标签： Dominica

Born citizens of the Commonwealth of Dominica are experiencing significant travel complications and diplomatic stigmatization due to international reactions against the nation’s Citizenship by Investment (CBI) program. Multiple countries including Canada, Ireland, the United Kingdom, Norway, and the United States have imposed stringent visa restrictions and travel bonds specifically targeting Dominican passport holders.

This situation creates a paradoxical reality where native Dominicans—whose only proof of citizenship is their Dominican passport—face heightened scrutiny, profiling, and suspicion at international borders. The article cites firsthand accounts of travel experiences, including one citizen who was detained for 45 minutes at Amsterdam’s airport after immigration authorities indicated he ‘fit the profile’ of wealthy individuals involved in human trafficking using Dominican passports.

The core issue stems from the perceived exploitation of Dominica’s CBI program, which critics argue has enabled passport acquisition without genuine ties to the country. This has led to international authorities associating Dominican passports with financial transactions rather than legitimate citizenship, resulting in systemic discrimination against all passport holders regardless of their birth origin.

Government officials including Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit and Immigration Minister Dr. Henderson are being urged to address these diplomatic challenges and protect the travel rights of native citizens who are increasingly finding their passport more a liability than a privilege in international travel.

Dominica’s political landscape is embroiled in a contentious debate over a clandestine immigration agreement with the United States. Dr. Thomson Fontaine, Leader of the United Workers’ Party (UWP), has publicly challenged Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit to disclose the complete details of a pact permitting third-country refugees from the U.S. to be relocated to Dominica.

The controversy emerged following the Prime Minister’s revelation during a press conference that this arrangement was negotiated as part of discussions subsequent to the December 16, 2025 proclamation that imposed partial visa restrictions. Dr. Fontaine criticized the government’s lack of transparency, emphasizing that the Dominican public learned about this significant agreement through indirect channels rather than official communication.

According to opposition research, approximately fourteen nations including Costa Rica, El Salvador, Antigua & Barbuda, Ghana, Poland, and Uganda have entered similar deportation acceptance agreements, typically involving financial compensation or specialized diplomatic terms. The UWP leader highlighted critical unanswered questions regarding the number of expected individuals, their national origins, security backgrounds, housing arrangements, and social support infrastructure.

In response, the Office of the Prime Minister issued a detailed statement characterizing the arrangement as non-binding and containing comprehensive safeguards for Dominican interests. The negotiated terms provide Dominica with absolute discretion to accept or reject proposals, refuse individuals based on criminal history, receive advance disclosure of medical and criminal records, and terminate participation through diplomatic notice at any time.

The government emphasized that all accepted persons would receive treatment in accordance with Dominica’s Constitution, domestic legislation, and international obligations including the Refugee Convention and Convention against Torture. Final operating procedures currently in development will specify documentation requirements from U.S. authorities and outline any support provisions from the American government.

The administration maintains that all decisions will prioritize national security, public welfare, capacity limitations, international law compliance, and the preservation of constructive bilateral relations with the United States.

In a significant diplomatic development, the Federation of St. Kitts and Nevis has formalized a bilateral arrangement with the United States governing the conditional acceptance of specific deportees and refugees. Prime Minister Dr. Terrance Drew disclosed the agreement during a press roundtable, emphasizing its carefully circumscribed parameters.

The memorandum of understanding (MOU) explicitly restricts eligibility to nationals of Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member states, with categorical exclusion of Haitian citizens due to articulated security considerations. This specificity addresses regional concerns about the scope of such agreements. ‘We have negotiated an arrangement exclusively for CARICOM nationals—this point requires absolute clarity,’ Dr. Drew stated during his media engagement.

The agreement emerges amid broader regional discussions regarding third-country national transfers, following reports that Dominica and Antigua and Barbuda had been approached regarding similar arrangements. Prime Minister Drew characterized St. Kitts and Nevis’ approach as proactive and deliberately constrained, emphasizing that ‘the program does not extend to individuals from outside the CARICOM region.’

Stringent eligibility criteria will govern the transfer process, with individuals having histories of violent or sexual offenses automatically disqualified. Financial and logistical responsibilities for the program will reside primarily with the United States, though specific operational details remain under bilateral discussion according to the Prime Minister’s statements.

In a significant foreign policy move, the Trump administration has declared its intention to withdraw from more than sixty international agreements and organizations, primarily those affiliated with the United Nations. The decision, formalized through a presidential memorandum dated January 7th, targets entities focused on climate change, marine conservation, renewable energy, and counterterrorism.

The extensive list of affected partnerships includes prominent environmental bodies such as the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The withdrawal strategy also encompasses agreements concerning maritime security, anti-piracy operations, and initiatives dedicated to women’s empowerment. According to the administration’s assessment, these 66 entities—31 of which are UN-linked—have been deemed ‘contrary to the interests of the United States.’

This sweeping action follows a comprehensive review of international commitments conducted by Secretary of State Marco Rubio at President Trump’s direction. The examination covered all treaties, conventions, and organizations where the U.S. holds membership or signatory status.

The policy has drawn sharp criticism from environmental and scientific communities. Rachel Cleetus, policy director and lead economist for the Union of Concerned Scientists, characterized the withdrawal from global climate agreements as ‘a new low’ for the administration. She further described the move as indicative of an ‘authoritarian, anti-science administration determined to sacrifice people’s well-being and destabilize global cooperation.’

In response to the announcement, the United Nations issued a statement through the Secretary-General’s Spokesperson expressing regret over the White House’s decision. The UN emphasized that assessed contributions to its regular budget and peacekeeping operations remain a legal obligation for all member states, including the United States. Despite the withdrawals, the organization affirmed its commitment to continuing its mandated operations, stating: ‘The United Nations has a responsibility to deliver for those who depend on us. We will continue to carry out our mandates with determination.’

Prime Minister Roosevelt Skerrit of Dominica has issued a compelling appeal for national solidarity as the Caribbean nation confronts significant diplomatic challenges with the United States. Speaking at a recent press conference, Skerrit addressed the dual developments that have placed Dominica under international scrutiny: its inclusion on the U.S. travel restriction list and a new visa bond requirement imposed by the Trump administration.

The restrictions, enacted through a presidential proclamation on December 16, 2025, cite national security concerns and deficiencies in foreign identity-management systems. Concurrently, the U.S. State Department has classified Dominica among 38 nations whose citizens must now post financial bonds—typically ranging from $5,000 to $15,000—when applying for B1/B2 visas, creating substantial financial barriers for Dominican travelers.

Skerrit emphasized that these external pressures should transcend political divisions, stating, ‘There are moments in time when we have to stand in solidarity with each other.’ He rejected opposition narratives that frame international challenges as opportunities for political gain, noting that crises affect all citizens regardless of political affiliation.

The Prime Minister highlighted his administration’s consistent leadership through various national challenges, both natural and external. ‘I maintain a calm and level head when challenges confront us,’ Skerrit asserted, positioning himself as a steady leader capable of navigating complex international relations. He called for collective problem-solving, urging citizens to contribute their ‘skills and talent at the disposal of the state.’

Looking forward, Skerrit expressed hope for increased national unity in 2026, emphasizing shared responsibility and mutual benefits for all Dominicans amidst these diplomatic hurdles.