Rethinking Foreign Policy – The Case for Tech Diplomacy

By Deodat Maharaj

News Americas, Gebze, Türkiye, Fri. Jan. 23, 2026: The drivers of economic growth, innovation, and societal change are no longer solely wealthy nation-states and global institutional actors, but increasingly the technology companies. The so-called “Magnificent Seven”-Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Meta, Tesla, and Alphabet (Google) – now dominate the global economy, redefining traditional thinking of economic power and influence. By the end of 2025, these seven companies had an estimated market value of US$22.2 trillion.

U.S. President Donald Trump (R) speaks to Apple CEO Tim Cook (L) as he attends a reception for business leaders at the World Economic Forum (WEF) Annual Meeting on January 21, 2026 in Davos, Switzerland. The annual meeting of political and business leaders comes amid rising tensions between the United States and Europe over a range of issues, including Trump’s vow to acquire Greenland, a semi-autonomous Danish territory. (Photo by Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

NVIDIA alone stood at US$5 trillion. This is more than Japan’s GDP, the world’s third-largest economy, which is US$4.4 trillion according to the International Monetary Fund. In terms of global reach, Meta, formerly Facebook, has more than 3 billion users. Over 2 billion people use it every day.  

This concentration of wealth has profound implications. Breakthrough technologies – artificial intelligence, cloud computing, digital platforms – are reshaping industries, creating new value chains, and generating immense opportunities. Yet, most developing countries, especially the Least Developed Countries, (LDCs), are being left out.

The scale of this digital divide reveals a critical gap: the world’s poor, small, and vulnerable countries are not just lagging in access to technology; they lack meaningful influence in how these technologies are governed, deployed, and regulated. Their exclusion from the emerging architecture for global technology governance will only deepen the already stark divide between rich and poor countries.

Addressing this imbalance requires innovative approaches. Traditional diplomacy and development strategies, while indispensable, are no longer sufficient on their own. To truly harness frontier technologies and ensure their people benefit from global innovation, technology must be an integral part of the diplomatic arsenal of any developing country. Tech diplomacy represents a holistic framework that integrates technology engagement, governance, and investment directly into a country’s foreign policy thrust.

Some countries have already embraced Tech Diplomacy.  Denmark was the first to formally recognize the technology industry as a foreign policy priority in 2017. By appointing a dedicated Tech Ambassador, it acknowledged that engagement with major technology companies requires the same diplomatic attention and strategic seriousness as with traditional state and multilateral actors.  

Brazil, through the appointment of a Tech Ambassador and the creation of more than 70 technology-focused sections across its embassies worldwide, has built a global network designed to facilitate technology transfer, attract investment, and strengthen international innovation cooperation.

Kenya offers a great African example. Through initiatives such as the TechPlomacy Connective and the appointment of a Special Envoy on Technology, Kenya has positioned itself as an active participant in global AI and digital governance. This approach has secured Kenya a leadership role in key international technology fora and enabled direct engagement with both global technology companies and multilateral institutions. Kenya’s example underscores how developing countries can shape technological change rather than simply respond to it.

So, what are the lessons learnt and a reasonable approach for developing countries, especially the 44 LDCs and capacity-constrained island states like those in the Caribbean and Pacific?

To start with, there must be a clear recognition of the importance of integrating Tech Diplomacy in the existing foreign policy architecture with a dedicated focal point and team. This facilitates participation in global technology governance, and ensures meaningful engagement on the standards, norms, and regulatory frameworks that shape emerging technologies. Without their presence at the table, the rules governing artificial intelligence, cross-border data flows, digital platforms, and digital trade will continue to be defined primarily by those who already hold economic and technological power. This will further entrench existing inequalities.

Second, engagement with technology companies is essential. Governments need structured, sustained, and strategic dialogue with global tech firms. Such engagement allows countries to build trust; co-design solutions tailored to local needs; and leverage innovation in support of national development priorities. Most importantly, getting information at the earliest will help place you at the front of the line in accessing opportunities.

Third, investment in digital futures must go beyond basic connectivity. Developing countries, including LDCs, require targeted investment in digital infrastructure, human capital, and innovation ecosystems. In a challenging financial environment, the technology companies have the requisite financing. Here again, Tech Diplomacy can help. With a forensic focus on making investment cases to businesses in the technology and innovation space, countries can create jobs, stimulate entrepreneurship, and begin to effectively compete in the global digital economy. India is a great example of success in attracting massive private investments in this space.

In summary, a world where technological leadership is becoming a defining factor of economic and geopolitical influence, poor, small, and weak countries need to lift their game by recognising this reality and becoming active participants. Tech Diplomacy, once leveraged effectively, gives these countries and their people the chance they deserve.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Deodat Maharaj is a national of Trinidad and Tobago and is presently the Managing Director of the United Nations Technology Bank for the Least Developed Countries. He can be contacted at: deodat.maharaj@un.org

RELATED: The AI Revolution And Least Developed Nations

Against The Odds: A Guyana Born Centenarian And Current Health Care

By Ron Cheong

News Americas, TORONTO, Canada, Fri. Jan. 23, 2026: Giving birth in a developing nation a hundred years ago was an act of quiet bravery. In British Guiana in the 1920s, childbirth carried an ever-present risk: infant mortality stood at a staggering 159 deaths per 1,000 live births. Mothers laboured without modern diagnostics, antibiotics, blood banks, or neonatal care. Survival often depended on little more than resilience, luck, and the skill of a handful of dedicated doctors. Against those odds, my aunt Pauline (Irma) Persaud was born and survived, along with three of her siblings.

Guyana-born Centenarian Pauline (Irma) Persaud, c. (contributed image)

This week, she reached the extraordinary age of 100. Frail in body now, her mind remains remarkably sharp. Even in her late nineties, she could correct me when I misremembered a family detail. At 100, her mental clarity endures, though the energy to converse has understandably waned.

Yet, when I asked her what she could recall of her earliest years, she surprised me. She believes the attending physician at her birth was Dr. Bissessar. She remembers him fondly, especially an image that has stayed with her for nearly a century: the doctor placing her younger sister – my mother – on a swing and gently rocking her. My mother, she said, adored him.

What my aunt did not know is that Dr. Bissessar’s grandson and I have been lifelong close friends. For decades, neither of us was aware of this earlier connection. It is a coincidence that quietly bridges generations – one life, one family, and one country’s long arc of medical progress.

A Century Later: Measuring The Distance Traveled

Fast-forward to 2025. Guyana’s infant mortality rate stands at approximately 24 deaths per 1,000 live births. While still higher than in developed countries, the difference from a century ago is profound. Behind that single statistic lies improved antenatal care, trained midwives, vaccination programs, emergency obstetric services, and access – however uneven – to modern medical facilities.

Healthcare progress, of course, is never linear. Guyana’s system has experienced periods of neglect, underinvestment, and uneven leadership. But the past five years mark a notable inflection point.

Rebuilding The Foundations: Infrastructure And Access

One of the most visible changes has been the rapid expansion of healthcare infrastructure. Several new regional hospitals have been brought on stream or advanced significantly, including facilities in Kato, Lethem, and Moruca – areas long underserved due to geography and historical neglect. These are not symbolic projects; they are functional hospitals intended to reduce the need for dangerous and costly medical travel.

In communities such as Mahdia, improved health facilities have dramatically improved access to primary and emergency care. Across the country, dozens of health posts and clinics have been built or rehabilitated, bringing services closer to hinterland and rural populations where outcomes were once predictably poor.

For a nation still grappling with vast distances and uneven population distribution, bricks and mortar matter. But buildings alone are not enough.

Leadership And Stewardship: A Stark Contrast

Under the stewardship of Minister of Health Dr. Frank Anthony, the health sector has demonstrated coherence, urgency, and a clear sense of direction. This stands in sharp contrast to the dismal performance under a previous administration.

That earlier period was marked by shortages, industrial unrest, deteriorating facilities, and a worrying absence of strategic planning. Morale among healthcare workers sank, and public confidence eroded. The system did not merely stagnate – it regressed.

Dr. Anthony’s return to the ministry brought immediate stabilization and a longer-term reform agenda. Procurement improved, staffing challenges were addressed more systematically, and partnerships that had long been discussed but never realized were finally activated.

COVID-19: A Defining Stress Test

Nothing tested Guyana’s healthcare leadership more severely than the Covid-19 pandemic. The contrast between administrations could not have been clearer.

Dr. Anthony’s response was swift, science-driven, and largely transparent. Guyana moved quickly to secure vaccines, expand testing capacity, and communicate public-health guidance. Mistakes were inevitable, but course corrections were made.

Covid exposed weaknesses everywhere, but it also demonstrated what competent leadership could achieve under pressure.

Vision 2030: Leapfrogging Into Modern Care

Today’s reforms are framed within a broader national blueprint: Vision 2030. The ambition is unapologetically bold: to transform Guyana’s public health system into a modern, accessible, and resilient one.

Central to this vision is “leapfrogging”: using digital health tools and targeted investments to bypass outdated systems entirely. Initiatives include electronic health records, telemedicine for hinterland communities, and dramatically faster diagnostics. The national pathology laboratory, for example, has reduced test turnaround times from months to days – a change that saves lives quietly but decisively.

Partnerships underpin this effort. Collaborations with Mount Sinai, the World Bank, and others are helping modernize infrastructure, train healthcare workers, and strengthen pandemic preparedness through a “One Health” approach that integrates human, animal, and environmental health.

Maternal and child health, cancer care, and workforce development are explicit priorities. Immunization rates have improved significantly, malaria cases have fallen sharply, and diagnostic capacity has expanded nationwide.

One Life, One Century, One Measure Of Progress

My aunt was born into a world where survival itself was uncertain. That she reached adulthood -let alone 100 – is a testament to personal resilience and the quiet dedication of doctors like Dr. Bissessar, working with limited tools but immense commitment.

Her life also offers a human measure of national progress. From an era when infant death was tragically common to one where modern healthcare is increasingly expected, Guyana has traveled far, but there is more to do – the work continues, and my aunt continues to be an inspiration.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Ron Cheong, born in Guyana, is a community activist and dedicated volunteer with an extensive international background in banking. Now residing in Toronto, Canada, he is a fellow of the Institute of Canadian Bankers and holds a Bachelor of Science degree from the University of Toronto. His comments are his own and do not reflect those of News Americas or its parent company, ICN.

RELATED: Hollow Projected Confidence No Substitute For Societies’ Self Discipline & Competent Realistic Governance

The Mahogany That Built Britain And Bankrupted the Caribbean

By Nyan Reynolds

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. Jan. 22, 2026: Walk into any Britain manor house built in the eighteenth century, and your eyes will almost inevitably find it. Along the doors, curling up the stair rails, lining the walls, and framing mirrors, a deep reddish-brown glow catches the light. Mahogany!

The Countess’ Bedroom at Florence Court. The view shows the mid eighteenth century Irish four poster mahogany bed with the Queen Anne chest at the end & a chest of drawers by the side.

For Britain’s elite, it was never just wood. It was a symbol of wealth, power, and permanence. Yet the story behind that polished glow is far more complicated, and far more devastating, than the walls of any country house can reveal.

Mahogany did not simply arrive in Britain. It was cut from forests in Jamaica and Haiti, from landscapes where people would never see the true value of what was taken from beneath their feet. These places are now regularly described as developing nations. Yet for generations they supplied some of the finest hardwood in the world, only to watch that resource leave their shores and enrich distant markets.

This is a chapter of Caribbean history that rarely appears in schoolbooks. It should.

The Wood that changed British Rooms

Before Caribbean mahogany entered British workshops in any serious quantity, furniture makers relied on oak, walnut, and pine.

Oak had dominated for centuries. It was strong, familiar, and durable, but it carried a heavy and somewhat muted appearance. Walnut rose in fashion toward the end of the seventeenth century. It offered a more attractive grain, but it could split and was vulnerable to insects. Pine was plentiful and cheap. It was often used for hidden structures or for less expensive furniture, but it lacked the prestige needed for elite interiors.

Mahogany transformed that craft world. The West Indian species described by botanists at the Royal Botanic Gardens in Kew combined strength with beauty. It resisted rot, worked smoothly under tools, and could be polished to a deep glow that looked almost like still water. It was tough enough for shipbuilding and yet refined enough for the finest drawing rooms.

The turning point came in the early seventeen hundreds, when captured Spanish ships brought mahogany planks into British hands. Shipbuilders noticed how well the timber withstood saltwater. Cabinetmakers noticed how stunning it looked indoors. Within a few decades mahogany was no longer a novelty material. It had become the preferred wood of the British upper class and an essential part of Georgian taste.

Britain’s Hunger for Timber and the Turn to the Caribbean

Mahogany’s rise cannot be separated from a wider imperial strategy.

By the early eighteenth century, Britain’s forests were under intense pressure from shipbuilding, construction, and iron production. The island simply could not provide all the timber a growing empire demanded. Parliament answered that problem by looking outward.

In seventeen twenty-one the Naval Stores Act removed import duties on timber and other materials coming from the colonies. That incentive encouraged merchants and shipbuilders to look west rather than toward European forests. Colonial hardwoods became strategic resources, and mahogany quickly moved to the center of this new supply system.

A few decades later, the Free Ports Act of seventeen sixty-six opened select Jamaican harbors to foreign ships, including French traders from Saint Domingue, present day Haiti. This legal change allowed timber from non-British colonies to pass through Jamaican ports and then on to Britain. On paper this looked like commercial flexibility. In practice it deepened Jamaica’s role as a processing and redistribution hub for West Indian hardwoods rather than a place where that wealth stayed and multiplied.

Jamaica and Haiti at the Center of the Trade

By the middle of the eighteenth-century Jamaica had become the most important supplier of mahogany to Britain.

Customs data examined by furniture historian Adam Bowett show that between seventeen sixty-four and seventeen seventy-four Jamaica provided more than ninety percent of Britain’s recorded West Indian mahogany imports. In some years the share was even higher.

Behind those figures was relentless and dangerous labor. Logging crews made up largely of enslaved Africans cut enormous mahogany trees that had taken centuries to grow. They dragged logs that could stretch twenty feet and weigh several tons through dense forest, often with the help of oxen. In interior regions they were forced to build rough roads simply to move the timber to rivers or coastal inlets. From there the logs were floated or hauled to ports such as Kingston and Montego Bay, where they were loaded onto ships bound for the Atlantic crossing.

Haiti, then the French colony of Saint Domingue, entered the British mahogany system in a more indirect way. The Free Ports Act permitted mahogany from Hispaniola to be shipped into Jamaica and then re-exported. As historian Neville Hall has noted, by the seventeen eighties a significant share of the timber listed in British records as Jamaican actually originated elsewhere in the Caribbean and simply passed through these free ports.

The ledgers suggest a single source. The reality was a wider Caribbean of extraction.

The Numbers that Reveal the Scale

The trade in mahogany was not a minor sideline. It was huge.

British customs records and Bowett’s research reveal a dramatic rise in imports.

In seventeen twenty-four Britain brought in a little over one hundred and fifty tons of mahogany. In seventeen twenty-five that figure had nearly tripled to more than four hundred tons. By the late seventeen eighties annual imports were measured in many tens of thousands of tons. Between seventeen eighty-four and seventeen ninety Britain imported more than one hundred twenty-four thousand tons of mahogany. In seventeen eighty-five alone more than ten thousand tons came from Jamaica.

Prices rose along with demand. In the seventeen thirties London prices averaged only a few pence per foot. By the middle of the century, they had roughly doubled. Around eighteen hundred the finest logs could command about two shillings per foot, an increase of several times the original price in less than a human lifetime.

Even after paying for freight and insurance, merchants made handsome profits. Freight typically added a small amount per foot, and marine insurance in peacetime ran only a few percent of the cargo’s value, although it spiked during war. Once those costs were covered, the profit margin on prized hardwood remained high.

Translated into present terms, Britain was importing timber worth the equivalent of millions of pounds each year. Much of it came from Jamaica and through Jamaica from Haiti and other islands.

Chart 1 – British Mahogany Imports: Jamaica vs Total (1724–1790)

Resource stripping and ecological loss

The ecological cost became visible even to observers within the colonial system.

By the seventeen sixties, planter and historian Edward Long was already warning that easily accessible coastal mahogany in Jamaica had been exhausted. Loggers had to push further and further inland. That meant greater labor costs, more roads cut through forest interiors, and more disruption of soils and watersheds. What had once been large continuous forest became scattered stands separated by clearings, paths, and erosion.

In Haiti the story continued into the nineteenth century under a new and cruel pressure. After the Haitian Revolution and independence in eighteen hundred and four, France forced the new Black republic to accept an independence debt in eighteen twenty-five under threat of renewed war. To service this obligation Haiti expanded exports of timber and other cash commodities, including precious woods such as mahogany. Environmental historian Richard Grove and others have shown how this debt driven extraction accelerated deforestation and entrenched economic dependency.

In both islands, forests that might have supported long term local industries and ecological resilience were sacrificed to meet the demands of foreign creditors and distant markets.

Who Gained and Who Lost

Chart 2 – Jamaica’s Share of British Mahogany Imports (%) (1724–1790)

If you stood in a London showroom in the late eighteenth century, the benefits of this trade would have seemed obvious.

Mahogany underpinned a thriving furniture industry, furnished the homes of the wealthy, and helped shape an image of British taste and refinement. Shipbuilders valued its durability for naval and merchant vessels. Merchants, shipowners, and investors profited at every stage of the process.

On the Caribbean side of the equation the picture looked very different.

The value of the timber flowed outward. Local economies saw little structural development from this steady extraction. Enslaved laborers endured the backbreaking work of felling, hauling, and loading vast logs without any share in the profits. Even free people of color who participated in parts of the trade operated inside a system that channeled the greatest returns to Britain and other European centers.

Postcolonial economist Walter Rodney described this pattern as a central mechanism of underdevelopment. Resources are taken from a region without equivalent reinvestment, leaving behind economies that are structurally weak, dependent, and vulnerable. The story of mahogany in Jamaica and Haiti follows this pattern with painful clarity.

Why we Rarely Hear This Story

Sugar, coffee, and bananas dominate the usual narrative of Caribbean economic history. Timber, and mahogany in particular, often appears only in passing or not at all.

This absence matters. It narrows how Caribbean history is understood. When resource extraction is presented mainly through plantation agriculture, we miss how deeply colonial economies reached into forests, mountains, and coastal ecosystems.

Historian Verene Shepherd and others have argued that colonial narratives often highlighted commodities that supported a certain image of the plantation system while minimizing industries that revealed a broader and more flexible web of exploitation. Timber was essential for ships, buildings, and luxury goods, yet its role in the exploitation of Caribbean environments and people has remained relatively obscure in public memory and in many school curricula.

That silence is itself part of the legacy of empire.

A Jamaican Childhood in the Long Shadow of Mahogany

For me this history is not just an intellectual interest. It connects directly to my own life.

My Jamaican family was poor. Not simply living on a tight budget but living with real and constant deprivation. We counted every dollar. We stretched every meal. We watched possibilities slip away because the entry costs were always out of reach.

Many of my friends lived the same way. My grandparents had lived that way for most of their lives. At the time it felt like an unfortunate normal, something we simply had to endure.

Only later, as I began to study the economic history of Jamaica and Haiti, did I start to see those personal experiences as links in a much longer chain. When mahogany and other resources were stripped from our landscapes and shipped abroad, the profits were not used to build broad based prosperity at home. They built estates, institutions, and industries elsewhere.

So, when I ask what my ancestors might have built if the wealth of their forests had been harnessed for their benefit, I am not indulging in fantasy. I am asking a question that belongs at the center of any honest conversation about global inequality.

Too often the modern poverty of countries like Jamaica and Haiti is treated as though it sprang from nowhere or from purely internal failures. In truth it is deeply connected to histories of extraction in which mahogany played a significant role.

The Past is Not Finished Business

People sometimes talk about the past as if it lived only in museums or in carefully bound history texts. Yet history is also present in very concrete ways.

It appears in under-resourced schools and hospitals. It appears in eroded hillsides where forests once stabilized soil and climate. It appears in national budgets shaped by old debts and unequal trading relationships.

The underdevelopment that I saw growing up was not a random misfortune. It was part of a pattern that stretches back to the colonial period, when land and labor were organized around the enrichment of distant powers. Mahogany is one thread in that pattern and following that thread helps us see how the past has been carried into the present.

Why this story still matters

The journey of mahogany from Caribbean forests to British drawing rooms is about far more than beautiful furniture.

It is about power, about who gets to decide how land and labor are used. It is about wealth, about where profits accumulate and where they do not. It is about memory, about whose experiences are recorded and whose are omitted.

Today Jamaica and Haiti are still labeled developing nations. Policy makers and commentators discuss their challenges in terms of governance, crime, education, and external shocks. All of those factors matter. But any analysis that ignores centuries of structured resource extraction is incomplete.

To tell the story of mahogany honestly is to restore part of what has been missing from that wider conversation. It helps explain how magnificent paneling in English houses is connected to exhausted forests and intergenerational poverty in the Caribbean.

Reclaiming the narrative

Mahogany’s legacy in Britain is easy to see. It sits in antiques showrooms and museum galleries, in paneled libraries and sweeping staircases, polished and preserved as part of the nation’s cultural inheritance. The wood is admired for its craftsmanship and beauty, rarely for the conditions under which it was obtained or the worlds it passed through before reaching those rooms.

Its legacy in Jamaica and Haiti is far harder to recognize, precisely because it is not displayed. It survives in altered landscapes, in hillsides where forests once stood thick and continuous, in river systems reshaped by erosion, and in rural interiors stripped of resources that might have supported lasting local industries. It also lives in economies that exported immense value yet retained little of it, leaving behind patterns of poverty and dependency that have proven remarkably durable.

Restoring this history is not simply an academic exercise or a matter of adding footnotes to the past. It is a step toward historical justice. By naming the exploitation, tracing the movement of wealth from Caribbean forests to British drawing rooms, and linking those processes to present economic realities, we begin to confront what was taken and how its absence continues to be felt.

For me, reflecting on mahogany’s story is inseparable from reflecting on my own life and on the lives of those who came before me. It is an act of remembrance and of responsibility. We cannot regrow every tree that was felled, nor can we rewrite the ledgers that recorded extraction while erasing human cost. But we can refuse the silence that has long surrounded this trade. We can insist that these histories be told clearly, honestly, and widely.

Only then can new chapters be written on a foundation of recognition rather than erasure. Only then can the forests and communities that remain be valued not merely as reservoirs of exportable resources, but as places with their own histories, their own dignity, and their own right to thrive.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Nyan Reynolds is a U.S. Army veteran and published author whose novels and cultural works draw from his Jamaican heritage, military service, and life experiences. His writing blends storytelling, resilience, and heritage to inspire readers.  

The Caribbean Is Growing — But Only One Country Is Changing The Game

By NAN Business Editor

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. Jan. 23, 2026: The Caribbean is entering a new growth cycle, according to the latest regional forecasts from the World Bank. After years of uneven recovery, several economies are projected to expand through 2026 and 2027. Yet, a closer look at the data reveals a striking imbalance: while growth is spreading across the region, only one country is fundamentally reshaping the Caribbean’s economic trajectory: Guyana.

A boat the Demerara river in Georgetown, Guyana (Photo by JOAQUIN SARMIENTO/AFP via Getty Images)

World Bank projections place Guyana far ahead of its regional peers, driven almost entirely by offshore oil production. The country’s economic expansion has pushed regional averages upward, masking far more modest growth elsewhere. In effect, Guyana is not just growing faster — it is redefining what “Caribbean growth” means in global economic conversations.

But headline growth tells only part of the story.

Despite record GDP expansion, Guyana continues to face deep structural challenges. Poverty levels remain above 50 percent, highlighting a critical disconnect between national output and household prosperity. This tension — extraordinary growth alongside persistent deprivation — is emerging as one of the most consequential development questions in the Caribbean today.

Elsewhere in the region, growth remains steady but constrained. Tourism-dependent economies are stabilizing, helped by improved airlift and demand from North America and Europe. Financial services hubs continue to show resilience, while commodity-linked states benefit modestly from higher global prices. Yet none of these economies approach the scale or speed of Guyana’s expansion.

This divergence matters.

For policymakers, it raises difficult questions about regional integration and economic planning. For investors, it reframes how opportunity should be assessed. The Caribbean is no longer moving as a single growth story. It is becoming a region of sharply differentiated trajectories, where sector exposure and policy execution matter more than geography alone.

GUYANA

Guyana’s experience underscores both the promise and the peril of rapid expansion. Oil revenues have the potential to fund transformative investments in infrastructure, healthcare, education, and diversification. At the same time, without disciplined fiscal management and long-term planning, resource-driven growth risks entrenching inequality rather than alleviating it.

That balance — between extraction and inclusion — will define Guyana’s next decade.

“The risk for the Caribbean is mistaking growth for transformation,” said Felicia J. Persaud, CEO of Invest Caribbean. “Guyana’s numbers are extraordinary, but the real test is whether that growth is converted into diversified economic activity, human capital development and opportunities that reach beyond a narrow slice of the economy.”

The World Bank’s projections suggest that while other Caribbean economies are improving, none are positioned to drive regional performance in the same way. This creates a new regional dynamic: Caribbean growth is increasingly concentrated, not collective.

For smaller states, the challenge is staying competitive in a landscape shaped by one dominant outlier. For development partners and lenders, it complicates regional policy approaches that assume uniform conditions. And for investors, it demands sharper analysis — distinguishing between cyclical recovery and structural change.

Growth, after all, is not inherently transformative. It must be managed, distributed, and reinvested.

Guyana’s rise has altered the Caribbean’s economic narrative. The next chapter will be written not by oil alone, but by choices — about governance, diversification, and inclusion. Whether the country becomes a long-term regional anchor or a cautionary tale will depend on how effectively today’s gains are translated into tomorrow’s resilience.

One thing is already clear: the Caribbean is growing again. But only one country is truly changing the game — and the consequences will be felt well beyond its borders.

Top Forecasted Caribbean Economies

Ranked by GDP Growth (Highest → Lowest)

RankCountry2026 Growth (%)2027 Growth (%)World Bank–Cited Drivers1Guyana19.621.9Oil production, investment2Dominican Republic4.54.5Tourism, domestic demand3Suriname3.53.7Investment recovery4Jamaica-2.33.7Post-contraction rebound5Grenada3.33.0Tourism, services6Dominica3.02.9Public investment, tourism7St. Vincent & the Grenadines2.92.7Tourism, reconstruction8Trinidad & Tobago0.32.5Energy sector recovery9Haiti2.02.5Fragile stabilization10St. Lucia2.02.1Tourism recovery11Barbados2.02.0Tourism-led stabilization12Belize2.42.2Agriculture, tourism13Bahamas2.11.8Tourism normalization

RELATED: Oil-Rich CARICOM Nation Guyana Still Faces High Poverty Levels, Data Shows

Caribbean Roots Shine As Delroy Lindo Earns First Oscar Nomination For Sinners

By NAN ET EDITOR

News Americas, NEW YORK, NY, Fri. Jan. 23, 2026: After decades of commanding performances that shaped modern Black cinema, Caribbean roots, British-born actor Delroy Lindo has finally crossed a milestone many believe was long overdue: his first Academy Award nomination.

British Caribbean actor Delroy Lindo attends the 83rd annual Golden Globe Awards at the Beverly Hilton hotel in Beverly Hills, California, on January 11, 2026. (Photo by Michael Tran / AFP via Getty Images) /

The London-born, Jamaican-rooted actor, 73, earned a Best Supporting Actor nomination at the 98th Academy Awards for his role as Delta Slim in Sinners, the genre-blending vampire thriller directed by Ryan Coogler. The nod marks a long-awaited recognition for an artist whose career has been consistently lauded by critics, yet repeatedly overlooked by awards bodies.

Delroy Lindo, l., Ryan Coogler (C) and cast and crew of “Sinners” accept the Cinematic and Box Office Achievement award onstage during the 83rd Annual Golden Globe Awards at The Beverly Hilton on January 11, 2026 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Kevork Djansezian/CBS via Getty Images)

For Caribbean audiences and the global diaspora, Lindo’s nomination resonates far beyond Hollywood. Born in Lewisham, London, to Jamaican parents who were part of the Windrush generation, Lindo’s life mirrors a transatlantic Caribbean journey – moving from the UK to Canada as a teenager, then to the United States, where he trained at the American Conservatory Theater and forged a career that would span stage, film, and television.

His mother was a nurse who struggled as an outsider in England but instilled a strong sense of heritage in her son, while his father held various jobs, contributing to the family’s cultural background. Lindo has said in the past that he felt like an outsider as the only Black child in his school, but was inspired to act after a school play. He deeply connects with his Jamaican roots, viewing his parents’ emphasis on presentation as a key part of his heritage, a theme echoed in his work.

Delroy Lindo accepts Best Supporting Actor for “Sinners” onstage during the 2026 Annual Movies for Grownups Awards with AARP at Beverly Wilshire, A Four Seasons Hotel on January 10, 2026 in Beverly Hills, California. (Photo by Michael Kovac/Getty Images for AARP)

Lindo has previously found himself in awards-season conversations for iconic roles, including West Indian Archie in Spike Lee’s Malcolm X and his searing performance in Da 5 Bloods. But when nominations failed to materialize, he deliberately resisted expectation. “I try not to buy into that,” he told Entertainment Weekly last year, reflecting on past snubs. Still, he admitted that the absence of recognition was painful. “I was profoundly disappointed, frankly.”

That disappointment did not derail him. Instead, Lindo kept working – on his own terms.

In Sinners, he delivers a performance critics describe as hypnotic. Playing Delta Slim, a Mississippi bluesman whose music anchors a juke joint that becomes the target of supernatural forces, Lindo brings gravitas, restraint, and lived-in wisdom to the screen. Coogler has praised the performance as “incredible,” noting what Lindo brought to the role every single day on set.

Audiences agreed. Sinners boasts a 97% critical rating and 96% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes, and its global box office haul of approximately $368 million made it one of the year’s most successful original films. The movie shattered awards records with 16 Oscar nominations, becoming the most-nominated film in Academy history.

For Lindo, the recognition arrives not as validation, but as affirmation. “To have been working as an actor for the length of time that I have… the fact that audiences still apparently find what I’m doing interesting – that’s not a given,” he said. “I don’t take any of it for granted.”

His Caribbean roots continue to inform his creative direction. Lindo has long spoken about the influence of his Jamaican heritage and the Windrush experience, which he is now exploring in a forthcoming memoir scheduled for release in 2027. He is also developing and directing a feature film set in Jamaica’s Blue Mountains, centered on spirituality, healing, and the power of community – themes deeply rooted in Caribbean culture.

Lindo exclusively told E! News that his son Damiri was the one to tell him he received his first-ever Oscar nomination for the 2026 ceremony. “I was in bed,” he recalled to E!. “My phone rang. It was my son. I picked it up and said, ‘Hey man,’ and he said, ‘Dad, dad, you got it. You got that s–t.’” 

“It means the world because he’s seen it all,” Lindo was quoted as saying. “He’s seen it away from the red carpet. He’s seen both sides of it. So, along with my wife, they have the internal and the external perspective on this journey. It felt completely right on to receive this news from my son.”

Lindo  faces off against Jacob Elordi (Frankenstein), Stellan Skarsgård (Sentimental Value), Benicio Del Toro (One Battle After Another) and Sean Penn (One Battle After Another) in his category.

But, however, it turns out, Lindo told E!: “It’s just incredibly joyful and affirming. Affirming that audiences inside and outside of the industry have responded to this work so fully, and the fact that the work has touched people, I believe, in the depth of their humanity. I don’t have the words to explain how gratifying and affirming that feels. It’s extraordinary.”

For many in the Caribbean diaspora, the moment already carries meaning: a son of Jamaican immigrants, whose artistry endured decades of industry blind spots, finally standing where history says he always belonged.

The Academy Awards, hosted by Conan O’Brien, air Sunday, March 15, 2026, on ABC.

RELATED: Teyana Taylor Makes Golden Globe History As Second Caribbean-Rooted Black Winner