It is important to bear in mind that in several continental countries, for reasons stemming from former times, the official geographical vision did not take the western Caribbean into consideration. Cartography played its part by detracting from the importance of that extensive zone that is undeniably Circum-Caribbean. The regional history of those countries was written and taught looking from the Pacific Ocean directly to the Atlantic Ocean, virtually overlooking the space of the Caribbean Sea. It is therefore not uncommon for the Caribbean coast of the Central American isthmus to be referred to as the Atlantic coast. In other words, the space that is proper to the Sea is not recognised as a border. Teaching the geography of the zone in that way led to an obscuring of that natural reality.

Gerhard Sandner presents this situation quite graphically: "The lower plains of the Caribbean coast of Central America remained, until the beginning of the 20th Century, an integral part of the extraction zone that must be seen as Circum-Caribbean, and at the same time, part of various provinces and countries, as the back and side" (emphasis added). [G.S. Centroamérica y el Caribe Occidental. Coyunturas, crisis y conflictos 1503-1984 (Central America and the Western Caribbean. Situations, crises and conflicts 1503-1984. Page 73]

One of the many objectives of that approach was to hide the process of spatial appropriation and exploitation of natural resources, which took place with a populational boost that consisted of slaves and labourers brought over from the West Indies, mainly from those islands that were English colonies at that time. But in the same way that the geographical belonging was hidden, so too was the working population, brought from abroad to work in the Western Caribbean. The African slaves and the Caribbean day labourers who followed were treated in such a way that they were practically excluded from the ethnic representation of the zone.

Thus, the Central American ethnocultural image was represented by the indigenous and European population, leaving out the new settlers. The societies on that coast belatedly began to proclaim their Caribbean identity. This occurred in the twentieth century, when the political and social processes of the Region facilitated the emergence of social movements protesting the ethno-Caribbean condition of those societies.

This is not the case of the island countries, whose history and geographic delimitation involved other factors that allowed them only  to perceive themselves  as Caribbean. It should be pointed out that although their name finds its origin in the sea that surrounds them, the Atlantic Ocean is recognised as an immediate geographic boundary. Nevertheless, history also conditioned the West Indian societies to not identify those opposite as part of the Caribbean Sea, and as a matter of fact, they appropriated the Caribbean name, excluding those on the other side from that title.

The notion of the Greater Caribbean, proposed within the ACS, puts an end, to a large extent, to the division of the zone into as many parts as there were metropolises established within the region. Thus Giancarlo Podigee (an ACS collaborator) is continually right when he says that the ACS is the only regional organisation that does not respond to the pattern left by colonial domination. Only in this Association do Caribbean peoples recognise themselves from a fundamental perspective and intend to break away from colonial divisionism, regaining geographic uniqueness and recognising themselves as something distinctive. In this Association, there is no difference among Central America, CARICOM, Spanish Caribbean, English Caribbean, French Caribbean or Dutch Caribbean.

In order for us to be able to continue deepening the consolidation of this co-operation space, it is crucial to adopt a new approach to interpreting the history and geography which, consistent with the conquering of the old mechanisms of domination and in keeping with the principles of the ACS, proclaims the Greater Caribbean as one unit, whose affinities and diversities form part of its strength.

Dr Rubén Silié Valdez is the Secretary General of the Association of Caribbean States. The views expressed are not necessarily the official views of the ACS. Comments can be sent to: mail@acs-aec.org