Published on November 8 at 08:55 via Starnieuws, this sharp opinion piece by local commentator Wayne Keith Telgt calls out the Surinamese government for its contradictory, short-sighted approach to immigration, agricultural development, and natural resource governance.
Telgt opens with a biting proposed new national tourism slogan: “Welcome to Suriname: Land of immigrants, but please don’t immigrate!” The jab comes in direct response to recent official moves to immediately expel a group of Mennonite families, including women and children, who arrived in the country with stated plans to establish large-scale agricultural operations. The author notes that the administration opted for rapid deportation rather than sitting down with the group to negotiate clear, regulated terms for their work, a choice that raises serious questions about the functionality of the national Ministry of Agriculture, which Telgt jokes appears to operate solely under the mandate of “no, that is not allowed” rather than proactive sector development.
The op-ed lays out a viable, pragmatic alternative framework the government could have deployed to turn the Mennonite group’s agricultural ambitions into a national asset. Suriname currently faces severe, well-documented food security challenges: domestic supplies of chicken, red meat, and core staple foods are prohibitively expensive, and the country spends huge sums importing most of its food supply, creating crippling import dependency. Instead of expelling the new arrivals, officials could have presented them with a structured agricultural development package that mapped out underused former plantation lands, existing partially decommissioned irrigation and processing infrastructure that only required minor investment to reactivate, and a strict, non-negotiable set of binding rules: no uncontrolled deforestation, no destruction of protected ecological zones, no agricultural activity without an approved environmental management plan, no illegal land grabbing, no unregulated expansion, full compliance with Surinamese labor and environmental laws, mandatory production quotas and crop monitoring, and formal agreements prioritizing local domestic food supply before any export activity. Under this system, families that followed the rules would be welcomed to contribute to national food production, while those that violated terms would face strict, immediate enforcement action. Telgt argues this model represents functional, accountable governance, a stark contrast to the administration’s preference for performative press conferences over actionable production policies.
The core of the author’s criticism targets the government’s glaring double standard in enforcement. Telgt asks where the same rapid, uncompromising official action is when Suriname’s interior regions are systematically destroyed by illegal artisanal gold mining, when land originally zoned for agricultural use is illegally reclassified for unregulated mining concessions, when rivers are poisoned with mercury, old-growth forest is cleared at industrial scale, and the country’s natural wealth is siphoned off with zero public oversight. He points out that no high-profile press conferences are held, no mass expulsion operations are launched, and no strict regulatory frameworks are enforced when foreign mining groups clash violently in the interior, using knives, broken bottles, and even firearms, with Surinamese civilians frequently caught in the crossfire as victims.
Telgt stresses a core principle: the law must apply equally to every person present in Suriname, regardless of nationality, whether they are Cuban, Brazilian, native Surinamese, Mennonite, or any other group. Perpetrators of violence, unlicensed miners, people who destroy protected ecosystems, and anyone who violates national law must face consistent, equal consequences. But the author condemns the government’s pattern of deploying swift, uncompromising action against groups like the Mennonite farmers who could easily be integrated into a regulated, beneficial system, while dragging on for years in endless, unproductive meetings, debates, and deliberate inaction in the face of far larger, far more destructive crises.
The op-ed goes on to remind Surinamese officials that the country’s entire national identity and history are rooted in immigration: every major cultural and ethnic group that makes up modern Suriname traces its origins to communities that arrived from other parts of the world, and all of them collectively built the prosperous, diverse nation that exists today. A country does not grow stronger by sending away willing, productive newcomers, Telgt argues; it grows stronger by drafting clear, fair rules, applying those rules consistently across all groups, and delivering predictable clarity for investors and workers who want to contribute to public good. He explicitly clarifies that no one is arguing Mennonite families should receive free rein to clear old-growth forest without oversight, but if the national government is serious about boosting domestic food production, cutting costly food imports, and revitalizing the agricultural sector, it must design functional regulatory systems that let productive groups operate within strict, monitored boundaries. The author proposes a simple, actionable model: allocate a designated plot of existing underused agricultural land, sign formal agreements with 50 Mennonite farming families, impose strict enforceable conditions, conduct regular inspections, allow the group to produce food for the local market, and take decisive, tangible enforcement action rather than sending out trivial warning letters if terms are violated.
Telgt concludes with a warning that the current path will leave Suriname with nothing but untouched empty forest, a collapsed domestic agricultural sector, sky-high staple food prices in local supermarkets, and a government that only has performative deportation wins to boast about. He suggests the government could implement a simple standardized welcome package for all new groups looking to settle and work in Suriname: a copy of the national constitution, a full guide to national environmental laws, a map of all publicly available zoned agricultural land, a clear list of strict binding conditions, and a formal warning that all violators will lose their right to stay in the country. Suriname must never become a lawless haven for unregulated deforestation, illegal mining, or violent criminal activity, Telgt notes, but it also must not become a nation that throws away tangible economic and food security opportunities simply because its leaders lack the basic competence to draft and enforce clear, fair rules. “We do not have a shortage of forest,” the op-ed closes. “We have a shortage of policy. And the largest form of deforestation taking place in this country right now is the deforestation of our government’s will to act competently.”