In recent years, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM)-led campaign demanding reparations from perpetrating European governments for the harms and legacies of the historical injustices of Transatlantic chattel slavery and native genocide has gained significant traction in international circles. Unlike the case of climate change, however, CARICOM’s ability to position itself as a leader in the global reparations conversation appears to be under threat due to questions of its legitimacy among its own citizens. This study posits that these doubts find their roots in faulty narratives undergirding CARICOM’s approach to the reparations issue, specifically in how the regional international organization has constructed ideas of regional identity, sovereignty and democracy. Recent discourse surrounding the inclusion of Indian indentureship within the CARICOM Reparations Commission (CRC) mandate and the controversial CARICOM-endorsed, U.S.-backed installation of a Transitional Presidential Council (TPC) in Haiti are used as case studies to explore this supposition. _x000D_
<br>_x000D_
<br>In conducting a narrative analysis of both formal CARICOM and informal public sentiment surrounding reparatory justice, this study confirms the presence of a worrisome disconnect between CARICOM’s constructed ideas of what reparations should be, represent, and to whom they are due, and the reality experienced by CARICOM citizens. Against a backdrop of continued European pushback and increased interregional collaboration between CARICOM and its African partners, this study proposes a comprehensive re-evaluation of the narratives which drive the CRC-led Caribbean reparations movement, if for no other reason than to ensure any potential diplomatic gains do not come at the expense of everyday citizen buy-in. _x000D_
<br>_x000D_
<br>Keywords: reparatory justice, Caribbean regionalism, historical injustices, Transatlantic chattel slavery, indentureship, sovereignty, regional identity, democracy
