Dear Editor,
I have no disillusionment with the PPP/C, its leaders, or with President Jagdeo. If I did, I would write my position out clearly so that there is no misunderstanding. My support for the PPP and the President is based on their record of achievement in government. I do not need the subterfuge of third parties to state my position. I do not have any personal political agenda.
Last week I wrote about debates in the diaspora concerning developments in Guyana. Goose and The Big Bird represented discontent with the crime situation, while Dhal defended the PPP and President Jagdeo (‘The PPP leaders should take the disillusionment in the diaspora seriously’ SN 3.7.08). Responses to the letter were mostly of the personal attack type and so they do not deserve any responses. There was, however, one letter in the Guyana Chronicle by Kendrick Appadu that broached a level of seriousness, and that does require attention (‘Guyanese in the Diaspora prompted to sell Guyana short’ 4.7.08). Allow me to go through Mr Appadu’s key arguments.
Appadu No 1: “…you would be amazed at the picture that is painted of Guyana by some persons, in order to receive overseas assistance from their relatives.” Do you really mean that Sir? Are you prepared to accuse thousands upon thousands of less fortunate Guyanese of lying to their relatives to get a barrel or some money? Do you really mean to tell me that despite the progress in the country, no one genuinely needs assistance from their relatives? This is a vile accusation and you should publicly apologize for it. Let me tell you this Mr Appadu – it is this type of nonsense that produces people like Goose and The Big Bird.
Appadu No 2: “…another dimension has to do with academics and other prominent people distorting ordinary people’s political position…” This is a Lil-ABC response, not that of a competent political operative. Goose and The Big Bird are real people and they mean what they say. The letter I wrote, essentially on their behalf, came out of nearly one year of listening to their position. Ambassador Bayney Karran was himself subjected to language from Goose in my presence. Ask him? When you come to Washington DC, I will introduce you to them. I must tell you that after the Bartica massacre I attended a rally in New York and witnessed the abuse I wrote about. It might not please you but I was the only person who defended the PPP who was not cussed-down. Get the video and read the press reports.
Appadu No 3: “Dr Randy Persaud is no different. He may be disillusioned with the PPP/C leaders, but seems unable to express this publicly.” This man clearly does not know me! Mr Appadu – where were you when Dr Randy Persaud was the only academic defending the PPP and absorbing the most hateful personal attacks on a daily basis? Where were your essaying skills then? Where were you when for two years I was debating David Hinds, Fredrick Kissoon, Alissa Trotz, Rickford Burke, Clarence Ellis, Evan Thomas, Peeping Tom, Baytoram Ramharack, etc? Light mus bin cut-aff – nah?
Appadu No 4: “ ‘Fineman’ and his gang should not be considered by persons in the Diaspora as your everyday ‘run-of-the-mill’ crooks.” Mr Appadu must have been in a long slumber on the question of the massacres in Guyana. Let me make this clear – I was the first person to characterize the violence in Guyana as an insurgency. Others called it “bandits,” “a criminal gang,” “centrally directed violence,” “crime wave,” or now in your own words, a “politically instigated criminal insurgency.” The language of Flea was used by Oliver Hinckson the day after my letter was published. In that letter I wrote, “Let me make this simple and clear. These are not simply bandits and everyday criminals. These men and women are part of an insurgency.” I also stated that the standard definition “…of insurgency clearly matches what is happening in Guyana. The sooner this is realized, the sooner the appropriate strategies and tactics will be adopted to root out this insurgency.” So Mr Appadu take this from this academic – scrap dem lang lang ting like “politically instigated criminal insurgency” and just say “the insurgency.”
I think when I first used this term GOG distanced itself from it. No problem, for that is politics. The point, however, should not be lost. I do not need a lecture from Mr Appadu to know that there is an insurgency in Guyana.
Appadu No 5: “Let them know that there is only so little that the Government of Guyana can do…” Mr Appadu is asking me here to pass on this message regarding the insurgency, to the diaspora! Do you really expect any reasonable person to accept that? Are you willing to stand on a stage in Guyana, New York or Toronto and repeat those words? I will give you some advice now, – never say that is all the government can do to defeat a violent destabilization campaign against the Government of Guyana. Never!
Here is what you might say, ‘The Government of Guyana will defeat this insurgency at any and all costs so people all across this country can live with peace and security. We will continue to provide the resources to the police and military to bring to justice these insurgents who have destroyed too many innocent lives, and who are bent on destabilizing a democratically government. We will not fail.’
The most important thing in defeating an insurgency, apart from intelligence (both background and actionable), tactical capability, and political support, is political will. Political will is critical in building political support, shaking up the white collar insurgents on TV, the letter section and the internet, and forcing the opposition to step forward. What is less important is attacking people who have supported you but who are a bit discouraged.
By the way Mr Appadu – who do you think is Dhal?
Yours faithfully,
Randy Persaud
