Nothing exemplifies more clearly the difficulties of doing politics in Guyana and the need for clear strategic thinking than Mr. Granger’s purely parliamentary approach to political change. When asked during his visit to New York to explain why APNU is not involved in more extra-parliamentary activities, he said that “protest actions have to be sharp and effective; they cannot be a blunt instrument” (“A few things were learnt from the opposition leader at Mike Persaud’s home” SN: 05/06/2014). I take it that what he meant is that protest should not cause disadvantageous collateral damage.
The question of what damage Mr. Granger wants to avoid is to be found in his statement that he intends to win the 2016 general elections. In our context this is not possible unless his party is able to wrench sufficient Indian support from the PPP or form a coalition that is able to do so. To help in achieving this end, Mr. Granger has largely excluded the use of non-violent protests because they tend to alienate Indians.
But if those who understand this community far better than perhaps Mr. Granger and I are to be believed, avoiding street protests is insufficient. The Brigadier must also apologise for the historical wrongdoings of his party or his efforts will come to naught. (“The PNCR: Its past and future” SN: 22/06/2014). In making this point Mr. Ralph Ramkarran addressed a