Dear Editor,
The overwhelming majority of responses to and comments on the media coverage of the Walter Rodney CoI report have been relatively balanced. Not surprisingly these responses support the findings of the Commission that identify the Burnham ruling group of having (fore) knowledge and being responsible for Dr Rodney’s death. The February 2016 letter columns of Stabroek News provide a cluster of these, as do the items reproduced in the Guyana Times as well as the PPP’s Mirror newspaper.
There are those notable exceptions emanating from trade unionist Mr Lincoln Lewis (Sunday Stabroek, February 28) and Mr Gerald Perreira, Chairman of the ‘revivalist’ pro-Burnham ‘Organisation for the Victory of the People’ (SN March 5). General Secretary of the PPP Clement Rohee not only called upon the Granger administration to release the Rodney Report (WM March 5-6), but has reiterated that “a black dominated reactionary regime killed a black progressive intellectual.”
It is significant that critics of the PPP/C have tended to unreservedly support the so far up until now incomplete reportage on the CoI (see SN February 24, column by Tarron Khemraj on the Rodney CoI findings: ‘The PPP goon squads and the abuse of the state’). Not unexpectedly, the WPA through it political spokespersons Tacuma Ogunseye and Dr David Hinds have been critical of President Granger’s recalcitrance in permitting the Guyanese people access to the CoI report.
At another level there remain the lingering reactions of what could be described as the Apprentices. These are elements who combine aspects of ‘polarisation’ with either Afrocentric or Indocentric value systems. It is within this area, this space if we like, that the more responsible stakeholders in this country must devote some attention. This narrative began with Kwayana’s publication on the bauxite strike and politics which was relaunched three years ago. But he has reproduced other materials especially dealing with Walter Rodney that must form part of the national conversation.
As an afterthought there is the notion that Kwayana once supported a quasi-secessionist, or a partitionist position towards resolving Guyana’s ethnic polarisation. He has recanted and clarified the 1960s refrain in that his advocacy was one to be an alternative “only in the last resort”. Then there is the Jaganist posture on the structural imbalance of Indians in the ranks (not only selected senior officers) in the Guyana Police Force. Here too there are differences in interpretation coupled with distortions of the truth.
Perhaps given the circumstances evolving from the political variants (PNC remade into APNU) President Granger should be provided with the big names Ann Wagner claims to have knowledge of but was unwilling to disclose. Certainly such a revelation would signify a change in terms of ironing out the perceptions that suggest flaws in the CoI Report. In this same context the Guyanese people should be appreciative of the hardworking Walter Rodney Secretariat and extend solidarity that may manifest at least over the short to medium terms.
Yours faithfully,
Eddi Rodney
