During the past week, governments like those in Antigua and Barbuda, The Bahamas and St. Vincent and the Grenadines have engaged in some surprising political choreography, apparently aimed at pleasing Washington, but without having the stomach to specifically endorse America's violation of the UN Charter.

Thankfully, for all of Washington's carrot-and-stick diplomatic games behind-the-scenes, the great majority of CARICOM governments continue to hold the line in questioning the legality and morality of the USA and Britain going to war against Iraq without the endorsement of the UN Security Council.

It is a commendable stand that I have no doubt would find popular support right across the Caribbean region.

Prime Minister P. J. Patterson's government may have done not only the Jamaican people but their CARICOM cousins, across the Community and of the Diaspora, very proud indeed by the firm, dignified stand as articulated last Wednesday at the UN Security Council by ambassador Stafford Neil.

Lamenting the daily scenes of death, woundings, destruction and dislocation resulting from the war, Jamaica's envoy made clear his government's opposition to a military warfare based on the new doctrine of "pre-emptive strike" for "regime change" in a sovereign state.

Basically reflecting the letter and spirit of a unanimously approved `Statement on Iraq’, issued by CARICOM leaders on February 15 in Port-of-Spain, as well as the position adopted by the UN Secretary General, Kofi Annan himself, ambassador Neil said:

"The Security Council must remain the source of legitimacy for any collective action and it should not be compromised or undermined by any new doctrines or policies inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations..."

It would have been much better if, as was the original intention, Jamaica was facilitated in expressing a similar position on behalf of all independent member states of the Community.

But the consultation process, required for coordination of foreign policies within the Community, was to reveal some rather strange manoeuvrings. For a start, The Bahamas was to point to lack of "sufficient time" to consider the draft statement.

Significantly, however, in his broadcast to the nation on March 19, that coincided with the start of the war on Iraq, Bahamian Prime Minister, Perry Christie, made no mention to the collective CARICOM statement of February 15 on the implications of the USA and Britain ignoring the UN in pursuing military action.

Others were to engage in a game of words that would have had the effect of weakening a principled, forthright stand consistent with the original CARICOM position of February 15.

Consequently, Jamaica felt obliged to go with its own position as articulated by Ambassador Neil. Foreign Minister K. D. Knight would have preferred a consensual position.

Understandably, he avoided any finger-pointing and restricted himself to simply saying: "We were unable to come to a common position in time and, therefore, we made our own statement before the UN Security Council".

In contrast to Jamaica' publicly expressed position, one that corresponds with that of the great majority of CARICOM governments, there were separate statements in Antigua and Barbuda, St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and St. Kitts and Nevis.

Variously, they placed emphasis or focus on the failure by the Saddam Hussein regime in Baghdad on "total and unconditional" compliance with UN Resolution 1441 on disarmament of weapons of mass destruction, than on an evident, and world-wide condemnation, of violation of the UN Charter by the USA/Britain war for "regime change" by military force - without any endorsement of the Security Council.

As the point man in the George Bush administration for the Latin American-Caribbean, Cuban-born émigré, Otto Reich, was alerting some Eastern Caribbean governments of coming visits, some scheduled for this week. Governments in Antigua and Barbuda, St. Vincent and the Grenadines and St. Kitts and Nevis seemed anxious to do their own thing.

That is, to emphasise failure by the Iraqi government to comply with UN Resolution 1441 than the fact that the war had been unleashed while the UN weapons inspectors were fulfilling their mandate and reporting significant progress. Worse, that the war for regime change by military force was in violation of the UN Charter and denounced by powerful UN Security Council members like China, Russia and France, apart from those non-voting members of the Council who had courageously stood up against US pressures to oppose a second resolution to 1441.

Prime Ministers Ralph Gonsalves and Lester Bird hardly did themselves any credit by making their separate statements when they could well have been engaged in helping to formulate a collective CARICOM position for articulation at last week's meeting of the Security Council.

"It is regrettable", said Bird, "that concerted diplomatic efforts failed (really?)...We urge all countries to remain steadfast in their commitment to, and support for the United Nations (sic)..." Who is Mr. Bird "urging" to "remain steadfast" in supporting the UN. Those who have shifted away, or somersaulting on the CARICOM position of February 15?

His colleague Gonsalves went even further in his shift by warning, most astonishingly, that "governments of the region ought not to issue strident denunciations of the American and British war activities in Iraq....

"Stridency", he added, "will only exaggerate our region's powerlessness in this matter..."

It is fair to ask Prime Minister Gonsalves which CARICOM "governments" he has in mind, and what examples of "stridency" he has to offer.

For now, let me conclude, for the benefit of readers, with a very relevant portion of the February 15 collective `Statement on Iraq’ issued by CARICOM governments at the conclusion of the 14th Inter-Sessional Meeting in Port-of-Spain:

"The Heads (of government) reiterated that the United Nations, through its Security Council, has been charged with the responsibility for maintaining international peace and security.

"They were, therefore, deeply disturbed at the prospect of the use of military force in Iraq without the endorsement of the United Nations Security Council and in the absence of a final conclusion by the UN weapons inspectors that Iraq is in material breach of Security Council Resolution 1441..."

When, therefore, a few CARICOM governments chose to make their own individual statements, they should have realised that rather than showing weakness under pressure - from whatever source - they could have instead take refuge in the CARICOM position of February 15.