Dear Editor,
I refer to the letter from Mr. Samuel A. A. Hinds titled “Work to create partnerships not sensational headlines” (SN and KN May 21). I once held former president and Prime Minister Hinds in high regard; that has faded a shade. Regard-less, when a Guyanese of the caliber of Elder Hinds take the time to wear his heart on his sleeve, and share his thinking, I read and listen first (something I rarely do for his other comrades); then I parse through for any precious gems embedded. I think there were some from Elder Hinds.
I agree that a lengthy annuity of energy and money has been expended in searching for Guyana’s oil. If I interpret Comrade Hinds properly, the high risks and heavy expenditures justify the sky-high returns. I have always said that the contract was the best that Guyana could have had, given the Venezuelan juggernaut, and our Gulliverian puniness; and the need for partnering with an American power to assure a sturdy American interest on our behalf. That is, we had to pay a premium in blood for the insurance protection. I assure Elder Hinds that none of that has changed.
But what should enlighten Comrade Hinds (and his brainy leader) is where I think the boat has been deliberately missed frequently, and opportunities were foregone rather docilely, to utilize the openings that came our way. I use a plantation and slave analogy, which I trust would not offend the venerable Sam Hinds. Having been exposed to the Western riches of sustenance and housing and civilization (Christianity, too), we ought to be complacent and not yearn for the greater prosperity that expanded freedom brings. To put differently, the reality of long delayed saccharine and cerebrally encouraging oil discoveries, and costly investments made, justifies us wanting to remain fully shackled to a state of contentment and doleful acceptance of what is in place. I beg to differ.
To Elder Hinds I say: though others may disagree, I respect the sanctity of contracts and their ironclad protections; and that deal is done. But it can be undone, in astute revisions here and there that return something more favorable to us, aids our self-enhancement; the Japanese call it kaizen. As examples: we have a problem with flaring, so we have to slowdown, if not stop totally. There is no other way. Incentives may help us see some light (for the sovereign fund, not leaders’ fun); change that thorny term over there; let us talk like real partners, and not the paternalistic to peons. We have a fear for our health, and our people are agitated, and they can be ferociously so (as elections attest), thus there is a price to political stability, social tranquility. Exxon may think that the solution is Blackwater; or another well-armed Yankee outfit incorporated in CARICOM’s Barbados. But then, they would have had to aim and fire at all of us. But that also would have meant the unified front that I have been calling for: partnering with the dreadful opposition, which is anathema to the self-dumbing down Vice President. The VP surrenders, since he likes selling so much.
Editor, to Elder Hinds, I tender that there are soft underbellies in our relationship with Exxon, which we loathe to explore and extract our pounds of flesh, our pints of blood – ounce by ounce, and one drop at a time. They add up, which Payara could have been. The VP had to play dead, not to see what kind of funeral he would get, but how much he would make Exxon’s leaders hold their noses and leave the table of conversation discombobulated. These blasted Guyanese people mean business, they play dirty; a little negotiation could follow. And because Exxon is vulnerable in its rickety balance sheet, its rebellious directorate room, and its suspect investor climate, (there is a dirty word – climate), then some low blows were in order. That is the norm, where I come from, there is no honor among thieves. Instead of Mr. Hinds’ PPP fellows recruiting Madison Avenue-type public relations (another vaunted American blessing) to soften and sweeten the sinister, they should have been saying to Exxon: this is where we are with the Guyanese people, and they don’t like it. We can’t hold them in line. We must test, now that the pompous one is gone, how much Blinken will blink, what Uncle Joe (Biden) is all about. I am sure I am understood.
I close with returning to slavery. One part of America went to war to perpetuate that odious institution; another section ostensibly confronted in the name of emancipation. I think that, as good and wholesome as they made out slavery to be, there is nothing like breathing and moving on one’s own freely. In sum: we have to confront Exxon. We must be resourceful and versatile and sagacious enough to find ways to do so, then carve out the tiny spaces to expand our Guyanese footprint. We must never settle for accepting the fullness of the status quo.
Sincerely,
GHK Lall
