Dear Editor,
There are many positives from Guyana’s 2011 general election. The failure of the PPP/C to secure a majority in parliament has the potential to be the biggest positive for a more cooperative and stable polity and society and for reducing racial tensions, which remain as great a threat as ever to future political stability and enhanced economic betterment. The realisation of this potential, however, requires political leadership or else it could lead to sterility and political volatility.
Even without the emergence of a minority government, Guyana needed a coalition government in its context of racial division and suspicion and deep perceptions of racial disadvantage which in its absence could permanently undermine political stability and progress and destroy forever whatever fellowship and solidarity exists.
I write to urge President Ramotar to explore with APNU and AFC the possibilities of a national government. This could be a wide exploration of cooperation possibilities in the context of a very difficult prospective functioning of a minority government, but it must include imperatively the possibilities of a national government or of a coalition of at least the two main parties, but most preferably the former.
Attempts may be made to see gain or future gain from independent action and to sabotage the cooperation process or inevitably to use gimmicks to secure unjustified current or future political advantage, but now is not the time to continue to risk Guyana’s future. There is now a crying need to build on the many positive developments with the theme of cooperation uppermost in mind. This must be reinforced by a clamour from reasonable and respected voices. Let us not miss the current opportunity to reset a New Guyana.
The bitterness in Guyana’s political discourse may make such an approach not seeming an immediate possibility, but I am encouraged by the other emerging positives, which this bitterness is obscuring:
1) The formation of APNU in the
context of the tainted history of the PNCR. It indicates a willingness to use a more cooperative approach and to broaden its appeal. It is most unhelpful to view this change cynically.
2) The relatively good economic progress being made by Guyana, which makes resources readily available to facilitate change.
3) The reduced political polarisation caused by the formation of the AFC and its attempt to project a non-racial image and act as a receptacle for those who are disaffected or do not like the racial image of the two major parties; and to develop a more general appeal. It would be narrow-minded to see those shifting to the AFC as betraying the PPP and the PNC and sabotaging their success at the polls.
4) The emergence of a PPP with reduced support and a new mature leader, with all the possibilities of a less aggressive and a more accountable style of government.
5) An APNU leadership as indicated in the post-election demonstrations showing
disinclination to encourage or foment disruption and civil strife for political advantage.
6) An APNU and AFC indicating willingness to join with others for cooperative governance, when independent opposition possibilities are not unattractive.
7) The then President of Guyana who during the post election counting drama, in the interest of peace and progress withdrew a recounting request, which if pursued could have had a major favourable outcome for the governing party.
In a world in which Guyana’s resource endowment is increasingly matching global needs for food and commodities, Guyana is at the cusp of tremendous economic advance. Let us reset a New Guyana politically and socially to enhance that progress and to share in it equitably.
Yours faithfully,
Prof Bishnodat Persaud
