Having the cake and eating it

Within two generations (1958-2004), Malta went from the quest for integration (with the UK) to political and economic independence and to integration (within the EU). This path was driven by a mix of rational and emotional considerations relating, in particular, to nationalism, sovereignty and economic development. It is still an unexplored phase of Maltese history. What would have been our fate today had Malta chosen a different trajectory, remains moot.

Godfrey Baldacchino’s latest work, Island Enclaves: Offshoring Strategies, Creative Governance And Subnational Island Jurisdictions, provides provoking insights into the presumed demerits of shared sovereignty. He argues that colonialism is not necessarily a tragic subjugation. Some societies may prefer it to economic marginalisation or to having to forego important “rents” (or other assistance) from the metropole. Prof. Baldacchino notes the experience of these non-sovereign territories “obliges a reconsideration… of imperialism, colonialism and development”.

Prof. Baldacchino is a world citizen but in his world (small) island states occupy a special place. There is little about islands he has not delved into. He tells us that, presently, 43 out of 194 sovereign states are islands or archipelagos. Another 100 island or part-island territories (including Scotland, Sicily, Okinawa, Hong Kong, Macau and the Isle of Man) have settled for sub-national status. Prince Edward Island, which has been home to Prof. Baldacchino since 2003, forms part of the Canadian Federation.

This work is essentially a tribute to his present home. Prof. Baldacchino nowadays perceives federalism as an attractive form of governance as it recognises local differences and respects “constituent rights to integrity, autonomy and self determination”. Most sub-national island jurisdictions seem to be content with their current predicament, have growing populations and express few intentions of seeking full sovereignty.

Despite certain dangers and restrictions, being affiliated with a larger, richer state enables many of these islands “to have the cake and eat it too”. Generally speaking, these islands have achieved per capita incomes that are almost three times higher than those of sovereign small island states. They enjoy other advantages such as opportunities for better education, connectivity to a large labour market, significant internal tourism, military security and a safety net in the case of a financial or environmental crisis. These islands have often also been able to obtain preferential conditions from the metropolis with regard to citizenship rights, self-government, paradiplomacy and economic sovereignty. For example, the citizens of the Faroe Islands, a self-governing community within the Danish Kingdom, have separate passports. The Faroese are Danish citizens but they are not EU citizens.

Yet, this is not always a one-way relationship. The metropolis may exploit islands as distinctly managed zones for economic, commercial, military or security purposes. Many islands have a strategic value. The creation of 200-nautical mile, exclusive economic zones implies that international maritime law now grants special rights for the exploration and use of marine resources.

Prof. Baldacchino prefers to watch, observe, study and assess before making conclusions. He realises islands can be both paradise and prison, both heaven and hell. The sea simultaneously divides and unites islands with the rest of the world. Islands, by their very nature, tend to be open systems, needing to reach out to extend economies of scale and economies of scope.

Offshoring, according to Prof. Baldacchino, illustrates how economies can strategically reconfigure intimate relationships between identity, function and location. It is best achieved through the creative use of legislative, executive and judicial powers. A dynamic resource, jurisdiction can be exploited to chart an economic development strategy whereby the state sculptures “regulatory constructions” (enclaves) and governs “over a differentiated set of regimes”.

Enclaves are seen as the engineering of borders within borders where spaces are circumscribed and assigned specific powers and functions. Prof. Baldacchino adds that enclaves are “islands of sorts”, created to exploit niches which turn small size and insularity into net advantages. Given that islands are “geographically bounded”, they lend themselves to “forays into ‘spatial-judicial’ enclaving”. Such enclaves have myriad uses: think of detention camps, quarantine sites, offshore financial centres, tax havens, export processing zones, military bases, duty free zones, heritage and conservation parks.

Globalisation, with its compression of time and space, has led many to believe geography no longer matters. Prof. Baldacchino argues that, certainly in the case of islands, geography and identity re-enforce each other, even as globalisation blurs the distinction between domestic and foreign affairs. In the present global order, big states can still leverage their strength to wipe away gains made at their expense by smaller economies. Malta’s i-gaming industry is facing a severe challenge from such countries as France and Italy. Yet, Prof. Baldacchino notes, many small island states and territories have held their ground: they tend to successfully exploit their “power of being powerless” in order to achieve some form of competitive advantage.

Prof. Baldacchino remarks that “Gozo may have been (and may yet become) to Malta as Madeira has been to Portugal”. Who knows what future lies ahead? Much may depend on the path taken by Brussels but also on how Malta makes strategic use of its shared sovereignty to further its economic trajectory. We live in a dynamic, imperfect world. There are no easy answers but it is wise to keep asking questions.