Dear Editor,

  I read the letter to you in the paper of January 17, written by David Salomon, and my final thought was “At last.”  Yes, at last there is someone who took time to analyze what is really happening here and openly expressed it.

  I will not draw any attention to myself because I would like for everyone on St. Maarten to read that letter and am therefore petitioning you to leave it online as long as possible. Thank you in advance and congratulations to David Salomon for doing the thing right.

Russell A. Simmons

Dear Editor,

  Good leadership is crucial for any organization to achieve success, yet it seems to be a rare quality on St. Maarten. Real leaders possess vision, the ability to motivate others, passion for their work, and a track record of achieving results. However, poor leadership seems to be the norm on the island, leading to a vicious cycle of negative impacts on employee morale, productivity, and overall organizational performance. In this article, we will explore the consequences of poor leadership and offer insights into a simple yet effective potential solution; the use of 360 feedback.

  When leaders lack the skills, values, or vision to effectively guide and support their teams, it can create a culture of underperformance that is difficult to break. One of the most common effects of poor leadership is a decline in employee morale. When employees are not supported, recognized, or valued by their leaders, it can lead to feelings of frustration, resentment, and disillusionment. This can result in a decrease in motivation and engagement, leading to a decline in productivity and overall performance.

  Poor leadership can also have a detrimental impact on organizational culture. When leaders fail to set clear expectations, provide adequate resources, and support, or model the behaviours and values they expect from their team, it can create a culture of underperformance. This can be particularly damaging in organizations where there is a lack of accountability or transparency, as it can foster a sense of complacency and a belief that poor performance is tolerated (or even rewarded). It is no secret that this is a general perception of the public sector on St. Maarten, which is often type-cast as having lazy, unproductive individuals who are just out for a paycheque And while this may be the case for a few bad apples, it is unlikely and unfair to group everyone within that narrative. Instead, we should look for the contextual factors that lead to creating the culture which fosters and maintains poor leadership.

  Nepotism (-) Accountability (-) Performance “Quite Quitting” = Culture of underperformance. It starts with nepotism/favouritism. Hiring those individuals that lack the skills to lead simply because of their last name or political affiliation. When one hires a family member or friend and they perform below expectations, it is difficult to then hold that person accountable. This in turn further demotivates employees, who then perform less and less to the point where the term “Quite Quitting” has been coined. This phenomenon describes employees who only do the bare minimum. They still have the job, but only do that which is required not to be fired. Ultimately leading to culture of underperformance where no one is truly motivated/driven/willing to go the extra mile.

  A situation that many readers may be able to identify with, and a terrible cycle to find oneself in, often times leading to an actual exodus of good employees, who do not want to be stuck in such a culture, further exacerbating the problems. We have seen this within several divisions of government recently.

  So, what is the solution? Or what can be done to help break the cycle? An effective strategy that organizations can implement is the incorporation of 360 feedback. 360 feedback is a process in which not just employees, but also management (leaders) receive feedback from a variety of sources, including their peers, subordinates and superiors. This can provide a more comprehensive and objective view of a leader’s strengths and areas for improvement and can help to challenge the status quo if taken seriously. Key words if taken seriously!

  For 360 feedback to be effective, it is important that it is implemented in a way that is fair, objective, and confidential. It should also be accompanied by a clear plan for improvement and support, such as training or coaching. But also, with real consequences if there is a clear trend of consecutive poor reviews. A leader that is scored poorly on numerous occasions by a majority of his or her employees, can then be subject to leadership training or other efforts to help rectify the situation, not excluding disciplinary measures. The added benefit here being that 360 feedback can help flatten the organizational hierarchy, which can foster more innovation and involvement from employees as their suggestions and ideas should be taken more seriously. Essential here is that the reviewing of the results of the 360 feedback is done by a well-balanced committee which are both impartial and critical. An example of committee members can be Human Resources (PNO), an independent 3rd party advisor, and the division head/SG/Board member.

This simple tool, which can be quickly implemented can help identify so-called ‘bad apples,’ or expose bottlenecks in one’s organization that may not have been apparent from the onset.

  Will it solve all our problems? Probably not, however it is a start and it is high time we here on St. Maarten break the negative cycles that constantly have us feeling more and more under pressure. Instead, we should aim for upward spirals, in which positive reinforcing acts take centre stage and motivates each one of us to do a little better each and every day!

David Salomon

Dear Editor,

  There are certain things that happen in life which when I experience them make me teary-eyed. I listened to an excerpt of an interview and it reminded me of one of the almost daily advices I got from my father. He always reminded us not to lie because “two wrongs don’t make a right”. Over the years I have heard all kinds of reasons why people react to certain behavior the way they did. If they would react in a way that is reasonable, it would be understandable to me, but “paying back in own coin” is not the solution to resolve a problem.

  If you are paying back that is not self-defense, that is paying back, which makes you equal to your so-called offender.

  I am of the opinion that too many people on St. Maarten are of the opinion or under the impression that they are entitled to a whole lot of things, which they are not. Again I put the cause of the lack of civics and basic laws of the land, which if instructed in the schools would eventually let everyone know where their boundaries are. Because if I did something that in one’s opinion is not correct (acceptable) this does not give another person the right to do the same thing and not expect a reaction. Again, two wrongs do not make a right.

  I understood from a child that not because something is not against the law (an offense in the law) that makes it the right thing to do. This comes with a sense of integrity. Which sadly to have to say is not regularly displayed by those who, because of protocol, we should expect if from.

  What I experienced in 1970 when I first came to Sint Maarten compared to what is happening today makes me ask where and why. I know that the nucleus of the population has changed, but I must also add that the temperament of the politicians has not helped. The expression is “… at.any cost”. We have had a lot of investigations involving high-placed government employees and all of those investigations involved illegal handling of monies. Why are there so many churches on St. Maarten?. What part of Romans 13:1-7 did none of those politicians understand, or is it their nature to ignore what is the right thing to do, just like they are ignoring the plight of the people?

  Before continuing I have this question. Is it not normal for any self-respecting person who when expecting visitors to, what we would say here “straighten up the house”? So why is it such a big thing now for aspiring politicians too, because ( just like any other government in the kingdom has done for years) the St. Maarten government has decided to patch up the holes in the road, in connection with the visit of the royal family? This is letting us know from the onset, what kind of politician we could expect.

  Now this. Since when have those roundabouts been in place? So, let me ask this. If I was Prime Minister at least twice since 10-10-’10, and had promised never to use link-one or link-two, why all of a sudden the interest to spruce up the Cay Hill roundabout? Which link is that a part of? And what would “not taking care of our own” during the time that I was in charge say about me?

  Again I have to insist that it is never personal, because I too put myself out there for 41 years, knowing that there would be retaliation, but I did not fool the people, neither some of the time nor did I try to all of the time. I served and protected them to the best of my ability all of the time. I did not rely on the people to forget, otherwise I would be relying on them to forget the so many unfulfilled promises made.

  When I read “Not that the other roundabouts are that exemplary either”, I said to myself it is either memory loss or G.A is in opposition. There is a saying “The only way for evil to be triumphant is for good people to do nothing”. So permit me via you to ask those who are expected to do the right thing. It takes much more energy to concentrate on not doing the right thing and then we forget because it is not genuine.

Russell A.Simmons

In 1813, two extraordinary military campaigns were launched from the Venezuelan periphery, aiming at reinstating Venezuelan independence, which had been gained in 1811 and then lost in 1812 to hands of Spanish General Domingo de Monteverde. One of those campaigns, the Admirable Campaign, was led by Venezuelan Liberator Simón Bolívar, who fought his way across the harrowing terrain of the Venezuelan Andes on his journey from Colombia to Caracas between May and August 1813.

However, less is heard of the equally exciting and impressive military campaign known as the Chacachacare Expedition, led by Santiago Mariño from the islet of Chacachacare in Trinidad. Mariño, aided by 45 men and a heroic woman, carried out a strategic operation from Trinidad that resulted in the liberation of Guiria (currently in the state of Sucre in Eastern Venezuela) on the 13th of January 1813; thus, inaugurating our Second Republic.

The Chacachacare Expedition did not lack romanticism. Indeed, it had all the ingredients needed for a riveting Netflix series.

Firstly, 45 men signed the Chacachacare Proclamation in which they swore to “conquer or die” for the liberation of Venezuela. They would go on to be known as the “Immortal Forty-Five.”  Many of these men in fact such as: Juan Bautista Arismendi, José Francisco Bermúdez and Curaçao-born Manuel Piar, went on to become quite relevant in Venezuelan history years later.

However, the truth is that it took more people than just those 45 brave men to make this enterprise successful. Among those who did not sign the Proclamation but played an important role was Jean Baptiste Bideau. Originally from St. Lucia, Bideau was the right-hand man of Santiago Mariño when it came to planning and recruiting soldiers and sailors for the expedition. In addition, he provided his own schooner, “Botón de Rosa” for the cause. In 1816, Bideau would become even more relevant in Venezuelan history, for he saved the life of Liberator Simón Bolívar.

Another exceptional person in this story, who did not sign the Proclamation either, was Doña Concepción Mariño, sister of Santiago Mariño, and rightful owner of the Chacachacare estate where the whole expedition was planned and exercised. Also known as the Magnanimous Señora, Concepción Mariño could be defined in modern military terms as a Logistics Commander. She led – to the smallest detail – the acquisition of arms, military equipment and boats, as well as their inconspicuous transport from Port-of-Spain to Chacachacare, in spite of the ominous surveillance by the British authorities.

In reality, considering all the contribution and passion both by Jean Baptiste Bideau and Concepción Mariño, the “Immortal Forty-Five” should really be the “Immortal Forty-Seven.”

In his book, “The Gateway to South America,” the late Trinbagonian historian Gaylord Kelshall explains how both Santiago and Concepción, as teen-agers, were inspired by Venezuelan Generalísimo Francisco de Miranda in 1806, who they met when he journeyed to Chacachacare with his entourage to visit the siblings’ parents, right after Miranda’s failure to liberate Venezuela in Ocumare. Ever since, Santiago and Concepción made their minds to tribute their young lives to the cause of Venezuelan independence.

So far so good, but what about British authorities ruling Trinidad at the time? In 1812 and 1813, the British Government’s position towards Venezuelan independence from Spain was ambiguous to say the least. Ultimately, it all depended on the governor general who would be in charge.

During the planning and execution of the Chacachacare Expedition, which lasted three months, the Governor General of Trinidad was Hector William Munro. Although he particularly detested Venezuelan patriots operating in Trinidad, he lacked the sophistication and precision of intelligence-gathering of his predecessor, Thomas Picton. Therefore, it was fairly easy for Santiago and Concepción to deceive Munro’s schemes.

Furthermore, Santiago was particularly charismatic and likeable. Years earlier, Santiago had joined the Island’s Militia in Trinidad, where he gained many friends and established useful contacts. Such was the extent of Santiago’s popularity in the Militia that practically the whole corps was collaborating with the Chacachacare Expedition, although in disguise.

To give an idea of the extent of the network of support developed by the Mariñoses in Trinidad, it should be noted that the personal secretary of Governor Munro, Manuel Valdez, was also one of the “Immortal Forty-Five.” Add to that the input of French Republicans populating Trinidad since the establishment of Spain’s "Cédula of Population," in the late 18th Century, and you would have a further advantage for the "Chacachacare Expedition."

In her book, “Women from the Independence,” Venezuelan writer and researcher Carmen Clemente Travieso describes how in the early afternoon of January 11th, 1813, the “Immortal Forty-Five,” along with the Magnanimous Señora Concepción Mariño and servants from the Chacachacare estate, gathered to eat a delectable barbecue and to sign and read the Chacachacare Proclamation. Both actions would certainly soothe the nerves and anxieties of the warriors who had promised to either liberate Venezuela or die.

At five o’clock in the afternoon, on January 11th, 1813, the expedition led by Santiago Mariño departed from Chacachacare’s La Tinta Bay towards Guiria, sailing through the Gulf of Paria. And by three in the morning, on January 13th, Santiago Mariño had successfully landed in Guiria. Before sunrise, the “Immortal Forty-Five” had defeated a force of 300 strong Spanish soldiers led by Royalist Lieutenant Juan Gavazo.

From this moment – and until August 1813 – this contingent of Patriots sealed the liberation of Eastern Venezuela, with Guiria, Maturín, Cumaná and Barcelona as key bastions in the campaign. The triumph of Mariño combined with the equally successful Admiral Campaign of Liberator Simón Bolívar in Western Venezuela, resulting in a new Venezuelan liberation.

The strategic importance of Trinidad – particularly Chacachacare – for the independence of Venezuela 210 years ago was paramount. Nonetheless, as reflected by history, especially the history of the Mariño family, the links between Trinidad and Tobago and Venezuela go way beyond the strategic aspect. It is really embedded in the culture and the common vision of both brotherly and sisterly nations.

By Venezuelan Ambassador to Trinidad

 and Tobago Álvaro Sánchez Cordero