SHORTLY after the Progressive Labour Party won the 1998 General Election, an expatriate chief executive officer lambasted the fact the international sector had no veto over this island's Immigration policies. At the time I wrote:

Precisely the same sentiment came to mind last week when I read the open letter addressed to Premier Alex Scott from the international companies which suggested that Independence, in the letter's words, "had almost no positives".

Only the people of Bermuda have the right to decide which direction to move in in terms of Independence. But it is not surprising to me that the foreign financial services presence in this country should consider that it has certain rights in our political affairs.

During the period of the United Bermuda Party rule, the impression was never given that Bermuda existed as a country in its own right. In fact, I remember one particular phrase often used by a former UBP Premier who referred to the island as "Bermuda Inc".

Perhaps he believed that the running of Bermuda was akin to administering a successful business but it was a description that I could never sympathise with for it suggested to me that Bermuda did not exist as a country in its own right but rather as an off-shore industrial park for international companies.

Is it any wonder that foreign investors hearing the then-Premier describe Bermuda in corporate terms came to believe they had carte blanche when it came to having input into the administration of this country's affairs? Yet we live in a world where such is not the case unless local governments that host powerful foreign economic interests have completely sold out their national interests to these overseas power players.

Sadly, there have been many instances where this has happened. Such scenarios rarely benefit the countries in question but only the interests of the small ruling elites. Multi-national corporations, as we have come to know them, are huge, hydra-headed concerns, producing, buying and selling around the globe but which have their origins in the most developed countries.

For example, one of the biggest multi-nationals is the American oil giant Exxon which has annual oil sales twice that of Nigeria's Gross National Product despite the fact that country is a major producer of oil.

Often the multi-nationals' assets are considerably larger than the economies of many Third World countries and such companies are a major factor in the increasing divide between rich and poor nations in this world.

The most successful ones often make super-profits, most of which are repatriated to their own countries from the nations where they do business. Bermuda often boasts about the off-shore businesses that are domiciled here.

We routinely call them "our" off-shore business, but in reality they are not ours. The vast amounts of money they deal with and profits they make do not trickle down into the Bermuda economy; these monies are repatriated to the firms' home countries.

, we believe we are making a good living out of this arrangement in terms of the jobs created by the international sector, the money its employees pump into the Bermuda economy ? rents, groceries and the other basics of life ? and what goes into the Bermuda Government's coffers in terms of tax revenue.

But as I pointed out, what we receive is a pittance in terms of the overall economic value of those companies set up on our shores. They are not here because they like Bermuda and want to give a boost to our economy. They are here because, as a country, we have provided the infrastructure and tax incentives that allow them to operate here.

From my perspective, though, we are still in a position to determine our own destiny without being unduly influenced by these firms. The alternative is unacceptable for that would amount to completely sell out our national interests to the international sector of our economy ? including Bermuda's quest for national Independence.

The bottom line is that multi-national companies (or as we still call them, "exempt companies") do not have a loyalty to the host countries in which they operate. If it was not in their financial interests to be here, they would not be here.

That said, then what is the real relationship between a host country and its foreign investors? Can there be anything approaching what we might call a partnership? If there was a genuine partnership between Government and the off-shore financial services industry, then they would not have expressed such strident anti-Independence views in their letter to the Premier.

After all, Bermuda's current colonial relationship with the UK is the aberration in the modern world ? sovereign Independence is the norm. So why should Bermuda not then take the next logical step in its constitutional development without inspiring such fear and panic in its overseas investors?

But such partnerships between local administrations and overseas investors are probably much rarer than we might like to think.

would think, for instance, there would be solid co-operation between the multi-national petroleum companies and the major oil-producing countries where they operate. Such a mutually beneficial relationship should be par for the course. But these relationships are routinely lopsided, favouring the foreign corporations rather than the oil producing countries. The countries in question might have the oil but companies like Exxon control the market.

Saudi Arabia has some of the world's largest oil reserves. The Arab kingdom is generally considered to be a very wealthy country in terms of what it earns from the selling its petroleum products to an oil-thirsty industrialised world.

But Saudi Arabia ultimately does not control its own economic destiny because although it sits atop a subterranean ocean of oil, it depends almost entirely on Western oil companies for the expertise to both extract and refine the oil as well as to sell it the international market.

I have specifically touched on the relationship between Saudi Arabia and its Western oil company partners because the kingdom is a very conservative Muslim country but it has compromised that status by allowing its expatriate workforce to flout traditional Islamic customs.

For instance, Saudi Arabia prohibits the manufacture and sale of alcohol to its citizens but turns a blind eye to the flourishing black market in bootleg liquor that exists in the vast compounds which house its Western workers.

This, among many other cultural concessions to foreigners, has fuelled growing resentment among ordinary Saudis who do not really benefit from the kingdom's wealth ? ordinary Saudi citizens who are increasingly embracing fundamentalist Islam and striking out against not only the foreign presence in their country but at their own rulers, who they believe are corrupt and very badly compromised.

It is probably not entirely coincidental that terror mastermind Osama bin Laden is a Saudi Arabian native, one who has violently rejected the Western World's attempts to bulldoze the sovereignty of Muslim countries in the Middle East.

the vast majority of 9/11 hijackers were also Saudi citizens, outraged Muslims whose anger at the cultural dominance of Western corporations and values in their society manifested itself in homicidal mass murder three years ago.

I assume you get my point. When foreign investors dominate a host country to the extent they believe they can dictate terms to the local government there is bound to be a negative reaction. Now don't misinterpret what I am saying.

I am not for one moment suggesting that a Bermudian equivalent to al-Qaeda is now in the making, an organisation that will take up arms against the international sector. Such a scenario is not on the cards in Bermuda.

But I do believe that for every action on the part of the international sector when it comes to attempting to influence Bermuda's internal affairs, there will be an equal and opposite reaction from angry Bermudians.

And in my view the letter the international sector sent to the Premier was nothing more or less than a calculated effort on their behalf to frighten Bermudians away from the idea of Independence.

I am not prepared to be intimidated over this question of Bermudian Independence, for I firmly believe that Bermudians have the same capabilities as any other peoples who have taken the road to national Independence. And I believe that many of my fellow Bermudians subscribe to this view as well.