Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not represent the views of Duravision Inc, Dominica News Online, or any of its subsidiary brands.
The United States already possesses one of the most robust and sophisticated security systems in the world. Applying pressure on a small nation like Dominica to help secure U.S. borders is not only unreasonable, but it also borders on mockery.
President Trump argues that individuals holding Citizenship by Investment (CBI) passports pose a threat to U.S. national security. However, the reality is simple: if a person has no criminal record anywhere in the world, none can be uncovered during the vetting or due diligence process. Background checks can only identify what has been officially recorded.
Another claim is that individuals previously denied U.S. visas reapply using a Dominica CBI passport, sometimes after legally changing their names. If this is indeed a concern, the responsibility lies with the United States to address its own
data-sharing limitations.
If the names of individuals denied U.S. visas were made available, whether through the U.S. State Department or to vetted international due diligence firms, those names could be flagged during CBI screening. At present, no vetting agency or due diligence firm has access to U.S. visa denial databases. As a result, identifying such individuals is impossible.
This security gap is not caused by Dominica or other small nations. It is a structural issue within U.S. information-sharing policies.
With today’s advanced technology, highly sophisticated digital systems, and electronic monitoring capabilities, it is entirely feasible for the United States to maintain and manage a secure database of individuals it considers national security risks—including criminals, fraudsters, and suspected terrorists.
Rather than placing undue pressure on small countries and punishing innocent applicants for the actions of a few, the United States should invest in comprehensive electronic data systems and improve international information-sharing mechanisms.
National security is a shared responsibility, but accountability must begin at home.
If I wanted something from Skerrit or his administration I would put up a serious defense of of him……….I won’t be a blind taxpayer
some people just prefer to pay a blind eye………….for goodies
Yes i………….boy look talk to defend Skerrit
When de US administration decide to return Dominican citizens back I don;t think Skerrit does do all dat in defense.
He only defends his pocket
whoever vex with me for saying dat can just put up their defense of him …………like that changes anything
I don’t need anything from Skerrit, I work honestly and pay my taxes
de only thing dat matters from me to Skerrit is a vote.
My vote is not for sale
My opinion is not for sale
my opinion has no impact …………only my vote
I take comfort dat Skerrit cannot be in this position forever
Everything is for a time
roof over my head, making my own money………without political influence
Leave Paul Alexander alone. The man has made great contributions to Dominica. Y’all must never forget.
On the question of USA national security, It is not the responsibility of the USA to vest applicants for Dominica Citizenship By Investment it is Dominica’s responsibility to do that.
It is the responsibility of the USA to vet every applicant for a USA Visa, and their decision to give or deny a USA visa.
So many of y’all just talking fowl sh@t on here…
Mr Alexander, I appreciate the fact that your commentary actually proposes a solution to a perceived problem, an approach that is rarely seen in this blog.
Yes, indeed a solution to a perceived problem
In 1983 Dominica led by Mary Eugenia Charles was the first island to stand with the US in invading Grenada.At that time invading was in the US interest.In 1983 an American made C130- Hercules landed at Douglas Charles airport and transported Dominican police to Grenada as members of the CPF.Some police officers left the wives and children to serve the American interest.Some of those police officers lived at Fort George,different police stations and patrolled the island of Grenada,sometimes for 12 hours STRAIT.That was in the interest of the US.Dominica got nothing from the US except grenades,night vision goggles,handguns,rifles,ammunition and speedboats and training by the 7th Special forces to continue working in their interest.There is no evidence that anybody with a CBI passport has ever committed acts of terrorism anywhere.Today being friends with Cuba,Venezuela and China in the caribbean is not in the interest of the USA.So the easiest way out is to single out the CBI.BULLIES.
Trump needs to better secure the US boarder by moving troops to the USVI, especially St Thomas, to go after those greedy, corrupt and selfish laborites like Paul and put all of them on s boat and ship them to their home country of Dominica, whether they have US passport or not. This author of this article even sounds like an enemy of the US and deserves to be dealt with forth with
Why just say things before thinking and making allegations. Do you think that the person who you dislike for their opinion is a threat to the US. lol, who decide what is threat to the US, you on this forum, is this how it works, so long.
Our government fault is de manner in which de CBI is run.
Skerrit have his cards to himself
How can I defend him
If I ask to be so informed I will be labelled as a traitor
De information that out government makes available to the public appears to be peanuts………..if he and actions are so squeaky clean then why this
what is it that he is keeping from us………for national security reasons
I refuse to go on my knees for my own government
I am not a full supporter of Trump neither my PM but Skerrit is hiding something some information that he possesses…..for national security reasons yes but this saga is undressing him
I don’t have any information to defend and back him up
de chickens shall come home to roost……….by nature’s law…….no money involved.
Diana_ Pascal. When one applies for a CBI passport, does Skerrit know who he is. The hijackers of the 911 airplanes were trained to fly jumbo jets by America in America. The 19 hijackers from Saudi Arabia obtained enter visas to travel to America. None of them had CBI passports. How was that accomplished under a watchful eye of America. Explain it to me.
Paul Alexander, we know for sure that Skerrit knew Alireza Monfared was wanted by interpol for crimes he had committed and based on the aljazera report we saw how hard Skerrit and his evil gang rushed him to Dominica.
We also know that Skerrit knew that the former NigerOil Minister, Dieziani Alison Madueke, was wanted for her alleged crimes in her country and Skerrit himself rushed her a Dominica passport according to investigation. There are several more we know about but for now I will just mention these two
Why do you make pathetic false statements.”Skerrit knew Alireza Monfared was wanted by Interpol for crimes he had committed and, based on the Al-Jazeera report,” totally false, it is not The PM who does the vetting process, such ignorance on your part. “former Niger Oil Minister, Dieziani Alison Madueke, was wanted for her alleged crimes in her country and Skerrit himself rushed her a Dominica passport according to investigation” false. Do you know that after all these years, a Court date in London was issued in this Summer in June, do you know it was after a new Government came to power in Nigeria that the allegations were brought against her. This is not about condoning her allege actions, a Court will decide that, as for Alireza Monfared, well if he was wanted by Interpol before he held a Dominican diplomatic passport how can he travel to Dominica from Kuala Lumpur and not arrested.
The 9/11 comparison is a distraction, not an argument.
That terrorists once exploited weaknesses in the U.S. visa system does not justify weak or revenue-driven citizenship issuance elsewhere. It proves the opposite: security failures have consequences, which is why global standards tightened after 2001.
The hijackers did not obtain permanent citizenship through a fast-track, fee-based programme. They entered on temporary visas that expired and could be revoked. Citizenship is permanent, portable, and confers far broader privileges. Conflating the two is a false equivalence.
Past U.S. failures do not excuse present governance risks in Dominica. The issue is whether citizenship approvals are insulated from financial pressure. When passport sales fund a large share of the national budget, risk tolerance becomes structural.
Deflection avoids the real question: is citizenship a sovereign trust or a revenue product?
Lol what jargon, if you do not understand something, why make up silliness to justify your tunnel vision. As to your last paragraph, Citizenship and Sovereign entirely two different things and should not be looked at as similar or tied together. As to CBI being it is a revenue generator for a Country Economy, yes, it’s the reason why so may Countries around the world implement such program, so why not Dominica.
Dominica is among the countries with the lowest percentage of individuals who overstay their visas in the United States. It also ranks among foreign nationals with the lowest rates of criminal activity in America.
Furthermore, not a single criminal or terrorist has been intercepted attempting to enter the United States using a CBI-issued passport.
Of the 47,000 citizenships granted through the CBI program, only twelve individuals with prior criminal records managed to obtain a passport—an exceptionally small number by any international standard. Another 27 had their passports revoked for submitting false information and withholding information.
It is also noteworthy that several countries with significantly higher visa overstay rates, higher crime levels, documented gang activity, and instances of forged green cards are not included on the visa restriction list, while Dominica is.
If the CBI program is indeed the determining factor, then it is reasonable to await the…
You know Diana Pascal Commentary is so riddled with perception and assumptions, guess she has her motives. The Accountability issue being echoed is not fully understood and ignorance prevail. The Opposition Parties use it as a great political tool at the Government, the Government has a great challenge to overcome such perverted ignorance.
Thanks for your participation, Gary, I will say that calling criticism “perception,” “assumption,” or “opposition politics” is not an argument, it is avoidance.
Accountability is not a political tool; it is a basic requirement of governance. When one programme supplies a dominant share of national revenue, scrutiny is unavoidable. That reality exists regardless of who raises the concern.
Labeling critics ignorant does not address the substance because overreliance on passport revenue, conflicts of interest, weakened incentives for restraint, and international reputational risk. These issues have been raised not only by our local opposing parties, but by foreign governments and regulators.
For argument’s sake – If the concerns i listed are wrong, then i invite you to present evidence. If the risks are exaggerated, explain why.
Your dismissive attitude is not a defense; it is an admission that there are no answers.
If you assume things and perceive what something is without evidence in your commentary or comment, and it’s pointed out to you, is not my avoidance to argue with you. I’m not expecting everyone to like the Government, but at least do not to wilfully ignore facts or make up your own facts to discredit The Government. Yes, accountability is a basic requirement of governance, and it should be a basic requirement also when expressing your thoughts. Accountability SHOULD not be a political tool to be used until it can be proven, not allege, assumed or perceived.
” When one programme supplies a dominant share of national revenue, scrutiny is unavoidable. That reality exists regardless of who raises the concern” you are correct, but a person is innocent until proven guilty. https://dominicanewsonline.com/news/homepage/news/uwp-takes-legal-actions-against-dominicas-government-over-cbi-program/ great they have to present evidence in Court, such Vedic ether will bring closer.
Paul Alexander. if you really care about Dominica the question you should be asking is How did Dominica find itself where we are today? What did Dominica do that caused Canada, the UK and the US to put visa restrictions on the people of Dominica? The simple answer is Skerrit and his administration are selling our passports to all crooks and wanted criminals like Monfared, that cannot be trusted and some of them are enemies of the US, Uk and other free countries. it’s as simple as saying that Dominica is equiping potential terrorists with armunition they need to attack the US. So should Dominica get a free pass? if you cared about Dominica you would be asking Skerrit to stop the sale of our passports to know wanted criminals
The question you should be asking is whether Dominica is better off today than it was, say 10 to 15 years ago. There are things that can be referenced for such comparison, Physical infrastructure and Economic data. To ask, How did Dominica find itself where we are today based on Visa restriction from Canada, the UK and the US is superficial and close minded, is such Visa restriction (applying for a visa before entering) a death sentence to our livelihood and progress. Let say Dominica were allowed to these Countries Visa free, and we had no CBI program, would be better off, Economic wise. If you do not understand Geo politics, then be it. What think of something and what that thing is not the same. We are endowed with a mind to think if you do not use it and think people will use it for you, so long.
Dominica did absolutely nothing wrong. Every system has loopholes and cracks. No one person with a CBI passport has never been accused of being involved in terrorist plot or terrorist act anywhere in the world.
All you can say what all you want but truth is, when farmers use to sell truck loads of bananas to the UK; when farmers use to export truck loads of copra almost daily and when we had Ross University booming with over 14 hundred foreign students, faculty and staff as the backbone of our economy, Dominicans had no problem going to the UK, Canada or the US because we didn’t pose any security risk to anyone. Since Skerrit came and deliberately dismantled our banana industry, our coconut industry and Ross University just so he, his agents and few friends could sell our passport that only and caused all to become poor so we could on our knees begging him for every damn thing, Dominicans with a Dominica passport have become a security threat to the US and therefore the US must put the pressure on us hoping that we will wise up and help get rid of both Maduro and Skerrit. I am more damn Red than all of you but I must speak because Skerrit has destroyed our country with his CBI passport sale
Mr. Alexander. I agree with you on a number of points, particularly the enormous gaps in data sharing even among departments that you would think are inextricably linked. I became a US citizen years ago after completing all of the necessary requirements with USCIS; nevertheless, as of last week, I received a letter from the National Visa Center suggesting that my visa application had been inactive for years and that they were deciding to terminate it. So you are right on that front. Nonetheless, our CBI program needs to be tightened since the agents have too much of a freehand and are endangering the entire country. A travel ban on us has far-reaching consequences.
Your sentiment causes problems because they create confusion or distract from the root cause of the problem for America. You’ve created plot inconsistencies and contradictions with your analogy, making your point of view less believable or even completely nonsensical. The bottom line is if there wasn’t a Dominican CBI passport holder with past offences, masked by a name change, there would be NO problem for the USA. Why such person with a criminal history possess/own a purchased Dominican CBI passport? By uncovering these deeper factors, you can implement lasting changes. You must look for consistent patterns, not isolated incidents.
Your argument is faulty on its face. The fact that there may have been any persons who fell through the cracks of vetting and received a CBi passport, is not a reason to discontinue the program, but to tighten the vetting process which the Dominican government has done in collaboration with stakeholders like the European authorities and US authorities. It’s like saying if one or two Dominicans overstay their visas , that might be a good reason to deny all Dominicans a visa to the United States. You can’t throw the baby out with the bath water.
Marcellus, with all due respect, this is a bad analogy.
But let me ask you, are overstaying Dominicans a security risk – enough to trigger visa restrictions to all other Dominicans?
Why is it a bad analogy, don’t you understand that in the vetting process, people fall through the cracks, and you should remember The majority of person who get a second passport from Dominica through the CBI may not be a security risk at all. There are things to minimize potential Security risk, but not make if absolute full proof. People who come to America with potential Security risk do not always obtain passports through Dominica CBI program or any other CBI Programs.
Do you know what the US EB-5 Visa is, https://www.globalcitizensolutions.com/eb5-visa/ and still with all the US vetting there someone who commit fraud https://marketrealist.com/what-is-eb-5-visa-fraud-and-how-investors-lose-money/
Well said, excellent.
My response was posted throughout several comments due to the text limitation of 1000 characters.
Please increase this number DNO.
Thanks
Why increase the text limitation of 1000 characters to a reply, to be bombarded with lengthy rhetorical comments.
Why don’t you simply ask Matt for an hour on one of his shows? Your content aligns with the narrative of his shows and that of the station where he works. I am sure that he will be delighted to embrace you. His shows are a veritable “anything goes for anyone.” So, you will get ample time there to expose your misguided reasoning.
Finally, describing legitimate security concerns as punishment of “innocent applicants” is a mischaracterization. Visa-free access is a privilege, not an entitlement. When a programme introduces elevated risk into international travel systems, partner states are entitled—indeed obligated—to reassess that risk.
This debate will not be resolved by pretending that all failures originate abroad. If Dominica wishes to defend its CBI programme credibly, it must confront uncomfortable facts: over-reliance on passport revenue, structural conflicts of interest, and the reality that citizenship has been treated less as a sovereign trust and more as a transactional product.
Accountability cannot be demanded of others while being avoided at home.
Sincerely
The letter also minimizes the significance of identity complexity, legal name changes, and thin personal histories by portraying them as issues only the United States can resolve. This is misleading. International AML/CFT standards explicitly require heightened scrutiny where identity continuity is weak or fragmented. These are not U.S. demands; they are global compliance norms. Ignoring them does not make the programme compliant—it makes it vulnerable.
Furthermore, the repeated assertion that the United States should simply “fix its databases” misses the point entirely. Border security does not begin at the airport. It begins with the sovereign act of granting citizenship. When a passport is issued, the issuing country is vouching for the holder’s identity, background, and trustworthiness. That responsibility cannot be outsourced, deflected, or diluted.
not explained away after the fact.
More importantly, the letter avoids the most critical issue entirely: revenue dependence.
Dominica’s CBI programme is not a marginal economic policy. It is a dominant fiscal pillar, accounting for a substantial share—often a majority—of government revenue. This fact alone creates a structural conflict of interest. When passport issuance becomes the primary income stream of the state, speed, volume, and approval rates inevitably come under pressure. No amount of rhetorical defense can change that reality.
This is not conjecture. It is basic governance logic. No country can credibly argue that citizenship decisions remain insulated from financial incentives when the programme funding the national budget depends on approvals continuing uninterrupted. In such an environment, the risk is not “accidental” approvals of unsuitable applicants—it is systemic tolerance of risk.
CBI Accountability – Deflected by Blaming U.S. Systems!
The recent letter seeking to absolve Dominica’s Citizenship by Investment (CBI) programme of responsibility by shifting blame almost entirely to the United States deserves careful scrutiny, not passive acceptance.
The central flaw in the writer’s argument is not technical—it is structural. The letter attempts to frame weaknesses in the CBI programme as unavoidable by-products of U.S. information-sharing policies, rather than as consequences of how the programme itself is designed, incentivized, and administered.
While it is true that no vetting system can uncover crimes that have never been recorded, this reality does not excuse weak or rushed due diligence. On the contrary, uncertainty demands greater scrutiny, not complacency. In international compliance, gaps in information are a risk factor that must be mitigated through conservative approval standards, extended investigations, and higher rejection thresholds—
I am not completely against the thoughts of Paul Alexander, but I just feel that if he is serious about what he wrote above, he probably should take his thoughts directly to President Trump either through a planned Whitehouse visit, a telephone call or even through an interview with FOX, CNN or ABC.
In fact after reading the article I googled Paul Alexander and found out that he is probably a Dominican residing in the USVI, who ran for public office in St Thomas in 2010 and 2012. So bro if this is really you, why don’t you write a personal letter to Trump and express those thoughts? If I were in your place I sure wouldn’t hide behind behind an article on DNO. I sure would find a way to ensure that President Trump gets a copy of this article
CBI has been weaponised by opposition parties in the region, Although they can see the economic benefits to these small Caribbean islands. Trump is using this issue to his advantage to try and bully these small island leaders into supporting him to take over the Venezuelas oil in order to further enrich himself and his oligarchs. Trump has his own CBI which is called the Trump gold card. This cost about five million dollars per applicant, and as long as you can afford to pay this price, US security is no issue. It is time these small island leaders stand together and confront Trump’s behaviour and let him know that the Caribbean is not US territory. If this Trinidadian leader want to concede Trinidad to Trump, by all means let her do so if Trinidadians allow her to do that. But the rest of the Caribbean nations should resist and maintain their independence.
“if a person has no criminal record anywhere in the world, none can be uncovered during the vetting or due diligence process. Background checks can only identify what has been officially recorded”.
If a born Dominican does not have any criminal record when applying for US Non-immigrant status (Green Card), no criminal activity will be uncovered at the time. Years later, having lived in the US and the person becomes involved in criminal activities, does that mean the US vetting system failed at the time of applying for a Non-immigrant Visa? Is Dominica to be blamed for the individual’s criminal activity today when none existed years ago? Or, none was discovered by the US authorities?
The US applying pressure on Dominica to secure its borders is not unreasonable because of the loophole CBI creates for malicious foreign characters to slip into the US via Dominica. Dominica’s small island size is not the problem; its CBI program is. And it’s more complicated than criminal background checks; it can be about other things: religion (Islam), culture, values, and economics. Those issues are equally critical to US national security. And they are concern about that. As to the other point about “national security is a shared responsibility”: In this case, I disagree. The burden of proof must be on the party (Dominica) who needs the visa, not on the country issuing it. If Uncle Sam has a vetting problem in selling their visa to us, then we should pay their price. They don’t owe us anything. More CBI changes and a less anti-US foreign policy may be more helpful than focusing on what their responsibility is in all this.
Who else would write this foolishness other than Paul Alexander or one of the defenders of Skerrit.
Paul, Trump has a right to defend the USA and a right to decide on who comes in and goes out. Similarly, Skerrit and Dominica have a right to defend Dominica. It’s no secret that Dominica has sold CBI passports to known crooks and corrupt criminals like Aliriza Monfared and if these criminals have not used their CBI passport to go to the US and commit crime, it’s just a matter of time before they do so. So I am in full support of the US tightening the bolts on Dominica and I even wish if Trump would go after people like you in the USVI too
Go to hell. Dominica never had visa-free entry into the US. No one carrying a Dominica CBI passport gets an automatic entry into the US. There was never a time when carrying a CBI passport made it easier to obtain a US visa. The requirements for obtaining a US visa are no different for people with a CBI passport or regular Dominica passport. One must first apply for a US visa before he can enter the US. Whether or not he has a name change, he must state his name, place of birth and date of birth on the application. He must answer questions relating to his character, schools attended, places lived, jobs held and social media accounts used. With the US getting all this information beforehand, what does it matter whether or not the person has a CBI passport?