Dear Editor,
In a recent press release I noted that the US party listed independence as one of its goals and laid out the philosophy of independence using the analogy that a child should at some point leave the parental home and become independent. This analogy has been regularly used in recent years by various politicians on Sint Maarten.
I would like to offer a different analogy for independence, and argue that this analogy is misleading. I would like to start by pointing out that the challenges of a micro state (which we are) are very different to states with greater scale .The first subliminal message component of this analogy is that by leaving the parental home (mother country ) we will get to be a “bigger “country is misleading .. We will under all circumstances remain a micro state with the challenges of that micro scale, which we have discovered more about in the last six years.
Allow me to offer a similar but more suitable analogy, also in the field of child development. Let me suggest that the challenges of statehood are more like the challenges of a school playground. In order to survive and prosper and maintain dignity, the child in a playground needs to belong to a club, groups and even gangs in order to maintain dignity, maybe protection and stature. In the global playing field of states this same challenge exists.
Like the playground, there are many clubs and groups to join or avoid .These clubs/groups/gangs are monetary unions, defence unions (NATO) trading unions (EU, CARICOM, Mercosur) Freedom of movement clubs (EU, OECS) Survival success and dignity depend on effective affiliations and collaboration, particularly for a small state and particularly crucial for a micro state.
Sint Maarten finds itself belonging to a “kingdom club” which is dominated by the original founder of the club, the Netherlands. The appreciation of this particular club differs depending on the view you have of the club’s rules. If you are a politician, who does not like to be hemmed in, it is particularly frustrating. If you are a citizen traveller, it is a good club for travelling with a great passport. If you come from a country where you have felt the consequences of the rule of law being in doubt, you are likely to appreciate this club. If you have a strong cultural interest in affiliating with parties with similar historical experiences like slavery, then it is a mixed bag.
To pursue the playground analogy, to consider other clubs or partially other clubs, we need to do some serious research into what the other clubs offer. Do we want to consider the OECS club with a monetary union, or the CARICOM club which is a little looser? Do we want to re-join the Antillean club that we just sort of left? What are the costs of these options? Can we afford these costs?
There seems little doubt that, like the school playground, you have to join some clubs to survive and prosper. Especially if you are as small as we are. But what are the real options on clubs? Talking of leaving is cheap. Real data on alternative options by our present politicians is almost non-existent. There are no really obvious options.
Robbie Ferron
