AH Challenge: A Surviving West Indies Federation

For those of you wanting Belize and Guyana and the Bahamas in, not only did the OTL WIF decide it'd try to recruit them, but I can find a link to a British Parliament debate on reviving the WIF in the '70s with Guyana being interested in joining a revival...so the idea's not ASB.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Why wouldn't an adaptation of the Australian Constitution (six senators each is a little much, silly Aussies) function? Legislatively, I think the lower house would have to be large enough for Jamaica to be proportionally represented and the Senate would have to be strong enough for the small islands to feel protected (essentially the Connecticut Compromise by another name). Furthermore, having the capital in Trinidad or moving it to Jamaica would be equally counterproductive. I'd suggest Barbados, which is both well-developed and small enough that it can't dominate the Federation. On trade and migration, I think that should have been an exclusive competence of the Federation, maybe with a phase-in period akin to the abolition of the slave trade in the US to allow internal markets to adjust.
The idea bout a sort of Connecticut Compromise/Australian model working out is a neat one. While I think that Barbados is a good candidate for the location of the capital, it is rather removed. Obviously not with regards to the Lesser Antilles, but I do recall reading that the distance of Jamaica from the core of the Federation created difficulties.

Perhaps somewhere in Saint Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla, as those islands are more or less equidistant from T&T and Jamaica, the Federation's two power centers. Maybe Basseterre could be the capital, though that might anger Nevisians as they tended to resent Kittitians for "neglecting" Nevis, so perhaps Charlestown would work.

And not to beat a dead horse, but we reallyneed to address this budget problem since that seems to have been the major issue.
For those of you wanting Belize and Guyana and the Bahamas in, not only did the OTL WIF decide it'd try to recruit them, but I can find a link to a British Parliament debate on reviving the WIF in the '70s with Guyana being interested in joining a revival...so the idea's not ASB.
I'd very much like it if you could provide that link! :D
 
Probably not much, I would imagine that it would still function pretty much as it does. Even though Guyana probably wouldn't be part of the federation they would still contribute players to the side. Just as Rhodesia did to the South African cricket side pre-1970 even though there was no political or economic union between the two.

Marius is right, it wouldn't affect it at all. In 1960-1961 the West Indies cricket team toured Australia with Worrell as captain and included in the team were 3 players from British Guiana (Guyana): Lance Gibbs, Rohan Kanhai and Joseph Solomon. By this time though the West Indies Federation had already been established for almost 2 years by that point.

Throw in the fact that Forbes Burnham became Premier of British Guiana in 1964 and was a passionate supporter of the federal concept (even tabling and arguing in support of a resolution for British Guiana to join in 1958) and there is a very good chance that British Guiana ends up joining between 1964 and 1966.
 

Wolfpaw

Banned
Marius is right, it wouldn't affect it at all. In 1960-1961 the West Indies cricket team toured Australia with Worrell as captain and included in the team were 3 players from British Guiana (Guyana): Lance Gibbs, Rohan Kanhai and Joseph Solomon. By this time though the West Indies Federation had already Throw in the fact that Forbes Burnham became Premier of British Guiana in 1964 and was a passionate supporter of the federal concept (even tabling and arguing in support of a resolution for British Guiana to join in 1958) and there is a very good chance that British Guiana ends up joining between 1964 and 1966.
This is a very interesting concept. If we have the UK spend more time developing a Caribbean customs union and gradually moving towards federalism and Guyana is incorporated, Forbes sounds like he would be the perfect candidate for the Federation's first prime minister.
 
Well the best choice for a West indian PM would probably be Jamaicas first PM, Alexander Bustamante. By the 1950's he was one of the most experienced and well liked politicans in the West Indes and did initially support the West Indes Federation (but later came to oppose it for the reasons already mentioned). The only problem that might arise is is extreme opposition to any form of colonial rule. In OTL he pushed for severing all political ties with Britain, which when it eventually happened cause huge politcal problems for Jamacia and much of the rest of the british West Indes. If he can be persuaded to calm his rehtoric down and take a more sensible approach, he may be just the man.

Russell

That might be dicey. Not because Bustamante wouldn't be a good man for the job (I do wonder if his "ASAP decolonization" was at all effected by Suez like so many others), but because that might be seen as giving too much power to Jamaica, especially with Kingston as one of the federal capitals. One of the main problems with the Federation--apart from T&T and Jamaican discontentment--was that the smaller island nations were afraid that too much power would be concentrated in the big islands. I think that very well may have played a large part in a Barbadian getting the premiership.

Based off the information available in books such as The British Caribbean: From the decline of colonialism to the end of Federation by Elisabeth Wallace, Bustamante would actually be the worst man for the job. From what I read he was disinterested in (though not yet opposed to) the federal concept from at least 1947 when he represented Jamaica at a conference on federation held in Montego Bay, Jamaica. I believe it was at that conference that the initial allocation of seats between the provinces in the federal parliament was agreed to and Bustamante went along with it....only to complain about it by 1961-1962. The impression isn't given that he paid much attention actually. Who knows, had he actually given more focus on the Conference and its agreements then things might have been very, very different. Of course, by then Bustamante was apparently showing inclinations towards favouring being a "master in his own house" which is borne out by the fact that in 1944 he became the first (unofficial) Chief Minister and at the same time didn't resign as head of his trade union (for which he was criticized in the local press) and then further combined those roles with being Mayor of Kingston in 1947 and 1948.

In addition, Bustamante's federal party (the Democratic Labour Party) lost the federal elections 19-26 to his cousin Manley's federal party (the West Indies Federal Labour Party). So there is no way Bustamante could become Prime Minister unless either Democratic Labour wins or unless Bustamante was in Federal Labour. Of course, maybe if Bustamante had paid attention to the issue of seat allocation and got an increase in the share of seats for Jamaica (and Trinidad & Tobago) then maybe, just maybe his Democratic Labour would have won a majority. The original parliament had 45 seats with 17 for Jamaica and 10 for Trinidad. The proposed changes by 1961 would have seen a 64 seat parliament with 31 seats for Jamaica and 14 seats for Trinidad. As Democratic Labour had won majorities in those two provinces in the 1958 elections (11 out of 17 and 6 out of 10) there is a good chance that had the parliament been 64 seats to start with then the DLP might have won say 18-20 seats from Jamaica and 8-9 seats from Trinidad. Then there might have been a 33-31 majority for the DLP. It would still require Bustamante to actually run for federal election though (which he didn't in OTL and neither did the two main leaders in the Federal Labour Party - partly due to some rule whereby persons couldn't sit in both a federal and provincial legislature I think from what I remember of Wallace's book). Otherwise a fella named Ashford Sinanan from Trinidad would have become the West Indian prime minister.

I suppose if Bustamante had seen the federation as path to even more power and had been interested in strengthening the powers of the federal parliament from the get-go (as well as showing real interest in the allocation of seats between the provinces, perhaps in alliance with his counterparts from Trinidad and Barbados) then we would have seen a slightly different Bustamante leading Democratic Labour to win the federal elections and becoming prime minister. After that though it's hard to say what would have happened. IIRC the DLP favoured avoiding high taxation through the use of foreign loans which isn't really going to put any country on a path to development unless those loans are going to be used to invest in something that will generate significant revenue within a fairly short space of time.

Another possibility would be to have Bustamante interested in gaining federal power and thus becoming an advocate for a stronger federal parliament and also advocating for more seats for Jamaica and Trinidad and then losing the federal elections (perhaps narrowly by 35-29 or 34-30). If his rival Manley then continues and wins the 1963 elections (as well as his party winning any elections in Jamaica in 1964) then maybe Bustamante would end up ceding authority in his party to a leader from one of the constituent local parties that had still managed to retain some electoral success (such as in Barbados). By then the platform of the DLP would have definitely changed (as it would for any party that wishes to win elections) and perhaps by 1968 the DLP would have won the federal elections. Checking the Wiki Genocide, by then ill-health would have retired Bustamante from politics (1967) and his cousin Norman Manley would have been within a year of retiring from politics and dying (1969). Perhaps an electoral loss in 1968 would have forced Manley's early retirement. By then of course, Guyana under Burnham would have probably joined and perhaps the Bahamas under a guy named Lyden Pindling (who was apparently in favour of federation and became premier of the Bahamas in 1967). Bahamas was strange in not really favouring federation at the time according to online sources (Wiki and elsewhere), they participated in the 1960 West Indies Federation Games with a future prime minister of the Bahamas, Perry Christie, participating in the track and field events. British Honduras/Belize may or may not have joined then. A stronger federation might have meant a stronger economic situation to which Belizeans would have been drawn to. If the situation with Guatemala heated up into armed conflict (as it threatened to do in 1948, 1957-1958, 1970 and 1975 according to the website Britain's Small Wars) then perhaps a "Falklands in the Caribbean" type situation would spell the end the party and politicians who supported closer ties with Guatemala and the rest of Central America. Throw in the 1961 hurricane that devastated Belize City and forced the building of a new, inland capital (perhaps by having an a West Indies federation that had been given more financial support by London and with funds and aid directed to Belize through the West Indies in 1961 after the hurricane and in the mid-1960s for the development of a new, inland capital) as well as the 1961-1965 negotiations between Britain and Guatemala that resulted in an agreement that was opposed by the great majority of Belizeans and pro-federation sentiment might win out in Belize by 1965-1972. Especially by 1968 when the UN's Economic Commission of Latin America reported that Belize was not suited to join the Central American Common Market due to it's Commonwealth trading patterns and preferences (thus ensuring Belize would only join regional organizations with majority Commonwealth membership).
 
This is a very interesting concept. If we have the UK spend more time developing a Caribbean customs union and gradually moving towards federalism and Guyana is incorporated, Forbes sounds like he would be the perfect candidate for the Federation's first prime minister.

Doubt he would be the first. He would have been 35 in 1958 and I get the impression that many politicians in the Caribbean don't become leaders until they are past the age of 40, although looking through Guyana's list of leaders I see that Burnham's chief rival (Chedi Jagan) was 35 when he became chief minister of British Guiana, but that might be more of an exception. Forbes could be the second, third, or more likely the fourth if Forbes brought British Guiana into a federation in 1964 and then maybe ran for election in 1968 (with that election being won by the DLP instead of the WIFLP to which Burnham would like have joined) before leading his federal party to victory in 1973 or 1978 (probably after 1973 if Eric Williams leads the party by then and decides to retire around 1977 and handing over the prime-ministership and leadership of the party to Burnham).

Roughly it could go something like this:

1. Norman Manley 1958-1968 WIFLP

2. Errol Barrow 1968-1973 or 1978 DLP (lead the Barbadian DLP in government in Barbados until 1976)

3. Eric Williams 1973-1977 or 1973-1980 or 1978-1980 WIFLP (lead the local Trinidadian constituent of what was the WIFLP and was prime minister of Trinidad until his death in 1980, so he could either win in 1973 or 1978 and then either retire in 1977 or die in 1980)

4. Forbes Burnham 1977-1983 or 1985 or 1980-1983 or 1980-1985 (if he wins a second term but then dies in 1985) WIFLP

5. Who knows? Probably someone from the DLP or some other party that might have been founded and wrested opposition from the DLP. At some point though I expect a woman would become prime minister. Maybe even that lady from.....Dominica, Eugenia Charles...probably in the opposition camp in the early 1980s. I would also expect that at some point after the 1970s someone of East Indian descent would become prime minister.


In any event this would cause a lot of butterflies:

- No Jonestown. Without Guyana being dirt-poor and thus easily exploited by those waving cash along with immigration being controlled at a federal level (with the less socialist DLP in power in the 1970s maybe) Jim Jones and his followers would not have found Guyana so favourable and might have gone elsewhere...maybe to Canada (one of the original options) or maybe to Suriname or in Central America somewhere (Costa Rica, Panama, Guatemala, Honduras, El Salvador, Nicaragua). Maybe even Colombia.

- No Operation Urgent Fury. The coup in Grenada (if not butterflied away by 20 years of different economic and political development) would have been put down by federal forces (police and military).
 
Last edited:

Wolfpaw

Banned
Well, I was thinking that the Federation itself would be created later, though a customs union and moves towards federalization would start in the late '50s. Perhaps in the late '60s the Federation is granted full independence. How would this effect things? I looked into Manley and I agree he is a great choice, but as you said he died in '69, so that would only give him a year or two at the helm. Would he serve for that short time or would Barrow become PM right out of the gate?
 
Well, I was thinking that the Federation itself would be created later, though a customs union and moves towards federalization would start in the late '50s. Perhaps in the late '60s the Federation is granted full independence.

From the book I got the impression that it would have been better for a federation to actually have started earlier. The earlier proposals for federation were for a strong federal government and (at the time) the proposals were far more progressive than the systems of government in the colonies at the time (remember some of them were Crown Colonies and universal suffrage hadn't been instituted in any of them yet). With the advances in local governance granted by Britain to all of its non-Dominion colonies in the 1940s, some of the eventual provinces of the federation ended up with a system of governance that was probably better or more advanced than the system instituted for the federal government. So it would seem that either a federation should have been formed earlier (say before World War II) and a customs union formed with it so that by the 1950s all the kinks are worked out OR the proposals for the governance of the federation are updated in the 1940s to take into account the more advanced constutional advancements of some of the colonies in the 1940s (this would be a Bustamante aims for ultimate high office POD) OR gradual moves to federalization along with a customs union/free movement are implemented in the 1920s-1930s with the aim of complete federalization by the late 1950s/early 1960s.

How would this effect things? I looked into Manley and I agree he is a great choice, but as you said he died in '69, so that would only give him a year or two at the helm. Would he serve for that short time or would Barrow become PM right out of the gate?

Well if Manley died in 1969 whilst in office or resigned shortly before he died then just as in any other Westminster system, the person who takes over leadership of the governing party (if that person also happens to be in parliament and command the majority in parliament) would become prime minister....unless his successor decides to call early elections as a result of his death. So I doubt Barrow would have become prime minister out of the gate in such a scenario since Barrow would have been in the DLP not the WIFLP. So Barrow wouldn't become PM unless a new election was called, but then it would all depend on the election cycles anyway. With 5 year cycles if the first election was 1958 the subsequent elections would be due no later than 1963, 1968, 1973, 1978, 1983, 1988, 1993, 1998, 2003, 2008 and 2013. If Manley was around until 1969 in a federation that formed later then a new election being called might depend on when then last one was held. If the last election was held in 1968 they might not bother with a new election, but if the last election was in 1967 or 1965-1966 then they might just call an early election.
 
The idea bout a sort of Connecticut Compromise/Australian model working out is a neat one. While I think that Barbados is a good candidate for the location of the capital, it is rather removed. Obviously not with regards to the Lesser Antilles, but I do recall reading that the distance of Jamaica from the core of the Federation created difficulties.

Perhaps somewhere in Saint Christopher-Nevis-Anguilla, as those islands are more or less equidistant from T&T and Jamaica, the Federation's two power centers. Maybe Basseterre could be the capital, though that might anger Nevisians as they tended to resent Kittitians for "neglecting" Nevis, so perhaps Charlestown would work.


I'd very much like it if you could provide that link! :D

Well if the Connecticut Compromise/Federalist Paper No. 43/Australian model (and even the Canadian model with Ottawa being chosen over Toronto/York and Montreal) were to be followed strictly then Basseterre (as the capital of St. Christopher) and Charlestown (as the capital of Nevis) couldn't be chosen as both were already capital cities. Rather a different non-capital town (like Ottawa) would have to be chosen or an entirely new city (like Washington D.C. or to some extent Canberra) built. Looking at some maps, maybe Newcastle on the north coast of Nevis, Middle Island on St. Kitts or St. Paul's on St. Kitts would be sufficient. Another consideration though would be communication and travel. Don't know what travel to those rather remote towns would have been like on those islands in the 1950s and 1960s (much less the 1920s to 1940s). Checking around I see there is an airport at Newcastle (the main airport for the island of Nevis apparently) that was once known as Newcastle Airport. Not sure when it was built though. However on the island Antigua (which was probably more of a air transportation hub than St. Kitts and definitely more than Nevis) there is the international airport now called as the V.C. Bird International Airport but which was built in 1941 (probably as part of the destroyer-for-bases agreement or related agreements) as Coolidge Airfield and was then upgraded to become Coolidge Air Force Base in 1948 before being closed in 1949 due to budgetary cutbacks within the US military and became Coolidge International Airport in the same year. Nearby there is a town (or scattered settlement or locality) called Coolidge, so maybe this could have been a potential capital site as well.
 
By that do you mean a Federal Commonwealth?

Australian constitutional model of house of representatives and senate (which is based off the American model) as well the Australian model of having a capital city that wasn't already a major/established city or near one (so Canberra was chose as being about 100 miles or more from Sydney).
 
Top