Dear Editor,
I believe that this year will be decisive in determining the political direction of the nation. For the African community, 2008 in political terms is to use a popular Guyanese saying: “a make or break” year. We have to and must intensify the struggle for a political solution that is in the interest of all Guyanese. As we prepare ourselves and the nation for this important engagement it is in our interest that we set in train a process of reflection of our past struggles in order to avoid making the same mistakes that were made. In this present struggle that the African community is waging against Guyana’s new oppressors it is necessary that we grasp the lessons of the anti-dictatorial struggle.
A lot has been written about the glorious achievements of the anti-dictatorial struggle in Guyana, which resulted in the return to office of the PPP/C. This period in the nation’s history saw the birth of the Patriotic Coalition for Democracy (PCD), a coalition of opposition parties that came together to fight for free and fair elections and the restoration of democracy. To date, little has been written on the failures of this struggle. There is a great need for an objective analysis of this important period in the nation’s history.
In other societies the academic community would have undertaken this task a long time ago. They would not have left it to the politicians and political activists who would have been more inclined to give their partisan interpretations of the period. As an active participant in that period of struggle I have no interest in downplaying the achievements of this patriotic effort. But it is necessary as we seek to shape the nation’s future to avoid the pitfalls of the past. To achieve this I am attempting to open a public debate on this aspect of the struggle since I believe that this discussion can help, not hurt the present struggle that is being waged to achieve meaningful political changes in the country.
It is not my intention here to make a comprehensive examination of this issue. What I propose to do is to state some of the areas where I believe the struggle failed the people.
The following are some of the areas of failure of the anti-dictatorial struggle which I believe should be drawn to the public’s attention:
(1). The most obvious and probably the least controversial of the failures was the inability to break the back of the race-based politics in the country. Many who had participated in the struggle had expected that the united opposition, supported by the multi- racial masses in the struggle for democracy, would have changed the racial nature of the national politics – unfortunately, this did not happen.
(2). The anti-dictatorial struggle did not develop into a democratic revolution of the masses. Instead the struggle was cut short and did not mature because of the unexpected end of the cold war between the USA and the USSR. This opened the way for the intervention of former US President, Mr Jimmy Carter, who successfully negotiated an agreement between the government and the political opposition, which put in place electoral arrangements for holding free and fair elections. In some political circles this is referred to as the “Hoyte political comprise”. As a consequence of this negotiated settlement and the US government’s removal of its opposition to the rule of Dr, Jagan and his party, the PPP felt no longer constrained by the past politics of the cold war and took a decision to dump its partners in the PCD. They then opted for new allies in the form of the Civic. The result of that decision was that the anti-dictatorial struggle did not bring to political office and the service of the nation, political and social forces that were allied to the PPP during the difficult period of that struggle. Instead, the PPP chose post 1992, to politically empower new forces which had no credentials of active struggle against the oppressors.
(3). The anti- dictatorial struggle also failed to reduce the political power and influence of the old political parties This failure reinforced their political dominance in the country and it is very obvious that these parties will continue to play a major role in influencing and shaping any meaningful political solution to the country’s problems both in the short and in the medium term.
(4). The struggle failed to produce the social and political conditions that would have allowed for sanctioning of political wrong-doers – it was business as usual and worse in post December 5, 1992. The result is that in the new dispensation ushered in by the 1992 elections persons against whom political wrong-doing have been alleged were not sanctioned. It is important to note that those political wrong-doers that have been functioning in the governments since the PPP/C’s victory in 1992 have been heavily rewarded and new meaning has been given to the politics of opportunism. No new political culture has developed to support the “democratic opening” and political unaccountability and lack of transparency are characteristics that pervade the corridors of political power.
(5). The anti-dictatorial struggle strengthened rather than destroyed the old majoritarian politics resulting in the well-known negative scenarios for the nation. Instead of reducing racial competition in the political, economic and social life of the nation, it worsened the situation to the point of African and Amerindian marginalization and exclusion. It also produced an unprecedented political situation in which Indian Guyanese political and economic power united with local drug lords. This unholy alliance is today transforming Guyana into a narco – state.
(6). Since its emphasis was on free and fair elections and the restoration of democracy, the anti- dictatorial struggle did not put to the people a plan for constitutional reform to establish a new system of governance. Unlike the previous struggle where the main concerns were elections and democracy, the principal objective of the present struggle is the overhaul of the old winner take all political system and the empowerment of the masses in an inclusive political system at all levels – central, regional, village and municipality.
As we engage the present struggle we must guard against political opportunism and personal agendas. Our efforts should not only be about the empowering of political parties and politicians but more importantly it must be about empowering racial communities and the masses in general. We will also have to resist the temptation of electoral opportunism – the desire to win elections rather than to fix the constitution.
One of the failures of the anti-dictatorial struggle which I have referred to above was its failure to develop the social and political conditions to sanction political wrong-doers. As important as this is, it has for political expediency to be weighed against our national objective and present political reality: as such the temptation of a political vendetta simply for settling scores has to be resisted. Success or failure at the end of the day will be judged by the extent to which the struggle creates the political, social and economic environment for enhancing national reconciliation. The end game must be the improvement of the lives of the masses of all races.
Finally, I believe that the historical exclusion of our indigenous people from meaningful political power must be put on the front burner in the national debate. There will be no meaningful national reconciliation and democracy unless and until the indigenous people, the rightful owners of this country have more political power than their “numbers” allow under the present political system
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
