Dear Editor,
I wish to refer to the letter by former Minister of Foreign Affairs, Mr Rashleigh E Jackson,
‘What programmes would Dr Jagan have pursued in Guyana as a socialist?’ published in the Stabroek News dated June 2, 2017. While I waited patiently for Mr Clement Rohee, another former Minister, to respond to his predecessor, and since I had not seen any response, it is my firm view that such a pertinent question cannot be left unanswered.
Economic policies offer one of the most concrete ways to evaluate any programmes. Former Minister Jackson cited the US Memorandum of Conversation records in 1961 to buttress his arguments on the conflicting ideological issue. However, the declassified files of the ʼ60s also reproduced a letter from Premier Jagan to then US President John F Kennedy on April 16, 1963 reminding him of the USA commitment to the then British Guiana. In this letter, Dr Jagan clarified his economic policies by stating, “my Government is committed to a mixed economy in which private and public enterprise would exist side by side…-my government must enter quickly into the industrial sector of development, either alone or in joint ventures with private enterprise… it is the policy of my Government to give protection where necessary to new undertakings both private and public to make them viable and competitive.” Regardless of ideology these were sound economic policies coming from the hand of Dr Jagan that would have furthered the cause of economic and social development in Guyana.
Despite Dr Jagan’s ideological stance, it did not conflict with his commitment to Guyana’s development. This point was further clarified by Professor Cary Fraser, formerly of Penn State University, USA who in a column in Stabroek News (May19, 2008) argued that “as a political leader who emerged out of the sugar plantation, Jagan threw himself into the challenge to both the colonial order and sugar plantations that largely defined the limits of possibilities for his generation… key to his political engagement was the search for national independence, and for strategies to make the sugar and bauxite industries provide a basis for economic expansion that would pave the way for serious economic growth.” He continued, “while many may have disagreed with Dr Jagan’s embrace of Marxist-Leninist ideology, his undoubted willingness to grow beyond the profession of dentistry into a political activist, and his deep emotional commitment to improving the lives of workers and farmers, stood as a testimony to his intellectual growth and political seriousness”. These two documents sought to reinforce the fact that despite the hysteria behind Jagan’s communism his policies and programmes were far more humane and progressive than those of his contemporaries.
Dr Jagan returning to power in 1992, continued to argue forcefully for a tri-sector economy involving state, private and cooperatives, in a period when the Washington consensus reigned supreme. I will not enumerate the list of Jagan’s projects that stand as the only shining light on a dark hill. Finally, Former Minister Jackson’s letter is thought provoking; however, his thoughts on the current state, its infrastructure, and the level of social and economic progress will be most welcome from one who had decades of service in public policy and politics in Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
(Name and address provided)
