Dear Editor,
Senior Lecturer at UG, Professor Thomas Singh, wanted clarification on the meaning of the “ethnic security dilemma (ESD)” since the term has been frequently featured in the press recently (SN, Oct 17). We are somewhat surprised at Prof Singh’s request since he has studied and taught about the concept which he addressed publicly as a “social dilemma” back in 2013 when he delivered a talk at the 33rd anniversary of Dr Walter Rodney’s assassination. According to SN, Dr Singh rejected institutions such as “power sharing or electoral mechanisms” and insisted, “We cannot rely on formal mechanisms to achieve national unity,” he said, noting that it was not an end in itself but a process….Singh noted that collective action involves a social dilemma where people have a natural interest to pursue something privately for themselves and this could ultimately affect the public good.” All we have done differently is to use the more specific term “ethnic dilemma” rather that the catch all “social dilemma” because it is along this line of cleavage our society generally makes choices in our dysfunctional political system.
In 2019 (Demerara Waves, July 11) along with a Terrence R. Blackman (PhD), Professor Singh spelled out in great detail the theoretical basis for the Guyanese “social dilemma” which, not so coincidentally, is identical to the one we have been using for the ESDs. “We believe that the current Guyanese political environment is a game akin to the classic Prisoner’s Dilemma. It is a game, configured by our socio-economic and political history, that induces either the PPP or the Coalition to choose to protect themselves at the expense of the other and as a result creating a less than optimal solution for Guyana as a whole.” By this time Dr Singh had evidently jettisoned his cynicism about the possibility of altering the bases of the “social dilemma” and was promoting cooperation between the PNC and PPP to effectuate constitutional change – specifically to change Article 164.
Once again we were more specific to point out that it was not just a matter of the leaders in the PPP and PNC making ultimate sub-optimal choices for the society but identified the ideological bases for the two major ethnic groups to go along with their mobilization tactics. Professor Singh quoted Elinor Ostrom, Economics Nobel Prize winning political scientist, (who) explained how communities have, for centuries, invented collective agreements that solve “social dilemma” problems where individual interests frustrated the collective good. In such dilemmas, what is needed is for the parties to have a common commitment to rules of engagement that preserve and promote the collective good, even as they continue to pursue their partisan interests.
In concrete terms, we have argued that in our competitive politics, both Africans and Indians share a security dilemma (thus, the term “ethnic”) because a win for one party is perceived as a loss for the other. This dilemma fuels the non-cooperative behaviour of political leaders and their followers, who take their cues from their ethnic entrepreneurs. Leaders discourage “vote splitting” during elections because to do so would result in a loss of economic and political opportunities. Both major ethnic communities share such a dilemma. The PNC, historically, has held on to power illegally to ensure the security of its own supporters, since an Indian majority guarantees their perpetual exclusion from political power. We suggested that in order to push us out of this dilemma, leaders from both camps should engage in deep dialogue and encourage cooperative action as the way forward. We argued for balanced state institutions (army, police, bureaucracy) as a means of addressing the security concerns of Indians, the implementation of Ethnic Impact Statements to ensure equity in the distribution of resources and a federalized state (based on geography, not demographics) to ensure the distribution of power to the regional population and away from the power centre in Georgetown.
While we don’t claim to speak for Africans, we believe the African Security Dilemma, the fear of being excluded from power by not being able to win a free and fair elections, has been addressed since both major political parties are now minority parties that can only win an election with crossover votes. More succinctly, the Indian majority that fueled the ESD for Africans has disappeared: Indian-Guyanese, as of the last census of 2012, had dropped to 39.8% of the population as opposed to 51.9% in 1980. African Guyanese were 29.3% in 2012 having slightly fallen from 1980 to 30.8%. Since we are a group of minorities, the population growth of the Mixed and Amerindian populations (which had almost doubled to 19.9% and 10.5% respectively), give rise to the need for the two main parties to reach out across traditional party lines for support. Politics has evolved from a zero sum game, to becoming more “normalized”.
Africans have a genuine concern that they will be left behind in the economic windfall generated from “Oil Dorado”. However, political leaders have an obligation to ensure that the anticipated oil wealth will benefit all Guyanese, Amerindians included, particularly through participation in local content, affirmative action policies, private initiatives, government-assisted programmes, etc. Accusations of relative economic deprivation and cries of discrimination based on historical wrongs and pursuit of disruptive politics by “memory warriors” will only further divide this nation and create windows of opportunity for “carpetbaggers” to have their way. Moreover, a deep dialogue on a willingness to change our institutions of power and an education system that recognizes the contributions of all Guyanese will move us closer towards a common Guyanese narrative – and a resolution of the ESD.
Professor Singh may wish to consult the link below (“Two Ethnic Security Dilemmas and Their Economic Origin”) for a more academic discussion of Guyana’s ESD by Professor Tarron Khemraj:
file:///C:/Users/Illuminate/Downloads/RG_Two-Ethnic-Security-Dilemmas-and-Their-Economic.pdf
Yours faithfully,
Baytoram Ramharack
Tarron Khemraj
Ravi Dev