I think the issue is quartering
crosswinds. The wind is not blowing straight across, but at some other angle, like 45° to the runway but favoring
the runway in use in your picture.
A crosswind is a crosswind is a crosswind. It is the HEADwind or TAILwind component that is important. The wind effect is a vector
effect. For example the runway in use in your photo is 13, or nominally, 130 degrees. If the wind was from 175* at 20 knots that would be a 14 knot headwind for this runway plus a 14 knot crosswind component. Landing toward the hill on runway 31 it would still be a 14 knot crosswind but it would also be a 14 knot TAILWIND component.
Also remember that we must be able to touch down, reject the landing, go around with an engine failure
in order for the landing to be legal and safe. This is VERY difficult when landing toward the hills. Apart from the dodgy maneuver of circling to land, landing on the runway shown here would ALWAYS be preferred over landing toward the mountains.
The rules are slightly different between nations and the wording is different but the basic rule is we cannot EVER fly or taxi an airliner into a position where it needs all its engines to fly out of it. (It is never worded that way - I'm summarizing half a dozen regs there.)
So if you land with the tailwind component and have to go around to prevent a Tenerife, that wind is pushing you toward the mountains faster.
Anyway, think go-around, not landing and it does make sense.
In my first post I was only addressing why the runway was not oriented or located differently.
* Of course wind is only reported in ten-degree increments.
Happiness is not seeing another trite Ste. Maarten photo all week long.