Dear Editor,
To be honest I was completely taken aback by the naïvete of Mr Mike Rahman’s letter ‘We have nothing to fear from Venezuela’ (KN 5.8.08) in which he criticizes Mr Raphael Trotman for some very timely observations contained in his KN column for the AFC (3.8.08). The fact, as Mr Rahman says, that Mr Trotman’s thesis “is not new” only reinforces the argument that our neighbour’s territorial claim has been around for a long time and we need to be aware of the Venezuelan potential for aggression. Venezuela’s bellicose attitude was amply demonstrated recently when it mobilized its forces on its border with Colombia. Furthermore, this act of aggression was motivated not by a powerful territorial imperative but by the mere desire to show solidarity with Ecuador, an ally and ideological friend.
But I agree with Mr Rahman and the American President who once famously said, “There is no new thing in the world except the history we don’t know.”
The annals of German history tell us that between 1936 and 1939 Adolf Hitler decided Germany would rearm in preparation for re-alignment with her more immediate neighbours. He was determined to outwit the ‘we-have-nothing-to-fear’ advocates in the interest of German advancement. In a two-faced diplomatic offensive Hitler did the unexpected thing. In January, 1934, he concluded a non-aggression pact with Poland. In September 1939 he invaded. In fact Hitler had long resented what he saw as an artificial state incorporating territory which had formerly been German. Hitler was cunning in the choice of gestures he made, designed to further, and not injure his territorial interests.
As European/world history was soon to reveal, no international agreements would stand in Hitler’s way. In pursuit of his territorial ambitions Hitler said he would use temporary treaties of friendship, non-aggression pacts: “I am willing to sign anything… there has never been a sworn treaty which has not sooner or later been broken or become untenable… Anyone whose conscience is so tender that he will not sign a treaty unless he can feel sure he can keep it in all and any circumstance is a fool… I shall make any treaty I require.”
Between 1934-1942 Hitler gave understandings, promises, commitments and signed several treaties and pacts designed to lull his intended prey into feelings of false security.
In 1938 he annexed Austria. In March 1939 he added Bohemia and Moravia. In September he invaded Poland. On April 9, 1940 he invaded Denmark and Norway. On May 10 he invaded Holland, Belgium and Luxembourg. And on October 7 German troops entered Roumania. By late 1941 the Germans were in Moscow and had occupied the Odessa with Roumanian help. Need I go on?
In his penultimate paragraph Mr Rahman says that Venezuela is “moving towards regional development that will finally unite the entire South American Region – where there will be no borders and there will be no claim.” But, does Guyana really want to be part of this borderless metemgee of countries in which it would be lucky to hold the importance of an unleavened duff? I fully agree with Raphael Trotman that while “Venezuela is seen as a friend, the outstanding issue of the controversy over the Essequibo must be resolved (unequivocally and permanently) before any such project (a reference to the proposed road from Venezuela to Georgetown and pipeline to Suriname) is approved.”
Modern history dictates we ought to have everything to fear from Venezuela’s territorial imperative.
Yours faithfully,
F Hamley Case
