The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Cooperation (BIS) announced on Wednesday that the visa requirement will be reintroduced for citizens from Bolivia and Mexico with effect from October 1. This remarkable and abrupt measure can be seen as a panic action by the ministry to keep the much-discussed Mennonites out. However, their numbers are limited, while other travelers are now also severely affected.
Text Armand Snijders
Image Jason Pinas
Although the ministry officially speaks of “recent developments in the field of migration” that make the measure necessary – without specifying what these ‘developments’ are – it is crystal clear to everyone: this sudden brake is directly related to the social and political unrest surrounding the possible large-scale arrival of Mennonites to Suriname.
“It would be better for the government to sit down with the Mennonites to see whether a satisfactory solution can be found for this thorny issue that has been dragging on for years.”
The announcement also came the day after Ruud Souverein of the facilitating Braganza Marketing Group the True Time had calculated that approximately 340 Mennonite families will settle in Suriname for the three large-scale agricultural projects that she wants to carry out in West Suriname.
Not a clue
The government, which is clearly concerned about the long-standing Mennonite issue, apparently knows nothing else to do than to introduce a visa requirement and keep some of the religious pioneers out. This is a lot more complicated for the Mennonites from Belize: they are residents of the Caricom and therefore cannot be excluded based on agreements within the Caricom.
There are now about thirty – large – families from that island living in the Tibiti area, Mennonite Peter Peterson recently revealed. That was also a surprise for the Ministry of BIS, which apparently has no idea who is entering Suriname and for what purpose.
By the way, due to all the vagueness that has been stated by Braganza Marketing Group in recent times, it is still completely unclear how many Mennonites have actually come to Suriname and where they come from. Sometimes the Sovereign says ‘sixty’, other times he claims ‘a few families’, all of whom are here temporarily. Based on Peterson’s statements, this does not seem to be correct.
So the 340 families mentioned by Sovereign should be taken with a large grain of salt for the time being, which makes the BIS measure seem very premature. By abruptly withdrawing visa-free access for citizens from two countries, the government is opting for a reactive control measure. However, the intervention indirectly confirms that the ministry was in danger of losing control of the situation through the regular channels.
Diplomatic decency
From the point of view of international relations and diplomatic propriety, introducing a drastic visa measure within 24 hours is highly unusual and contrary to the norms of predictability. In international legal transactions it is common to use a transition period of thirty to ninety days.
It is imperative that traveling citizens, who legally and in good faith booked a ticket months ago, are protected. They are now confronted with acute travel disruptions, financial damage or the risk of being stranded at a transit airport somewhere. Travelers without a visa are suddenly no longer able to travel to Suriname. This can lead to significant damage claims. It is not known how many people are involved in total.
Respect will also have to be shown for the relationship with the countries to whose residents the visa measure applies. An abrupt change without prior diplomatic consultation or a reasonable extension period – as in this case – can be interpreted by Bolivia and Mexico as a serious violation of diplomatic trust. Other countries will also be on their guard, which could have adverse effects in view of the upcoming oil extraction.
Lack of consistent policy
Furthermore, the logistical feasibility for the aviation sector is also at stake: airlines and the systems used there need time to make adjustments. Enforcing the inspection obligation at such short notice places disproportionately heavy operational pressure on the sector, which endangers safety. Claims can also come from that angle.
In international practice, emergency measures are generally reserved for acute national security crises, outbreaks of war or other serious emergencies, such as pandemics. The use of this heavy instrument for a protracted, domestic socio-economic debate about Mennonites and agricultural migration shows a lack of long-term planning and consistent policy.
The temporary nature of the measure and the promise of ‘periodic evaluations’ underline that this is not part of a well-thought-out national migration strategy. Now the responsibility for a complex migration issue is being shifted to the traveler and the transport sector through an administrative emergency measure. The government would be better off sitting down with the Mennonites to see whether a satisfactory solution can be found to this thorny issue that has been dragging on for years.
*The Ministry of Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Cooperation did not respond to questions from De Ware Tijd
