By Abubacarr

Copyright standard

Dear Editor,Here’s the thing: Politics is about winning political power. The decisions taken by every political party are measured against how the party will win political power. The UDP can win the 2026 presidential election. We just need a new leader and presidential candidate.I don’t know how I can argue about Talib leading the UDP: it doesn’t make sense.And Darboe running again doesn’t make sense either. Other than the UDP and the other opposition groups working together, there’s no third rail, President Barrow will win again.Every Gambian including Darboe himself should be concerned about President Barrow winning again. We can prevent that from happening by getting the UDP a new leader and presidential candidate. It’s as simple as that!We’re all witnesses to the precipitous decline of political authority and economic conditions in The Gambia. That’s the perfect recipe for political instability.And with President Barrow, things will only get worse for everyone.Security conditions in The Gambia are deteriorating and getting dangerous.Corruption and lies are the two sides of the Barrow Government business card.The Gambia is being vandalised and destroyed.The only way to arrest the slippery slope into political chaos in The Gambia is by winning the 2026 presidential election declared by the IEC officially.Other than that, whatever else anyone is saying is off the point.To want to elect Darboe president will not make Darboe the president.For Darboe to win the presidential election, certain political chips must have to fall into place. If not, why can’t we rescue ourselves and The Gambia from the hapless President Barrow: get a new UDP leader and presidential candidate, win the presidential election and save ourselves from President Barrow?I’m neither anti-he nor anti-her. I just want change and national development in The Gambia. And to start, we have to get President Barrow out.That’s all my political arguments are about. I can’t support head in the sand political propositions!Yusupha ‘Major’ BojangScotland

Unfair US visa bond

Dear Editor,As someone who once served as director of American Affairs at The Gambia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, I find the decision by the United States government to impose a visa bond of up to US$15,000 on Gambian passport holders, effective 11th October, 2025, to be deeply troubling and diplomatically counterproductive.While every nation retains the sovereign right to regulate entry into its territory, this measure is excessive, discriminatory, and corrosive to the spirit of mutual respect that should guide relations between the United States and The Gambia.It unfairly penalises ordinary Gambians who travel legitimately for business, family, education, and tourism, while doing little to address the underlying concerns the US may have about overstays or immigration violations.Beyond the principle of fairness, there is also the issue of economic proportionality.The US and The Gambia exist in vastly different economic realities. In a country where the average income is only a fraction of American standards, demanding a bond of up to US$15,000, nearly D1,000,000, places the visa entirely out of reach for the overwhelming majority of Gambians. It is not merely a financial condition; it is an effective ban cloaked as a bond.If reciprocity is a principle of international relations, then The Gambia would be within its rights to consider imposing similar financial bonds on US citizens seeking entry into The Gambia.How many Americans traveling to Banjul for leisure or short-term business would willingly post a deposit equivalent to US$15,000 before boarding a plane? Such a policy would be met with outrage. Why then should Gambians be subjected to such indignity without protest?Diplomacy requires proportionality, fairness, and dialogue. A blanket financial penalty imposed on an entire nationality reduces people-to-people exchanges, stifles trade and investment opportunities, and casts a shadow over what has historically been a relationship of cooperation.The Gambia has always shown a willingness to engage constructively on migration management and international cooperation. It is regrettable that Washington has chosen unilateralism over bilateral dialogue and problem-solving.From a foreign policy perspective, this decision calls for a firm but measured diplomatic response from Banjul and one that defends the dignity of Gambian citizens while seeking to preserve the long-standing ties between the two countries.As an independent observer, I must stress that migration control is a legitimate policy objective, but it must never be pursued at the expense of equity, partnership, and mutual respect.To single out Gambians with a prohibitive financial barrier is to stigmatise an entire people, and that is something diplomacy must always frown upon.The government of The Gambia must show and demonstrate strength for once and demand that respect be accorded to The Gambia and its peoples.Melville R RobertsEngland