Dear Sir,

  For the man in the St. Maarten street who does not particularly care whether St. Maarten has a seat at the United Nations but is more interested in whether the economy will not fall apart and the level of poverty on the island does not increase, it is not easy to grasp the challenge of Dutch aid and efforts at control and implementation of governance reforms.

  It requires a look back at the last 10 years that the Kingdom relationship has existed. The fundamental characteristic is that the Kingdom government, together with island leaders, designed the governance of St. Maarten on the basis of the Dutch national system of governance with all the bells and whistles associated with that. Governance systems vary and each has its strengths and weaknesses and few people have said that the Dutch model is particularly bad.

  There is hard evidence, however, that it is not working optimally in St. Maarten. Whilst the institutions function formally in large measure, the results of their efforts have been consistently underperforming. This relates to the top authority being parliament to the advice institutions and the executive branch.

  Some of this underperformance is clearly a result of it being new and every expectation is that time will lead to some improvement. But much of it is because the St. Maarten population has not embraced the Dutch models in a manner that would allow this optimization. These institutions require to be intensely supported if they are successful. The system is not theirs and the optimization will only occur when the systems are fully embraced. That is a complex, subtle and difficult goal to achieve.

  The apparent goal of the COHO is by having greater control to enhance the effectiveness of critical governance areas to achieve this optimization. The identification of what the critical areas are is not the subject of dispute.

  Our problem is that there is no reason to believe that a more controlling approach to improved governance is going to work. Many of the past collaboration and support efforts have not worked optimally. Why should this more controlling approach be successful? Will it create more resistance or is it the final push that will make things work and get us over the bump?

  The approach seems to lack any strategy other than “push harder” and this may lead to a result of “push back harder”.

Robbie Ferron

Dear Editor,

  The recent decolonization debate will surely bring forth the usual parade of charlatans and “quick buck” artists who wish to exploit the gullibility and general lack of information regarding decolonization. Here’s a quick test that governments can use to separate the “wheat from the chaff”. These charlatans are aware that if they are foreign, anything they peddle will be accepted by gullible governments. That is why the Caribbean, in general, tends to be a gold mine for foreign “experts and consultants.” Pro Soualiga is here to help avoid falling into that trap.

  1) According to the UN, which 4 items will have to be changed for St. Maarten to be considered decolonized?

  2) Can you explain why St. Maarten is not on the list of United Nations Non-Self-Governing Territories list?

  3) Name the other territories that were decolonized in the same decade as St. Maarten (former Netherlands Antilles).

  4) What are the key, critical differences between their resolutions and Resolution 945 (X). Why is this important?

  5) What is the main argument in the “Written Statement of the Kingdom of the Netherlands Antilles” and what logical conclusion does it lead to concerning the Kingdom Charter?

  6) In which document and in which paragraph can the recent admission regarding Article 73 of the UN Charter by the Dutch State be found?

  If the “expert” or “consultant” or, perhaps even government itself is not aware of this material, avoid being entrapped. If the “expert” cannot answer these questions without hesitation, there are legal grounds to demand a refund based on “fraud and misrepresentation.” Usually, the threat to report the matter to this expert’s bar association is enough to make them cough up any funds collected.

  Pro Soualiga challenged the Dutch State in court with these same questions. They too, with all their money and vast resources could not answer or, ran away from answering, relying on their judges to bail them out instead. It was only when finally cornered that they admitted what they had been hiding for 65 years: The United Nations General Assembly never issued a resolution declaring that the former Netherlands Antilles were decolonized.

Pro Soualiga Foundation

Dear Editor,

  “Culture Time” should be upgraded. I will suggest that the hosts should interview the senior citizens to talk about the past and present times. Furthermore, the younger generation has to be included to discuss the future as well. I would also like to suggest that the program should be called “Culture and History”.

Mavis Arrindell

Dear Editor,

  After every hurricane by which the island was struck, no matter the devastation, we, the people that believe in St. Maarten, always show our resilience and bounce back. Yes, we do get help to assist initially but, as though it is instinct, we do rebuild our country and get our economy up and running in a relatively short time.

  Perhaps we should consider the constant delays in receiving liquidity loans to be a blessing in disguise. Although many people are struggling, the country is still surviving. Perhaps it is because that is what we do and that is what we are made of.

  The financial assistance that we have received thus far is an accumulation of loans that must be repaid. In fact, these loans become payable as per April 2022,unless the Netherlands decides to extend the payment arrangements. Be that as it may, we must bear in mind that we will have to generate the funds to repay our debts from within our economy. Maybe it is not a bad thing that we are forced to do with less. It should be seen as something we can learn from.

  Our assertiveness may sometimes be perceived as bold, but it is actually a reflection of our strength which increases by the day. We are partners in the Dutch Kingdom. Equal partners, but not with equal equity, which confuses the conversation. But, whether we like it or not, that is the constitutional structure that is cemented in the Kingdom Charter. A Kingdom with partners that may require assistance from time to time, partners with different cultures, partners who sometimes do not speak the same language. But we are partners that share a joint history, yet our differences often present obstacles in our relationship. Despite all of this, we must be able to count on one another and that we be fair to each other.

  Our country must be able to stand on its own. Our continuous proclamations of doom and gloom after 10-10-10 show that many of us do not truly believe in St. Maarten, but are merely here to benefit from the good ride as long as others are towing the vessel.

  Our continuous efforts to belittle our own and to label them as corrupt and other sorts of degrading names, show that the people of this country do not understand the true meaning of being a patriot. Yes, I admit that some have made mistakes, but a few rotten apples do not spoil the whole bunch.

  If you do not believe that we can stand on our own in our own country and you are not willing to work towards standing on our own, then I truly believe that you do not belong here; born here or not. Every country has naysayers, those who preach doom and gloom, corrupt politicians, law enforcement officials, businessmen and women, and others. But, that should not stand in the way of remaining patriotic to the country we call home. If that is not St. Maarten then I’m sure after reading the above you will draw your own conclusion.

  Why do we continue to beg to be dependent while we know we have the ability to stand on our own? The recent presentation to parliament by the Chamber of Commerce revealed that after Hurricane Irma in September 2017, 1584 new businesses were established of which 641 were sole proprietors, a clear indication that we want to and are able to invest in our own country, thus building our economy.

Claudius Buncamper

Member of Parliament