In 2020, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 75/123 declaring the period 2021-2030 the Fourth International Decade for the Eradication of Colonialism. At the Opening of the 4th Session of the UN Permanent Forum on People of African Descent April 14, 2025, outgoing Chair June Soomer emphasized the fact that there are still seventeen (17) black colonies seeking independence from colonial masters, including the five unincorporated U.S. territories of Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), American Samoa, the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. Russ Christopher and Siphiwe Baleka discuss the issue as it relates to the US Virgin Islands.

“There are 41 populated dependent territories in the entire non-communist world, with only 12 of these territories having larger populations than the U.S. Virgin Islands. Among these 41 dependent territories, 13 are under British jurisdiction, nine under French rule, and seven under U.S. control.
Considering these statistics, the United States could be seen as the third-ranking colonial power in the non-communist world. It’s worth noting that in 1960, the United Nations General Assembly identified over 80 million people who were still in colonial status. Consequently, in that year, the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples was adopted. Between 1960 and 1976, around 70 million of these people gained their independence, and 47 more nations became United Nations members.
Presently, the United Nations Decolonization Committee acknowledges that only 22 territories in the world have not yet achieved self-determination or independence, and the 1960 U.N. Declaration still applies to these territories. The U.S. Virgin Islands is among these 22, and this list gradually shrinks year by year. According to the United Nations, there are only two options for dependent territories to be removed from this list—independence or integration.
Other Caribbean territories to which the Declaration still applies include the British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, and Anguilla. On the contrary, the Declaration is not applicable to Puerto Rico, Guadeloupe, Martinique, the Netherlands Antilles, and French Guiana. These territories, although not independent, are considered by the United Nations to have achieved a status of integration or self-government in relation to their respective parent countries.”
U.S. Virgin Island Sen. Janelle K. Sarauw

Consider:

Various African peoples were trafficked as prisoners of war to several British colonies that legalized slavery: Massachusetts in 1641; Connecticut in 1650; Virginia in 1657 and Maryland in 1663 leading to The United States of America officially entering the Dum Diversas War trafficking of people from Guine (Africa) after the American pro-slavery counter revolution in 1776 that established the first apartheid state in history.

Importantly, at the end of the U.S. Civil War, General Sherman’s Fourth request to the representatives of the newly freed men meeting in Savannah, Georgia, was worded, “State in what manner you would rather live - whether scattered among the whites or in colonies by yourselves. . .” Sherman’s Special Field Order Number 15 defined and established de facto “self-governing colonies”.

Additionally, General Rufus Saxton was appointed Inspector of Settlements and Plantations and was required to make proper allotments and give possessory titles and defend them until Congress should confirm his actions. . . . Saxton testified: ‘General Sherman’s Special Field Order No. 15 ordered their colonization on forty-acre tracts . . .” Here then is our basis of the argument that at Emancipation in 1865, concentrations of New Afrikans were referred to as colonies. DuBois referred to America’s “distinctly colonial” racial state. Mary McLeod Bethune, a last-minute addition to the NAACP’s consultant team at the founding of the United Nations in San Francisco, spoke forcefully on how the UN Conference had painted in ‘bold relief’ that ‘common bond’ between African Americans and the colonial peoples. If anything, Bethune remarked, the UNCIO had made it very clear that the ‘Negro in America’ held ‘little more than colonial status in a democracy.’ The similarities were appallingly clear. The fight for colonial self-determination paralleled the battle to overturn the South’s racist voting restrictions. The efforts to revise the UN’s ‘domestic jurisdiction’ clause matched the assault on the states’ rights philosophy of the South. And the dissatisfaction with a trusteeship plan that denied colonies the right to lay their grievances before an international tribunal mirrored the opposition to America’s separate and unequal system of justice.

THE QUESTION MUST BE ASKED AND ANSWERED: WHEN AND HOW DID THE NEW AFRIKAN PEOPLE, ORIGINALLY ENSLAVED IN COLONIES AND THEN COLONIZED BY GENERAL SHERMAN’S SPECIAL FIELD ORDER NO. 15 CEASE BEING AN INTERNAL DOMESTIC BLACK COLONY BY 1945-1960?

WHY WERE AFRICANS UNDER ALIEN RULE ON THE CONTINENT CONSIDERED “COLONIES” BUT AFRICANS UNDER ALIEN RULE IN THE WEST, ESPECIALLY THE UNITED STATES, NOT CONSIDERED AS COLONIZED PEOPLE?

Background:

In 1945, the United Nations was founded. According to the UN Charter, Chapter XI, Article 73 regarding Non-Self Governing Territories, the United States was obligated to assume responsibility for the administration of the former self-governing New Afrikan territories that reverted to non-self governing territories as a result of President Lincoln’s assassination and subsequent US government campaign of fraud and terror limiting the newly-freedmen’s political rights. Alternatively, the United States government could have declared these New Afrikan territories as trust territories, under UN Charter, Chapter XII Article 77.1.c trusteeship system.

The United States territory is an acquisition of legal title by conquest that has been rejected as anachronistic and contrary to the Charter of the United Nations. Afro Descendant/New Afrikan presence on said territory is the result of a declaration of total war and the subsequent “Trans Atlantic Slave Trade” that has been acknowleged as a crime against humanity both now and then. Territorial acquisitions or other advantages gained through the threat or wrongful use of force cannot have legal effect, because international law cannot confer legality upon the consequences of wrongful acts incompatible with the Charter. In such cases, there should be full restitution. To claim that the new class of freedmen - aliens residing in foreign territory through forced displacement - now hold a status is “American citizen” is to confer legality on an acquisition of a territorial legal title by conquest, a crime against humanity, and a campaign of fraud and terror by the government of the United States of America (after the assassination of President Lincoln and the 14th Amendment).

The issue is: will the United States’ internal domestic black colony be recognized as such?”

“At its twelfth session, the UN General Assembly, on 11 December 1957, adopted resolution 1188 (XII), entitled "Recommendations concerning international respect for the right of peoples and nations to self-determination". In that resolution the General Assembly considered, in the fourth paragraph of the preamble that disregard for the right to self-determination not only undermined the basis of friendly relations among nations as penned in the Charter of the United Nations but also created conditions which might prevent further realization of the right itself; and in the fifth paragraph it expressed the belief that such a situation was contrary to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations. It reaffirmed that it was of international importance that, in accordance with those purposes and principles : (a) Member States should, in their relations with one another, give due respect to the right of self-determination; (b) Member States having responsibility for the administration of Non-Self-Governing Territories should promote the realization and facilitate the exercise of that right by the peoples of such Territories.

At its fifteenth session the General Assembly, on 14 December 1960, adopted resolution 1514 (XV), entitled "Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples". (See Appendix A) This declaration, which is a document of historic importance, represents one of the most significant contributions the United Nations has made to developing the concept of the right of self-determination, to condemning colonialism and all forms of subjection of peoples to alien domination and exploitation as a denial of that right and of fundamental human rights and to action to promote decolonization.” - Special Rapporteur of the Sub-Commission on Prevention of Discrimination and Protection of Minorities, Aureliu Cristescu, The Right to self-Determination: Historical and Current Developments on the Basis of United Nations Instruments (1981)

In 1960, the following colonies attained independence:

January 1, 1960: Cameroon

April 4, 1960: Senegal

May 27, 1960: Togo

June 30, 1960: Republic of the Congo

July 1, 1960: Somalia

July 26, 1960: Madagascar

August 1, 1960: Benin

August 3, 1960: Niger

August 5, 1960: Burkina Faso

August 7, 1960: Côte d'Ivoire

August 11, 1960: Chad

August 13, 1960: Central African Republic

August 15, 1960: Democratic Republic of the Congo

August 16, 1960: Cyprus

August 17, 1960: Gabon

September 22, 1960: Mali

October 1, 1960: Nigeria

November 28, 1960: Mauritania

Why didn’t the U.S. domestic black colony/non-self governing territory receive its independence in 1960?

UN Resolution 1541 (XV) Principles which should guide Members in determining whether or not an obligation exists to transmit the information called for under Article 73 e of the Charter - 15 December 1960 states:

Principle IV

Prima facie there is an obligation to transmit information in respect of a territory which is geographically separate and is distinct ethnically and/or culturally from the country administering it.

Principle V

Once it has been established that such a prima facie case of geographical and ethnic or cultural distinctness of a territory exists, other elements may then be brought into consideration. These additional elements may be, inter alia, of an administrative, political, juridical, economic or historical nature. If they affect the relationship between the metropolitan State and the territory concerned in a manner which arbitrarily places the latter in a position or status of subordination, they support the presumption that there is an obligation to transmit information under Article 73 e of the Charter.

THE UNITED STATES UNDERSTANDING OF COLONIALISM

The United States abstained from voting on the 1960 Declaration, objecting to the word ‘independence’ in the title, arguing that independence was not the only possible result of an act of self-determination by a people. This was true but irrelevant. Nevertheless, the United States Representative, James J. Wadsworth, speaking to a plenary session of the U.N. General Assembly on 6 December 1960 made the following extraordinary remarks - which, of course, under U.S. constitutional principles, are deemed to be the words of the U.S. President and an authoritative statement of international law as the United States sees it:

‘First let me say what we mean by colonialism…. It is the imposition of alien power over a people, usually by force and without the free and formal consent of the governed. It is the perpetuation of that power. It is the denial of the right of self-determination - whether by suppressing free-expression or by withholding necessary educational, economic, and social development.*** Obviously not all colonial regimes have been the same…. But, however important these differences, the fact remains that colonialism in any form is undesirable. Neither the most benevolent paternalism by a ruling power nor the most grateful acceptance of these benefits by indigenous leaders can meet the test of the charter or satisfy the spirit of this age.”

For the New Afrikan statements on our colonial status, see Appendix B.

Had the United States declared its New Afrikan territories as trust territories, under UN Charter, Chapter XII Article 77.1.c trusteeship system, then these New Afrikan territories - namely, the Black Belt five states of Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia and South Carolina - could have been subject to the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960). The question of self-determination, self-government and independence for New Afrikan/AfroDescendant peoples in the United States would thus have been handled by The Special Committee on Decolonization, or C-24 established in 1961 by General Assembly (GA) as its subsidiary organ devoted to the issue of decolonization, pursuant to GA resolution 1654 (XVI) to

- Examine the application of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (GA resolution 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960; and
- To make suggestions and recommendations on the progress and extent of the implementation of the Declaration.

THIS IS THE ISSUE THAT MALCOLM X TRIED TO BRING BEFORE THE WORLD COURT BEFORE HIS ASSASSINATION IN 1965. THIS IS THE CASE THAT STILL MUST BE DECIDED.

APPENDIX A

Resolution 1514 (XV), entitled "Declaration on the granting of independence to colonial countries and peoples" reads as follows:

The General Assembly,

Mindful of the determination proclaimed by the peoples of the world in the Charter of the United Nations to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.

Conscious of the need for the creation of conditions of stability and well-being and peaceful and friendly relations based on respect for the principles of equal rights and self-determination of all peoples, and of universal respect for, and observance of. human rights and fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion.

Recognizing the passionate yearning for freedom in all dependent peoples and the decisive role of such peoples in the attainment of their independence,

Aware of the increasing conflicts resulting from the denial of or impediments in the way of the freedom of such peoples, which constitute a serious threat to world peace.

Considering the important role of the United Nations in assisting the movement for independence in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories,

Recognizing that the peoples of the world ardently desire the end of colonialism in all its manifestations,

Convinced that the continued existence of colonialism prevents the development of international economic co-operation, impedes the social, cultural and economic development of dependent peoples and militates against the United Nations ideal of universal peace,

Affirming that peoples may, for their own ends, freely dispose of their natural wealth and resources without prejudice to any obligations arising out of international economic co-operation, based upon the principle of mutual benefit, and international law,

Believing that the process of liberation is irresistible and irreversible and that, in order to avoid serious crises, an end must be put to colonialism and all practices of segregation and discrimination associated therewith,

Welcoming the emergence in recent years of a large number of dependent territories into freedom and independence, and recognizing the increasingly powerful trends towards freedom in such territories which have not yet attained independence,

Convinced that all peoples have an inalienable right to complete freedom, the exercise of their sovereignty and the integrity of their national territory,

Solemnly proclaims the necessity of bringing to a speedy and unconditional end colonialism in all its forms and manifestations;

And to this end Declares that:

1. The subjection of peoples to alien subjugation, domination and exploitation constitutes a denial of fundamental human rights, is contrary to the Charter of the United Nations and is an impediment to the promotion of world peace and cooperation.

2. All peoples have the right to self-determination; by virtue of that right they freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development.

3. Inadequacy of political, economic, social or educational preparedness should never serve as a pretext for delaying independence.

4. All armed action or repressive measures of all kinds directed against dependent peoples shall cease in order to enable them to exercise peacefully and freely their right to complete independence, and the integrity of their national territory shall be respected.

5. Immediate steps shall be taken, in Trust and Non-Self-Governing Territories or all other territories which have not yet attained independence, to transfer all powers to the peoples of those territories, without any conditions or reservations, in accordance with their freely expressed will and desire, without any distinction as to race, creed or colour, in order to enable them to enjoy complete independence and freedom.

6. Any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations.

7. All States shall observe faithfully and strictly the provisions of the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the present Declaration on the basis of equality, non-interference in the internal affairs of all States, and respect for the sovereign rights of all peoples and their territorial integrity.

The Declaration and the principles proclaimed in it were interpreted as calling for the immediate abolition of the domination of any people by an alien people in any form or manifestation

APPENDIX B:

NEW AFRIKAN STATEMENTS ON OUR COLONIAL STATUS

Mary McLeod Bethune, a last-minute addition to the NAACP’s consultant team in San Francisco, spoke forcefully on how the UN Conference had painted in ‘bold relief’ that ‘common bond’ between African Americans and the colonial peoples. If anything, Bethune remarked, the UNCIO had made it very clear that the ‘Negro in America’ held ‘little more than colonial status in a democracy.’ The similarities were appallingly clear. The fight for colonial self-determination paralleled the battle to overturn the South’s racist voting restrictions. The efforts to revise the UN’s ‘domestic jurisdiction’ clause matched the assault on the states’ rights philosophy of the South. And the dissatisfaction with a trusteeship plan that denied colonies the right to lay their grievances before an international tribunal mirrored the opposition to America’s separate and unequal system of justice.

John Henrik Clarke (1961) - “all of the Afro-American nationalists basically are fighting for the same thing. . They feel that the Afro-American constitutes what is tantamount to an exploited colony within a sovereign nation . Their fight is for national, and personal liberation.”

Harold Cruse: Revolutionary Nationalism and the Afro-American (1962): “From the beginning, the American Negro has existed as a colonial being. His enslavement coincided with the colonial expansion of European powers and was nothing more or less than a condition of domestic colonialism. Instead of the United States establishing a colonial empire in Africa, it brought the colonial system home and installed it in the Southern states. When the Civil War broke up the slave system and the Negro was emancipated, he gained only partial freedom. Emancipation elevated him only to the position of a semidependent man, not to that of an equal or independent being. . . .The Negro is not really an integral part of the American nation beyond the convenient formal recognition that he lives within the borders of the United States. . . The only factor which differentiates the Negro's status from that of a pure colonial status is that his position is maintained in the "home" country in close proximity to the dominant racial group. . . . Of course, the national character of the Negro has little to do with what part of the country he lives in. Wherever he lives, he is restricted. His national boundaries are the color of his skin, his racial characteristics, and the social conditions within his subcultural world.. . . Unlike the situation in the colonial area, the Negro could not seize the power he wanted nor oust "foreigners. . . . Their rejection of white society is analogous to the colonial peoples' rejection of imperialist rule. The difference is only that people in colonies can succeed and American Negro nationalists cannot . The peculiar position of Negro nationalists in the United States requires them to set themselves against the dominance of whites and still manage to live in the same country.”

The Provisional Government of the African American Captive Nation (PG-AACN) Declaration of Self-Determination of the African American Captive Nation by “Chief” Oseijeman Adefunmi President; Robert F. Williams, Prime minister; Abdul Rahman, First Deputy Prime Minister; Audley Moore, Second Deputy Prime Minister:

“Be it further resolved that all the land south of the Mason-Dixon line where our people constitute the majority, be partitioned to establish a territory for Self-Government for the African nation in the U.S.A.; and Be it further resolved that the United States Government take full responsibility for training our people for self-government in all of its ramifications, and Be it finally resolved that the Provisional Government of the African American Captive Nation be recognized by the Government of the United States as of now.”

Malcolm X:

“Every nation in Asia gained its independence through the philosophy of nationalism. Every nation on the African continent that has gotten its independence brought it about through the philosophy of nationalism. And it will take black nationalism -- that to bring about the freedom of 22 million Afro-Americans here in this country where we have suffered colonialism for the past 400 years.”

“America is just as much a colonial power as England ever was…what do you call second-class citizenship? Why, that's colonization. Second-class citizenship is nothing but 20th (century) slavery. How you gonna to tell me you're a second-class citizen? They don't have second-class citizenship in any other government on this Earth. They just have slaves and people who are free! Well, this country is a hypocrite! They try and make you think they set you free by calling you a second-class citizen. No, you're nothing but a 20th century slave.”

-Malcolm X, The Ballot or the Bullet

Max Stanford:

“There are two conflicting views; the first sees our people as citizens denied their rights and believes that they will be assimilated or integrated by revolution, reform, or other means into the White American way of life; which means exploitation of non-white peoples. The other sees our people as a nation within the boundaries of another nation, a nation in captivity striving to obtain independence, self-determination, or national liberation. . . . By the proportion of the population - in the South especially - AfroAmericans constitute a nation within a nation.”

Donald Freeman:

“Further the conference [1964 AfroAmerican Student Movement conference at Fisk University] maintained that the federal government's refusal to enforce the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments renders AfroAmericans slaves or a colonized Black Nation, not American citizens, thus relegating them to a position analogous to that of Afro-Asian and Latin American nations under Western imperialism.”

Eldridge Cleaver, Head of the International Section of the Black Panther Party, stated,

“We have, in the United States, a ‘Mother Country Working Class’ and a ‘Working Class from the Black Colony. We also have a Mother Country Lumpenproletariat and a Lumpenproletariat from the Black Colony. Inside the Mother Country, these categories are fairly stable, but when we look at the Black Colony, we find that the hard and fast distinctions melt away. This is because of the leveling effect of the colonial process and the fact that all Black people are colonized, even if some of them occupy favored positions in the schemes of the Mother Country colonizing exploiters.

Kathleen Cleaver, Minister of Information for the Black Panther Party stated,

“There was an explanation for why our housing was bad, our education was poor, our political power was limited. And that explanation was that we were held as colonial subjects within the United States. It’s not a perfect explanation. It’s an analogy to situations in Africa and in Asia that we could see that ‘fit’ us. Therefore, colonialism had been denounced by the United Nations and people were entitled to their independence and they were justified in breaking out of that type of control. That was the basic American history.”

Huey P. Newton, founder of the Black Panther Party, stated,

“Police in our community couldn’t possibly be there to protect our property because we own no property. They couldn’t possibly be there to see that we receive the due process of law for the simple reason that the police themselves deny us the due process of law. And so it is very apparent that the police are only in our community not for our security but the security of the business owners in the community, and also to see that the status quo was kept intact. . . . In America, black people are treated very much as the Vietnamese people or any other colonized people because we’re used, we’re brutalized. The police in our community occupy our area, our community as a foreign troop occupies territory.”

Imari Obadele made an explicit connection to our colonization and African national liberation movements:

“For no less than they have We boldly shed the nationality of our colonizer and gone to contest for independent land. . . .“ and “The essential strategy of our struggle for land is to array enough power ( as in jiu-jitsu, with a concentration of karate strength at key moments) to force the greatest power, the United States, to abide by international law, to recognize and accept our claims to independence and land. The purpose of this strategy can be further simplified: it is to create a situation for the United States where it becomes cheaper to relinquish control of the Five States than to continue a war against us to take back or hold the area.” - from Foundations of A Black Nation

In A Suggestion Towards the Framework of A Reparations Demand And A Set of Legal Underpinnings, Imari Abubakari Obadele Chairperson, the People’s Center Council (National Legislature) of the Provisional Government Republic of New Afrika And Associate Professor of Political Science, Prairie View A&M University, Texas writes,

“It is relevant to the charge of war against the United States that We were still an occupied and oppressed nation in this period between the Civil War and 1968. We were a colony living on territory claimed by the United States, subject until 1968 to a body of legislation and court decisions which defined our subordination to the White nation and facilitated the White nation’s economic and cultural exploitation of us, and our social degradation.”

Kuwasi Balagoon trial statement at the opening of the Brinks trial,

“This is a war against New Afrikan people for the purpose of colonization and genocide.. . . . When i say we New Afrikan people are colonized, i mean that our lives socially, economically and politically, with the exception of our war of liberation, are controlled by other people, by Imperialist euroamericans. Imperialist euroamericans tell us where to live and under what conditions, euroamerican invaders, colonizers, decide what laws we should obey and what jobs we will get. . . . The American Heritage Dictionary defines a colony as a group of emigrants settled in a distant land but subject to a parent country 2. A territory thus settled 3. Any region politically controlled by another country. But just as the hypocritical U.S.A. claims that it has no political prisoners, it claims that it has no colonies. . . . If the United States was a democracy it would set a date for a U.N. plebiscite, hold elections with no interference, and abide by the outcome.

Ramon Gutierrez writes in Internal Colonialism: An American Theory of Race (2004),

“The tangible results of the Civil Rights Movement remain evident through heightened levels of political representation, patterns of voting participation, and economic upward mobility for some, swelling the ranks of the Black rich and middle class leaving behind a much larger permanent underclass that has continued to fall further and further behind. The theory of internal colonialism was elaborated in the United States for them.”

Albert H. Dyson, Office of the General Counsel, Dept. of Defense, Chokwe Lumumba, Chairman, New Afrikan Peoples Organization, Brooklyn, N.Y., Nkechi Taifa-Caldwell, Minister of Justice, Republic of New Afrika, Washington, D.C., for Dr. Mutulu Shakur. - 690 F. Supp. 1291 (1988) UNITED STATES of America, v. Marilyn BUCK, Defendant. UNITED STATES of America v. Mutulu SHAKUR, Defendant. Nos. 84 Cr. 220-CSH, SSS 82 Cr. 312-CSH. United States District Court, S.D. New York. July 6, 1988.

“As is the case with every colonial experience, the New Afrikan Nation as a colony has no independent economic structure. The vast majority of the population of New Afrika, however, has at all points in history been contained within the same imperialist economic structure, and has shared the misfortune of suffering discriminatory treatment within it. Indeed it is appropriate to say in the case of New Afrika, as in the case of most colonies, that New Afrikans as a National population are an underclass frozen at the bottom of the American economy.”

Nkechi Taifa, in Black Power, Black Lawyer: My Audacious Quest for Justice, writes,

“In one of my college papers, ‘The Political Economy of the Black Ghetto,’ titled after a book of the same name by William Tabb, I argued, ‘A colonial relationship presently exists between the Black ghetto and the larger society, having many similarities with the same oppressive dependence that exists between many underdeveloped countries and industrial nations.’ My paper’s conclusion was that the ‘Black ghetto was also a colony whose situation closely paralleled the political and economic relationships existing between many Third World nations and the industrially advanced countries.’”

APPENDIX C

February 2024: Baku Initiative Group holds int’l conference on decolonization - The Baku Initiative Group (BIG) on Saturday kick-started an international conference titled Decolonization: Awakening of the Renaissance in the Turkish metropolis Istanbul. The gathering brings together representatives from 13 different countries and four international bodies, featuring delegates from French territories including New Caledonia, French Polynesia, French Guiana, Martinique, and Guadeloupe.

U.S. Virgin Islands:

A People's Historical Journey to Self Determination & Decolonization

November 10, 2022: What are the VI's Self-Determination options?

February 25, 2025: Self-Determination in the Virgin Islands & the 6th Constitutional Convention

British Virgin Islands:

September 1, 2021: UN Reaffirms VI Constitutional Position And Right To Self-Governance

December 7, 2023: Seventy-eighth session Agenda item 58 Implementation of the Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 7 December 2023 [on the report of the Special Political and Decolonization Committee (Fourth Committee) (A/78/429, para. 33)] 78/89. Question of the British Virgin Islands

July 17, 2024: Fraser champions BVI’s self-determination

February 17, 2025: Premier denies selecting independence as sole option for BVI

Bonaire:

July 17, 2024: Baku hosts opening ceremony of Congress of Independence Movements from French-colonized territories - Three organizations from the Dutch colonies of Bonaire and Sint Maarten attended the Congress as guests of honor.

August 22, 2024: Baku hosts international conference on Bonaire's decolonization

Azerbaijan adopts final declaration on Bonaire

October 1, 2024: Summit of the Future: Bonaire’s Cry for Justice – Demanding Self-Determination and an End to Human Rights Violations

November 7, 2024:Bonaire Human Rights Organization Takes Stand at UN Geneva Conference, Spotlighting Colonialism and Indigenous Rights.

March 29, 2025:Bonaire activists condemn Dutch policies as colonial pressure mounts

St. Maarten:

November 14, 2018: Independence is Pro-St. Martin. Period.

November 18, 2021: Rhoda Arrindell calls for national anthem the people can be proud of