Dear Editor,

  According to Member of Parliament Emmanuel, as reported in The Daily Herald of August 9, 2019, the Minister of Justice of St. Maarten, De Weever, is “out of touch, CFATF laws biased.”

  According to the Cambridge dictionary, one of the top results Google provided to my search, the term “out of touch” refers to someone who is not informed or not having the same ideas as most people.

  Next, a little background on “CFATF laws biased” is in order.  For that, it is helpful to understand who or what is the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force (CFATF). It is an organization of states and territories of the Caribbean Basin, of which we form part, that have agreed to implement common countermeasures against money-laundering. CFATF has associate status within the Financial Action Task Force (on money-laundering).

  And what are these common measures against money-laundering?

During the 1989 G7 Summit in Paris, the FATF was formed to combat the growing problem of money-laundering. At that time, FATF had 16 members, which by 2016 had grown to 37.

  One of the first actions of the FATF was development of a report containing 40 recommendations to more effectively fight money-laundering. After the September 11 terror attacks in 2001, the FATF included terrorist-financing as part of the recommendations.

  Practically all major financial centers around the world, not the least of which is the USA, are represented by the 37 members of FATF.  Money makes the world go around and no country, big or small, can exist without doing business with other countries.

  Without banking relationships with these major financial powerhouses, a country is basically not a part of the international community/economy.

  Back to the headline: The Minister of Justice is, in my opinion, not at all out of touch. It is MP Emmanuel who seems to be uninformed. Most people understand that St. Maarten is a part of the global economy and therefore part of the international financial system. As such and as part of the Caribbean Basin, it needs to do its share to (want to) combat money-laundering and terrorist-financing. In fact, the Minister has correctly made Parliament aware of the fact that Country St. Maarten, and by extension all of us, are out of time regarding becoming compliant!

  Are these laws that St. Maarten has to change and adopt to meet the (C)FATF recommendations biased? Do they favor one group over the other? Is St. Maarten being bullied? I am no lawyer or scholar but believe I have been blessed with common sense and therefore I try to be practical.

  Whether the MP wants to suggest otherwise or not, St. Maarten has no choice. Since the 911 attack on the USA, that country, St. Maarten and the rest of the world have had to implement levels of screening at airports to a magnitude never before even dreamt of. None of us like it, but none of us had a choice. Our harbor and international mega-yacht marinas had to introduce stricter security measures as well. We simply had no choice!

  What happens to St. Maarten if we fail to meet the FATF recommendations? According to the FATF’s website, jurisdictions that are seen as non-compliant are a risk to the integrity of the international financial system. Those non-compliant jurisdictions receive a public warning “to address their deficiencies in order to maintain their position in the global economy.” That’s a nice way of saying: either comply, or you are no longer welcome; you are “blacklisted”.  North Korea and Iran are on that list. As a small half-of-an-island Caribbean nation, dependent on mostly North American and European tourism, St. Maarten cannot afford to be on that list. But that’s a worst-case scenario.

  A more likely result of being on the wrong side of (C)FATF recommendations is de-risking by financial institutions and loss of correspondent banking relationships. In plain English, the banks will not take on customers they feel are a risk for money-laundering and financing of terrorism.

  The financial system is global. Local banks that fail to take measures will lose relationships with the big banks in the USA and Europe. Try conducting business on St. Maarten when you can’t send or receive money from overseas. (Here’s a hint: Google “Belize and correspondent banks”).

  (C)FATF has been a reality from since before 10-10-10.  But that’s water under the bridge. St. Maarten is out of time and we had better deal with that fact, rather than believe (like MP Emmanuel obviously does) that the international community will be intimidated by him, or for that matter all of our Parliamentarians together. Legislation is being pushed through to meet deadlines. Debate and fine-tuning of these laws to find a bi-partisan, mutually acceptable way of meeting international requirements and not hurting our community is now difficult, if not impossible.

  That failure is on all MPs and Ministers, past and present (including me)! And yes, Hurricane Irma did not help. But to the rest of the world Irma was never the problem and sure as heck cannot be used any longer as an excuse to kick this can down the road.

  If MP Emmanuel wants to take his marbles and go home because he feels the game is rigged and unfair, that’s his prerogative. Good luck with that! The rest of St. Maarten has to meet the reality head-on, because like it or not, we need the rest of the world. The rest of the world does not need us. So, either we play ball and meet the internationally-set standard or become totally self-sufficient (?!) in a big hurry!

  And just in case the MP decides to respond to this commentary the way I expect him to, my response to him remains the same.

Michael J. Ferrier

Dear Editor,

  It is now almost two years since Hurricane Irma brought us to our knees, with such devastating and destructive power, that it will remain in St. Maarten’s history as the most terrible hurricane so far. I know most of us would not want to face another monster hurricane like Irma again. The thought of another hurricane like Irma alone would be enough to move your bowels.

  Since that time up to the present, as we look around this island, we can see that there is still more to done to get us back on track. For instance, when driving around this island our roundabouts are in need of dire care and restoration as most trees once planted have dried up, some yachts are still drifting in the waters like monuments of a past disaster, many people are still without a home, some waiting for repairs, but most important for our economy, our airport is still in need of complete repair.

  Yes, back-and-forth talk and dialogue has been going on, but much is being said, but little done. As we know it now boils down to the fact that the Dutch have promised financial support, but they are not going to play “Father Christmas”. Nothing will be given for free. It’s like saying: “You will receive, but you have to first bow to our request and demands or you wouldn’t get a red cent!” “You need what we have in abundance...”

  So as it seems, dear editor, the Dutch are playing their rhythm, and we have no other choice but to dance to their tunes. Yes, the Dutch may be using, the destruction of Hurricane Irma as a good opportunity to humble us, and show us who is really the big boss. Since Hurricane Irma in 2017, we are now already again in another hurricane season, and God forbid that we get another blow at this time as we have not yet even fully resolved all the pending problems Hurricane Irma brought to this island.

  During one of our parliament meetings some time ago, our Prime Minister was accused by a member of parliament that she was giving in too much to the demands or requests of the Dutch. Yes, the Europeans used their wealth, wisdom, and power to enslave our forefathers of this island, and we would want to seek total freedom or independence from the now psychological enslavement our generation today is facing. But dear editor, the old people have a saying: “Dog does need he tail more than once.”

  Should another hurricane or disaster, God forbid, trike this island again, then who can we run to for help, or which country can we count on to receive direct help? Whose obligation it would be to render their first-hand service and aid to our little helpless island St. Maarten? Can we run to the US, Russia, China, England, Africa, France, (Oh, yes the French side can do that), or any of the smaller Caribbean islands who, in times of disaster, can’t even help themselves?

  Now I am not saying that we should accept anything the Dutch throw at us, but we are still part of the Dutch Kingdom, so we must expect them, even before any other nation, to do a much greater part in helping us. Hurricane Irma was the first of its kind, but it will not be the last. And let us bear in mind that it need not necessary be another monster hurricane again. Disaster can strike in any other form, especially observing the times we are living in.

  Dear editor, St. Maarten seems to be at a crossroad. We may not like the psychological colonial rule of the Dutch, but with not much other options in mind, I believe we will have to sacrifice our pride, because we will be dealing with the Dutch Kingdom for yet a long time more to come. Yes, independence may be sweet, but we are still far off from proving to the Dutch, and ourselves, that we can handle matters on our own. So, the Dutch will continue to play their tune, not leaving much options for us on the table but to dance.

Concerned citizen

Name withheld at author's request.

Dear Editor,

  How much longer will TelEm continue to provide this lousy service to the former subscribers of Cable TV? Since the passing of Hurricane Irma in September of 2017, the previous customers of Cable TV have been catching hell, with this mediocre service – an imposed arrangement, provided by a company that has absolutely no regard for its customers, nor possesses the knowledge of how to operate the cable business.

  Consequently, the majority of us had to wait more than a year to have the service restored. In my case, I settled an outstanding bill November of 2017, which consisted of the few days in September of the same year. In the process of trying to reconnect the service, I was told that I owed an amount. I presented my receipt to counteract the claim. Then, the customer service agent gave me a tab to present to the cashier.

  When I thought that everything was settled, I was confronted with the same bill again, upon my return to pay my monthly subscription. I presented my receipt, but it was not acceptable to the cashier. I was told to pay the amount or take up the matter with the service agent. I decided not to waste any more time on the issue, and so I paid the invoice again.

  As time goes by, I heard the cries of others, who are still waiting to be compensated for the service that was paid months in advance, prior to Hurricane Irma. That is not all: nowadays, it has become customary for us, the clients, to experience consistent outages and with little or no explanation whatsoever. How could this be, in a government-owned company that is supposed to set the tone for exemplary customer service?

  Imagine, less than two weeks ago, cable was off for a whole day. This week Monday, the same thing occurred, and only on Wednesday I got back cable, with still just a few channels to look at. The sad thing about it is that I never heard one announcement on air or in the newspaper, to indicate the dilemma. We, the clients, were left all alone to figure out the problem.

  What is very suspicious, is that TelEm seems to be selective with which channels it chooses to put back on stream. How is it that not even the local channel is on, and the most popular ones? Is this the tactic that TelEm is using, in order to force the subscribers to buy into its new and expensive package that was unveiled a few months ago? If this is so, it is immoral and unprofessional. I will not subscribe to this bundle.

  With this inconsistency and failure to provide adequate service to its clients, does the Management of TelEm find it fair for us to pay the full amount, when our next bill is due? One thing about Cable TV, it was always its policy to compensate the subscribers anytime that company did not deliver the proper service to the clients. It was a fair provider, and the former employees were always there to help.

  Besides these major outages, the cable goes off several times during the day, and no one at TelEm has the decency to explain anything to the public. Instead, the blame is being pushed around as if no one is in charge. If the financial manager is failing to do her job, then fire her! As CEO of the company, we the people, expect and deserve a lot more than what is being offered.

  Everything has worsened since TelEm has purchased Cable TV. It is obvious that the company is not capable of handling the operations of a cable network. So, the best solution to this ongoing problem is to put back the operation into the hands of professionals – experts, with the knowledge of how to operate a cable network, and those who value the patrimony of its customers.

Joslyn Morton

Dear Editor,

This week news broke that there would some streets named after notable figures in the fight against Dutch colonial domination and various prominent cultural producers of our islands. The celebratory-padding-ourselves-on-the-back tone of the messaging across media platforms was however off putting. Don't get me wrong, it is good that the history of the struggle against Dutch white colonial domination is highlighted through those who fought those fights. But the framing of this all is frankly rather disturbing. 

In the articles about the new streets and the press release the speech of the first female mayor of Amsterdam Femke Halsema of Groenlinks was noted as the jumping off point. This erases the decades of work that grass roots campaigners and organizers have put into changing the structural and decorative landscape of the city. What this endeavour has done doesn't come close to reckoning with the continued veneration of genocidal colonists through street names in Amsterdam. It only adds the names of those who had to deal with their murderous and racist legacies and presents them as equal. Jan Pieterszoon Coen or Abel Tasman, who both have streets in de Zeeheldenbuurt, have nowhere near the same amount of courage of somebody like Quashiba. She's a hero and they're simply not. Continuing to pretend otherwise is going along with a white supremacist fantasy. 

The problem with the celebratory tone of this news is that it also obscures the fact that at the moment those who are fighting injustice in the Netherlands are ridiculed, mocked and persecuted. Halsema herself has repeatedly derided the work of anti-racists in the Netherlands in national publications. In her first speech as mayor she even noted that those who 'peacefully' demanded the right to be themselves would find her on their side. I'm not so sure that she would categorize Virginia Gaai as a peaceful fighter. And this idea of the peaceful fighter coming from her is hypocritical when you consider that she as the leader of Groenlinks was instrumental in sending Dutch military troops to Afghanistan for an unjust war. 

When she presented this initiative during her speech in this years perpetually woefully underfunded annual Emancipation Day observance she mentioned that she wanted the city to 'become everyone's city'. Well, it actually already is. It sounded like Halsema had yet to take the Black Heritage Tour by Jennifer Tosch. When you take the tour you would know that the buildings along the UNESCO world heritage canals are still unabashedly boasting architectural references to slavery and colonial products. From sculptures of sugar cones and tobacco leaves to actual busts of people of African descent and Black children as accessories for white gentry. Amsterdam is as much Halsema's city as it is from a kid with ancestry to those who toiled on this island during slavery who will go to one of our primary schools come the beginning of the school year. The city of Amsterdam was namely part owner of the West Indian Company under whose umbrella St. Maarten was colonized, administrated and its salt ponds were exploited. 

The problem with street naming vanity projects such as these is that it attempts to ahistorically right a historical wrong by decentering responsibility to repair the damage that was done. As mentioned earlier, the Zeeheldenbuurt for instance will not be touched. The murderous villains in world history will still be upheld as heroes within the Amsterdam city context. The same can be said about the Transvaalbuurt with among others its Paul Krugerplein. Kruger was a late 19th century leader of the Boers, descendants of VOC invaders in Southern Africa, who abducted women and children from the Tswana and Basothos chiefdoms and enslaved them to work in their homes. It's bizarre that this man still has squares, streets, avenues and roads named after him and we're supposed to be happy with a few streets in a far away part of the city that, no offence to IJburg, most don't visit unless you have to. 

Let's not forget that the only reason the names were chosen for these streets is because last year people objected to the naming committee naming the streets in this new part of the city based on a battle against the Spanish. The 1573 battled led to a release from Spanish power and Amsterdam becoming the violent and aggressive geopolitical player it became through colonial pillaging, genocide, slavery and the all round awful things it sent its sailors to do in other parts of the world. That the but-colonialism-and-slavery-was-so-long-ago crowds do however seem to find this important to remember is telling. By presenting the name change as something that Halsema came up with negates the fact that the mayor's office has yet to formally apologize for slavery and recently had to be forced by the new city council to do so by July 1st 2020. The time up until then will be spent researching the extent of Amsterdam's involvement, which in all likely translates to figuring out how to downplay how much damage they wreaked on our ancestors on the islands and how that continues to contribute to the way in which The Hague views us and treats us. 

It's great that Camille Baly is getting the recognition that he deserves, but that should not be limited to this street. His work should be included in every high school English literature list. At the moment it isn't. It's terrific that Roestam Effendi is being highlighted, but does this mean that Amsterdam will acknowledge the Indonesian date of independence or stick with the Dutch one that places it fours year later? It's awesome that Frank Martinus Arion is getting a street, but will that lead to an awareness of what he before his passing called the Dutch recolonization of the islands? How will these streets contribute to the emancipation of the communities of color in the city who are still subjected to lower life expectancy, higher poverty rates, housing discrimination and racist work impediments? My hope is that collectively we prick through the facade of these superficial attempts to jump on the bandwagon of decolonization and push those in power to get on with the actual process of it. Street names and recognition are good, but reparations are better. 

Quinsy Gario