping and committed to agreed objectives, including coordination of foreign policy, it is expected that due care would be exercised to avoid causing unnecessary misunderstandings, or worse conflicts, among the partners of such a grouping.

Such a concern has arisen within the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) by the decision of some heads of government to travel to Libya to explore possibilities for financial and technical assistance.

On the surface, this would seem perfectly normal. Except that having diplomatic relations with Libya and conducting business with that Arab nation has not been normal for many member governments of CARICOM.

Very few, possibly no more than four CARICOM states, have diplomatic relations with Libya. In Tripoli and Georgetown, the Guyana-Libya diplomatic relation remains dormant.

The fact that Libya has been for some years now on the so-called blacklist of the USA as a "terrorist" state is hardly a militating factor in the forging of relations between independent nations.

The USA's criteria for determining which countries should be categorised as "terrorist states" should not be the guide for other sovereign nations from having diplomatic or other relations with any of the countries of the Arab world, or else, including Libya.

Sensitivity
However, when it is known that member countries of CARICOM have deep, and probably justifiable reasons, for the dissatisfaction they express about the relations that President Muammar Gaddafi's administration forge with dissident groups and organisations, then it is advisable that some sensitivity be shown by other members of the Community for such concerns.

In the circumstances of the just-concluded visit to Libya by the Prime Ministers of Dominica, Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines, at least two other heads of government of CARICOM -the Prime Ministers of Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago - have considered it necessary to publicly voice their own concerns while carefully, and correctly, avoiding any direct criticism of or lecturing to their colleagues who went to Tripoli.

In the case of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, it does not even have diplomatic ties with Libya. Consequently, questions have been raised about the precedent of an official visit to Tripoli to engage in business at state-to-state level.

'Traditional Solutions'
The Foreign Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, Mervyn Assam, had gone public - even before the trio of OECS Prime Ministers left for Tripoli - with his observation that if economic and technical aid was such an urgent issue, then perhaps CARICOM should have been considered a first option.

Subsequently, Prime Minister Owen Arthur of Barbados was to issue his own advice against any CARICOM partner or group of states, as in the case of financially-strapped OECS countries, resorting to what he euphemistically described as "non-traditional solutions" in the quest for aid.

Arthur, whose own government, like that of Prime Minister Basdeo Panday's in Port-of-Spain, has demonstrated an active interest in aid to countries of the Eastern Caribbean, said, in direct reference to the 'Libya mission' by the three OECS heads of government, that it was important that "traditional solutions" be given first option in the quest for assistance by states in financial difficulties.

The Prime Ministers of Dominica, Grenada and St. Vincent and the Grenadines are expected to return with promises of financial aid. The sum of about US$20M has actually been hinted for sharing among them and also to help meet expenditures for the OECS Secretariat.

Whenever this aid materialises, it still would not detract from the concerns expressed by governments like those of Trinidad and Tobago and Barbados. The Libya-CARICOM connection seems likely to be a foreign policy issue for the next heads of government meeting.