Dear Editor,
Dr Grantley Waldron’s programme ‘Spotlight,’ which was aired on HBTV 9 on Sunday July 5, 2009, hosted two of Guyana’s prominent politicians, PPP General Secretary, Donald Ramotar and former PNCR Chairman Winston Murray, who participated in the seventh of a series of discussions ‘Reconciliation in Guyana for what? How?
’
Both gentlemen argued their positions with conviction. While they expressed different views on most issues they had their moments of agreement on some. What was noteworthy was the respect they showed to each other throughout the discussion, which demonstrated that the country’s two main political adversaries can be civil to each other when they choose to. This attitude if it continues is good for the nation.
In this letter I propose to deal only with positions that Mr Ramotar took in the discussions for these reasons: (1) As the General Secretary of the ruling party and with the passing of both Dr Jagan and his wife, he is now the undisputed party leader; and (2) on the vexing issue of national reconciliation it is my opinion for what it is worth, the ruling party has a greater responsibility than the opposition to mend fences.Therefore, the positions of leaders of the government and ruling party on this matter have to be carefully examined.
I wish here to particularly examine the following positions taken by Ramotar: (1) the PPP is the party in Guyana that suffered the most from race; (2) there is need to build trust before we can have shared governance; (3) the PPP/C has made significant electoral gains since 1992 (4) there are better race relations in Guyana since the PPP/C returned to office, there is no serious race problem in the country – only instigators raising the issue of racial problems; and (5) the PPP/C has no Indian plan only a national plan.
It is important to acknowledge that Mr Ramotar, in his opening remarks, had conceded that the country has a history of racial problems which predated the PPP and PNC. Here he was referring to the problems that were endemic in our colonial history. He invoked Dr Jagan’s position on the issue, “Race must not be under estimated or over estimated.” But as the discussion proceeded he moved to the usual PPP/C position of denial.
I strongly, disagree with Mr Ramotar’s contention that the PPP is the party in Guyana that suffered the most from the issue of race in our politics. Any objective review will show that it is the WPA and not the PPP which suffered the most in this regard. History will show that from the early days of Dr Jagan’s entry into Guyanese politics he and his party were the beneficiaries of racial and working class solidarity. The Indian masses saw him as their leader, championing their cause. This remains true to this day. National unity in the ’50s under Dr Jagan’s leadership was in the main, a unity of the major race groups against white colonialism. Here again the race factor helped to bring the PPP to prominence and power. And today it is race solidarity that keeps them in office. To deny this is either playing political games or outright dishonesty.
The PPP/C ‘s position that there is need to build trust between the two major parties before any serious consideration of shared governance, is that party’s way of insisting on the right to one party/one race rule. Shared governance is not a matter between the two parties but the race constituencies in the country. Is Mr Ramotar saying that Africans and Amerindians have to demonstrate to the rulers that they can be trusted before the issue of shared governance is to be seriously addressed with the urgency it deserves? If that is his position it has to be equated to that of a conqueror who will do all at his disposal to hold on to his conquests at all costs. This position of the ruling party was first made public many years ago at a meeting at the University of Guyana. If anyone now takes the PPP/C talk of trust that person has to be naïve, since that party to date has not set out any comprehensive conditions to determine if, how and when the required trust has been achieved, nor has the party fixed a time period for the process.
Over time, whenever PPP/C leaders were asked to deal with the racial divide in the country they did as Ramotar has done, boast about electoral gains the PPP/C has made since the 1992 general elections. Putting aside the ongoing controversy over the reliability of the voters’ list, I am willing to concede that the PPP/C has increased its votes in some Amerindian communities and in a small percentage of African areas. And these cross-over African votes are the result of a systematic policy of the PPP/C to starve Africans economically forcing them to join the ruling party to get economic and social benefits. To cite a good example, at the last PPP/C congress held at Diamond one of the new African recruits from Region 10 took to the floor and made an important outburst. She said if the PNCR was able to look after us we would not have been here – how true.
Are the few cross-over votes enough to justify the PPP/C’s claim that the country has gone past racial voting? My answer is no. The bulk of the voters in our elections cast their ballot along race, the majority of Indians vote PPP/C and the same is true for African Guyanese who vote for the PNCR. This has been the reality since the split of the national movement in the early ’50s.
I now come to the General Secretary’s claim that since the PPP/C’s returned to office there are better race relations and there is no racism in the country, only instigators whipping up the issue of race. Before dealing with that point it is necessary to clarify the race issue in our politics. When the PNC was in government the political opposition influenced by WPA’s theoretical work on race in Guyana, had agreed that our race problem is one of “racial insecurity” and not unfettered racism as was practised in apartheid South Africa. Apart from the ’60s there has been no open communal violence in Guyana. The post-election disturbances which took place in 1992 and after, had political and racial undercurrents, but did not reach the crisis of the ’60s. Is it the absence of open race war which prompts the PPP/C to say that there are better race relations post 1992 in the country? If this is their logic they inherited this form of better race relations from PNCR rule.
The question which should be asked is – has the PPP/C regime reduced racial insecurity in the country? It is only the PPP/C leadership that cannot recognize the obvious. Their continuous denial of the reality is not due to the burying of their collective heads in the sand but it is due primarily to their political dishonesty. Racial insecurity in the country is at its worst in recent history. It has long been established that when the PNC is in office the Indian insecurity becomes high since they feel excluded from power. The same is true of Africans when the PPP is in government. It was true in 1957, in1961and in 1963 and it is true today in 2009 and has been so since the re-emergence of the PPP in government in 1992. One would have expected that all Guyana would by now have come around to accepting this fact of life. But it seems that the PPP/C now that it is in power seeks to deny this. It has long been established that during the cold war political scenario, Africans’ racial insecurity and electoral rigging combined to deny Indian political aspirations.
Similarly, the end of the cold war, Indian superior numbers, racial voting, the Westminster winner-take-all political system, Indian racial insecurity and drug money also combined to deny Africans’ political aspirations. Readers will note that I have not included here the impact of the extra-judicial killings of young African men, the alleged government links with the drug cartels, the criminalization of the state, rampant corruption, or the rape of state funds on deteriorating race relations.
Before addressing Mr Ramotar’s claim that the PPP/C has no Indian plan for the country, only a national plan, I just want to remind the PPP/C leadership that the PNC under Mr Burnham was entitled to make the same claim. In fact everything the then ruling party did, good or bad, they did under the banner of nationalism, not race – something the PPP rejected. Throughout the PNC’s rule the single most important slogan of the PPP and Dr Jagan was, “racial and political discrimination.” What has changed under the PPP? The truth is that racial and political discrimination in Guyana is at its worst level today, since independence. The only difference is that under the PPP/C it is dressed up with electoral legality.
Neither, of the two parties – the PPP and PNC – have ever publicly, put out a race plan as the basis of their political work. It should be noted that when they hold the reins of governmental power they have always denied the existence of race problems in the country. So it should come as no surprise to anyone when Ramotar said that his party has no Indian, only a national plan. Having a national plan, however, does not mean that race considerations are not a major part of the party politics and governmental policies. Yes, we will not be able to go to the national archive and find a PPP/C document entitled, ‘PPP/C Race Plan or Manifesto,’ therefore the test for that party’s racial even-handedness is its practice both in opposition and in government.
A cursory glance will show the extent to which the PPP/C’s national plan is taking hold. When the PPP was in opposition Dr Jagan had always campaigned against the African dominance in the public sector and the security forces. When he became President after the 1992 general elections, one of his early public pronouncements was that his government was committed to correct the racial imbalance in the public sector. He did not give a similar commitment to deal with the racial imbalance in the economic sector where his supporters were and still are the dominant force. The same eagerness was not shown to deal with African and Amerindian marginalization in the economic sector. A new, elite set of Indian contractors were awarded large public works contracts, after 1992. In spite of the fact that some were known to deliver substandard works they continued to garner the bulk of the contracts for governmental works while African contractors got the crumbs. New businessmen with close relationships to the PPP have developed, some of whom are involved in the drug trade.
The party has been doing its utmost to put more Indians in the public sector and the security forces and to ensure that they dominate where possible, all of the senior positions. Almost every aspect of seniority in public life is characterized by an Indian face. In some instances wherever a black person holds office he or she does so in an acting capacity. There is a spin-off to this dominance by Indians in public life. All of the blame for failure and crisis in these areas has, very correctly, been laid at their doors.
The private sector is now more dominated by Indians than at any time in the country’s history. In this sector Africans retain some dominance but with smaller numbers. Access to foreign agencies’ loans is another area where Indians have benefited the most, since government approval of projects was necessary and favours their applications.
Mr Ramotar and his party will be best advised to adopt a proposal made in one of WPA’s election manifestos, for an agency to be responsible for keeping a check on the condition of ethnic groups, and publicly make their findings known, so the government and the nation can come up with solutions. If that recommendation was put in place we would not be having this debate today.
No one is fooled by Mr Ramotar’s statements, since the PPP/C’s record on governance has contributed to the intensification of racial insecurity to a point only surpassed in the early ’60s. Ms Gay McDougal, the independent expert on Minority Rights was not fooled by the regime on the situation in the country.
What gives Mr Ramotar the right to believe he can fool Africans and Amerindians and others? These days Indians make no secret of their domination of the country – that is the result of the PPP’s unwritten plan.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
