

Response to State Secretary Knops’ report to the Dutch Parliament
Dear Editor,
I have taken note of the report of State Secretary Knops to the Dutch Parliament dated May 31, 2018, and hereby wish to state the following in response.
First of all, as has been pointed out on numerous occasions, based on both international law and rulings of the Dutch Supreme Court, the intervention by the Dutch Government in February of this year (as are certain provisions in the “WolBES”, “FinBES”, and “het Statuut”) was and is unlawful and in violation of international treaties to which the Government of the Netherlands is signatory. These include the UN Charter (i.c. chapter IX, article 73) and the resolutions regarding decolonization.
As such, I wish to again state that the Dutch Government is not above international law and that the legal and other consequences of said intervention will be borne by the Dutch State, as was the case with the Dutch Supreme Court’s ruling on the “Women of Srebrenica” case. Ignoring this reality will not absolve the Dutch Government of their (international) responsibilities and obligations, nor make the situation they have placed themselves in due to their intervention go away.
Secondly, I must point out that the backlog in infrastructural and material development on Sint Eustatius as described in the report has always been evident. It is largely the result of gross neglect and the lack of willingness/governing capability over the past decades by both the Dutch Government and the local Democratic Party with which Mr. Knops’ CDA party has formed a formal alliance. This historic fact has been confirmed by a number of reports commissioned by the same Dutch Government, including the “IdeeVersa” and “Spies” reports, and the same report by Mssrs. Franssen and Refunjol which Mr. Knops used as a pretext for his unlawful intervention.
The fact that the Dutch Government is suddenly willing and able to address these matters and make seemingly resources funds available only now after the unlawful legislation approving regime change was rushed through both of their legislative Houses, is both a glaring self-indictment of failed Dutch Government’s policies, and proof of the hypocrisy and bad faith it has been displaying over the years.
Had the Dutch Government executed the recommendations and engaged in the dialogue which the Government of Sint Eustatius had proposed as recently as March 2017, there would have been no reason to create a false pretext for the unlawful intervention.
Unfortunately, and despite calls from the current, democratically elected, legitimate coalition Government of Sint Eustatius of which I form part since March 2015, the Dutch Government chose to ignore the conclusions of said reports, and refused to address the issues at hand in accordance with its obligations under the UN Charter and the international laws and conventions regarding decolonization.
In the third place, I wish to point out that most of the observations and conclusions in the report are not substantiated by documentation, clearly biased, and not taking into account the efforts and accomplishments of the Government of Sint Eustatius over the past three years. For the sake of due diligence, good governance, and transparency, I would expect Mr. Knops to provide the Dutch Parliament with said substantiation, and the Dutch Parliament to request the same from him in return.
The legitimate Government of Sint Eustatius has presented written legal substantiation for its claim that the (legal basis for the) intervention on Sint Eustatius is a violation of the UN Charter and relevant resolutions. By doing so, it has exposed the lie by Mr. Knops’ predecessor as perpetrated in his letter of July 5th, 2017, namely that the Charter of the Kingdom of the Netherlands is in compliance with the UN Charter.
From the conclusions on pages 237 and 238 of Mr. Hillebrink’s dissertation, it is clear that that was not, and still not is the case. Based on the principle of continuity in/of Government, Mr. Knops is now responsible for his predecessor’s misrepresentation and misleading of the Dutch Parliament, the citizens within the Kingdom, and the world community.
The intervention Mr. Knops initiated and is currently carrying out on Sint Eustatius, and the lacking legal basis under international law for such, are further proof of said deception by his predecessor.
As was the case at the UN in the 1950s, and confirmed by Hillebrink in his dissertation, the Dutch Government is once again resorting to deception tactics in order to present a false image of dignity, honor, and fairness, while circumventing the voices of democracy it says to support and uphold in countries like Venezuela, China and Russia. As was the case with its intervention in the 1940s in Indonesia, however, the attempts of the Dutch Government to stop the free will of the people it colonized will not succeed in Sint Eustatius either.
Based on the above, all other irrefutable evidence that has been presented to Mr. Knops, and the fact that he has not been able to present any evidence to the contrary, I am hereby (again) urging him to immediately end the unlawful occupation of Sint Eustatius, and finalize the decolonization process of Sint Eustatius and the other five Dutch Caribbean islands lawfully and in full accordance and compliance with chapter IX, article 73, of the United Nations Charter. MP Bosman rightfully suggested this in October of 2016, and I trust that he will see to it that his suggestion is carried out.
This will mean amending and/or suspending (elements of) any and all legislation in the Dutch Kingdom that is in violation of international law, starting with the Statuut, as has been suggested by members of the Dutch Senate in June of 2016.
Clyde I. van Putten
Leader, Progressive Labour Party
St. Eustatius
Dear Editor,
From 2014 up to recently, I have been asking some of my fellow St. Maarteners the question about independence for St. Maarten. I really wanted to know if they, like some politicians and activists, believed that now is the time for us to step out of the Kingdom of the Netherlands.
Some St. Maarten nationalists have said, “Yeah, let’s get out, we can’t lose, we will survive. The colonial masters have been meddling in our affairs for much too long.” But there have been quite a lot of St. Maarten people who spoke to me with a great deal of apprehension about independence.
Oops! I almost forgot this one. One St. Maarten nationalist said that he believed that it was (is) high time that we stop nursing like little pups on the nipples of Europe. In other words, stop being lackeys of the colonial masters.
But that anti-colonial spirit seems to be at a low ebb, comrades. If we rush like sunlight on morning, we will end up like dead fish in a ravine. To leave the Kingdom of the Netherlands now to become an independent dependency would be pseudo-independence. Or maybe some would like us to embrace American or Chinese hegemony. But I believe that we, St. Maarten people, should be the architects of our destiny. And we should not allow devious people (native or non-native) to push us kicking and screaming into independence.
I believe that the “aboriginal soualigans” (the indigenous St. Maarten people) and the St. Maarten diaspora will speak with one voice at the appropriate time, not before.
Comrades, we should be the architects of our destiny, because we have a rendezvous with destiny. And we will speak with one voice at the appropriate time. My fellow St. Maarteners, keep your eyes open.
Julien R. Petty
The Missing Ship
Ah on Marigot water front
Looking for ah ship
Ah see ah Hatien ship
In some kind ah ackward
relationship
They tell min Da is
Thé NEW Sxm partnership
Ah also see ah SANTOSHIP
Looking te get French cityzenship
And trying te get out ah censorship
But no place ah look
Ah could find
Saint Martin flagship
Cause ah looking fo
We leadership
Somebody say.
Det the leadership
Skip town
With the other haïtien ship
And they gone te Russia
Abord à soviet ship
On ah Friendship
Tour, leaving all ah WE here
On Saint Martin in we hardship
And nobody saying nothing
Oppositions can't HELP WE
Cause they too on ah sinking ship
Ah still want te KNOW
How could WE Leadership
Skip ship
And leave saint Martin on this
Rudderless ship
Unless hé Want WE te wreck
The ship
But I refuse te believe that
So ah still looking for
Thé saint Martin Leadership
So ah leaving tomorow
On a battle ship
Going to Russia
Te bring BACK we leader ship
Inspite of thé one Man
Dictatorship
Thé Tourist ship
Went to New York
On ah Dutch ship
Trying hard out. Of
That Relationship
Te get thé cruiseship
Te come into Margot
Township
After all that WE still
Missing WE LEADERSHIP
Raymond Helligar aka “Big Ray”
The St. Maarten population praises Minister of Justice Cornelius de Weever as a great politician, a man of action who keeps his word.
We welcome the small claim court, but we the people want to know what role the police, detectives and Marshal will play? Will they be involved in the small claim court if someone does not comply with the verdict?
Construction workers are victims of many of the bad-pay masters and police and detectives keep saying, go find a lawyer.
Both legal and illegal people should have access to the small claim court, and police, detectives, Marshall and Prosecutor are ready to make it a success.
Cuthbert Bannis
Let ‘us’ park the cars on the beach....
see how far the cars can reach.
Condoms, trash, dirty diapers in the sand...
destroying our beautiful St. Martin land.
‘We’ don’t care because it is me, me, me...
seeing no further than the eye can see.
Ankie Nieuwenhoven
Copyright © 2025 All copyrights on articles and/or content of The Caribbean Herald N.V. dba The Daily Herald are reserved.
Without permission of The Daily Herald no copyrighted content may be used by anyone.


