Dear Editor,
Parliament meeting to discuss Venezuela’s sabre rattling must also discuss the idea floated by Bharrat Jagdeo to give Venezuela passage to the Atlantic, via Guyana’s territory that country is coveting. During this parliamentary discourse the nation does not only need to hear motions reaffirming our unity as “One People One Nation One Destiny.” We must go beyond this to address the issue of Jagdeo’s view/idea, his retraction and full denunciation, and also issues of internal affairs. This nation would recall on 23rd October 2015, at a press conference, then Leader of the Opposition and General Secretary of the PPP, Bharrat Jagdeo, informed when he was President his regime, and by extension his party, discussed the idea that Guyana could have negotiated a settlement with Venezuela that would see that country being given a “channel out to the sea.” Such an idea also accepts Guyana would cede part of its Economic Exclusive Zone (EEZ) as settled by International Law of the Sea.
Today, the PPP is in government, Jagdeo is still the Party’s General Secretary, wields significant influence in government, oftentimes usurping the responsibility of the substantive President Irfaan Ali, and he has never denounced or walked back his statement. And whereas the APNU+AFC government, initiated the approach to the International Court of Justice, and included Gail Teixeira, as part of the PPP representative in the accepted quest for a national united front. This was inherited by the PPP, but notwithstanding this, Guyanese deserve unambiguous clarity in 2023 of the PPP’s position on resolving the border controversy. Is the PPP, as represented by the General Secretary, still interested in exploring and/or granting Venezuela, “channel out to the sea.” If so why, and if not, why? We are in a fight for our life with Venezuela that has military might and bullish allies such as Russia. The world is no longer rigidly split between the West and East, and the non-aligned policy that once served Guyana well is uncertain in the post-Cold War era and under successive PPP governments.
People are well aware that diplomatic back channels are also a means to resolve issues. What is Guyana, under the PPP leadership, saying to Venezuela through such channels that the ordinary man is ignorant of? As far as Venezuela is concerned there are two messages out there- the ICJ route or giving Venezuela a “channel to the sea.” As far as Guyanese are concerned there are two messages out there. We need a full renunciation of the PPP’s message if that is not the party’s position today, whether in the seat of government or not. Our Parliamentarians, on both sides of the House, must have this matter clarified in the nation’s highest decision-making forum, and recorded in the Hansard for posterity. Our parliamentarians must also realise the border controversy and Venezuela ratcheting up its aggression is not only about condemning same and going on a national PR and education blitz, but also about addressing internal governance that would provide assurance to a battered, deprived and divided people that both the Opposition and Government care about them.
We must be able to address our internal affairs in tandem with the external threat for they are not mutually exclusive but intertwined. The welfare of the citizens, among which include better pay and working conditions for the Disciplined Forces and other public sector workers; the upholding of basic human rights for all, and adherence to good governance as enshrined in the Constitution must be placed on the table for discussion. Guyanese are constitutionally assured of their right to be treated with dignity and respect and engage in meaningful participation in the day-day management and decision-making of the state that impacts their collective and/or individual wellbeing. The border controversy is one such among many. A contented people lead to a contended nation. The state of Guyana will mean more to citizens if they feel the nation-state cares about them. As citizens we shoulder the responsibility to guard Guyana’s soil from both internal and external forces that fly in the face of the people’s right to all 83,000 square miles, its EEZ, the infrastructures of state, and governance that serve as both shield and defender.
Sincerely,
Lincoln Lewis
