A major infrastructure oversight has emerged at Tobago’s newly constructed ANR Robinson International Airport terminal, with the National Petroleum Company Ltd (NP) confirming that connecting fuel lines from the existing airport site to the new terminal will carry a price tag of $50 million. THA Chief Secretary Farley Augustine recently verified the cost estimate, shedding light on a critical gap in the terminal’s construction: the new building was completed without any on-site fuelling infrastructure at all. In an interview with local media outlet Express, Augustine detailed that discussions with NP several months ago yielded the $50 million projection, adding that the national energy firm is currently debating whether it will absorb the full cost of the project. For Augustine and the Tobago House of Assembly, the project is far more than a basic construction fix: the regional body wants the new terminal to meet modern, efficient, and competitive standards that match or exceed peer airports across the Caribbean and broader global aviation network. The oversight, Augustine explained, is not an unforeseen mistake. He recalled that former THA Infrastructure Secretary Trevor James first flagged the need for integrated fuelling infrastructure back in 2022, when the ruling PNM Cabinet held a gathering in Tobago at the prime minister’s official residence. Despite the early warning, Augustine said, the THA’s input was sidelined, and construction proceeded without including this critical utility. “But of course, as usual, in 2022 the THA was ignored, our thoughts were not considered at the time and the terminal was built without that critical infrastructure there,” Augustine stated. Even with the past disregard for local input, Augustine emphasized that the THA remains committed to collaborating with Trinidad and Tobago’s central government to get the terminal fully and efficiently operational. He framed the airport as a key economic asset for Tobago, rather than just a transit hub for passengers. “Airports in of themselves are potentials for generating income; we have to see the airport as such and not just as a hub for planes to land and pick up people, but as an income-generating facility,” he said. The issue has now gained traction at the national level: Minister of Works and Infrastructure Jearlean John acknowledged the problem in a Monday interview with Express, confirming that the project will require design adjustments to address the fuelling gap. John shared that she shares concerns over the terminal’s current lack of fuelling capacity, and has scheduled a meeting with relevant officials later this week to map out a path forward. The full proposal to resolve the issue will be presented to the national Cabinet for consideration next week.
分类: politics
-

Trump: Tijdelijke pauze voor Amerikaanse operatie in Straat van Hormuz
In a significant shift in US policy amid escalating tensions in the Persian Gulf, former President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that Washington is temporarily halting its military operation to escort stranded commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. The pause, he says, is intended to create diplomatic space for finalizing a comprehensive peace agreement between the United States and Iran.
Trump made the announcement via his social media platform Truth Social, noting that the temporary suspension was agreed to “at the request of Pakistan and other nations” following what he called “major progress” in negotiations with Iranian representatives. He clarified that while the existing US blockade on Iranian ports remains fully in effect, the escort mission codenamed Project Freedom will be put on hold to allow negotiators to finalize and sign a formal agreement. As of Wednesday, Tehran has not issued an official public response to Trump’s announcement.
The announcement comes at a moment of rapidly intensifying friction across the Gulf region. In recent days, the US military confirmed it has destroyed multiple Iranian fast attack boats, cruise missiles, and drones. The United Arab Emirates also reported that its air defense systems have intercepted missile and drone attacks launched from Iran for the second consecutive day, while a commercial transiting vessel said it was struck by an unidentified projectile in the strait.
In parallel to the military escalations, Iran has rolled out new shipping regulations for vessels seeking passage through the strait. Under the new framework, ships receive updated transit rules via email from the newly established Persian Gulf Strait Authority. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) also released a revised map expanding Iran’s declared maritime control area, issuing a warning that vessels must only use Iran-designated shipping corridors or face a “decisive response” if they deviate.
In Washington, Secretary of State Marco Rubio confirmed that the US has concluded its offensive military campaign against Iran, codenamed Operation Epic Fury. “We will not open fire unless we are attacked first,” Rubio stated, though he stressed that Iran will still face consequences for its attempts to assert exclusive control over the strategic waterway. “The Strait of Hormuz does not belong to Iran. They have no right to close passage, blow up ships, or lay mines,” he said, adding that allowing Iran to collect tolls for transit would set a dangerous precedent that could be replicated by other countries around the globe.
The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, carrying roughly one-fifth of global energy supplies. The waterway has been effectively closed to most commercial traffic since large-scale military operations between the US, Israel, and Iran began on February 28. After a ceasefire took effect in early April, the US imposed its own unilateral blockade to prevent vessels from entering or exiting Iranian ports.
The closure of the strait has already rippled through global markets, disrupting supply chains, pushing up crude oil and fertilizer prices, and stoking widespread fears of a looming global recession and expanded food insecurity.
Speaking to reporters earlier Tuesday, Trump argued that the combination of US military pressure and economic sanctions has forced Tehran to the negotiating table, despite its public rejection of talks with his administration. “Iran wants to make a deal,” Trump said. “What I don’t like is they talk to me with a lot of respect privately, then go on television and say they won’t talk to the president. They’re playing games. But let me be clear: they want a deal. Who wouldn’t? Their military capability has been destroyed, we can do whatever we want.”
Trump, who faces growing political pressure from rising consumer prices ahead of November midterm elections, dismissed Iran’s remaining military capacity as nothing more than the firing of “firecrackers.” When asked what actions from Iran would count as a ceasefire violation, he simply said, “They know what they shouldn’t do.”
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, speaking from the Pentagon, added that the recent outbreaks of violence in the strait do not constitute a breach of the four-week-old ceasefire. “US forces do not need to enter Iranian territorial waters. We are not seeking a fight, but Iran cannot block innocent nations and their cargo in international waters,” Hegseth said. “The ceasefire is holding for the moment, but we are monitoring it very closely.”
-

Pawiroredjo en Gajadien uiten scherpe kritiek op ingreep president bij Self Reliance
On Tuesday, two leading parliamentary faction leaders from Suriname — Jerrel Pawiroredjo of the National Party of Suriname (NPS) and Asis Gajadien of the Progressive People’s Party (VHP) — delivered pointed, urgent questions to the national government during a sitting of the National Assembly. The inquiry centers on claims of inappropriate political meddling in the operations of state-linked enterprises and the broader domestic financial sector, triggered by recent actions taken by the Surinamese president targeting the Board of Commissioners of the national insurance firm Self Reliance.
Lawmakers have characterized the president’s move as a deeply troubling development that threatens long-standing principles of good governance and transparent corporate oversight. “Shareholding carries responsibility, not unchecked absolute control,” the parliamentarians emphasized in their questioning. According to unconfirmed reporting from local outlet Starnieuws, the controversial intervention is expected to be reversed in the near term, with all formal correspondence related to the plan also withdrawn.
A leaked letter from the president to Albert Jubitana, president-commissioner of Self Reliance, reveals that acting on behalf of the Surinamese state, which holds shares in the company, the head of state pushed for an emergency general meeting of shareholders to be convened. A key item added to the proposed meeting agenda is the dismissal of multiple sitting members of the Board of Commissioners. The request specifically calls for a full review of the performance of board members, with an eye toward potentially removing several from their posts.
In the correspondence, the president cites Article 23 of Self Reliance’s corporate bylaws, which formally grants shareholders the right to request an extraordinary general meeting. The letter also demands the board turn over internal records on ongoing deliberations and disclose the legal basis for recent decisions the board has made.
Critics of the president’s action have raised serious questions about the appropriate boundaries of shareholder influence, particularly in this case: the Surinamese state does not hold a controlling majority stake in the insurer, instead owning only approximately 40 percent of outstanding shares.
Beyond the insurer itself, concerns have also been raised about potential political pressure on the Central Bank of Suriname. Observers warn that unchecked political influence could erode the central bank’s regulatory independence, creating significant unneeded risks to the overall stability of Suriname’s financial sector. In their inquiry, the parliamentary leaders have demanded the national government provide full transparency around the intervention, as well as a clear, legally sound justification for the president’s actions.
-

Pesticidenschandaal: DNA hekelt falend toezicht en risico voor volksgezondheid
A major political controversy has erupted in Suriname after the European Union rejected two of the country’s key agricultural export shipments in just four days, triggering fierce criticism of the government’s failed food safety regulation from lawmakers in the National Assembly (DNA).
The rejected products, red pepper and yardlong bean, failed EU entry checks due to containing pesticide residues that exceeded the bloc’s strict safety limits. Lawmakers from across the political spectrum have warned that this failure is not just an international trade issue, but an immediate threat to domestic public health, with one senior parliamentarian saying the current broken system is actively poisoning the Surinamese population.
During Wednesday’s public parliamentary session, legislators drew a direct line between the EU rejections and deep, structural flaws in Suriname’s domestic food safety monitoring regime. NDP parliamentarian Jennifer Vreedzaam led the criticism, leveling sharp blame at Agriculture, Livestock and Fisheries (LVV) Minister Mike Noersalim for the government’s inaction on this long-recognized problem.
VHP lawmaker Cherryl Dijksteel emphasized that the incident confirms a fundamental breakdown in the country’s food control infrastructure. “If we cannot stop banned substances from entering the supply chain, detect residue limit breaches, or inspect products before they reach markets, we have to ask: does our current system work at all?” Dijksteel said. She pressed the government to answer a series of urgent, detailed questions about the incident, including whether the responsible exporters have been identified, whether products from the same farms are being retested for domestic sale, and how the country can improve product traceability. “You cannot run effective control if you do not know where a product comes from,” she stressed.
A core unresolved question at the heart of the debate is whether agricultural products are actually tested before they are distributed domestically or exported. If pre-market testing does occur, lawmakers say, the failure to catch the excessive pesticide residues points to major gaps in inspection quality and process. If testing does not occur at all, that indicates a complete failure to deliver the most basic level of consumer protection.
Vreedzaam and VHP colleague Dew Sharman argued that Minister Noersalim and the broader government cannot be allowed to avoid accountability for this failure. Vreedzaam called for immediate corrective action, noting that no recalls have been issued for potentially contaminated products sold domestically. “Nothing has been done. We haven’t seen any products pulled from store shelves, which means contaminated goods are still sitting there for consumers to buy. That can only mean one thing: we are poisoning our own people,” Vreedzaam said.
Dijksteel added that the crisis is entirely avoidable: the problem of unsafe pesticide residues has been recognized as a top priority for years in the strategic plan of the National Institute for Food Safety Suriname (NIVS), and global development programs including the STDF project have already mapped out clear solutions. “We know what the problems are, we already have the solutions worked out, but nothing is being implemented,” she said.
The consequences of this inaction stretch far beyond the two rejected shipments, lawmakers warned. Beyond the immediate damage to Suriname’s reputation as a reliable agricultural exporter, unregulated pesticide residues pose a long-term threat to the health of the domestic population. Dijksteel called the fact that EU inspectors, not local regulators, detected the breaches particularly alarming. “This means our system is failing at its most basic core function: protecting the consumer,” she explained.
Criticism has centered almost entirely on the LVV ministry, which holds formal responsibility for food safety oversight and enforcement. The demand for immediate government intervention has grown louder, with Dijksteel noting the issue has long outgrown the stage of being a simple technical problem. “This is a governance failure. The question is no longer whether there is a problem, it is why nothing has been done to fix it,” she said.
Suriname’s government is now facing widespread pressure to deliver concrete, immediate policy changes: strengthening pesticide use monitoring, closing gaps in food safety inspection, protecting public health, and rebuilding trust with both domestic consumers and international trade partners.
-

Sanctions and threats of war: The last stand
On May 1, 2026, hundreds of thousands of Cuban citizens gathered in massive, organized demonstrations across the island to voice their unified support for the country’s revolutionary government, a display of popular solidarity that directly pushes back against a years-long campaign of pressure from the United States government. According to analysis from Cuban outlet *Granma*, this open show of national unity poses a unprecedented challenge to a sitting U.S. administration that has long positioned itself as the unchallenged hegemonic power across the Western Hemisphere.
The reporting, published May 6, notes that the current U.S. policy toward Cuba is heavily shaped by hardline right-wing political interests based in Florida, with key influence exerted by high-profile figures including Senator Marco Rubio and former Inter-American Development Bank president Mauricio Claver-Carone. Cuba’s decision to openly celebrate Labor Day with a public display of grassroots backing for its sovereign system comes as Washington has spent years leveraging harsh economic sanctions to force Havana into political surrender and demobilization.
Framed by Cuban commentators as a modern David versus Goliath struggle, the Cuban people have refused to be silenced even as the U.S. has used economic pressure to create widespread hunger and hardship to force political change. In a pre-planned escalation following the demonstration, the U.S. president signed a new package of punitive sanctions designed to further subjugate Cuba, while once again openly hinting at potential military intervention to force the country into compliance.
The new U.S. policy framework relies heavily on falsehood and strategic misinformation to justify tightening the decades-long economic blockade on Cuba. The core goal of this escalating pressure, the report argues, is to force the Cuban people to abandon their hard-won independence and sovereignty, bending to the political demands of extreme opposition factions.
The entire U.S. approach to supposed talks with Cuba is described as a cynical exercise in coercion: dialogue masked as pressure, mixed with leaks, political blackmail, and non-negotiable ultimatums. What Washington frames as negotiation is in reality a trap, the analysis says: a carefully constructed plan crafted behind closed doors at the U.S. State Department by allies of anti-Castro factions based in Miami, acting on direct orders from top White House national security and diplomatic leaders. These officials take their direction from Florida’s vengeful far-right, which remains committed to restoring a corrupt, annexationist order in Havana.
The stark contrast between the two nations’ positioning on this year’s Labor Day could not be clearer: While Cuba used the occasion to reaffirm its call for peace and an end to the decades-long U.S. blockade, the U.S. responded with threats of military power and new punitive measures. The massive May 1 demonstration, which drew the equivalent of more than 6 million participants across the country, stands as a collective rebuke to what Cuba describes as a genocidal threat of foreign aggression.
-

New immigration, foreigners, and citizenship laws transform Cuba’s migration system
On May 6, 2026, Cuban officials announced the publication and phased implementation of three landmark pieces of legislation that fundamentally reshape the country’s decades-old immigration framework. Laws 171, 172 and 173, which update rules governing immigration, foreign national residency and Cuban citizenship, introduce a series of user-centric changes designed to align the country’s migration policies with modern global trends and address longstanding concerns of Cubans both at home and abroad.
Colonel Mario Méndez Mayedo, head of the Ministry of the Interior’s Directorate of Identification, Immigration, and Foreigners Affairs, outlined the scope of the reform at an official press conference. The overhaul represents a massive expansion and update of outdated legal language: the core Immigration Act has grown from just 25 articles to 170, the Aliens Act from 25 articles to 91, and the new Citizenship Act marks the first time Cuba has codified citizenship rules into a standalone law. Supporting regulatory frameworks have also expanded dramatically, with the Immigration Regulations now containing 362 articles and Aliens Regulations 200 articles. This expansion reflects the complexity of modern migration issues and the broad inter-agency consensus built over years of drafting, which included input from 37 government bodies.
Méndez Mayedo noted that the legislative process was “lengthy and very complex,” with continuous consultation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Cuban consulates worldwide to collect feedback and concerns from the country’s large diaspora community. After being approved by the Cuban National Assembly in July 2024, the laws are now set to enter into force after a 180-day transition period for most provisions. However, one high-priority section — the new immigration status for foreign investors and business actors — took effect immediately upon publication via a separate decree-law, tied to ongoing updates to Cuba’s economic model.
The most transformative change for Cuban citizens living overseas is the elimination of the controversial 24-month limit on continuous stays outside the country, replaced by a new legal concept of “effective migratory residence.” Under the new rules, Cubans may remain abroad for any length of time they choose, with no automatic loss of residency status. To retain effective migratory residence, individuals only need to have spent a cumulative 180 days in Cuba over the previous 12-month period. Those who do not meet this threshold can still retain their status by proving ongoing formal ties to the country, including immediate family relationships to Cuban residents, active paid employment, registered investments, property ownership, domestic bank accounts, compliance with tax obligations, or other holdings of movable or immovable assets in Cuba. Cubans residing in the country who must stay abroad for extended periods for work, medical treatment, study or other approved reasons also qualify to retain their effective residence status with proper documentation.
“There is no time limit for being outside Cuba. Cubans can remain abroad for as long as they need, as long as they require, as long as they want,” Méndez Mayedo emphasized. This change will phase out the existing category of “emigrant,” which will gradually shrink as most Cubans living overseas are reclassified to the more flexible and beneficial status of “resident abroad.” Beyond benefiting individuals, the new effective residency framework will also produce more accurate data on Cuba’s actual resident population, supporting more informed public policy and government decision-making.
Another major reform addresses widespread concerns over property rights for Cuban citizens living overseas, a top issue during preliminary public and parliamentary debates. Article 31 of the new Immigration Law explicitly enshrines that all Cuban citizens residing abroad hold the constitutional right to own, use, and freely dispose of property located in Cuba, in alignment with Article 58 of the Cuban constitution. Méndez Mayedo confirmed that this explicit protection was included to directly resolve longstanding anxieties among the diaspora over their domestic assets.
For foreign nationals seeking to live in Cuba, the new laws introduce far more flexible residency pathways and expand eligibility for both temporary and permanent status. Previously, permanent residency was largely limited to spouses of Cuban citizens; now, multiple additional categories qualify, including parents of Cuban-born citizens who reside in Cuba, foreign nationals who have lived in Cuba for more than five years with proven deep social and economic ties, skilled professionals with advanced degrees, international recognition or expertise in science, sports, culture or the arts endorsed by Cuban state agencies, foreign individuals holding significant assets or domestic bank accounts in Cuba, and foreign families with established employment, economic or long-term survival ties to the country. The laws also create a formal regulatory framework for humanitarian protection for vulnerable groups that previously lacked clear immigration status, including victims of armed conflicts, people in crisis situations, and insolvent tourists. “This has been happening, but without a regulatory framework; now we are including it in the Law,” Méndez Mayedo explained.
In closing, the senior official framed the reform as the culmination of extensive public and parliamentary debate, designed to balance the interests of all relevant stakeholders while prioritizing the most beneficial outcomes for Cuban citizens. “Today we are implementing a new immigration system in the Republic of Cuba. This is the greatest demonstration of the fulfillment of the political decision to keep immigration regulations up to date,” he said. The full text of the three laws, along with the immediate decree-law for investors and accompanying financial regulations, are published in Ordinary Official Gazette No. 39 and Extraordinary Official Gazette No. 60 respectively.




