Times Caribbean
The Caribbean Community is now staring down one of the most explosive leadership crises in its modern history, as calls intensify for the resignation of Secretary-General Carla Barnett amid a widening regional revolt led by Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
In what can only be described as a political firestorm, Persad-Bissessar has launched a relentless and highly public campaign, condemning Barnett’s reappointment as a “corrupt backroom operation” and branding leadership within CARICOM as “dysfunctional, dishonest and incompetent.”
Her warning that the matter will be “ruthlessly and relentlessly” pursued signals not just discontent—but open confrontation. But the crisis deepened dramatically when respected Antiguan diplomat Ronald Sanders publicly declared that, in Barnett’s position, he would have already resigned.
His reasoning cuts to the heart of the matter: legitimacy and unity. If a major regional leader refuses to engage while the Secretary-General remains in office, then the office itself becomes a barrier to integration—not a facilitator of it. This is no longer a dispute. It is an institutional breakdown.
At the center of the storm sits CARICOM Chairman Terrance Drew, whose handling of the crisis has drawn mounting criticism. Instead of decisive leadership, the region has witnessed paralysis—an absence of mediation, clarity, or urgency.
The result? A deepening fracture that now threatens ministerial participation, diplomatic cohesion, and the very credibility of the regional bloc. CARICOM’s founding mandate is unity. Yet today, unity is conspicuously absent.
If key member states disengage, if high-level meetings are boycotted, and if leadership is perceived as compromised or ineffective, then CARICOM risks sliding into irrelevance. This moment demands more than silence and procedural defense—it demands accountability.
The uncomfortable truth is this: when leadership becomes the obstacle, leadership must change.
