Evelyn Wever-Croes: “Jetten has not answered our questions. MEP stands by its demands”

ORANJESTAD — “Jetten has not answered our questions. Jetten talked about speculation.” With these words, MEP leader and former Prime Minister Evelyn Wever-Croes responded to Noticiacla regarding statements made by Dutch Prime Minister Rob Jetten, who on Wednesday urged against speculation about former Queen Beatrix’s personal notes concerning Betico Croes and Aruba’s struggle for Status Aparte.

AVOIDING SPECULATION

According to Wever-Croes, MEP requested an official explanation from the Dutch government through the Aruban government precisely to prevent speculation. “We have said from the beginning that, precisely to avoid speculation, we are demanding that our government obtain clarification from the Dutch government. Therefore, we stand by our request,” Wever-Croes stated.

JETTEN REFUSES TO INTERPRET THE NOTES

During Wednesday’s debate in the Dutch House of Representatives on the King’s 2027 budget, Jetten responded to questions from Dutch parliamentarian Tijs van den Brink, who expressed concern about the controversy caused in Aruba by the publication of the notes. Jetten emphasized that Beatrix had always demonstrated great dedication to the Caribbean parts of the Kingdom, particularly Aruba. However, regarding the meaning of the notes, Jetten said that the full context in which they were written is unknown and that he therefore did not wish to speculate about their intended meaning.

The Dutch Prime Minister confirmed that he had discussed the matter with representatives of Aruba, but did not disclose with whom or what exactly had been discussed.

MEP WANTS TO KNOW WHAT BEATRIX MEANT

The controversy centers on a personal note written by Beatrix in the 1980s, which reads: “Tijd winnen! Hij zal eens wegvallen. Dat afwachten.” Translated: “Buy time! At some point he will be out of the picture. Wait for that.” These words have raised serious questions in Aruba, particularly about the meaning of the Dutch expression wegvallen in the context of Betico Croes’s struggle for Status Aparte. Wever-Croes emphasized that MEP is not drawing conclusions about Beatrix’s intentions but is demanding clarification about what the note meant, what information was available at the time, and whether any scenario or operational plan had been prepared to eliminate Betico Croes as a political figure. So far, no evidence has been presented proving that the note referred to a plan to physically eliminate Croes. However, according to MEP, the lack of context is precisely why historical clarification is necessary.

MEP HAS ALREADY TAKEN SEVERAL STEPS

Wever-Croes’s latest response is not MEP’s first action on the matter. On October 8, Wever-Croes publicly expressed her concerns about the notes and announced that MEP’s parliamentary faction had requested clarification from the Dutch government through the Aruban government. Subsequently, on October 22, MEP’s parliamentary faction sent a reminder letter to Prime Minister Mike Eman, urging the government to take action and seek answers in The Hague. According to Wever-Croes, MEP has now sent two letters to Eman without receiving a response. For that reason, the faction has requested a public parliamentary debate so that the legislature can determine its position on the matter.

“SILENCE DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE DOUBTS”

Wever-Croes believes that the Aruban government has a direct responsibility to represent the interests of the Aruban people in this historical matter. “The Aruban government cannot leave our people without answers to these serious questions. It is its responsibility to treat this matter with the seriousness it deserves and to actively insist on clarification from the Dutch government,” the MEP leader told Noticiacla. She warned that a lack of response could increase distrust rather than resolve concerns. “Remaining silent does not eliminate the doubts. On the contrary, it makes the situation more serious and increases distrust.”

QUESTIONS REMAIN UNANSWERED

With Jetten’s statement, the Dutch government has made clear that it does not wish to interpret the notes without knowing their context. However, MEP does not consider this an answer to the specific questions the party has raised. The distinction is clear: while Jetten urges against speculation, Wever-Croes maintains that obtaining an official explanation is precisely the way to prevent further speculation. The political question that now remains is whether Prime Minister Mike Eman’s government will formally request clarification from The Hague and whether Aruba’s Parliament will address the matter in a public debate. “Aruba has the right to clarity about its own history. MEP will continue demanding answers,” Evelyn Wever-Croes concluded.