(De Ware Tijd) PARAMARIBO – Had NDP leader Desi Bouterse caused political unrest under the previous government, it would be doubtful whether the Surinamese intelligence and security service CIVD would be willing to help restore order and calm according to the US Embassy. The Embassy has little faith in the CIVD, as shown by diplomatic correspondence from the Embassy in Paramaribo published by Wikileaks. In the cables, former Ambassador Marsha Barnes replied to question from Washington about the ability of police and army to curb possible civil unrest created by Bouterse against the Venetiaan/Sardjoe government. The Ambassador replied that police would be able to control small-scale protests of short duration in the capital. In case of large-scale nationwide protests, however, these would very likely get out of hand due to a lack of capacity within the police. The National Army would have to be involved then. “It is very doubtful whether the CIVD will play a constructive role in handling any unrest. The CIVD has the nominal responsibility with regard to national security, but is mainly deployed for internal political intelligence work and consists of criminals and questionable characters with ambiguous loyalties,” the former Ambassador writes.
DWT EDITORIAL
‘LEAKED DIPLOMATIC CORRESPONDENCE’ from the US Embassy in Suriname indicates that Suriname’s intelligence and security service CIVD might not able to take adequate action in case Desi Bouterse would have fomented unrest during the government headed by Ronald Venetiaan. The Venetiaan government is also criticized for slowness and a lack of decisiveness in case of calamities. These claims have been publicized by Wikileaks but say nothing new about the Venetiaan government, Bouterse’s position, the CIVD and the police. Even the average man on the street who has a normal interest in political developments in Suriname could have come to the same conclusions that former US Ambassador Marsha Barnes reported to Washington according to Wikileaks. These claims are nothing new, as all important government departments have been politicized. That includes the Army and security services. Politicizing sensitive departments carries with it a certain influence that is not advisable for a stable Army and security services. Wikileaks need not wait for leaked correspondence from the US Embassy in Suriname to draw such conclusions. The digging around for information about the police’s limited capabilities can be avoided because the problems the police have been dealing with for years are well-known. It is no news that police are not sufficiently equipped with manpower and material to combat violent crime, and that the assistance of the National Army is needed sometimes. For that matter, Suriname is not the only country with this problem. Recently in Trinidad, a state of emergency was declared to combat crime. This year, Suriname has been in the grip of criminals for months, but calm has been restored due to the cooperation of citizens and stronger action by police and military units. This shows that our law enforcement is capable to deal with crime in spite of limited resources, and it gives us a good feeling. Therefore the conclusions of the former Ambassador, if she had really reached them, make no sense and are misplaced. But as the US Embassy is as silent as the grave about the revelations by Wikileaks, analyzing statements by the former Ambassador is of no use. Otherwise there would he reason to protest against a statement by Barnes about the decisiveness of Venetiaan and link this to unrest and security. The Embassy may give that qualification, but in essence it is a Surinamese affair.
