Dear Editor,
To understand the relationship between the Netherlands and Country Sint Maarten today, it is important to understand some recent history. Some crucial parts of this history are seldom exposed in the local press.
In the 1970s and after, the Netherlands was highly involved with the issue of development in third-world countries. The efforts to stimulate development in many third-world countries did not go smoothly. Much was written and much regret about poorly-spent funds was expressed.
Some crucial lessons stood out. Countries that did not have strong administrative institutions were unable to effectively handle development funds. Countries that took on debt in order to build infrastructure without limitation often ended up with debt they could not repay, and their available funds were consumed by interest payments that made no contribution to their development.
When it came to the further development of their Kingdom partners, the Dutch tried to be creative and learn from the failures they experienced. So, in the Antillean restructuring prior to 2010, they included the establishment of extensive institutions in their treaties (Parliament, Council of Advice, SER, audit chamber, integrity chamber, etc.) and to avoid the build-up of debt the CFT. In the case of Sint Maarten, the rapid development of the ’80s and ’90s seemed to suggest the possibility of a very small but healthy economy and if the institutions were to be in place, the optimist would have concluded that there was a great potential for a casebook successful development strategy.
As we all know, the various institutions, even though they have been created with all the necessary budgets, staffing, infrastructure and statutes, have not functioned in an optimal manner. In many cases there have been results, but not on the most critical outcomes needed in the country from a developmental perspective.
Now let’s look at the picture from Sint Maarten.
The slave-descended Sint Maartener, who lived in what was effectively a village in the first part of the 19th century, observes rapid economic growth from the 1950s base. Instead of benefitting directly from this, the opportunities are quickly snapped up by foreign operators. The small village community sense is heavily impacted by US television, extraordinary gambling access, development of assertive black thinking and consumerism. In the civil service many of the top jobs are taken by light-skinned consultants with high salaries whose presence is justified by the need to make the agreed abovementioned institutions work. Unfortunately, they don’t.
Use of debt, very common on the much-viewed US media that dominated Sint Maarten, is limited by the institution dominated by the Dutch known as the CFT. It seems to the Sint Maartener as if the Dutch do not want Sint Maarten to “move forward”. The word “colonialism” is heard in reference to this mechanism without there being necessarily a colonial analysis.
The village type communications insist that there is an abundance of money (example: high number of Dutch consultants, slow-moving Hurricane recovery, but it is not going to the majority of the electorate to the degree that matches their expectations.
The village-type media in Sint Maarten does not deal with the possible creative development strategy that was developed in the Netherlands after their experience in
third-world settings. The man in the street is not looking at the many sovereignties, many in the Caribbean, who did get trapped by debt and inadequate institutions: the eyes are on the standard of living on US TV and in the Netherlands. Neither the strategy nor the goal is on the local political radar.
What might be a well-thought-out strategy is not appreciated by the parties who are the target beneficiaries and worse still, interpreted negatively instead of positively.
Robbie Ferron
