national insolvency. There was a real danger that the smaller banks around the world that had lent to Jamaica would lose their patience and call Jamaica into default ( International Herald Tribune 6/ 5/ 1980). This was a direct consequence of Jamaica's subsequent late decision in March to break off talks with the IMF and delays in the disbursement of loans negotiated with Libya (US$ 50 million), Iraq (US$ 10 million) and Venezuela (US$ 97million).
When the NEC met again on March 22, suspicions about the Fund's intentions and considerations regarding the upcoming elections in October had the majority of the centre joining with the minority left and voting with a two to one majority for an immediate break with the IMF. This vote was opposed by Manley and a majority of the Cabinet, but nevertheless formally approved by it two days later. 16
The substance of Jamaica's relations with international capital and the US in the 1970s was greatly affected by both the local bourgeoisie and international capital whose interests increasingly converged towards the end of the 1970s. Both then mutually complemented each other in the influence which they sought to exert over the PNP government, which narrowed the state's relative autonomy in foreign policy considerably. The government's attempts to put up resistance to these aspects of capitalist development in Jamaica and the North-South relations in general complicated its foreign policies, but were unable to change the substance of the international economic relations effectively. Despite its rhetoric and diplomatic manoeuvres aimed at giving a new quality to Jamaica's relations with the US and international capital, they essentially remained determined, directly or indirectly, by the stewards of the domestic and international economy.
Because the government's bauxite offensive had the broad and active support of the local bourgeoisie, it was able to successfully negotiate against international capital's opposition and to unilaterally impose and internationally defend its position. However, its flanking diplomatic strategy, albeit successful, was rather apologetic, which also indicates the desperate resistance that some parts of international capital offered. When the government phased out its cooperation with the national bourgeoisie, the subsequently negotiated deal with the Soviet Union (the supposedly fraternal socialist brother nation) was so detrimental to the country's interests that the government eventually had to request a renegotiation. This would seem to indicate that at the