Despite all that has happened since February 23, 2002, this is the first time that the residents of the lower East Coast have confronted the administration in anger. And so they should. Who else is responsible for the security failures of the last six years if not the Government of Guyana? That government, however, appears to be overwhelmed by the events at Lusignan, and so far, at any rate, has not responded in a way which conveys the impression that it is in charge, that it has a plan, or even that it has apprehended the issue in all its dimensions.
At his press conference last Saturday, President Jagdeo propounded the view that the motive behind the killings was linked to the investigation into the missing weapons from the PNC era. No one took him seriously. Even at that stage a hypothesis about a specific motive which was some what more credible even if it was not subject to immediate proof, was available. And in any case, who would believe that the gunmen from Buxton, most of whom would not even have been born when the army issued weapons to PNC ministries and officials thirty years ago, could care two hoots about some inquiry into where they had gone. As it is, the government can’t account for guns which have disappeared on its own watch in very recent times, let alone those which are unaccounted for on someone else’s three decades ago.
The head of state’s ruminations on this subject conveyed the impression that he was not coming to terms in a candid way with the slaughter that occurred on January 26, and was taking refuge in the time-worn tactic of retreating into the political laager. That impression received some reinforcement when on the day of the funerals President Jagdeo was asked by one resident if he would engage the PNCR in discussions on the issue of crime and security, and he answered that he wouldn’t do so unless that party’s leaders publicly acknowledged that Buxton was a safe haven for criminals. Its political aspects aside, it was hardly the most sensitive, considered or respectful response to a resident who had put forward a constructive suggestion about the safety of a community which had suffered so much.
Last Sunday, when he met residents of several lower East Coast communities, Mr Jagdeo appeared unable to give them confidence that he had meaningful measures in mind to make them secure. As we reported in our Monday edition, some of them told this newspaper that the President had not addressed their concerns – he spoke of “rice, sugar and VAT,” said one man, while a woman remarked, “This man ain’t say anything that mek sense.” Of course, he is not accustomed to coming under such sustained criticism from his own supporters, and he presumably has been harbouring fears about the solidity of the party base. It might be observed, however, that if he and his party had adopted a more rational approach to the security issue (and others) many years ago, he would not have had to think about the integrity of the party base now.
As it is, this is not the time for petty politics; not only will it not guarantee anyone’s safety, it will also make things worse. It might be remarked in addition that a part of Mr Corbin’s reaction to Mr Jagdeo’s unfortunate reply to the resident given to this newspaper did not quite rise above the petty political either; he too – quite unnecessarily and inappropriately in the circumstances – played to his political base. Once he did that, inevitably the PPP weighed in to deplore what he had said. So much for “vision” among our most senior politicians on both sides.
Of course, what everyone recognizes is that even although there may possibly have been a specific and rather personal motive for the Lusignan killings, they occurred in a political/ethnic context. The gunmen did not go into any community to exact their ‘revenge’ or send a ‘message,’ or whatever was in their bloodthirsty minds; they selected their targets in a front-line Indian village. Their ‘message,’ therefore, contained elements which went beyond the simply personal. That being so, the potential for ethnic strife is not lost on anyone, and for the PPP it carries shades of the sixties. But this is not the 1960s; the ruling party has been in office now for more than fifteen years, with full control of the state machinery and no British looking over their shoulder.
And the reaction of the people was different too – and way ahead of that of their leaders. Organizations representing all ethnic groups expressed horror at what happened in Lusignan, while the relatives of the slain in a gesture of spiritual magnanimity which should humble all of our politicians, invited Mr Corbin to speak at the funerals. And the protestors, as said above, directed their anger not at Africans in general (as opposed to the criminals in Buxton in particular), but as said above, at the government which had failed to protect them.
There were some of them, it is true, who called for the return of the discredited former Minister of Home Affairs Ronald Gajraj, as well as drug accused, Roger Khan who claimed to have helped the police during 2002-03. In terms of an approach to dealing with this brand of violent crime, these calls, at least, probably echoed the unvoiced sentiments of the party. But they reflect a preference for methods which played their part in bringing us to this point in the first place, and a return to them can only cause a further deterioration in the situation. A synopsis of how we reached where we are now with regard to security is contained in Stabroek News’s Thursday editorial, and if after all that has happened the government cannot at last recognize that political interference, extra-judicial actions and shadowy death squads cannot substitute for professionalism where the security forces are concerned, then we are doomed.
And there are some home truths on other fronts that need to be faced as well, concerning in particular the drug trade and its perceived connections to certain centres of power, as well as corruption in government, which among many other obviously damaging things have undermined respect for those in office. In addition, for as long as the ruling party continues to promote the pretence that it is a multi-racial government, then it will make no progress. A significant section of the society feels itself excluded, and no amount of propaganda to the contrary – and it doesn’t matter how many African ministers it has – will persuade anyone otherwise. In addition, the problem of depressed communities which supply the recruits for the criminal gangs has been largely ignored by those in office, while much has been written about the ruling party’s obsession to control every organization in the land, however apolitical the aims of that organization might be.
The obsession for control goes hand in hand with the party’s aversion to appointing people of competence and independence of mind to positions of authority. Traditionally, loyalty has been the only test required for office, and the party’s general approach to governance has bred total cynicism on the part of the governed. At least some of the administration’s current problems have part of their origin in the incompetence of those it has put to manage the nation’s affairs in one department or another, and when it is doing some soul-searching it should be looking at the replacement of certain officials.
The general background of our current problems, of course, provides absolutely no justification for what happened at Lusignan. However, these situations always have the potential to spiral out of control, and the onus is on the government, not only to deal with the gangs in Buxton and provide security for the lower East Coast, but to reduce the tensions in the society and address the sense of exclusion and frustration which fuel discontent. In short, it needs to do something it has never done before: abandon failed strategies, open its mind to different possibilities and think creatively.
