Tweet

January 22, 2026 — Times Caribbean

While Caribbean leaders routinely sermonize about unity, shared destiny, and regional integration, Terrance Drew, Prime Minister of Saint Kitts and Nevis and current Chairman of CARICOM, has torn the mask from the rhetoric—laying bare a policy many are calling discriminatory, hypocritical, and morally indefensible.

In a stunning news conference late last week, Dr. Drew explicitly excluded Haiti from his government’s resettlement framework for third-country nationals, citing vague “security matters,” while simultaneously welcoming nationals from other CARICOM member states. The exclusion was not implied—it was repeated three separate times, leaving no doubt about intent.

The backlash was immediate and fierce.

“Protect from what?”

Leading the condemnation is Marcus, a Haitian physician who lived in Frigate Bay for three years during his medical training and now practices in the United States. His words cut sharply through the Prime Minister’s carefully scripted justifications.

“Protect from what?” Marcus asked. “Ninety percent of migrants in Saint Kitts are Dominican from the DR and African, mostly Nigerian. Drew knows that. I lived there for three years. He knows me personally. This is a lie.”

Marcus dismissed the Prime Minister’s explanation as political theatre designed to appease external pressures rather than reflect facts or fairness.

“This is about folding to the U.S. agenda against Haitian migrants and visa benefits. This statement is purely xenophobic and low of moral. We, the Haitian community, condemn this behavior in the strongest terms.”

Hypocrisy at the Highest Regional Level

What makes this episode especially disturbing is not merely the policy itself—but who is advancing it. As CARICOM Chairman, Dr. Drew occupies the very office charged with defending regional solidarity, humanitarian responsibility, and the free movement of Caribbean people.

Yet here stands the Chairman of CARICOM, openly singling out Haiti—the region’s most vulnerable member—for exclusion.

This contradiction is not accidental; it is structural hypocrisy. You cannot champion integration while carving out exceptions rooted in fear, stigma, and selective morality. You cannot speak of Caribbean brotherhood while erecting walls against Haitians.

Security or Scapegoating?

Dr. Drew’s attempt to frame the policy as one of national security and capacity management collapses under scrutiny. By his own admission, the resettlement framework already screens for criminal backgrounds, sexual offenses, and violent histories. Haiti’s exclusion, therefore, is not about risk—it is about optics.

For critics, this is a classic case of political expediency masquerading as leadership.

For Haitians, it is something far deeper: a betrayal of the Caribbean’s shared history of struggle, resistance, and survival.

A Wound the Region Cannot Ignore

This moment has reopened old wounds—about how Haiti is treated, spoken about, and quietly pushed aside whenever regional politics become inconvenient. Marcus’ denunciation reflects a growing frustration with official narratives that ignore facts while reinforcing prejudice.

As debate over migration and resettlement intensifies, one truth is unavoidable: solidarity that excludes is not solidarity at all.

As Caribbean icon David Rudder once reminded the region:

“Haiti, I am sorry… One day we’ll turn our heads and restore your glory.”

Until Caribbean leaders move beyond speeches and confront the moral weight of their policies, those words will remain less a lyric—and more an indictment.