Dear Editor,
Reading the Guyana dailies one is prompted to ask the query as to whom does Guyana belong? Why is Venezuela making these unilateral proposals?
First, I was informed that Venezuela proposes to build a road through Guyana to Suriname. Then a few weeks later I am told that Venezuela proposes to build a pipeline through Guyana to Suriname. At no time did these two articles mention that Guyana is agreeable to either of these two ventures traversing its territory.
It seems to me that the intent of both proposals is exactly the same. First, if we can’t get a road built then let us propose a pipeline, with the caveat of giving some gas to the unsuspecting host.
The question is, at what juncture would Guyana be allowed to reject or accept this devious proposition?
Would it not result in the same objective being achieved by Venezuela? Would it not require an access road running parallel to this pipeline? If Guyana is reluctant to give access to a road, then is it not possible for Venezuela to achieve their objective by building a pipeline? A pipeline that requires an access road to maintain this gift of a pipeline? Then Venezuela would have captured two birds with one trap.
To repeat myself, Guyana must never allow a pipeline or road to be built by Vene-zuela, when Venezuela is desirous of dividing Guyana along some contrived line that they have demarcated?
Both of these proposals are lacking what is most needed, and that is the revocation of Venezuela’s stated intent to pilfer from Guyana, under some false pretence, what is rightfully Guyana’s.
What is eerily lacking is Guyana’s objection to and rejection of any proposal from Vene-zuela to either build a road or pipeline through Guyana when Venezuela has made crystal clear its intent. Why are Guyana government functionaries going to Venezuela to discuss them? In addition there is the fact that these proposals are terminating in a country which has claimed Guyana’s territory while it was presumed that Guyana was asleep.
It is my expectation to see some form of rejection on the part of Guyana, telling Venezuela that Guyana is not for sale or plunder, and that no pipeline would be allowed to cross Guyana’s landmass until a statement is made to the international community withdrawing the claim to the very territory that Venezuela would like to purloin.
It is irrelevant whether Guyana would benefit from this pipeline or road. We have seen what Venezuela is capable of. We should not forget the dredge caper where Guyanese mining properties were destroyed under the premise that they were operating in Venezuela’s territory.
It is preferable for Guyana to continue suffering its hardships rather than face more severe hardship in the future. A future that will inevitably cost us lives and consternation. A word of mouth guarantee from Venezuela would not suffice. Anything short of an international revocation of Venezuela’s claim would not suffice. It is unfortunate that we cannot trust our neighbour, but it is preferable to be safe than sorry. A letter or some other written notification to the United Nations would be acceptable, and serve to placate the national apprehension and inherent fear and doubt that any Venezuelan intent invokes.
The Government of Guyana should be very clear about notifying that these two ideas could only come to fruition when Venezuela has shown that it has an honourable intent. The government must also request the expertise of the international community, including environmentalists to determine the effects on the plants, animals and rivers of a pipeline and road. The government must also query who will monitor this pipeline running through Guyana’s territory and never agree to any military presence.
Then and only then should Guyana consider any proposal of a road or pipeline emanating from Venezuela and terminating in Suriname.
Yours faithfully,
Patrick Barker
