Dear Editor,

Recent changes in our relationship with the United States – from new visa bond requirements to migration and security arrangements – have exposed how vulnerable Dominica is when too much of our life runs through one country. This affects our students, families, medical care, business and tourism all at once. We need a development model and set of partnerships that make us more resilient to geopolitical shifts and hemispheric pressures.

Dominica already has the outline of such a model. Morne Trois Pitons National Park, a UNESCO World Heritage Site, is recognised for its remarkable volcanic landscapes, biodiversity and endemic species. Our rivers, forests, mountains and reefs are god-given; treating the whole island as a single, living national park and protecting it with discipline is both good policy and an act of gratitude. The choice before us is whether we take our “Nature Island” identity seriously enough to make it the organising principle of our economy and diplomacy, or continue treating it as a slogan while decisions on the ground slowly erode the very assets we claim to cherish.

This vision is not abstract. Our decision to establish the world’s first sperm whale reserve and protect these resident whales and their habitat fits naturally into a one-national-park approach, extending our care from mountains and rivers out into the sea. The same is true on land for organic and low-chemical farming, which supports food security, healthier communities and a stronger ‘clean and green’ brand for Dominica’s exports and cuisine. In both cases, careful protection of nature opens doors for higher-value tourism, research, education and agriculture, and strengthens Dominica’s ability to sell organic produce, botanicals and other nature-based products into discerning export markets.

If Dominica embraced a whole-island conservation model – strict environmental rules, clear no-go zones, and a focus on resilience and low-impact, high-value activity – it would not only protect our home, it would also strengthen our hand abroad. France and the European Union are looking for credible climate and biodiversity flagships, particularly in overseas regions. Canada has committed significant climate finance to vulnerable small island states that can show serious plans and institutions. Latin America and the wider Caribbean are building regional agendas on climate, blue economy and nature-positive growth, backed by development banks. A Dominica that can honestly say “our entire territory is managed as an integrated national park and resilience lab” is exactly the sort of partner these countries and institutions want to back.

This of course would also demand a profound shift in how we live and do business: how we manage waste, how we build, what we put on our farms, and how we move around. It means steadily moving away from pesticides and single-use plastics, and planning for a gradual transition off fossil-fuel vehicles in favour of cleaner, more efficient transport over time.

Our geography helps. Dominica sits between Martinique and Guadeloupe, with direct institutional links into Paris and Brussels through the French territories. With a clearer conservation and resilience vision, Dominica could position itself as the wild, protected heart of a French-Caribbean eco-region, unlocking support for forests, coasts, marine protected areas and resilient communities. Better sea and air links with the French islands, and structured cooperation on health, education and tourism, would then serve that strategy rather than just chasing volume. Similar logic applies to the United Kingdom, Canada and key Latin American partners: a small state that knows what it is trying to do, and enforces its own rules, is more likely to attract patient, high-quality investment.

China also has a place in this picture. It has been a notable development partner in infrastructure, public facilities and health, and will remain an important actor for Dominica and other small states. The point is not to swap dependence on one country for another, but to engage all partners under a development model that insists on strict environmental and social safeguards and supports resilience.

To be credible, an integrated national-park strategy has to reach into areas where we have been weakest. Citizenship by Investment is one of them. CBI has been critically important from an economic perspective, but for years it has suffered from opacity, poor enforcement and a culture of treating citizenship as a tradable commodity rather than entry into a shared project. That has exposed us to reputational risk and outside pressure when rules change elsewhere. Repurposed properly, CBI could become part of the solution: a transparent, tightly regulated programme aimed at high-value applicants who accept residency requirements and invest in conservation, resilience and community-based projects would be unlike almost anything else currently on offer. It would attract more families and entrepreneurs who genuinely want to be part of a country that has chosen to organise itself and live as a national park.

The same discipline must apply to large projects. Public concern around the international airport, new marina and the cable car has centred not only on financial and contractual elements, but also on weak public consultation, compliance issues and uncertain environmental impacts. These projects are strategic and will support the desired development model. But they must be disciplined and compliant, with rigorous environmental and social impact assessments and binding mitigation and monitoring plans.

Our geothermal project sits at the intersection of these questions. Using our volcanic resource to move towards near-100% renewable electricity is exactly the kind of step a one-national-park country should take. Built and operated to high environmental and safety standards, with honest community engagement, geothermal power can cut emissions, reduce energy bills and strengthen resilience, while reinforcing Dominica’s claim to be a real climate-smart model.

There is growing evidence that in the future, one of the scarcest resources for many countries will not be oil but clean, reliable water. A development model that treats our forests, rivers and watersheds as strategic assets, and keeps pollution and erosion out of them, is in fact a long-term investment in the future value of that resource for Dominicans.

The Kalinago people are one of our most important living communities and custodians of knowledge about how to inhabit this land with restraint and respect. A credible integrated national-park model would recognise Kalinago land, language and culture as core national assets. Protecting nature while marginalising its first guardians would be an unforgivable contradiction.

A clearer, rules-based development model would make Dominica a more predictable, respected partner for Washington as well as for others. The right policies regarding environmental protection, social risk, energy choices, indigenous rights and CBI standards will only strengthen partnerships.

Choosing this path would mean adopting and enforcing a land-use and marine-spatial plan, expanding and connecting protected areas, strengthening impact assessment rules, and aligning tourism, agriculture, fisheries, energy, infrastructure, CBI and Kalinago development behind one coherent vision. It would also mean a more deliberate external strategy: working with the United States, France, the EU, Canada, China, key Latin American partners and many others on projects that reinforce that vision.

A clear, well-regulated whole-island conservation model creates space for upward mobility, entrepreneurship and wealth creation in guiding, small lodges, farm-to-table ventures, creative industries, science and technology services, and Kalinago- and community-owned enterprises that are rooted in place. In other words, it invites our people to build prosperity by enhancing what makes Dominica so special.

Dominica is unique in the Caribbean, and one of the few countries in the world that could still make such a turn. Our small size, our still-intact natural systems, and our living indigenous culture give us a narrow window to get onto the right development path. We are almost too late, but not quite. This is not a two-, five- or even ten-year plan; it is a 20- to 50-year choice about what kind of country we want to be. Sovereignty in this century must mean more than a flag and an anthem. It must mean the ability to say “yes” and “no” on our own terms because we have built an economy and a web of partnerships that do not collapse when any one partner frowns. A whole-island sustainability and resilience model, backed by stronger ties with our international partners, is the surest – and perhaps last – chance Dominica has to step out from under the shadow of any single power without turning its back on cooperation or friendship with any of them.

Yours faithfully,

Gregor Nassief