Almost uniquely amongst the major regions of the modern world, the Caribbean is set up as a patchwork of often remarkably distinct cultures and histories — an abundance of mini-civilisations, if you like — which nevertheless insist on being addressed in some respects as a coherent whole.
Monday, February 02, 2026
Miskito Repellant
Tuesday, January 27, 2026
Stupor Mundi
Sunday, January 25, 2026
Dumped
The delightfully named Belizean village of Dump...
Wednesday, January 07, 2026
Peering beneath the hysteria...
The very persona of Trump generates a cloud of hysteria. Yet it is also true that he seems to understand this on some level and feed it, whether this can be described as strategic or not is debatable.
One is obliged to try to tune out of this hysteria, even if like paranoia, it is sometimes justified.
One also needs to tune out of all the yabbering ‘historians’ and other experts who are trying to impose precedents as templates to the present moment. Whatever use these could have as gateways to understanding is always limited. America has such as short-sighted view on history that it systematically re-treads the same old hackneyed material, over and over.
I might cite examples from the sixteenth, seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (or even earlier) which could even be more relevant — or insight-pregnant — right now, but it would still be irresponsible. Historical narratives can function like dogmas, a semi-transparent cutaneous layer over reality.
Trump has said and perhaps also done many outrageous things on the way towards finding an end to the war in Ukraine, yet behind all the unsettling noise, concrete positive steps continue to be made and the major European powers are accepting a heavy future load, which may have been the underlying goal all along from a US perspective.
I always saw Venezuela as Little Marco’s pet project. And we need no reminding that early 50s Guatemala was also the pet project of a sitting Secretary of State. The way Vance is so far distancing himself from the seizure of Maduro does seem to reinforce this impression.
Yet even if recent events go against the core MAGA belief system, there should be no doubt about the lures which have proved difficult to resist here: Caracas sits at the centre of a nexus of major US policy itches — narcos, migration, almost insanely blatant corruption driven by a criminal mafia which co-opts the organs of state (as here in Guatemala), support for Islamism, and a wormhole through which both Russians, Chinese and even Iranians have been able to blithely pursue strategic inroads right under Uncle Sam’s nose.
And for Marco it has been holding up late stage ‘Castro’. Remove the imports and other assistance from Venezuela while Putin simultaneously self-destructs and Cuba would thereafter depend largely on goodwill gestures from Mexico and Canada, neither of whom are major participants in the new ‘Great Game’ nor represent a significant extra-hemispherical threat to anything like the same extent.
Part of this new game, as being played by both the US and China is to make Putin think he is himself a key player, while slowly undermining him.
The seizure of those Russian-flagged tankers today was a step in this. Before making their move on Taiwan, China is much more likely to snatch a swathe of territory in the east that it disputes with Russia. If and when it does, Russia will exit rather like one of those unfortunate third-placed reality show contestants. (No doubt with a good deal of sour grapes that could turn into very toxic grapes indeed.)
The ‘international law’ system was born out of hope and resignation in the last century. It was always going to require nations to start acting like Japanese citizens, reflexively sticking to rules with only a minimal need for policing. And when that policing did take place it was occurring at the end of a Cold War where the world appeared unipolar (a fully-aligned NATO or the US) and the cop could be seen as in some ways benign, but even before the neocon over-reaches of the 'War on Terror’, the first big customers for the Hague were brought there by a bombing campaign over Serbia which had the effect of turning Putin against the West.
Right now the ‘other’ powers and mini-blocks around the three playing the top level game need to adapt to the evolving new situation fairly rapidly. NATO can still have some influence, because Trump wants benefits more than he wants costs and to some extent so does Xi. Only Putin still has this logic utterly back to front.
In simple terms the big picture world may have just four ways to go forward right now: 1) the late twentieth century platitudes of the ‘international law’ order, perhaps precisely just the same old platitudes, but some would strive for a world so multipolar and inherently peaceful and harmonious that everyone just buries all their weapons along with their greed and resentment 2) open, unabashed direct conflict between the blocks, probably leading to apocalypse 3) ‘globalise the intifada’, overthrow everything, destroy all wealth, imprison and kill everyone who disagrees, and go back to some sort of totalist medievalism across the globe (possibly seguing back into option three in the end) or 4) find a way to live within a world that has three or perhaps 2.5 great powers acting selfishly and sometimes amorally, clashing either through proxies or at a regionalised level, yet never walking away from the table where a deal of some sort awaits.
These are never going to be absolute forks in the road. Though option two in its most exclusive form tends to become one in the end. There’s some wriggle room for both head and heart, thought and action.
Other courses continue to be possible at every other level other than the top level, given the current social, political and financial constitution of humanity.
Maduro’s error, far more than his predecessor, was that he flaunted his position as a provocation in this situation where option four has been developing. He was, as they say, taking the piss.
Monday, December 29, 2025
Belize Backstory — Part One
The area that we now know as Belize first appeared on the map, by right, after Britain and Spain signed the Treaty of Versailles in 1783, bringing to a formal end the set of conflicts which had erupted around the American War of Independence.
I find this early period in the region's history — roughly eighty years until the establishment of British Honduras in 1862 as a Crown Colony — particularly interesting for a number of reasons.
Firstly, because the current government of Belize very clearly does not want it to be quite so interesting. One of their primary foreign policy objectives has been to join the wider push to stiff the present day British public for reparations for slavery, an institution abolished by Britain, somewhat inconveniently, timeline-wise, in 1833.
But the greater interest stems from the way the original, not-so-off-the-books community was formed out of a fusion of two very different territorial projects, neither of which were strictly 'colonial', at least not in the sense commonly understood, and around which there would be considerable disagreements — aaaarguments — and tensions from the get go, all of which were heavily informed by the recent traumas around consent up in North America.
Prior to Versailles, there had existed a tiny, essentially autonomous community of so-called Baymen operating a base camp around the mouth of the Belize River. At the most around 100 individuals of European descent and 300 or so African slaves.
There is evidence to suggest that many of these were former buccaneers who had been using the cayes as cover for attacks on Spanish shipping, but as demand for logwood and then mahogany boomed across the Atlantic, they swerved into the straight and narrow (though albeit still extra-legal) logging lifestyle. By 1730 the Belize River operation was the main source of such wood for the British furniture market.
A small settlement of fishermen and smugglers had remained on St George's Caye. It would be hard to overestimate the importance of contraband in the local grey economy, for both major European powers in the area were attempting to maintain strict commercial monopolies accompanied by a system of duties, and during peacetime at least, the locals — both Spanish and English-speaking — were partial to a bit of inter-community commerce.
Meanwhile, Britain's largest nearby colony on Jamaica had been pursuing a plan of encroachment around the Bay of Honduras, holding Roatán for a time and establishing a small settlement on the coast opposite the island, known as Black River (Rio Tinto).
The individuals involved in this activity came to be known as the Shoremen.
Unlike the aforementioned Baymen, they were a 'motley crew' — an ethnically-blended band of characters functioning at the very margins of the grand enterprise: freed slaves, zambos (a mix of indigenous and African peoples), former Irish indentured labourers, small scale farmers, traders, rum-brewers, shipbuilders and smugglers, plus some of the equally miscegenated settlers from further down in what had come to be known as Mosquitia (now eastern Nicaragua).
Britain tended then to refer to its overseas territories collectively as a Commonwealth as opposed to an Empire and these Shoremen were, one might say, a bit too common for the Commonwealth.
The war which Versailles settled had seen them displaced from the northern shore of what is now Honduras, so Britain hoped to fling the Baymen and the Shoremen together into a single entity to be known henceforth as the Bay of Honduras settlement, perhaps even under a single administration linked to London indirectly via Jamaica.
Though, as this was not to be a colony* it could not have a Governor, only a military superintendent whose primary role was to act as a go-between in maintaining the terms of the treaty. This did not grant sovereignty to either Spain or Britain.
The Baymen had possessed the basis of a set of rules to live by since 1765, the so-called Burnaby's Code, named after the British Admiral who helped regularise relations between these former buccaneers.
It maintained more than a whiff of pirate democracy and along with establishing guidelines for meetings, the election of officials and stipulating punishments for theft, it also set up a swear box for penalising those guilty of public profanities. (A biggish box, one might presume.)
Although perhaps not consistently imposed as a system of government, Burnaby's Code was cherished by the Baymen as part of their identity as a long-established, independent encampment, before all the newcomers turned up.
The Baymen wanted more than the Versailles document had given them, specifically the right to cut mahogany and not just the logwood, plus the right to fish and farm. They also wanted a swathe of territory to the south of the river for further settlement.
The situation was to be finessed in 1786 by the Convention of London, via which the Baymen got some of the things they wanted, but ended up with a keen sense of betrayal by distant diplomats, for Spain had regained formal sovereignty in exchange for the mahogany rights and the (effectively leased) territorial expansion.
And whilst farming was also permitted, the Baymen would not be allowed to participate in the Caribbean plantation economy (tobacco, sugar, coffee etc.)
* Although it does seem that the British government contemplated establishing a colony of the penal variety in the Bay for the transportation of convicted criminals, but the Baymen threw such a tantrum about this that it was eventually concluded that this sort of riffraff would have to dispatched down to Australia instead. Musket ball dodged.
Tuesday, December 16, 2025
Sirât (2025)
My alternative title for the film would indeed be Bad Trip. (V suggests The Wrong Trip).
Oliver Laxe's chosen title refers to an apparently Islamic concept — a bridge leading at once to paradise and perdition — yet this seems a bit crowbarred on to me.
It won the Jury prize at Cannes, yet Peter Bradshaw described it in the Guardian as a 'path to nowhere', ending frustratingly in a 'wildness of un-meaning.'
Yet the thing is that it does begin as a journey to somewhere, which only around the midpoint abruptly segues into this un-meaningful trip to nowhere, and some people are undoubtedly going to connect with that, even as they discover it to be existentially rather jarring.
Having invited us to invest our curiosity in various narrative hooks (a missing person, a fun fiesta somewhere over the next hill, and a rapidly declining North African and possibly wider geopolitical backdrop) we reach a point where any resolution has suddenly turned inconceivable.
And this is either going to seem like one big cosmic 'meh', or it will do something to you like it did to me, which is send me to sleep thinking about many things I have not thought about in a very long time.
It does seem like a masterful piece of film-making, expended on what also seems to be some very un-masterful storytelling.
How deliberate and useful this latter aspect of it is will be a highly subjective take-out I suspect. The characters are sketchy and no effort has been made to fill them out better via dialogue. They are mostly interesting as a collective.
Even before the film's sudden mid-life switch presents itself as a possible metaphor for the journey that we all make, Laxe has made it obvious that all of these individuals have already chosen to swerve away from the main road before we first see them coming together in the desert.
There's something orientalist about all this, at least in precisely the same way that the stories of Paul Bowles are orientalist and I don't mind it there at all, but I think I would mind it if a European director used the landscape around here in a similar way to make a perhaps trite point about first worlders adrift in a hostile, near-allegorical landscape.
It has actually been attempted and the only time I enjoyed it was Gareth Edwards's calling card, Monsters — which, like this, also had a fabulous score. And this particular region has been used before, tritely, in Babel.)
Wednesday, December 10, 2025
Nelson and the Kingdom of Mosquitia
This map (on which Guatemala appears decidedly Chilean) is the one that that lay on the table of Lord George Germain, 1st Viscount Sackville, Secretary of State of the Colonies in London, 1775-82.
Sunday, December 07, 2025
Sugar Rush
England drawing Ghana in Group L prompts me to tell a little tale from history...one of those of the 'Hollywood wouldn't touch it with a barge pole' variety.







