What did we bring home?

2026-03-15 - 02:08

Mickela Panday The Government has described Trinidad and Tobago’s participation in the Shield of the Americas Summit as a strategic success. Perhaps it will be. But after the speeches end and the photographs fade from the headlines, citizens are entitled to ask a simple question: What exactly did Trinidad and Tobago bring home? The recent summit, hosted by US President Donald Trump, brought together leaders from across the hemisphere to discuss regional security, organised crime and the growing influence of transnational criminal networks. Among those attending was Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister. For a country like ours, participation in high-level international discussions is not merely symbolic. The Caribbean sits along trafficking routes linking South America to North American markets. The drugs, weapons and illicit money that move along these corridors shape the security challenges facing small island states across the region. From illegal firearms trafficking to the rise of organised criminal networks, the Caribbean is confronting threats that no single country can address on its own. Cooperation with international partners, particularly the United States, has long been a pillar of the region’s security framework. It therefore makes sense that Trinidad and Tobago would participate in hemispheric discussions aimed at strengthening cooperation against these threats. But participation alone is not a strategy. When governments return from major international gatherings, the public is entitled to understand what was achieved. In a statement to Parliament following the summit, the Prime Minister outlined several potential benefits, including enhanced intelligence sharing, joint maritime operations and expanded security cooperation with partners across the hemisphere. She also reported meetings with senior United States officials on matters ranging from regional security to energy cooperation and trade. Those engagements may prove valuable. However, international security partnerships are not symbolic gestures. They involve commitments, strategic, operational and financial. Beyond broad statements about cooperation, the public still knows little about the specific role Trinidad and Tobago will play within this new initiative. While the operational details of security cooperation must remain confidential, the broader framework of the coalition should not be. Citizens do not need to know sensitive tactical plans, but they do deserve to understand the nature of the commitments their country is entering into. The Shield of the Americas initiative appears aimed at strengthening cooperation across the hemisphere to combat powerful criminal organisations, particularly drug cartels that operate across borders. In Latin America, these organisations have grown so powerful that they pose a direct challenge to state authority. The Caribbean may experience these dynamics differently, but it is certainly not immune. The region lies within the same trafficking corridors that connect South America with markets further north. The consequences are visible in the form of illegal firearms, gang violence and criminal enterprises that exploit small countries. Greater regional cooperation, including intelligence sharing, coordinated maritime surveillance and stronger law enforcement partnerships, could therefore play an important role in addressing these threats. At the same time, initiatives of this scale must be carefully designed if they are to succeed. Security cooperation in the Americas has historically worked best when it attracts broad participation across the region. Durable frameworks depend not only on leadership from major powers but also on the confidence of smaller states that their interests are being taken seriously. Notably, several of the hemisphere’s largest and most influential countries, including Brazil, Mexico and Colombia, were not represented at the summit. Their absence does not diminish the importance of the discussions that took place, but it highlights a reality of regional diplomacy: lasting security arrangements tend to succeed when they bring together the widest possible coalition of countries. Clarity is essential. Announcements about cooperation against organised crime are encouraging, but effective partnerships require clear mechanisms, how intelligence will be shared, how law enforcement agencies will coordinate their efforts and how resources will be sustained over time. Without that operational clarity, even well-intentioned initiatives can struggle to translate political commitments into measurable results. None of this diminishes the importance of the United States as a partner in regional security. Caribbean countries have long benefited from cooperation with Washington in areas such as maritime security, intelligence sharing and law enforcement training. For Trinidad and Tobago, maintaining strong and constructive relationships with international partners is essential. But diplomacy must always be guided by a clear sense of national interest. When our leaders participate in international summits, the objective should never be simply to attend. It should be to advocate for the priorities that matter most to our country: stronger action against illegal firearms trafficking into the Caribbean, meaningful support for regional security institutions and practical cooperation that strengthens the capacity of our own law enforcement agencies. The Shield of the Americas summit may yet prove to be an important initiative for the region. But diplomacy is not measured in communiqués or summit photographs. For the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago, it is measured in safer communities, stronger institutions and a Government that approaches international partnerships with clear purpose and transparency. Until the country understands what was agreed, what was gained and what comes next, one question remains. What exactly did Trinidad and Tobago bring home? Mickela Panday Political Leader of the Patriotic Front and Attorney at Law