late 1806 · Haitianseason
Britain regulates trade with Haiti, which is recognition of a kind
›Read the full entryClose
Gaffield's central conceptual move is to break recognition into layers. Britain never issued a statement on Haiti's diplomatic status, but from this point it explicitly permitted and regulated the trade, which amounted to economic recognition of the country's independence from France. Her further claim is that the Admiralty courts went beyond what the government had authorised, extending some measure of diplomatic recognition to Haiti in their rulings between 1806 and 1826. Since legal trade with Haiti sustained the political break from France, and any trade at all violated French claims over the island, the commercial and the diplomatic questions could not be kept apart. She borrows Lauren Benton's idea of layered sovereignty and applies it outward, arguing that just as sovereignty was divisible, so was recognition, and that Haiti's survival depended on the divisibility. Where this account departs from the standard one: Gaffield argues that withholding diplomatic recognition did not amount to isolation, and that Britain extended economic and, through its courts, partial diplomatic recognition to Haiti decades before 1826.